Here’s my latest presentation on what the data shows. Enjoy.

Clicking the link will silently download the 10MB PDF file to your Downloads folder.

Challenge your friends to find an error!

If you like my work and are not already a paid subscriber, please consider subscribing at $5/mo (or $50/yr) to support my work. Thanks!

Subscribe now

If you are willing and available and want to help us advocate for truth and transparency on special projects as they become available, please fill out this form.

Filling out the form doesn’t obligate you to help out; it just makes it easier for us to notify you.

As I need help, I’ll draw upon this list so I can target my requests.

Thanks!

I’m putting together a public directory so that people worldwide can find lawyers who are willing and able to take on the establishment.

Lawyers: Register your services here

Clients: View the directory here

COVID litigation conference links: Description Register

Areas covered by this directory of legal services:

• Employer Mandates: State/federal, ADA, worker’s compensation, individual & class action plaintiffs

• Education Mandates: Public & private K-12 schools, public & private universities, Title 10, coercion, informed consent, fraud, conflicts of interest.

• Medical License: Medical board certification, tortious interference, First Amendment, fraud, libel, violation of Administrative Procedures (APA or equivalent)

• Fraud: False Claims Act, pharma fraud, VAERS fraud, SBA and PPP fraud, whistleblower protection

• Civil Rights: Public access/accommodation, ADA, informed consent (state agencies), due process, religious liberty, First Amendment

• Censorship: First Amendment, collusion, racketeering (federal agencies)

• Vaccine Injury: Includes liability, informed consent, mandates by institutions, VICP, CICP

• Hospital Negligence: Includes Remdesivir, denial of early treatment protocols, vaccine coercion

• Mass Torts: Includes Covid vaccine injury and hospital misuse of Remdesivir

Share

Yesterday, I gave a presentation at the Senate in Mexico City with Dr. Robert Malone and Dr. Alex Diaz. It was a big hit.

The presentation has a few slides summarizing the data, but the bulk of the presentation is simply me asking questions that nobody wants to talk about like this one:

The presentation

Versions available: PDF and Google slides

Each slide links to the reference for the statement on the slide.

Feel free to create derivative works.

If your friends have any critical thinking skills left, this presentation may convert them.

The deck is largely self-explanatory.

My presentation in the Senate chambers in Mexico (obviously, this would not be allowed in my home country) starts at 1:07:00:

Summary

Today, government authorities worldwide are hiding the vaccine-death record level data that we need to show the truth. Why would they do that? Don’t they want people to know the truth?

Top health authorities, such as ACIP Chair Stanford Professor Grace Lee, “duck and run” for cover when asked questions like, “Would you like to see the safety data from the Israeli Ministry of Health?”

Why can’t we talk about the issues to resolve our differences? Is government-directed censorship of doctors and scientists really the best way to resolve scientific differences?

Versions available: PDF and Google slides

Share

Evidence-based physicians: Register here (free).

General public: View the registry

Note: This was published on Jan 7, so if you are looking for a provider, give it a few days.

California disclaimer

Note that California doctors are required by law to treat COVID cases according to the medical consensus, even if it kills you. Doctors will lose their license if you give a patient individual care for COVID and the medical board finds out about it.

The doctors from California who register here aren’t breaking the law since they are saying that for all other conditions, they will treat you based on the medical evidence. Amazingly, that is still legal in California.

People can die from the vaccine for at least a year after their vaccination.

Here’s how to do the proper tests during the autopsy to find out whether the vaccine played a significant role in the death.

Here’s what pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole recommends

Here’s the article where we discussed it. That article links to the Rumble video:

Dr. Cole recommends Dr. Burkhardt’s protocol for autopsy.

He also wrote me:

On section II.2 I would also consider TLR4 stains on heart microscopic slides. I would also add a SARS cov2 nucleocapsid antibody test to all microscopic tissue sections where spike is found to verify damage by viral infection vs vaccine tissue damage.

So this is what all medical examiners in the US should be doing.

How many are doing it? Just one guy: pathologist Ryan Cole MD. And he’s not a medical examiner!

Other methods

Also, doing the studies outlined in the Schwab paper can assess vaccine causality. Basically, if the body is attacking organs like the heart, brain, lungs, or other critical organs, that’s another telltale sign.

Finally, looking for:

1. extensive micro-clotting

2. large amyloid clots

is also a telltale sign of COVID vaccine involvement in a death.

I do wish someone would create a definitive guide, but in the meantime, I hope this is useful.

Why isn’t the CDC producing recommendations for medical examiners?

The CDC should be all over this if they care about the safety of the American public.

Have you seen the CDC guide to medical examiners to instruct them on how to assess whether the COVID vaccine played a role in a death?

Of course you haven’t because it does not exist.

If such a guide existed, the most it would say is: “This page intentionally left blank”

Why doesn’t it exist?

Because they do not want anyone to find out the vaccines are killing people. Biden wants people vaccinated. That’s their top priority at the CDC. I know. I’ve talked to people who used to work there.

The CDC should be requesting medical examiners do the proper tests for anyone dying proximate to vaccination. Within a year would be good, but they aren’t even requesting this if the person died within 24 hours of COVID vaccination!

They don’t want you to know about the safety of the COVID vaccine. Period. Full stop.

The CDC is never going to give any guidance to medical examiners on implicating the COVID vaccine in a death

For a vaccine which was rushed to market, doing post marketing investigations like autopsies to assess possible causality should be required and the federal government should pay for it.

But they aren’t requiring it and they are not paying for it because Biden, your elected officials in Congress, and the CDC (and other 3 letter agencies) don’t want it to be revealed that they supported a vaccine that has killed hundreds of thousands of Americans.

Nobody in the medical community will say anything either. They don’t want their NIH funding stopped or their license to practice medicine revoked or to lose their job.

The press doesn’t want this known either since they don’t want to look bad. Anyone pursuing such a story would be fired. And if the medical community is saying nothing, the press won’t go against them since that would be anti-science.

So do you think it’s ever going to happen? Fat chance.

People who work at the CDC all believe that the vaccines can’t cause people to die from the vaccine even after this has been clearly demonstrated in a paper published by a world famous pathologist in a top peer-reviewed scientific journal. Why don’t they believe it? Because they are told the vaccines are safe and effective and they do exactly what they are told. The science doesn’t matter. Basically, if the vaccine might be deadly, Dr. Fauci would have said so. Since he hasn’t, all that stuff in scientific peer-reviewed journals is viewed by the authorities as just more misinformation.

Just like over 1,200 papers on COVID vaccine injury that are already in the peer-reviewed literature.

It’s all ignored. Only a few brave doctors like UCSF Professor Vinay Prasad are speaking out publicly. The rest are sheep.

Summary

I hope this is useful in the meantime.

I’ll ask Dr. Cole to produce something more definitive.

These are guidelines for comment moderation

Please use the comments below to comment on the comment policy.

Introduction

There are three dots below every Substack Article. They can be used to report another person’s inappropriate comment or to edit your own comment. This is very important, please read and re-edit your comment if necessary. Report inappropriate comments and say why to help maintain a productive and pleasant comment section. Your help is much appreciated and allows the Steve Kirsch Newsletter Substack to have free comments. Here are some guidelines to follow when commenting:

1.      Please be polite and civil. Typing on a computer can invoke a sense of dislocation – don’t let that overcome normal inhibitions of a regular conversation that you would have at the dinner table.

2.      Insults for insult’s sake alone or a high number of insults in a comment or by a commenter will be removed. If a pattern develops the commenter will be banned.

3.      Threats of violence or death are not allowed. It is understood that in the context of medical genocide justice by legal government will be discussed, but avoid naming people in this context such as saying a specific person will be tried and hung.

4.      Steve Kirsch is looking for comments about the article, his Substack and related topics. Slightly off-topic is ok, extremely off-topic is not ok and may be removed.

5.      Commercial spam and scams are instantly deleted and banned. However, if you want to recommend and link to a salient book, study, article or product relevant to the Steve Kirsch article or comment conversation that is not considered spam. Use common sense – the moderators will.

6.      Well-meaning copy/paste spam is regretfully denied on this Substack. Even if your comment or link is good, do not copy and paste it many times. Once or twice is enough, no matter how good it is.

7.      Super-long posts or posts with many links will be removed. Posting Part 1 and Part 2 won’t get around that rule, they will both be removed. It is suggested that you write your own Substack Newsletter – the title of it will appear by your name every time you comment so that when you make great comments, people will go look at your Newsletter. Again, use common sense as the moderators will.  

8.      Trolling is not allowed; trolls will be banned and any subscription refunded. Troll activity is defined by the moderators but in general, it is making ridiculous comments only to push emotional buttons, cause trouble and waste time. This includes repeatedly asking obtuse questions.

9.      Racism, antisemitism and like posts will be deleted and the poster banned. It is understood that people who post these things will often try to be “clever” and “slyly” imply their inappropriate point without saying it outright. If you see something like this, please report it immediately so we can follow up.

10.  Don’t recommend or post about committing illegal activity, it will be removed.

Remember the three dots below each comment and help keep free comments by reporting posts that break the rules and guidelines above. The moderators will remove or restore the comment based on their second evaluation of the comment.

Related link: Etiquette Today: Comment Threads

If you are on the fence about whether the COVID vaccine is safe, this deck should help you make up your mind.

Available as:

1. PDF deck

2. Google slides deck (you can download as a powerpoint and edit to make your own derivative works)

Please stop asking me about the “no virus” people which include the people above as well as people such as Alec Zeck and Jon Rappoport.

These people refuse to engage in an open public recorded discussion with me, or qualified experts such as JJ Couey, Kevin McKernan, James Lyons-Weiler, or anyone else who understands virology.

They won’t do a recorded zoom call for even 5 minutes.

They won’t do it for free, and they won’t do it for a million dollar reward. They won’t respond to emails either inviting them to a recorded video discussion.

They don’t seem to be camera shy when there is nobody knowledgeable enough to challenge them on camera.

I have written at least 10 articles on this topic as summarized in this article.

Until someone provides evidence that the principals are ready to show up for a public discussion where each side is given equal talk time, I will not be commenting on this topic any further. It is a complete waste of time.

Executive summary

Here’s a high level collection of some of the most compelling pieces of evidence I’ve seen to date. This is not an exhaustive list, but just the key pieces of data that are impossible to explain if the vaccines are safe and effective.

I’ve divided the collection into sections and I’ve tried to limit each section to the most compelling data points. So don’t be disappointed if your favorite item isn’t mentioned in this article; I wanted to keep it short enough to be read..

I’ll try to keep this updated over time. It can be found in the Reference section of my Substack.

The most definitive data

The official US government safety monitoring system is the VAERS system. It has been throwing safety signals since the vaccination program began. The signals are all being ignored and the CDC will not comment on it.

1. The VAERS system generated a safety signal for “death” long ago, but the CDC never noticed and is not commenting. This is a clear message that the CDC is not monitoring safety events. We were lied to. They said they were watching the safety signals like a hawk. They forgot to mention the hawk had a blindfold on.

2. Nobody in the world can explain this graph. VAERS is the official safety monitoring system for all vaccines. We proved it isn’t fraud and it isn’t overreporting. Our survey of healthcare workers randomly sampled shows it is from more events happening. We were lied to.

   

3. Not only are they not monitoring their own safety system, but none of the people at the CDC wanted to see the more sophisticated data collected by the Israeli Ministry of Health that the MoH did not tell the public about. Even the chair of the ACIP committee refused to even answer the question about seeing the safety data (preferring to call the Palo Alto Police instead).

4. The CDC claims VAERS is simply overreported, but cites no evidence. The evidence I collected shows that VAERS is underreported by 5.4X. For example, the VAERS data shows that acute cardiac failure is elevated in the COVID vaccines by 475X compared to other vaccines. Once we correct using the 5.4X factor, we get a 2,565X higher fatality rate for these vaccines. How could that be “safe”? Nobody will explain that.

5. Several analyses put the death count in America caused by these safe vaccines at over 500,000. The US household polling data shows as many as twice as many people were killed by the vaccine as from COVID. Nobody wants to comment on the survey or even to try to replicate the survey.

6. There are no autopsies that test for whether the vaccine caused the death. Only one pathologist in the US is doing the proper tests to make the association. The rest don’t want to know. If they don’t test for it, how will they know?

7. Damage to women’s reproductive systems (stillbirths, miscarriages, lower fertility, etc) are nearly all happening ONLY to vaccinated women.

8. Sudden deaths worldwide are happening to vaccinated people at a 50:1 odds ratio. That’s highly unlikely if the vaccine wasn’t causing these issues.

9. US household surveys show that over 1M people are so injured from the vaccine that they can no longer hold a full-time job.

10. UCSF Professor Vinay Prasad calls for Biden to get new COVID advisors. That would simply never happen if nothing is wrong. Vinay Prasad is highly respected.

11. See the news items in this article for more.

The most egregious evidence ever

1. In Alberta Canada, they are simply deleting the medical records of those injured from the vaccine.

2. Look at this video at 6:21. In 777 patients who got the vaccine, the curve is shifted to the right uniformly. Meaning, pretty much everyone is getting heart damage to some extent after taking the mRNA boosters. This is hard for anyone to explain away. Professor Christian Mueller, MD, the scientist who did the study, is an expert in cardiac disease.

Corruption at the CDC

1. The CDC has been collecting V-safe data since the start of the vaccine program. The data was very bad, so they hid the data from everyone, even their own outside committees. After over a year of legal work, that data has now been released and it is devastating.

2. The CDC is ignoring the safety signals triggered by key adverse events such as death. This is unambiguous because the data and formulas, both from the CDC, are in plain sight. A safety signal has been generated by the “death” symptom but the public has not been informed of this unprecedented event. There is no investigation and no press coverage. There are no “fact checks” and no comment from anyone at the CDC on this. This is corruption at the highest levels. This is the most critical safety signal to get right and they have completely missed it according to all the document obtained under FOIA. Furthermore, they refuse to comment.

3. Nobody at the CDC, or on any of the outside committees, is interested in taking a look at the Israeli Ministry of Health (MoH) safety data that was concealed by the MoH. Think I’m wrong? Name the person who wants to see the data.

The phase 3 clinical trial data

1. The Pfizer trial 6 month report showed absolutely no all-cause morbidity or mortality benefit. There were no all-cause benefits at all. It was all negative. Ask your doctor why you should take a new, unproven medical intervention that is not shown to have an overall benefit. Even if there was a benefit of fewer COVID infections (which is seriously suspect due to the gaming below), the fact that the total all-cause numbers for both mortality and morbidity were negative means the intervention should not be recommended by any doctor.

2. The Pfizer trial 6 month report showed that more people died (and were injured) who got the drug than who got the placebo. In other words, the cure was worse than the disease. The drug maker claimed that none of the people in the vaccine group were killed by the vaccine. They do not reveal the tests they did and explain how they were able to make that assessment. Why the secrecy here, especially in light of the study by Bhakdi and Burkhardt showing that trained medical examiners missed the causality link in 93% of the cases they looked at? The Pfizer vaccine had 4X as many cardiac arrests in the treatment group than the placebo (see page 12 of the Supplemental Appendix). This lines up very well with the numerous cardiac-related problems related to the vaccine as documented in the study by Retsef Levi and in the VAERS data which showed that the “cardiac arrest” reports were elevated by a factor of 93X higher than the annual baseline rate (VAERS reports from all vaccines combined in previous years). For some reason, the CDC wasn’t able to detect that signal (it was only 100 times higher than normal so they ignored it for some reason; they won’t let me ask them about it). In short, the claims from the manufacturer that none of the deaths were caused by the vaccine are highly suspect since all the evidence for those claims remains hidden from public view for some reason.

3. The Pfizer trial 6 month report showed that at best, the drug saved only 1 COVID life per 22,000 recipients. This means that at best, after vaccinating 220M Americans, we might save 10,000 lives from COVID. But the VAERS reports show an excess death toll of well over 10,000 people and that’s before applying the minimum estimated under-reporting factor of 41. So there isn’t a mortality benefit: it’s actually the reverse. Furthermore, VAERS reports will likely only be filed for deaths in temporal proximity to the shot and is highly unlikely to report those deaths happening 5 months after the shot which appear to be the bulk of the deaths. This makes the comparison even worse. In short, we aren’t anywhere close to saving any lives at all.

4. The Classen paper analyzed the clinical trial data for all three US vaccines and confirmed the lack of any overall benefit. There was an increase in morbidity which was highly statistically significant in all three vaccines. It concluded, “Based on this data it is all but a certainty that mass COVID-19 immunization is hurting the health of the population in general. Scientific principles dictate that the mass immunization with COVID-19 vaccines must be halted immediately because we face a looming vaccine induced public health catastrophe.” This is exactly right.

5. The paper by Christine Stabell Benn entitled, “Randomised Clinical Trials of COVID-19 Vaccines: Do Adenovirus-Vector Vaccines Have Beneficial Non-Specific Effects?” confirmed that there was no mortality benefit by taking the COVID mRNA vaccines. “Based on the RCTs with the longest possible follow-up, mRNA vaccines had no effect on overall mortality despite protecting against fatal COVID-19.” See this article by Daniel Horowitz for more information. In other words, these vaccines have no death benefit. Period. Full stop. This is exactly what the Canadian analysis below showed.

6. Serious adverse reactions, including paralysis, were not reported to the FDA and there were other very serious discrepancies in the trials. For some reason, nobody seems to be interested in exploring or explaining these very serious issues. Some are very clear cut such as the case of Maddie de Garay who was one of 1,000 kids in the clinical trial. She’s paralyzed now and has to eat with a feeding tube. The FDA and Pfizer never investigated, but reported her results as mild abdominal pain in the trial results. This is fraud. Also, there were 5 times as many exclusions in the treatment arm as in the placebo arm of the trial: 311 vs. 60. Do the p-value computation on that one and you’ll find that it could not possibly have happened by chance (1e-40). It means the trial was not blinded. Why didn’t anyone in the medical community ever point this out? Nobody will tell me.

7. Pfizer admitted to clinical trial fraud in federal court. Their defense was that the FDA was in on it.

Official government data

1. In Canada, the #1 cause of death is now “unexplained.” See Deaths with unknown causes now Alberta's top killer: province. If it isn’t the vaccine, what is causing this?

2. In the US, the FDA is withholding autopsy reports from people who died shortly after vaccination. See “EXCLUSIVE: FDA Withholding Autopsy Results on People Who Died After Getting COVID-19 Vaccines.” Why would the FDA withhold from the public conclusive proof that the vaccines are safe and effective? The mainstream press isn’t asking about that. The article notes: “The FDA declined to release any reports, even redacted copies.” You don’t need anything more than that to figure out there is something very wrong.

3. There aren’t any all-cause mortality studies vs. placebo on the COVID vaccine or any other vaccines for that matter. Why haven’t any governments anywhere in the world funded any such studies in the past 60 years? There must be a reason. Do you know what it is?

4. The VAERS data, which is the official adverse event reporting system used by the US government, shows that an estimated hundreds of thousands have died and millions have been injured. If these weren’t caused by the vaccine, what caused them? Why are there more adverse events reported for these vaccines than for all other vaccines in history combined? Nobody can answer that question. See this tutorial and this recent confirmation and this article on VAERS and causality. Here’s how these numbers were calculated. Here is independent confirmation of the estimates by Dr. Naomi Wolf who used different datasets. No fact checker was interested in contacting me to challenge the facts since I always insist on recording any calls. Also, the causality of events was confirmed by the Israeli safety studies, but nobody wants to look at those.

   

5. The US Social Security Death Master File showed a 60% increase in the all-cause death rate in September 2021 vs. September 2020 for ages 18 to 55. According to the insurance companies, it wasn’t COVID. COVID kills only a small fraction of people in this age range so even if the COVID death rate doubled, it would be a minor blip on the all-cause death rate. A five month delay in death vs. vaccination was discovered in multiple countries, not just the US. Different studies found nearly identical delays. Also, I find it very troubling that the insurance companies aren’t asking the family of the policyholders who died whether they were vaccinated with the COVID vaccine and when. They don’t want to collect this information for some odd reason. So let’s be clear that a 60% increase in all-cause death rate makes this intervention extremely dangerous. I’m not aware of anything that comes close to killing people in such massive numbers. The CDC is silent on this. They don’t even want to show the public this chart:

   

6. US disability rose dramatically soon after the vaccines rolled out (Y axis is Z-score). A 3 sigma increase is hard to explain.

   

7. As of Sep 2, 2022, the vaccination rate in Israel is now just 2.4%. They used to be one of the world’s most vaccinated countries. Today, very few people in Israel are considered to be vaccinated. If the vaccines are so beneficial, why has nearly the entire country shifted from extremely pro-vax to extremely anti-vax in such a short period of time?

   

Statements from government officials

1. The Israeli Ministry of Health revealed in a confidential meeting with scientists that the reason that they never notified the people of Israel about the safety issues from the vaccines was because of budget/staffing issues. Apparently, while they had millions of dollars to promote the vaccines as safe and effective, they forgot to budget for the possibility they were wrong.

Independent expert reports solicited by government officials

1. The Israeli vaccine safety data showed very clearly the side-effects are serious, long-lasting, and caused by the vaccines. Secondly, it showed that the Israeli authorities and the worldwide mainstream media are covering it all up. It also showed that US officials were not interested in seeing credible COVID vaccine safety that didn’t go along with the narrative. I tried to find out why, but nobody would talk to me. Harvard Professor Martin Kulldorff, a widely respected authority on vaccines, when asked why these people wouldn’t want to see the data, replied, “I don’t know.” This is the single most damaging report in the history of the COVID vaccines. Nobody wants to talk about it. They are hoping it will die. It won’t. Some people claim Israeli used a broad mix of vaccines, but that’s not true. Over 90% of the reports are from Pfizer, the bulk of the others are from Moderna. See also Israeli Investigators Find COVID-19 Vaccines Cause Side Effects: Leaked Video.

2. The Canadian report prepared for the Liberal Party of Canada (Trudeau’s party) showed no benefit for infection, hospitalization, and death for those under 60. “The empirical evidence investigated in this report from PHO and PHAC does not support continuing mass vaccination programs, mandates, passports and travel bans for all age groups.” You can’t have a vaccine that doesn’t work in Canada work in other countries. The authors of the report had to hide their identities for fear of retribution. The statistics analyzed were those from Ontario which is not a small province (15M people). Naturally, the mainstream press ignored the report. Nobody has shown where the experts who wrote this made a mistake. The conclusion of the report is supported by independent analysis done by Mathew Crawford of the data from San Diego County, San Diego County Data Busts a Hole in Vaccine Efficacy Narrative. So apparently, the results are not limited to Ontario.

Pre-prints from highly credible sources

1. The Harvard-Hopkins-UCSF-Oxford study showed it is unethical to mandate vaccination for college students and anyone younger. The study clearly said, “University booster mandates are unethical.”

2. The Thailand study did blood tests before vs. after the jab and determined that nearly 30% of young adults experienced cardiovascular injuries after the jab. How is that safe? And why didn’t anyone in the US ever do such a study? Do we not want to know? This was a simple blood test before and after the vaccine. Why did they not notify parents as soon as the study was published?

3. The study by Bhakdi and Burkhardt showing 93% of deaths after vaccination were caused by the vaccine

4. The data showing the vaccines cause prion diseases shortly after vaccination. This is impossible if the vaccines are truly safe. See the paper on ScienceOpen.com (after ResearchGate removed it).

5. Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine-Induced Myocarditis Requiring Hospitalization by Jessica Rose and Peter McCullough showing the myocarditis caused by the vaccine have distinct biomarkers.

Papers published in peer-reviewed medical journals

1. The Malhotra two papers called for a halt to the COVID vaccines based on a 6 month look at the risk-benefit data. See Curing the pandemic of misinformation on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines through real evidence-based medicine (Part 1 and Part 2). See also the backstory on these papers.

2. A Case Report: Multifocal Necrotizing Encephalitis and Myocarditis after BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccination against COVID-19 proves that the vaccines cause both myocarditis and Encephalitis (brain inflammation). Vaccines aren’t supposed to cause either one. And the CDC and medical community are supposed to warn people at a minimum. They remain silent.

3. The Fraiman-Doshi paper looked at serious adverse event rates and found that the vaccines may not be as safe as has been claimed, but they cannot do a proper analysis because they are not allowed to see the data. “Full transparency of the COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial data is needed to properly evaluate these questions. Unfortunately, as we approach 2 years after release of COVID-19 vaccines, participant level data remain inaccessible.” You have to wonder: if the vaccine is so safe, why are the drug companies hiding the data?

4. The Levi cardiac arrest rate elevation paper showed a troubling correlation between vaccine doses and increased cardiac events from January–May 2021. When they tried to get data after May 2021, they were refused access. This begs the question: if the vaccines are perfectly safe, what are they trying to hide?

5. There are over 1,250 papers published in the scientific peer-reviewed literature showing the vaccines cause significant adverse events.

6. The Walach paper found that the vaccines harm more people than they save.

7. This news article published in the BMJ showed that 10 out of 100 deaths in elderly people they examined were "likely" caused by the vaccine. Funny, in America we think the number is 0. They can’t both be right. Someone should investigate why we have different results. This is very important. In fact, with a deeper investigation, over 90% of the deaths thought by medical examiners not to be caused by the vaccine were shown to be caused by the vaccine. This suggests that the US isn’t looking at the deaths.

8. My colleagues and I are not misinformation spreaders according to this paper published in a peer-reviewed medical journal.

Articles by respected vaccine experts interpreting the data

Are the Covid mRNA Vaccines Safe? was written by Harvard professor Martin Kulldorff who until recently was on vaccine committees of the FDA and CDC. He concluded:

Fraiman and colleagues have produced the best evidence yet regarding the overall safety of the mRNA vaccines. The results are concerning. It is the responsibility of the manufacturers and FDA to ensure that benefits outweigh harms. They have failed to do so.

Articles on court rulings and expert opinion

Canadian court decisions on the constitutionality of Covid measures are invalid due to jurisdictional errors of law reviews court decisions on COVID and emphasizes the courts’ repeated over reliance on government expert testimony. Courts are supposed to find the truth and not rely on government representations or propaganda.

Articles debunking bogus studies in the peer-reviewed scientific literature

1. The Watson et al. “modeling study”: did “COVID vaccinations” really prevent 14 million deaths? The original paper was clearly bogus since the vaccines kill more people than they save. This article examines the paper claiming the vaccines have been ridiculously effective.

Autopsy reports

There are specialized tests required to diagnose a death from the COVID vaccine.

The CDC has never told any medical examiner in the US about these tests.

So the medical examiners aren’t implicating the vaccine in any of the deaths.

The question is we know what the tests are, we know there is solid evidence from multiple countries that the vaccine causes death, yet we refuse to even consider the possibility that the vaccine caused the deaths. Why?

Retracted papers published in peer-reviewed journals

This paper, A Report on Myocarditis Adverse Events in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in Association with COVID-19 Injectable Biological Products, was retracted because the publisher didn’t like the result. So he unilaterally decided to retract the paper. This is unethical.

Here’s the “withdrawn” notice.

Here is the backstory as well as this censorship update.

The publisher hasn’t fixed the problem in over a year despite assurances it would be quickly resolved.

Here is another retracted paper that was correct:

Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19? by Ron Kostoff
“Compared with the 28,000 deaths the CDC stated were due to COVID-19 and not associated morbidities for the 65+ age range, the inoculation-based deaths are an order-of-magnitude greater than the COVID-19 deaths!”

That is basically what I found: the vaccines kill >10X more people than the number of COVID deaths that they save. The paper passed peer review and was published. The editor of the journal quit after he was overridden by the publisher on the retraction.

The reason cited for the retraction:

1. The use of key terminology, specifically the key terms “inoculation” and “vaccination” diverges from common use and are incorrect, indicating clear evidence of bias.

2. Publicly available data from the United States Center for Disease Control (U.S. CDC) were concluded by the external reviewers to be misinterpreted to make the erroneous conclusion that the vast majority of reported deaths due to COVID-19 are actually due to other comorbidities. Such an egregious misinterpretation and misrepresentation are unacceptable.

This is completely bogus for two reasons:

1. The editor could have easily normalized the terminology to eliminate any perceived “bias.” They simply ask the author to do a quick search and replace.

2. The vast majority of COVID-19 deaths were in fact due to other comorbidities. For example, the New Mexico death records where COVID-19 was listed as the cause of death and 5 out 6 were not consistent with a COVID death. If anyone wants to challenge me on that, I have access to the death data. In Massachusetts, only 10% to 20% of the deaths listed as COVID were actually caused by COVID. Most people don’t have access to the death data, but I do. So I wonder if the journal is interested in fixing their error?

Hard-to-explain anecdotes

Can anyone explain how these anecdotes are possible?

1. Why don’t Dr. Paul Offit (FDA vaccine outside committee) and Professor Grace Lee (Chair, CDC vaccine outside committee) want to see the Israeli safety data? They are deliberately avoiding answering the question. Why?

2. There is data from over 1,000 vaccine injured people where 10% of the injured report 30 or more symptoms that are unique to the vaccine injured. How is that possible if the vaccine is so safe? Marsha Gee was perfectly healthy before her COVID vaccine. Less than 1 hour after her first Pfizer shot she experienced severe symptoms and experiences 78 of symptoms common with other vaccine injured. If Marsha wasn’t injured by the COVID vaccine, what caused all these symptoms?

3. Why is it illegal to analyze the vaccine vials? Why hasn’t a single medical institution done an analysis of the content of the vaccines to see if there are placebos with saline solution and the amount of mRNA degradation, rendering the vaccines useless? Why the secrecy here? If we knew what was in the vaccines would this cause harm? How?

4. Why are prominent people risking their careers to obtain fake vaccine cards? We know top people at Mass General Hospital have fake vaccine cards. We’ve heard that people at the highest levels of the DoD can get fake vaccine cards. It is well known that the CEO of a large pharmaceutical company bought a fake vaccine card. Why would he risk spending years in jail if the vaccines are perfectly safe?

5. The Died Suddenly group on Facebook was adding users at 20,000 per day making it the fastest growing group in Facebook history. They had to throttle the growth rate due to attempts by the British military to infiltrate the group to cause it to be shut down.

6. The average age of the people reported dead in the Died Suddenly group has been trending younger and younger over time. How can you explain that? The only worldwide massive intervention that goes to younger people is the COVID vaccine.

7. The embalmer data (such as The Epoch Times article and this interview). These clots are not blood clots, but they are clots embalmers never saw before mid-2021 (since they take 3 months or more to form into large sizes). If the vaccines are not causing these killer clots, what is? They can be found in up to 93% of the embalming cases.

8. Insurance company data from insurance companies worldwide:

   1. Adults Aged 35–44 Died at Twice the Expected Rate Last Summer, Life Insurance Data Suggests

   2. Millennials Experienced ‘84 Percent Rise of Excess Mortality’ Into Fall 2021: Former BlackRock Portfolio Manager

9. Wayne Root’s wedding: 200 guests, half vaxxed, half unvaxxed. Only the vaxxed got injured (26%) or died (7%). I surveyed my readers and collected data from over 600 readers who collectively reported very similar stats. That’s hard to explain if there isn’t a huge effect.

10. My neurologist stats: 11 years without needing to do a single VAERS report; this year, she needs to file 1,000 VAERS reports on 20,000 patients in the practice. How can anyone explain that if the vaccine is perfectly safe with mild, short term effects? This is similar to the 4.5% rate of neurological injury reported earlier by the Israeli Ministry of Health.

11. The polling results using third party polling firms (so not my followers) consistently show that more people died from the vaccine than from the virus. The mainstream media refuses to do similar surveys and most survey firms refuse to even ask the questions.

12. Ten different surveys I did all showed the vaccines are more harmful than helpful.

13. Doctors in Canada died at a rate that was more than 10X normal after getting the fourth dose of the vaccine. And those are just the ones we know about.

14. The fact that Paul Offit isn’t going to get the latest booster even though the CDC says he should. Why should any of us take the shot if Paul Offit is refusing to take the shot? He’s arguably the world’s most respected authority on vaccines and sits on the FDA outside advisory committee?

15. Why are health authorities removing safety data on the latest shots? If they are so safe, why not release the data?

16. Google searches show people became interested in topics related to vaccine safety before they became popular on social media

17. When I ask data/statistics experts such as Joel Smalley and Professor Norman Fenton whether they’ve seen any credible data proving the vaccines are safe and effective, they are unable to cite a single reference.

18. A local news station (WXYZ-TV) asked people to report on unvaxxed loved ones that became sick and died and instead they got hammered with hundreds of thousands of people saying they lost loved ones to the jab. See my video on the WXYZ-TV story and also this video.

19. Woman collapses and dies in the pharmacy 7 minutes after Booster shot… The stunning thing is the Twitter video documents that the pharmacy workers have been instructed to not bring it up when briefing patients and, if asked, not to comment on the death. Do you think they are looking out for your best interest by withholding adverse events like death 7 minutes after the shot from the public? That should never happen. Have you ever seen a video like this before the COVID vaccines rolled out? The death was ruled as “natural causes” which means it was from internal organ failure as opposed to being hit by a truck. However, the internal organ failure was due to an external event (vaccinated).

20. From Jim R: I was just today discharged from the most prestigious academic teaching hospital in the South. I had gone in to the ER yesterday morning because I was so dizzy that I could barely stand (I’m a health 62 in good shape; BMI: 24). I am also a few weeks post-concussion, so I was worried about a cranial bleed.

    Long story short: I was held overnight so that they could do an MRI/MRA w/contrast this morning. That showed no TIA bleeding, which was great news. Apparently, the concussion has done some damage to my Vestibular functions (inner ear). I was then discharged after lunch, told to live life slowly and carefully, and instructed to follow up with a neuro-balance therapy group. Now for the interesting part…

    I asked for all of my data files and paperwork, as I always do. As I went through the exhaustive four pages of MRI interpretation, I noticed a paragraph at the bottom of page five titled: HS Troponin - I Beckman with an excellent result (4 ng/L w/ reference range of 3-19). That's curious! So, I asked the nurse “Why did you run this test?” She responded that it is often run for potential stroke patients, which, upon reflection, I could understand.
    

    I went a bit further and asked how frequently it is tested in the general population, and that’s when I got the fascinating answer to the real (vaxx) question. She said “Just this year we have started running Troponin on almost everybody, even a guy that comes into the ER with a cut on his finger”. I asked why the new protocol, and she didn’t have an answer, but she did close by saying “We sure are seeing a lot of elevated levels in so many people”. Wow, I thought. You’ve just given a hard-core mRNA skeptic like me a gold nugget.

    Jim R.

    Atlanta

Cancers

1. Turbo-cancer is being reported now. It’s impossible to explain. Never been seen before.

2. A reader wrote: I work in the financial services industry in Toronto. A co-worker of mine was recently diagnosed with cancer. He has been getting treated at Sunnybrook hospital for it. The doctors there told him they’ve seen a significant spike in cancer cases well above what could be explained by people missing getting screened due to the pandemic. What’s more though is that they catalogue the vaccine status of every cancer diagnosis and the spike in the number of cases is only occurring in those who are vaccinated- apparently they are researching it to try and find out why the vaxed have seen a spike in cancers vs the unvaxed who haven’t- obviously they are not ready to go public with this but they know about it and are researching it fwiw

Books

1. Turtles all the way down: Vaccine science and myth shows the vaccines are not nearly as safe as people think. This is the most damaging book ever written showing the safety of the vaccines is highly questionable. There isn’t a single risk-benefit trial on all cause mortality and morbidity vs. placebo for any of the 70 approved vaccines even though they’ve had 60 years to do this. If the vaccines are truly beneficial, why do you think it’s never been done for any vaccine? A team of Israeli scientists wrote this book over 5 years. It was recently translated into English and is available through purchase on Amazon.

2. Dissolving Illusions: the history of vaccines shows they did a lot less than people think; probably next to nothing.

3. The Real Anthony Fauci: illustrates the corruption in the medical community today. For example, they created a more accurate adverse event reporting system (ESP:VAERS) system and then scrapped it after it showed all the vaccines were unsafe.

Slide presentations

1. Vaccine Secrets: a 20 minute slide presentation from CHD

2. The CCCA presentations:

   1. Stop the shots,

   2. More Harm Than Good

   3. Dispelling the Myth

3. My mega-presentations:

   1. What I learned during the pandemic

   2. The elephant in the room

   3. Vaccine Policies

   4. Vaccine Essentials

   5. All you need to know

   6. Things you need to know

   7. 180 questions they can’t answer

Fact checks

Once I established a policy of always recording calls with “fact checkers,” I’ve not had a single call from them trying to refute anything I’ve written.

None of the drug companies that make these products will refute anything I’ve written or supply a representative to debate me or any of my colleagues in a live debate. They have immunity from liability and they are not willing to be held accountable in the court of public opinion either.

1. The COVID lies by Dr. Michael Yeadon

Mitigation measures: masks, vaccines, lockdowns, social distancing, 6 foot rule, …

This was a very well done study, but it is of course attacked by the pro narrative people. We’d love to have an open debate about this study, but the other side doesn’t want to talk about it in a neutral forum.

A LITERATURE REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTS OF LOCKDOWNS ON COVID-19 MORTALITY

Masks don’t work at all. See this article which has plenty of references. If anything, masks are more likely to hurt you than to benefit you.

There is no study at all on the 6 foot distance rule. They just made that one up.

Origin of the virus investigation

Professor Jeffrey Sachs was tasked by The Lancet to lead an independent investigation into the source of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. After he determined it came from US biotechnology, all of a sudden nobody wanted to pursue the investigation any further.

Conflicts of interest

Tony Fauci gets paid every time you get a Moderna shot. He won’t disclose how much he makes and you can’t get via FOIA (it’s blacked out). If the Republicans get control of the Senate, that will change. Watch this video from Sept 20, 2022 of Rand Paul commenting on this as well as the well founded accusation that Fauci created the virus in the first place and then desperately tried to make it look like it came from nature after top scientists said it was a lab leak (watch the video at 2:00 onwards). Rand Paul called it, quite rightly, “the biggest cover-up in the history of science.”

The question you have to ask yourself is why is Fauci keeping his funding of the gain of function research and also his compensation for each vaccine dose a secret?

Tony Fauci was the primary reason that all early treatments were ignored by the government. It appears he did that because it would cut into his revenue stream.

Early treatment options

Early in the pandemic, two physicians, George Fareed and Brian Tyson, developed a treatment protocol using a variety of safe, low cost drugs and supplements with little to no side effects that had a near 100% success track record in preventing hospitalization, death, and long haul COVID if the patient started treatment shortly after realizing they were infected. They’ve treated over 10,000 patients. They wrote a best-selling book about it.

Today, more than two years later, the FDA and the CDC have not returned their calls.

Questions for lawmakers

1. Why can't we have open forums where our public health officials can be challenged by experts who disagree? Is there proof that having open debate results in worse outcomes?

2. Why doesn’t anyone want to see the Israeli safety data?

3. Why isn’t anyone asking for Fauci’s unredacted emails?

4. Is there a scientific reason that the CDC is ignoring me and all the experts I work with?

5. Questions I'd love to ask Congresswoman Anna Eshoo... that she'll never answer

Questions I’d like to ask the CDC

1. Why hasn’t anyone calculated the minimum VAERS under-reporting factor (URF)?

2. Did the propensity to report change in 2021 vs. previous years. What is the new number in 2021 and 2022 compared to previous years? How did you calculate it?

3. Why do John Su and Tom Shimabukuro never talk about the URF in the ACIP meetings?

4. There were over 14,000 excess deaths reported in VAERS. That’s before the URF is applied. If these weren’t caused by the vaccine, what caused them?

5. If these vaccines are so safe, why are there more adverse events reported for these vaccines than for all other vaccines in history combined?

6. I found thousands of adverse events that are elevated by these vaccines compared to all other vaccines combined in previous years. How many adverse events did the CDC find?

7. There was a dramatic rise in adverse events reported in the VAERS system for the COVID vaccines. How could this not be a serious safety concern? The propensity to report did not increase. If you believe the propensity to report did increase, what data do you have to support that?

8. My neurologist has been in practice for 11 years. She has 20,000 patients in her multi-physician practice. In that time, she’s never had to report a single event to VAERS. With the COVID vaccines, she now needs to make 1,000 reports. If the vaccines are safe and effective and most all the symptoms are mild and short term, how do you explain this? Her event rate similar to the 4.5% injury rate that the Israeli MoH found. So her reporting rate is more than 10,000 times higher than for any other vaccine. Couldn’t that be the explanation for the higher rate of VAERS reports? Doesn’t this suggest that the propensity to report is much lower this year because there are so many more events and doctors simply don’t have the time to report them all?

9. The NEJM pregnancy paper by Tom Shimabukuro noted that the results on safety for pregnant women was preliminary since many of the women were still pregnant. What was the final result and why wasn’t it published?

10. There was an analysis of the VAERS data by Hannah Rosenblum published in the Lancet. It never goes into explaining why there were elevated reporting rates and also the nature of the reported events are not normal background events. Couldn’t the elevated reporting rates be caused by a dangerous vaccine? Does she want to look at the Israeli safety data? If not, why not? The Israeli data directly contradicts the conclusion of the paper. Shouldn’t we figure out which conclusion is correct?

11. Why does Carol Crawford not answer my questions about an open discussion with the top vaccine misinformation spreaders to resolve our differences and reduce vaccine hesitancy?

12. Why does Martha Sharan ignore my emails and phone messages when I attempted to ask for permission to talk to the authors of the Rosenblum paper? Can’t she reply with the reason questions are not allowed?

The unanswered questions

Questions I’d love to get the answer to. These were asked, but never answered.

1. Why did the CDC never publish the follow up on the NEJM pregnancy paper by Tom Shimabukuro?

2. The CEO of Moderna was asked how the 19 nucleotide sequence from a Moderna patent got into the SARS-CoV-2 genome. That sequence is never found in a virus. How did it get in this one? The CEO said he’d look into it, but never reported the explanation. I’d love to know what it was.

3. Why hasn’t any Democratic committee chairman asked the NIH for Tony Fauci’s unredacted emails? Don’t we want to know the truth about whether there was a deliberate cover-up? If there was, shouldn’t Fauci be fired?

4. Fauci wasn’t supposed to be funding gain of function research but he was. How is he being held accountable?

5. How much is Fauci making every time someone gets a Moderna shot? He’s a public official… Why is this a secret?

Debates

People who disagree with the mainstream narrative are rewarded with censorship, permanent bans on posting on social media, demonetization of your YouTube account, revocation of your medical license, revocation of your medical certifications, loss of hospital privileges, loss of job, loss of funding, loss of friends, and a Wikipedia entry labeling you a “misinformation spreader” and/or “conspiracy theorist.”

This is a problem. I am not aware of any paper published in the medical literature that shows that such tactics result in better health decisions.

Should we use the same rules at the UN when nations disagree? Do you think that will result in better outcomes?

The way people resolve differences is by confronting the issues and talking through them. But we are not doing this:

1. Why can't we find anyone who will defend the CDC, FDA, and NIH on camera?

2. Dr. Byram Bridle and 2 colleagues challenged Canada's health authorities to a debate

3. Vinay Prasad's most important op-ed

Articles about the corruption of science

1. The head of the CDC's outside committee on vaccine safety does not want to see the safety data collected by the Israeli Ministry of Health.

This is objective proof of a broken system. It is indefensible. Caught on video camera. There is no reason that anyone in a position of authority on the COVID vaccines would refuse an opportunity to see the most thorough post-vaccine safety study ever done: one that shows causality of serious adverse events.

From Israeli Investigators Find COVID-19 Vaccines Cause Side Effects: Leaked Video:

Rechallenge changes a causal link “from possible to definitive,” Dr. Mati Berkovitch, head of the research team and a pediatric specialist, said at the meeting.

and

Many of the reported adverse events were found to be long-lasting, which researchers said in the meeting was surprising since the brochure handed to vaccine recipients says otherwise. They also said Pfizer officials told them that Pfizer did not know of any long-lasting symptoms.

and

In the official report later issued to the public, the MoH did not detail how researchers were caught off guard by the duration of the events and side effects. The health agency also stated that there were no new events identified.

It concludes:

The choice to omit some of the crucial findings discussed in the meeting from the public report is “a recipe to destroy” the entire vaccine program, according to Levi, an Israeli native and an expert in risk management.

“The more pro-vaccine, the more disturbed you need to be from something like this,” Levi told The Epoch Times. “And the reason is that the two most important enablers for vaccine programs … to be successful is trust and transparency, that you actually communicate to people the real risk-benefits and allow them to make choices about what they want to do. The second thing is that you take care of the people that were harmed by the vaccine because no vaccine has 100 percent safety.”

“I think we have in this example … where we violate these two very important principles,” he added. “This is a recipe to basically destroy all vaccine programs, so the more pro-vaccine you are, you should be more disturbed by this.”

How can you have the chair of a safety committee not interested in seeing important safety data? Professor Grace Lee should be removed from her position by the CDC. Why isn’t she? Does anyone care?

Why does Dr. Paul Offit ignore requests to see the same data?

According to the Epoch Times article, everyone declined to comment on the story: the scientists, the MOH officials, and the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office declined to comment on the Israeli findings.

Meta-collections

If the above isn’t enough, there are hundreds more “hard to explain” data points.

1. List of over 1,200 papers published in peer-reviewed scientific journals

2. The safe and effective narrative is falling apart

3. Think we got it wrong?

4. How the authorities can INSTANTLY stop the spread of "COVID misinformation"

5. Examining COVID Vaccine Efficacy

Using all the available evidence

There is an excellent article written in August 2020 by Norman Doidge entitled “Medicine’s Fundamentalists” which talks about the “all-available-evidence approach.” It should be read by every doctor in America. This is how medical science should work.

The precautionary principle of medicine

The precautionary principle medicine seems to have been thrown under the bus during the pandemic. It says in the face of uncertainty, one should take reasonable measures to avoid threats that are serious and plausible.

For example, the Pfizer clinical trial showed the vaccine saved only one COVID death per 22,000 injected. That means we might only save around 10,000 lives if we inject 200M Americans. So if VAERS, which is at least 41 times under reported, is showing over 12,000 deaths associated with the vaccine, any reasonable person should say that killing more than 41 people to save 1 life is nonsensical… shouldn’t we put a PAUSE on this intervention until we resolve the uncertainty?

In the current system, questioning the CDC or other authorities results in serious retribution as mentioned earlier.

Is that really the right way to handle scientific dissent?

Summary

Are the vaccines “safe and effective” as claimed?

To answer this, science requires that we look at all the available data and see whether the data is more consistent with the hypothesis of “safe and effective” or “not safe and effective.”

All the data that I and my colleagues have seen end up being placed in the “not” bucket.

We are open to being shown we got it wrong on the hundreds of pieces of evidence we have examined, but nobody is willing to discuss the data with us to resolve the issue, not even for $1M dollars.

I even went to extraordinary lengths to offer the Israeli safety data to ACIP Chair Grace Lee. Her response: she called the police on me. That pretty much tells you everything you need to know: they simply refuse to look at any data that goes against their currently held beliefs. That’s the way science works.

Please share this widely.

Share

Contact requests

There are two ways to contact me:

1. Use this form if you are responding to a specific request I’ve made in my Substack or Twitter post such as a debate challenge or help that I’ve expressly requested.

2. If you want to book my time and ask me anything (including whether viruses exist) and get instant answers in an interactive Zoom call, use this link. You can purchase anywhere from 15 minutes to 2 hours by changing the quantity. After your purchase, you’ll be able to immediately book a mutually agreeable time slot by following the instructions. You control how the time is used so you can interrupt me at any time.
   
   The paid link is meant for serious discussions.
   
   You will need to be respectful at all times; I reserve the right to terminate the call if you are not. The point of this is to show that I’m not hiding from questions from anyone. If you’re willing to compensate me for my time, I’m perfectly happy to answer any questions. Now wouldn’t it be great if people on the pro-vax side of the debate were open to doing the same thing I am? But they aren’t and that’s the problem.
   
   My consulting rate is currently set at $500 for 15 minutes. The price is set high enough to discourage people from using this method to waste my time and high enough that I don’t spend all day long in these calls.
   
   And I’d be absolutely delighted to pay the exact same rate to any prominent “pro narrative” people to buy their time to defend the narrative.
   
   I challenge any of them to make a similar offer as I am making here.

Debunk me

See this article for how to debunk anything I’ve written about.

Debate me 1:1

See this article if you’d like to challenge me in a live 1-1 debate for how to post your challenge.

Simple rules.

To qualify, you must have a real name, an h-index of 7 or higher, at least 1,000 followers, and a topic you want to challenge me on.

I meet the requirements.

You can see the people who challenged me here.

It was first posted on Jun 11 and as of July 3, 2023, there have been no takers.

Debate us (request a formal group debate)

See this article if you’d like to challenge us in a formal debate.

You can see the acceptances here.

The article was posted May 12, 2023 and as of July 3, 2023, there have been no takers.

Bet against me (side-bet form)

Use this form to bet against me ($25,000 or more). You can make big money quickly by proving I’m wrong.

You can also see a list of all of the people who are willing to wager against me here.

Update Nov 10, 2022

Since there were no takers for any of the bets I offered after many months, I’m terminating all the outstanding bet offers detailed below.

Use the contact me form if you like to propose something.

The whole point of the offers was to show how few people were confident that the government narrative was correct. As of Nov 10, there were no takers. Point made.

But the other reason for the withdrawal is because I realized I was exposed on one of the bets. I claimed that the COVID vaccines are the most dangerous vaccines in history and that may not be true because they likely buried the safety data on the other vaccines too. So I was taking at face value that the smallpox vaccine only kills 1 person per million. It easily could be worse than the COVID vaccine since they could have hidden those deaths too. Fortunately, I realized this before anyone accepted so I withdrew all the offers until I could properly think through to ensure that I didn’t make a similar bad assumption on my other claims.

From this point forward, if you think we’ve made a mistake, simply publish your argument and we’ll happily read it and if it convincing, we’ll change our thinking.

Executive summary

The ideas presented here are not new. Rootclaim uses a very rigorous method to evaluate claims, but the most important thing is their $100K bet offered to anyone who thinks they got it wrong.

I developed the bet idea independently and then found out later about rootclaim’s bet.

Both Rootclaim and I both offer bets on the lab leak theory. They offer a $100K bet on challengers to any of their claims. My minimum is $200K. Check out their site it’s cool.

Funny thing: they’ve never been challenged. It’s a tacit admission that they got it right.

I went with the lower overhead approach here. Basically if nobody will challenge me for $200K, there is a very high probability I’m right. It’s no more complicated than that. So far, nobody thinks I’m wrong on anything who is confident enough to risk any significant capital. That tells you everything you need to know.

Overview

This document describes:

1. Acceptance links

2. The available bets

3. The term sheet draft proposal

4. Why I am doing this

5. A description of how the side pool works

6. Why the methodology described here is so effective in determining the truth

For many people reading this document, you might want to start at #6.

IMPORTANT

The term sheet below is fully negotiable.

So if you disagree with the definition of terms, the number of judges, how the judges are selected, how the bet is won, etc. and are willing to negotiate in good faith to provide something that satisfies the intent of the offer, then that is fine.

For example, if you don’t like using Webster’s dictionary for the meaning of a word and want to use the OED for the bet, I’m fine with that substitution because it is neutral and doesn’t favor any party.

You can legally accept my offer here

Filling out these forms and clicking Submit constitutes legal acceptance of my offer(s) per this term sheet. Make sure you read the term sheet before accepting. The term sheet obligates you to good faith negotiations on a term sheet.

1. Accept here to challenge me on my beliefs ($200K minimum required).
   You can see who has accepted my open bets so far here. Accepting is not risk free. It obligates you to negotiate in good faith to a final definitive agreement.

2. Accept here to participate in the side pool.
   This is paid out based on which party wins the argument (no minimum; you double your money if you bet on the right side and lose it all if you bet on the wrong side). There is no negotiation of terms, you don’t need a lawyer, and you get to decide whether to participate in each bet at the time the definitive agreement of the bet have been signed. This means this is risk free since you can decline to fund each time. See this list of people who are interested in placing a side bet.

WARNING

Do not play games. My $1M offer is absolutely serious.

If you fill out the form and click submit, you are entering into a legal agreement to proceed to having your attorney talk to my attorney to negotiate any changes to the term sheet, leading to a definitive agreement.

If you want to bet for less than $1M (there is a $200K minimum), then specify the amount in your acceptance. If you want to bet for more than $1M, I’m open to that as well.

There are significant monetary penalties for non-performance by either party.

My open bets as of July 27, 2022

I claim that:

1. Viruses exists: The scientific evidence shows that it is more likely that (A) viruses exist than (B) they do not exist. Read this article before you accept.

2. SARS-CoV-2 is a real virus. The scientific evidence shows that it is more likely that SARS-CoV-2 is a virus than (b) something else such as a bacteria or an arbitrary computer sequence fabricated in a lab. Read this article before you accept.

3. SARS-CoV-2 causes COVID: The scientific evidence shows that (a) it is more likely that SARS-CoV-2 is a novel virus that infects people and often causes them to develop COVID than (b) COVID is not caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus; it is caused by something else.

4. Viruses cause disease: Viruses (a) can cause disease is more likely than (b) viruses are unable to cause disease.

5. SARS-CoV-2 is more likely than 5G to cause COVID: The evidence available shows that it is more likely that COVID is caused by (a) the SARS-CoV-2 virus than it is by (b) 5G.

6. The Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccine have killed more people than they have saved from dying from COVID. Based on the VAERS data, the Phase 3 trial data, and more, evidence shows the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines more likely than not kill more people than they are likely to save.

7. Masks don’t work: The evidence shows that it is more likely than not that the Bangladesh mask study which was embraced by the medical community as proof that masks work showed nothing of the sort: it showed that there was not a statistically significant difference between wearing a mask vs. not wearing a mask.

8. Censorship costs lives: It is more likely that censoring doctors who claim that the mRNA COVID vaccines are dangerous and that early treatments with combinations of pre-existing repurposed drugs and other supplements are a preferable approach, has resulted in an increase in deaths rather than a decrease in deaths.

9. Lab origin is more likely: It is more likely that the virus originated (a) in a lab than (b) via a purely natural origin. Read this article before you accept.

10. Masks for kids causes more harm than benefit: It is more likely that masking kids in school causes more harm than benefit.

11. Vaccine mandates in schools are bad: It is more likely that mandating COVID vaccines in schools for people under 20 years old causes more harm than good.

12. Lockdowns were counterproductive: It is more likely that COVID lockdowns caused more harm than good.

13. The most important statements I made on Fox News on August 10, 2022 were all true. Specifically:

    1. Hundreds of thousands of Americans have been killed by these [mRNA COVID] vaccines

    2. Millions of Americans have been injured by these vaccines

    3. The statistics at Wayne Root’s wedding (8 months after the wedding) were that at least 26 people were severely injured and 7 people died who were vaccinated while Wayne was not aware of anyone who was unvaccinated who reported any injuries or death.
       
       For me to win this bet, I have to show all the statements are true. For you to win, you must show all statements are false. I am happy to offer a subset of these claims if you want to narrow the bet. I included all the claims because I stand fully behind what I said. If you want to only challenge a subset of the claims, then you agree to admit that you agree with the claims you chose not to challenge. Also, let’s be clear that the term “hundred of thousands” also includes “millions.”

You can accept any of the offers. Accept here.

All definitions of key terms (virus, exists, etc) are per “generally accepted” meaning of the terms, e.g., Webster’s dictionary or any other mutually agreeable neutral source for the meaning of words.

Vaccine refers to the mRNA vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna as approved under EUA in the US.

Don’t like any of my bets? Propose a bet for me to accept?

Nobody seems to want to challenge me on the 15 bets I’ve proposed.

So just to make sure we cover the playing field, I’ve modified the acceptance form so that now you can propose a bet for me to accept.

So if you disagree with me on anything, now’s your opportunity to settle the question.

You may also use the acceptance form to propose a bet for me to accept.

Amount must be $200K to $1M.

Specify the subject matter of the bet on the Acceptance form.

I then have 10 calendar days to accept and both sides are bound by the term sheet if I accept.

WARNING: Do not propose a bet you are not serious about funding.

Generic bet term sheet

The term sheet is designed to be fair and perfectly symmetrical for both parties of the bet. This is just the initial term sheet. If you accept the offer, the first step is to negotiate any changes in the term sheet. For example, if you want to “lock in” the definitions of virus and exists in the term sheet, we can do that.

The terms ONLY apply to the principals, not to the side-pool participants.

These are the terms you agree to when you accept my offer (unless you specify exceptions when you accept):

1. Upon acceptance, you must specify the amount of the bet if you are accepting for <$1M. You may accept for any amount between $200K and $1M. You must specify the amount at the time you accept the offer.

2. If want to propose a counter offer for me to accept, propose it in the acceptance form.

3. Attempt to resolve before the attorneys are involved. Upon your acceptance by clicking the Submit on the acceptance form, within 10 calendar days, both parties agree to have a single two hour record session to try to resolve the dispute. Both parties can bring up to 3 experts. Both sides will have a total of 1 hour talk time (chess clock style) and agree to use best efforts to resolve the issue themselves. The recording will be made public.

4. Both parties must mutually agree within 3 calendar days after that session to engage the attorneys in the negotiation of the term sheet and the drafting of the definitive agreement. Either side can drop out of the bet at that point without any money changing hands. This makes resolution of the bet simple, fast, and efficient when one side concedes.

5. Each side must have a US attorney to negotiate on your behalf and escrow the $1M for you.

6. If the parties didn’t agree to settle, both parties will have their respective attorneys start to negotiate a final term sheet and definitive agreement.

7. Each party agrees to enter these negotiations in good faith. If one of the parties defaults on good faith negotiation, the defaulting party agrees to pay the other party $25,000 plus all legal costs to collect.

8. In negotiating the final term sheet and definitive agreement, the parties may communicate directly with each other or choose to have all communications go through their attorneys. Either party can force this.

9. Within 10 calendar days of a fully executed definitive agreement, each party will deposit with their licensed US attorney the agreed bet amount in a separate trust fund (escrow account). Failure to perform the escrow transfer will be a contract violation entitling the party who did comply to recover the full escrow amount from the other party.

10. Once the escrows are fully funded, the consulting firm identified in the agreement will be engaged to locate the judges.

11. The hearing will be scheduled at a mutually convenient time after all judges are selected, ideally no later than 30 calendar days after the judges are selected. This time may be extended by mutual agreement. This gives each side time to prepare their materials and strategy.

12. If a party needs to move the hearing date for good cause (e.g., the party or an expert is hospitalized), if 2/3 judges agree, the hearing will be postponed.

13. Based on the result of the judges, the amounts held in escrow will promptly be processed, e.g., paid to the winning party.

14. To win the bet, you must have 3 of 3 judges rule in your favor. Otherwise it is a split decision and both sides get their money returned by their lawyers (minus the fees for the judges and consultants).

15. Neutral judges, ideally with a science background. The judges of the bet will be selected randomly from a pool using a mutually agreed process. For example, the parties can agree to select a retired microbiologist, a retired molecular biologist, a cancer researcher, a medical doctor, a professor of medicine, an MIT physics professor, etc. I am very open to the specification of the judges. For example, they can be scientists from different fields that are peripheral to virology. I’m open to any method for selecting a neutral panel. The specification for the judges will be given to a mutually agreeable third party firm to assemble a list of candidates who meet the specification. The specification should not give an advantage to either party. For example, if the bet is about whether virology exists, insisting that any judge be a virologist would be biased. Similarly, picking people with a strong anti-establishment bias would also be biased.

16. Judges selected by third party firm. A third party consulting firm, mutually agreeable to the parties, will be hired to recruit a neutral panel of five judges who meet the specifications. This allows for each party to eliminate one judge so we are left with three judges. The consultant returns an ORDERED list of judges. After blind elimination by the parties, the first three judges will be used. Or the parties can agree to randomly order the judges before elimination.

17. Payment of the consultants and another expenses. The attorneys will take the expenses for the consultants, and any other expenses, out of the escrow fund. So each party pays half of the consultant fees. This will reduce the total reward at the end.

18. Either party has up to ONE (1) dismissal of a judge for any reason. So once the 3 judges are selected by the consultants, you have up to 5 calendar days to dismiss one of the judges. The consulting firm will identify a list of five candidates in order and each party will be given the option to eliminate one from the top 3. Both parties choose at the same time and it is done blinded so the parties don’t know the selection of the other party.

19. We are left with a 3 judge panel after the selection process (the top 3 judges after elimination).

20. Each party will have 3 hours of total “talk” time for everything. The clock starts when you start speaking and ends when you stop. This encourages each party to be short and to the point whenever they talk.

21. We flip a coin to determine who has “the floor” first. When that party is done, control of the floor flips to the other party. When that party is done, it flips back. This is done until time runs out for the party. At that point the other party can talk until their time runs out.

22. During the hearing the judges are responsible for enforcing the rules and monitoring the time of the speakers.

23. The person who holds the floor can ask questions of the judges.

24. The judges can ask questions of either party at any time.

25. A party who has control of the floor may ask questions of the other party, but vice versa. The party answering can talk for as long as they want, but the person holding the floor has the right to cut them off if they have gone longer than 3 minutes. The time is always counted against the person SPEAKING, not the person holding the floor. Hence, the responding party will want to give succinct answers. This keeps the discussion focused and prevents filibustering gaming.

26. You cannot control the floor for more than 30 minutes if the other party requests it. In other words, you have the floor for up to 30 minutes, but after than time, the other party can request the floor.

27. When the person with the floor is done (or has run through his allotted time), he can yield the floor to the other party.

28. The hearing is done via a Zoom call with the parties and the judges.

29. Each party may have up to 3 expert witnesses on their side at the hearing.

30. The list of experts shall be made available to the other side at least 3 days before the hearing and may not be changed without consent of the other party.

31. The judges can interrupt and ask questions at any time. There is no time clock on the judges, but the timeclock is allocated to the person answering the question.

32. The parties can mutually agree to extend the 3 hour time limit as many times as they want for as long as they want, but no longer than 6 hours total for each side.

33. Each side can prepare a 30 slide deck and give it to the judges and to the other party at least 3 days prior to the presentations. That is the presentation that the party is entitled to give live.

34. If a party doesn’t comply with the terms, the judges may assess a time clock penalty against the party who is not in compliance of up to 20 minutes per violation (essentially like a contempt of court punishment). If done before the hearing, the counterparty will notify the party of such violation and give 1 business day remedy time before contacting the judges to assess a penalty.

35. The parties can mutually agree to extend the elapsed time to more than 1 day

36. Any modifications to this term sheet shall be done in a public recorded forum.

37. Both sides are entitled to their full speaking time. So if one person times out earlier, the other party has exclusive talk time without rebuttal.

38. The time clocks will be visible to both parties. So it’s like a chess clock.

39. Legal agreement to be governed by laws in California.

40. Any evidence is allowed, including expert testimony, scientific papers, etc. It’s unrestricted. If we limited evidence to peer reviewed papers, this could put one side (who is going against the popular narrative) at a substantial disadvantage and the point of the bet is to make the terms as fair as possible to both sides.

41. I reserve the right to change these terms at any time, however, once accepted, both parties will be bound by the term sheet contents at the time of acceptance.

42. The offer automatically expires after the first person has accepted. After that, it must be manually re-opened which I will expressly do. For example, there are three offers available, so the maximum numbers of acceptances are three. This encourages people to act quickly.

43. The loser must publicly acknowledge that they were wrong and no longer express the erroneous belief for 10 years.

44. Although there are over 10 bets, there is only one of me. I reserve the right to process the bets serially, but in some cases, I may process more than one at a time. All bets are processed first come, first served basis.

45. If either party is disabled, the bet is suspended until the party recovers. The escrow money can be withdraw, but must re-deposited when the party recovers.

46. If either party dies or becomes permanently disabled affecting their ability to complete the challenge, prior to the decision of the judges, the bet is terminated and all unspent funds are returned to the parties.

47. People make mistakes. In the course of getting to a definitive agreement, if either side makes a mistake which is inconsistent with their position, the other side should not rely on this misstatement unless the party making the error has been notified and given a chance to correct it.

I’m happy to negotiate modifications of this term sheet. It was designed to be fair, but keep the discussion focused so it concludes in <6 hours and each party is given equal floor time and speaking time.

The bet

The purpose of the bet offers are to resolve important issues quickly in a fair manner. When large dollar amounts are at stake, each of the parties is motivated to try to win their argument. Not only can they claim that they are right, but they also walk out with a cool $1M reward for winning.

I accept wagers of $200K or more for each issue to be resolved.

So to challenge me, you need to have or raise at least $200K to escrow the funds up front, and sufficient money to pay your legal fees to negotiate the contract.

The side pool rules

For people who are not challenging me directly as a party, I’ve created a side pool so you profit if you are on the right side of the issue.

The amount of money you win is determined by the amount of funds on the other side.

The minimum bet is $100 and there is a $10K maximum.

The minimum is just due to administrative costs. The maximum prevents a single person from getting the bulk of the proceeds.

You can pledge money and revoke your pledge at any time up to 3 calendar days BEFORE the date of the hearing on the merits done between the betting parties.

So you won’t be asked to irrevocably commit any funds until you see:

1. who the parties are,

2. how much they have at risk,

3. the definitive agreement that they negotiated

4. the names of the judges that were ultimately selected

5. how much is being bet on both sides.

Say we get $100K on one side and 10K on the other side. If Side A wins, the $10K would be paid out in proportion to the bets on Side A, so each participant would make 10% on their investment. But if Side B wins, they get a 10X return on their investment.

Motivation behind the side pool

Financial markets are an excellent quantitative measures of support for a position. So even if none of my bets are accepted, looking at the sizes of the side pool is a rough quantitative indicator of how strongly someone believes in their position.

We can often determine the most likely outcome by looking at the dollars bet on both sides.

For example, bet #1 is about whether viruses exist. If there is $1M supporting the “exists” hypothesis and $100 supporting the the “doesn’t exist” hypothesis, we can with some confidence say that the people who don’t believe that viruses exist only weakly believe it. We can also estimate that it is 10,000X more likely that viruses exist and we can predict the likely outcome of the contest even if the contest never happens.

A great example is the lab leak theory that has been in the news. The side pool provides an objective and quantitative measure of intensity of belief on different hypotheses.

Today, we can easily be misled by the headlines which now have shift to the incorrect “natural evolution” thesis.

By contrast, financial markets are much more objective and honest. So for something really stupid like “Do viruses exist?” the pool will be very lopsided, e.g., 100:1.

If Christine Massey claims that I’m stupid for thinking viruses exist, instead of getting into a never ending debate with her, I can immediately call her out for being disingenuous by saying, “Christine, I see you can make 100X your money in 30 days by betting in the side pool against me. Why aren’t you investing $10,000?”

And that will end the conversation. Quickly, efficiently, and objectively. It’s a lie detector that is better than anything else I’ve seen.

In essence, it’s asking people to put their money where their mouth is.

Money has a way of making strength of conviction in a belief a lot more obvious, quantifiable, and believable.

And it rewards people who are promoting honest views.

I would love to bet Tony Fauci $100M about the safety of vaccines. This would result in a net transfer of $100M from him to me. This accomplishes two things: it shows I was right and it punishes Tony financially for promoting a false belief.

I’m just explaining the rationale for the side pool. You may not agree with me and that’s fine.

If you have a better way to quantify the conviction of parties, reward those promoting truthful views and punish those who promote false views, I’m all ears.

Why the method described here is a fast and efficient way to find the truth

The method described above in which the parties first agree to have a discussion to resolve the dispute and then, if that fails to resolve the dispute, proceeding to a more formal process in front of a panel of three mutually selected judges (selected by both parties to be neutral) is effective for several reasons:

1. Finality: It determines a winner in a fast, efficient, mutually agreed process. If the judges are split, it can determine that too.

2. It rewards the party who is right

3. It punishes the party who is wrong (both financially and reputationally)

4. It ensures that people take the process seriously (since serious money is at stake)

5. The magnitude of the bets on the side pool highly likely predicts the outcome making it unnecessary to even go through the process for any issue on the table

6. Can identify the weaker argument immediately (e.g., nobody accepts the bet).

In short, using the process described in this document is a fast, efficient, neutral, and accurate way to cut through the rhetoric and quickly ascertain who is telling the truth.

For example, if nobody accepts the bet and the side-pool strongly favors my views, it’s a pretty clear signal of who is correct.

It works because money quantifies intensity in a belief. On most issues, the intensity is extremely asymmetrical even though the rhetoric can appear to be symmetrical.

The process outlined here was designed to eliminate all possible excuses for not accepting.

Status update 2:52pm Monday Jun 27
I was sick with COVID on Friday. By Monday, I’m pretty much over it. Just some congestion in my lungs, but my O2 sat is 99%.

I’ve always said that the only thing we really needed to do to respond to COVID was tell people:

1. If you are sick, stay home

2. As soon as you realize you have COVID, start on an early treatment protocol like the one listed below.

Nothing else was needed. In fact, I’d argue that everything we did including vaccination, masking, lockdowns, mandates, remdesivir, standardized hospital protocols, and more was counter-productive; it just made things worse.

Introduction

I came down with COVID on Friday, June 24, 2022.

My wife had COVID (she got it from a golfing partner) and I didn’t wait long enough before interacting with her.

I am double vaccinated because in March 2021, I believed that the FDA and CDC were honest organizations. It wasn’t until 2 months later that I figured out I was badly mistaken. While many others realized this before I did, pretty much all our friends are still on the blue pill. I switched to the red pill as soon as I saw two black swans (a friend with 3 dead relatives 1 week after vaccination and a vendor and his wife both vaccine injured).

I suspected I had COVID because I woke up with muscle aches on Friday morning.

Since I was symptomatic, I verified it was COVID with a test from iHealth. These are the cheapest tests around, less than $5 per test ($9.79 per two pack) if you order from code1supply for example. The iHealth test showed positive for me 30 seconds after I applied the liquid to the well (it is normally supposed to take 15 minutes so I guess I had a high viral load).

Everyone has their own favorite COVID protocol

Here’s how I’m treating my COVID and it seems to be working pretty well since I’m just a bit tired.

This is not the only way to treat COVID. This is just what I’m doing.

Your treatment may vary depending on what drugs you are already on so check with your doctor before duplicating what I did.

Also, different doctors will have their own preferences. For example some people will have you take 40,000 units of vitamin D just once. Others say 10,000 IU per day. Which one is better? Hard to know. So all of these treatment protocols are approximate guesses as to the optimum protocol. Which means your doctor may recommend something different and it may be just as good. I’m not making the claim the protocol listed below is optimal.

One thing everyone agrees on is that you always want to start treating COVID instantly as soon as you get diagnosed which is why I always carry the meds with me when I travel.

I already had all the meds on hand because I pre-ordered everything using myfreedoctor.com. If you want to get the cheapest meds, it takes about a week, otherwise you have to use local pharmacies and that can be a lot more expensive.

Here’s the list of things I’m taking. For me, there are no side effects at all for any of these drugs making the combination very easy to take:

1. Nasal rinses. Nitric Oxide Nasal Spray (NONS) lowers Covid viral load by 94 per cent in 24 hours: Lancet study; Nitric Oxide blocks entry into nasal passage, kills the virus and stops its replication

2. Vitamin C: 3,000 mg/day   (3 chewable tablets since I like chewables)

3. Vitamin D3: 10K IU/day. Two small little pills in my case.

4. Zinc: 50 mg/day (I have this covered since I take Biome Boosters from Progenabiome which supports Sabine Hazan’s research). Don’t overdo the zinc. The zinc is really helpful to make the ivermectin effective so don’t think of it as optional.

5. Aspirin: 81 mg (some advise more): I went with the chewable Bayer aspirin. There is some debate about whether full aspirin is better but I’ve read that it is better to take the lower dose, but I can’t recall where I read that; it turned out that different things are activated on the lower dose vs. the higher dose.

6. Pepcid: one10 mg tablet 2x per day (20mg /day). Malone’s paper recommends a much higher dose 60mg TID which is 180mg/day. He also recommends using this with Celecoxib which requires a prescription. Also the higher dose was used when this drug was used as the sole therapy. I went with the lower option so this may not do much

7. Allegra: once a day. This is complementary to the Pepcid and blocks a different set of receptors.

8. NAC: 600 mg/day

9. Nigella sativa seeds: 80 mg /kg per day x 10 days (split it up) which is 6gm /day; So I take 1.5 tsp 3X/day.

10. Ivermectin (15mg pills compounded): 2 pills/day for 10 days. Take with a fatty meal for best absorption. This is based on my weight which is 77 kg. Your dosage will be proportional to your weight.

11. Hydroxychloroquine (200 mg tablets): 2 tablets twice a day on day 1, then 1 tablet twice a day for 10 days total. Ideally take on an empty stomach.

12. Activia yogurt: twice a day. This contains bifidobacteria which is helpful for eliminating COVID from your gut.

13. Azithromycin (250 mg tablet): 2 tablets day 1, then 1 per day thereafter for 5 days total. Doesn’t do wonders for your gut bacteria though. However, even Sabine Hazan who is a gut bacteria expert recommends this for up to 5 days.

14. Melatonin: 3mg extended release at bedtime

15. Fluvoxamine: 50mg taken twice a day (total 100 mg per day) for 14 days. AVOID caffeine while on fluvoxamine. You’ll regret it if you ignore my advice.

16. Povidone-iodine nasal rinse: 4x day. First I microwave 60ml of distilled water in a NeilMed sinus rinse squeeze bottle. Then I add half an eyedropper of Povidone iodine 10% and 1/4 tsp of salt and use it just like a regular sinus rinse. It should look like a dark iced tea.

17. Crest Scope Classic gargle: 4x day because it has CPC (Colgate Total can be used as well). You can also swab your nostrils with this, but the saline rinse is more comfortable.

18. Plenty of rest

19. Walk around regularly to keep the blood moving. You want to minimize your risk of a DVT or pulmonary embolism.

20. If you sit, elevate your feet.

21. Take regular pulse ox readings while walking around

22. Glutamine: 10 g l-Glutamine available in powder forms taken 3 times a day with meals. In the control group, 38 out of 230 covid patients died. In the glutamine group, 0 out of 222 patients died. The effect of glutamine supplementation on serum levels of some inflammatory factors, oxidative stress, and appetite in COVID-19 patients: a case-control study - PubMed (nih.gov) Again, no mortality and no ICU admission in the glutamine group… Effect of oral l-Glutamine supplementation on Covid-19 treatment - PubMed (nih.gov). This is not to be confused with glutathione which you’d take if you were vaccine injured. On the other hand, there is this paper: Endogenous Deficiency of Glutathione as the Most Likely Cause of Serious Manifestations and Death in COVID-19 Patients.

23. Lactoferrin: 750mg per day for 14 days.

24. Prednisone 20mg tablets. Take 3 tablets/day for 5 days starting on DAY 8 as last resort and ONLY if needed. I have it handy but you should never need to use it. The mistake a lot of people make is not to read the instructions to only use it LATE in the disease. I know people who start taking it on day 1 and they regret the error. If you started treatment early, you aren’t going to need this drug.

For more ideas and options, see this article on How to treat COVID.

For more on the science behind any of these drugs/supplements, see c19early.com.

Supplements that may work

Haven’t had cycles to check these things out, but they look interesting and worthy of further study.

Dhamasa

From Captain Rabbit:

Ivermectin, or quinine, on their own are not enough. They are ionophores and you need ZINC for them to be effective. The zinc element is one thing nobody has been talking about. This was discovered in 2005 and was proved to cure all corona-viruses with 100% efficacy. But you must use zinc. Also this is for corona-viruses, and if you're suffering from the spike proteins, Fauci Fleas I call them, this is not much use. I suggest Dhamasa, ie: (Fagagonia Arabica.) Heaped teaspoon twice a day in some water. It is a miraculous blood purifier, It cured my heart disease after two heart attacks, and I have used it to deal with brain fog and thrombosis about 1.5 years after I had Covid. I have used it to cure rabbits who came to me from a jabbed family. I get nauseous around jabbed people and can even smell them. After using Dhamasa again this vanished.

A young rabbit I got from a jabbed family was having severe fits when I got her. I realised what it probably was and stopped these with Dhamasa for her. But she was pregnant and when the babies were born, they started dying suddenly with no symptoms, from heart attacks about 4-5 weeks and it seems they were sterile also. I only then realised they'd been born with the spike proteins and only was in time to save one. Soon after starting her and her mother again on Dhamasa, they both became more active as well. At just a year old and six month respectively I then realised they'd been very inactive before. I assume blood clots. This is the treatment for the spike proteins and I swear it works fast. Ivermectin and quinine etc, are NOT going to help against the spike proteins.

Modified protocol

Started this on Monday per advice from Dr. Sabine Hazan since I basically recovered so quickly:

1. Stop the NAC, Nigella Sativa, HCQ. These aren’t good for gut bacteria.

2. IVM: reduce to 15mg/day

3. Add bone broth, sauerkraut, increase to 4 activia yogurts/day to rebuild gut healthy bacteria

4. Saline rinse without the povidone iodine

5. Add 200mcg of Selenium for 10 days

6. Increase Pepcid to 40mg 2X per day (80mg total per day)

How am I doing?

Friday, Jun 24: Muscle soreness. Started treatment. Oura ring showed an elevated pulse (90bpm during sleep instead of 67bpm) as well as elevated temperature (2.6 degrees over normal).

Sat, Jun 25: Productive cough (yellow stuff), diarrhea. Oura says body temp 1.9 degrees over normal.

Sunday, Jun 26: Just feeling a little off/tired. No cough. My nighttime pulse is back down to 68 bpm during sleep. Oura ring indicated Body temp 1.2 degrees over baseline.

Monday, Jun 27: Pretty much back to normal. No runny nose, no cough, etc. Never lost smell. My nighttime body temp last night is nearly back to normal per my Oura ring. Now on the “modified” protocol.

Wed, Jun 29: Feeling fine. Did iHealth test again which is still positive. Oura ring shows my resting pulse is 65 bpm which is normal for me. Here is my nighttime temperature. The 0.3 is the Wednesday morning reading. Friday is highest bar. So you can visually see my recovery.

Sadly, I left my ring on the charger Thurs night. Darn!!!

But clearly, the Oura ring told me instantly I had COVID and to start treatment and the ring basically told me the treatment was working:

Check out the comments

Be sure to go online and check out the comments. Lots of interesting insights.

Shorter version

Steve Kirsch is the Executive Director of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation (vacsafety.org) and a popular Substack journalist who writes about the pandemic (stevekirsch.substack.com). 

Prior to his work on COVID, Steve was a serial entrepreneur and has founded eight high-technology companies.

When the COVID pandemic hit, Steve took a leave of absence from his company to start the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund which funded clinical trials using repurposed drugs to treat COVID. 

Steve and his family were doubly jabbed in March 2021. A month later, Steve started hearing stories of death and injury from his friends.

He started speaking out publicly on May 25, 2021 with a 285 page article published on TrialSiteNews and an appearance on the Darkhorse podcast with Bret Weinstein and Robert Malone on June 10, 2021. 

Steve was told if he kept speaking out against the vaccine he would have to leave his position at the startup he founded. So he left. He has been permanently banned on Twitter (twice), LinkedIn, Medium, and Wikipedia. His Wikipedia entry has been modified to make him look like an evil person.

No public health official will debate Steve or any of his colleagues, even though such debates would theoretically stop misinformation and end vaccine hesitancy.

He’s also invited fact checkers who challenge him to a debate. None have accepted.

He writes one of the most popular Substacks in the world on vaccine safety.

He has a BS and MS from MIT in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science.

Longer version

Steve Kirsch is the Executive Director of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation.

Steve has been at the forefront of tech innovation for more than three decades. He invented and owns a patent on an early version of the optical mouse, founded Infoseek, one of the first Internet search engines, and helped create FrameMaker, a popular publication tool used by technical writers.

Steve was a serial entrepreneur and has founded eight companies: Mouse Systems, FrameTechnology (acquired by Adobe), Infoseek (acquired by Disney), Propel, Abaca, OneID, Token, and M10.

When the COVID pandemic hit, Steve took a leave of absence from his company to start the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund. He put in $1M of his own money and raised $5M more from private sources. The organization funded and/or assisted in the research of four drugs: fluvoxamine, hydroxychloroquine, interferon lambda, and camostat. All four drugs have been shown to be effective in treating COVID, but the FDA and NIH think none of them work.

Steve and his family were doubly jabbed in March 2021. A month later, Steve started hearing stories of death and injury from his friends. So he started looking at the data to see how that could be. He quickly identified obvious fraud in the Pfizer clinical trial and huge safety signals in the VAERS system that could only be caused by a very dangerous vaccine. Instantly, it all made sense. The evidence he found was consistent with an unsafe vaccine and a corrupt medical system. The more he learned, the more appalled he became.

He started speaking out publicly on May 25, 2021 with a 285 page article published on TrialSiteNews.

He appeared on the Darkhorse podcast with Bret Weinstein and Robert Malone. YouTube censored the video after 1M views and rave reviews. (1 hour version and full version) and demonetized his YouTube channel.

Steve was told if he kept speaking out against the vaccine he would have to leave his position at the startup he founded. So he left. He has been permanently banned on Twitter (twice), LinkedIn, Medium, and Wikipedia. His Wikipedia entry has been trashed to make him look like an evil person. They even removed the fact that he received a National Caring Award since this was inconsistent with positioning that the Wikipedia editors wanted to convey: that he was an evil person and a menace to society.

Steve started the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation which co-sponsors events such as Defeat the Mandates and other activities to help educate the public on the safety of the vaccines.

No public health official will debate Steve or any of his colleagues, even though such debates would theoretically stop misinformation and end vaccine hesitancy.

He’s also invited fact checkers who challenge him to a debate. None have accepted.

Steve has briefed only two public health officials who ignored everything he said. He’s never been invited to brief any corporate board or university Board of Trustees as none of them are interested in hearing the other side of the story.

He has a BS and MS from MIT.

Steve and his wife, Michele started a foundation which donates to a wide variety of charitable causes, and were subsequently named the 1999 Outstanding Philanthropists of the Year by the National Society of Fund Raising Executives. He is a 1997 Henry Crown Fellow of The Aspen Institute and a member of the Aspen Global Leadership Network.

He writes one of the most popular Substacks in the world on vaccine safety with over 500 articles. You can view some of his best non-Substack content here.

My resume from LinkedIn

Thanks to SignalHire which cached my LinkedIn entry before they permanently banned me, here is my work history.

Summary

I've founded 7 companies, 2 with billion dollar valuations. I'm currently involved in researching the safety of the COVID vaccines with 20 other scientists, doctors, and statisticians. What we've found is very troubling. You can see my recommendations for treating COVID, vaccine injury, and vaccine safety at www.skirsch.io. I love tackling really hard problems. My innovations have spanned a broad range: optical mouse, Internet search, desktop publishing, spam filtering, Internet acceleration, secure federated identity, open banking, and digital money. I'm a proponent of nuclear power to help solve the global warming problem. I was an Executive Producer of "Pandora's Promise." I helped rid the US of junk faxes (junkfax.org). Married 28 years; 3 daughters. I've been involved with computers for 50 years (since I was 10 years old). I've programmed in almost two dozen languages, and was lucky enough to work with the pioneers of the Internet while I was in junior high school. I shared an office with Jon Postel at UCLA (he wrote the email protocol we use today). I wrote the email program used by the Internet inventors at UCLA. Vint Cerf recommended I go to MIT. Charitable foundation: www.kirschfoundation.org The Computer Science Auditorium at MIT (Kirsch Auditorium) is named after me (but to be honest, a multi-million dollar gift influenced that decision). Interests: Making a the world a better place, improving the user experience in banking/payments, identity, cybersecurity, entrepreneurship, philanthropy, waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia, glaucoma, type 2 diabetes. An article I wrote on Quora, "Why is Elon Musk so successful?" is the #2 hit on Google and has nearly 1M views.

Skills:

• Agile Methodologies

• Apache

• Architecture

• Big Data

• Cloud Computing

• Computer Security

• Cryptography

• Databases

• Distributed Systems

• Encryption

• Enterprise Architecture

• Enterprise Software

• Entrepreneurship

• Git

• Go-to-market Strategy

• Hadoop

• High Availability

• Identity Management

• Java

• JavaScript

• Linux

• Messaging

• Mobile Applications

• Mobile Devices

• MySQL

• Network Security

• Open Source

• Perl

• Philanthropy

• PHP

• PostgreSQL

• Product Management

• Python

• REST

• SaaS

• Scalability

• Scrum

• Security

• Software Design

• Software Development

• Software Engineering

• Start-ups

• Strategic Partnerships

• System Architecture

• TCP/IP

• Unix

• Virtualization

• Web Applications

• Web Services

• XML

I’m switching to Riverside.fm to record my interviews from now on.

You can watch it live, chat with me while we are live, and you can even “call in” and be part of the video call. How cool is that?

And they won’t censor your livestream like some other platforms.

Click here to join the call:

Join Steve Kirsch Substack Studio Audience

Options

1. Riverside.fm mobile app: watch live only. No chat or live call-in features.

2. Desktop web browser: you can chat with me while the interview is live and you can also hit the “call in” button and join my live interview with video and be part of the final recording.

Clearly the desktop web browser is the way to go!

Times to call into the studio

Interview times for my guests will be announced in advance in my Substack articles and also posted here (if I remember).

Upcoming interviews

Marsha Gee: Tues, May 31, 12pm PST

Update

Here’s an even larger list of articles published in peer-reviewed journals: 3,400 articles.

My list of nearly 500 articles

I didn’t compile the list below. Someone else did, but I don’t know who did because they didn’t put their name on the Word file presumably because they wanted to remain anonymous.

Neuro:

General Neuro side effects: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ane.13451?fbclid=IwAR1CemFwLUpsMK19GMZa_xPF775Q4B0IiksbrziKUpIrRXhYR5cDQFFfVAQ

Small fiber neuropathy: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mus.27251...

2 cases of Parsonage Turner Syndrome following Moderna and Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34402669/

Trigeminal Neuralgia and cervical radiculitis after Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34155020/

Neuralgic amyotrophy following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34347105/

Amyotrophic neuralgia secondary to AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34330677/

36yoM with transverse myelitis following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33787891/

Acute Myelitis following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34392078/

67yoF with transverse myelitis following Moderna 1st dose: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34482455/

Longitudinal extensive transverse myelitis following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34507942/

Transverse Myelitis and Bells Palsy after J&J vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34458035/

Recurrent GBS following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34468703/

GBS following Johnson and Johnson: https://www.onlinescientificresearch.com/articles/the-development-of-guillain-barre-syndrome-subsequent-to-administration-of-ad26cov2s-vaccine.pdf

4 cases of GBS following Astra Zeneca:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34114269/

GBS following 2nd dose of Pfizer:: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34347563/

GBS after the first dose of Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33758714/

GBS in a 25yoF following 2nd dose of Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34346014/

GBS in a 61yoM following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34484780/

GBS in a 65yoM liver transplant patient following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34431208/

GBS in a 73yoM following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34477091/

GBS in 73yoM following 2nd dose of Pfizer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8253659/

GBS in 82yoF following 1st dose Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33758714/

GBS 10 days after AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34272622/

GBS 11 days after AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34187803/

GBS following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34330729/

7 cases of GBS following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34114256/

GBS following AstraZeneca with papilledema as atypical onset: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34418708/

2 cases of Sensory GBS following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34416410/

Bilateral facial weakness with paresthesia variant of GBS following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34261746/

Bifacial diplegia variant of GBS following J&J vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34449715/

Facial Weakness, extremity weakness, encephalopathy, and severe refractory ITP following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33854395/

Transient akathisia after Pfizer:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34113842/

Phantosmia: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34096896/

21yoF nurse with Bells Palsy following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34322761/

34yoF with Bells Palsy 2 days after Moderna: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8143982/

36yo with Bells Palsy, left arm tingling/numbness/weakness following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34336436/

37yoM with Bells Palsy after Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33611630/

50yoM with Bells Palsy after Pfizer, ongoing symptoms after 21 days: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34330676/

57yoF with Bells Palsy <36 hours after 2nd dose of Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33594349/

61yoM with Bells Palsy after each dose of Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34281950/

Bells Palsy following mRNA and inactivated (CoronaVac) vaccines: a case series and nested case-control study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34411532/

Rate of Bells Palsy following mRNA vaccination is 2-3x higher then expected: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34111409/

Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD): https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10072-021-05427-4?fbclid=IwAR2DGcW8Y5UxvdzcOQaBUPn6_RTZGQRSsNo6bzanyAm9yN6387E3Z6WrKlI

Patient’s first MS Flare following Pfizer:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00415-021-10648-w

4 cases of activation of stable MS, 2 cases of new MS, 1 case of new onset neuromyelitis optica after mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34480607/ 

Severe Multiple Sclerosis relapse after Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34447349/

Optic neuritis and transverse myelitis in MS patient after Astrazeneca vaccination: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8205198/

Myasthenia Gravis Flare Following Moderna: https://www.cureus.com/articles/60348-a-case-of-covid-19-vaccine-causing-a-myasthenia-gravis-crisis

CVA and Thrombocytopenia following Astrazeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34175640/

Central venous sinus thrombosis with subarachnoid hemorrhage in a 45yoM following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34478433/

Cerebral venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolus following AstraZeneca: https://www.sciencedirect.com/.../pii/S0196064421003425

Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis after AstraZeneca, neurologic and radiological management: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34327553/

Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and thrombocytopenia following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34485807/

Cerebral Venous sinus thrombosis, review of European cases:  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34293217/

Review of European data of Cerebral venous thrombosis with cytopenia, observed in Pfizer, Moderna, and AstraZeneca https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34375510/

A multicenter cohort study of cerebral venous thrombosis after AstraZeneca Vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34370972/

45 cases of Cerebral Venous thrombosis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34288044/

International Cerebral Venous Thrombosis consortium report on cerebral venous thrombosis following vaccination against SARS-COV-2: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34462996/

Fatal ICH following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34477089/

Treatment of AstraZeneca induced immume thrombotic thrombocytopenia related acute ischemic stroke: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34461442/

Worsening Neuro-Oncologic Disease Symptoms following mRNA vaccination: https://www.cureus.com/articles/61880-new-onset-neurologic-symptoms-and-related-neuro-oncologic-lesions-discovered-after-covid-19-vaccination-two-neurosurgical-cases-and-review-of-post-vaccine-inflammatory-responses

Clinical characteristics of Headache following Pfizer, a multicenter observational cohort study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34405142/

Aseptic Meningitis following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34378098/

Delirium in an elderly patient following Pfizer: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ggi.14163

Delirium in an elderly patient following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33829614/

Two cases of encephalopathy and seizures following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34367780/

Acute disseminated encephalitis following Pfizer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8294707/

Acute Disseminated Encephalitis in a young female following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34480527/

Postvaccinal encephalitis following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34324214/

Acute encephalitis, myoclonus, and sweet syndrome after mRNA vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34312136/

New onset psychosis in 31yoM after mRNA vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34388513/

Severe dyskinesia in Parkinson Patient following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34368991/

Cytotoxic lesion of the Corpus Callousum following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34402238/

Myeloperoxidase anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody positive optic perineuritis after mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34432055/

Three cases: CVA, left facial nerve palsy, and myelitis all following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34507266/

Headache after AstraZeneca: a MultiCenter observational cohort center: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34313952/

Characteristics of COVID vaccine induced Headache: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34510919/

Covid Vaccines are not free of Neurologic side effects: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8206845/

Rebuttal about Functional Neurologic Disorders and Vaccination: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ana.26160?fbclid=IwAR3C-QQc-ZDEDoCu0fWNQuVYzvbC3qYHGekCaicU5-l_bOUz4N52jl1wjJ0

Neurologic safety monitoring of COVID-19 vaccines, lessons learned from the past to inform the present: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34475124/

Cardiac:

Myocarditis in 23 military members: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2781601

Perimyocarditis in teens: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34077949/

Vaccination associated myocarditis in Adolescents: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34389692/

mRNA vaccination and myocarditis in adolescents: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34393110/

Association of myocarditis with mRNA vaccination, a case review in children: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34374740/

Recurrence of myocarditis after vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34166671/

Myopericarditis in young adults presenting to the ED: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34310793/

Pericarditis following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34364831/

Myocarditis following J&J in a healthy, young male: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34420869/

Acute myocarditis after Moderna in young male: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34308326/

Myocarditis in a healthy male: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34229940/

Acute myocarditis following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34331307/

Acute myocarditis following Pfizer in a healthy man with previous COVID infection: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34367386/

Myocarditis case report: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34118375/

Myocarditis following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34393273/

Myocarditis in 24yoM: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34268277/

Myocarditis in a 24yoM nurse after Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34400043/

Myocarditis in a 15yo following Pfizer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8369878/

Myopericarditis in a 16yo following vaccination:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34133825/   

Myocarditis in a 22yoM following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34348657/

70yoF with myocarditis following J&J Vaccination: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8270733/

Biopsy proven lymphocytic myocarditis following 1st mRNA vaccination in a 40yo: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34487236/

Cardiac imaging of acute myocarditis following mRNA in a 24yoM: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34402228/

Cardiac MRI findings in young adults following mRNA vaccination: a case series: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34496880/

Myopericarditis following mRNA vaccination: the role of cardiac biomarkers and multimodality imaging: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34487161/ 

Myocarditis should be consider in those with a troponin rise and unobstructed arteries following Pfizer vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34463755/

Myocarditis Associated with COVID-19 vaccination: echocardiography, cardiac tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging findings: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34428917/

Fulminant myocarditis and systemic hyperinflammation in 2 patients following mRNA: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34416319/

2 cases of histological confirmed myocarditis following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34407340/

Myocarditis and Pericarditis: 2 case reports: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34277198/

Two cases of myocarditis:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34166884/

Two cases of myocarditis:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34166884/

3 cases of cardiac manifestation following Pfizer: https://academic.oup.com/qjmed/advance-article/doi/10.1093/qjmed/hcab177/6311674

4 cases of Myocarditis and their Cardiac MRI findings: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8245050/

4 cases of myocarditis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34396358/

6 cases of men age 17-37 with myocarditis: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8219373/

8 cases of myocarditis in adolescents following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34319393/

13 cases of Myocarditis in adolescents following Pfizer: https://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476(21)00665-X/fulltext

Review of 15 published cases of myocarditis: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8272967/

Review of 29 published cases of acute myopericarditis following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34356586/

Review of 214 myocarditis cases:: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8233865/

JAMA article, concerns for perimyocarditis underreporting, review of 40 hospitals: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2782900

Intravenous injection of mRNA vaccine can induce acute myopericarditis in mouse model: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34406358/

The Novel platform of mRNA vaccines and myocarditis: clues into the potential underlying mechanism: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34312010/

3 cases of acute infarct-like myocarditis (2 Pfizer, 1 AstraZeneca): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8325525/

2 cases of acute MI <24 hours after mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34364657/

Acute STEMI MI following AstraZeneca vaccination,?Kounis syndrome?:  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34394944/

Vaccine induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis associated anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34486030/

Frequent PVS and NSVT following 2nd dose of Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34275963/

Isolated tachycardia in a 29yoF following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34466331/

Covid-19 vaccine associated Takotsubo cardiomyopathy: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34375049/

63yoF with Takotsubo cardiomyopathy following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34330629/

Tachycardia following Pfizer: 3 cases in those previously infected with COVID-19: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33858709/

Dizziness, HTN and new LBBB following AstraZeneca vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34508485/

GI:

Gastroparesis following Pfizer: https://journals.lww.com/ajg/Citation/9900/Gastroparesis_After_Pfizer_BioNTech_COVID_19.28.aspx

Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis following 2nd dose of Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34423463/

Acute Pancreatitis in a 96yoF following 1st dose of Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34084669/

Cutaneous hypersensitivity reaction with acute hepatitis following Pfizer 2nd dose: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34485657/

41yo F with Autoimmune hepatitis following Moderna: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8197609/

76yoF with autoimmune hepatitis following Moderna Vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34332438/

71yoF with Autoimmune hepatitis after mRNA vaccine (Moderna): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168827821018961?via%3Dihub

80yoF with autoimmune hepatitis following Pfizer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8186938/

63yoM with autoimmune hepatitis following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34293683/

61yoF with liver injury following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34430106/

35yoF with autoimmune hepatitis following Pfizer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8056822/

New Onset autoimmune hepatitis following mRNA vaccination in a 36yoF with Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34450237/

56yoF with autoimmune hepatitis following Moderna: https://www.journal-of-hepatology.eu/article/S0168-8278(21)00424-4/fulltext

Two cases of autoimmune hepatitis following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34225251/

Liver injury in a liver transplant patient following mRNA vaccination: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8214934/

16 cases of liver injury following Pfizer and Moderna: a multicenter case series: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8324396/

Reactivation of Hepatitis C infection following Pfizer in a 82yoF: https://www.dovepress.com/hepatitis-c-virus-reactivation-following-covid-19-vaccination--a-case--peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-IMCRJ?fbclid=IwAR3u0x1baFcAZz1eOrNsXsgmrlUYt0EJV2SmoXA75RiplFQbPrtSAIo2GAs

Unusual fever, HA, and abdominal pain in a healthy woman following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34339677/

Hepatic vein thrombosis due to TTS following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34432063/

Renal:

ANCA glomerulonephritis after Moderna: https://www.kidney-international.org/article/S0085-2538(21)00555-X/fulltext

New onset ANCA vasculitis after Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34280507/

ANCA associated Glomerulonephritis following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34423176/

Nephrotic Syndrome following AstraZeneca: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8257404/

New onset Nephrotic syndrome following J&J: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34342187/

Nephrotic syndrome and vasculitis following Pfizer, Moderna, and AstraZeneca: https://academic.oup.com/ndt/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ndt/gfab215/6318785

De novo vasculitis after Moderna: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8166777/

ANCA associated vasculitis following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34416184/

IgA and crescentic glomerulonephritis following Pfizer:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8141343/

Minimal Change Disease Following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33839200/

Minimal Change Disease relapse following Pfizer: https://www.ajkd.org/article/S0272-6386(21)00627-2/fulltext

MCD relapse following Pfizer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8137360/

MCD relapse following Pfizer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8098029/

Severe MCD relapse 3 days following Pfizer: https://europepmc.org/article/pmc/pmc8156905

Minimal change disease and AKI following Pfizer: https://www.kidney-international.org/article/S0085-2538(21)00493-2/pdf

Minimal Change disease following Moderna: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8149162/

Minimal Change disease and Severe AKI following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34242687/

3 cases of minimal change disease following 2nd dose of mRNA vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34337193/

IgA nephropathy in 2 pediatric patients after Pfizer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8256683/

3 cases of IgA nephropathy patients developing exacerbations following mRNA vaccine: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8166778/

2 cases of IgA nephropathy patients developing exacerbations following moderna: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7987498/

IgA nephropathy flare up following Moderna: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8079938/

IgA Nephropathy after mRNA vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34278290/

2 cases of IgA Nephropathy patients developing hematuria after Pfizer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8329426/

Reactivation of IgA vasculitis following Moderna: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8260100/

IgA vasculitis following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34509658/

IgA nephropathy flare-up following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34415336/

Membranous nephropathy following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34419553/

Membranous nephropathy following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34332960/

Renal Thrombotic Microangiopathy following Pfizer in a 35yoM: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34451509/

Rheumatology/Endocrinology/Orthopedics:

Lupus exacerbation: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dth.15017

Lupus exacerbation following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34291477/

Systemic lupus following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34418261/

Relapse of class V lupus. Nephritis after mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34352310/

Subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus flare triggered by Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34455671/

Emergence of new onset SLE following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34450645/

Hyperglycemic crisis: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/dme.14631

Perturbation of blood glucose following vaccination, a review of 20 adults:  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34375490/

Subacute Thyroiditis: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21645515.2021.1947102?fbclid=IwAR02FYW94iQGbu6e2uTpD42XoIwp6QHzwhDBWotULtT4ZCGR5sVKkyexbRg

Two cases of subacute thyroiditis after Moderna and AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34504856/

Two cases of Graves disease following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33858208/

Two more cases of Graves disease following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34342859/

5 cases of adrenal crisis following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34358373/

Myositis in a 56yoF following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33647971/

mRNA induced rhabdomyolysis and fasciitis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34435250/

Rhabdomyolysis after Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34150372/

21yoM with Pfizer induced rhabdomyolysis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34186348/

Quadrilateral space region inflammation and other incidental findings on shoulder MRI following Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34306275/

Rash, arthritis, swelling, muscle weakness following AstraZeneca: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jmv.27175

Polyarthralgia and Myalgia syndrome after AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34463066/

40yoF with Henoch-Schonlein Purpura following Pfizer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8241653/

New onset mainly guttate psoriasis after Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34309932/

2 cases of exacerbation of plaque psoriasis after Pfizer and CoronaVac: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34427024/

14 cases of psoriasis activation following vaccination (Moderna, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34363647/

Pustuluar psoriasis following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34398977/

Psorasis exacerbation after AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34487570/

Arthritis in the L elbow following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34363344/

Vasculitis and bursitis on 18F FDG-PET/CT following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34495381/

Remitting seronegative symmetrical synovitis with pitting edema following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34348912/

Scleroderma renal crisis following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34339745/

Adult onset Still’s disease following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34316728/

Adult onset Still’s disease following mRNA vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34316726/

Hyper-inflammation after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination: at the cross roads of multi-inflammatory disease and adult onset still’s disease:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34487678/

Immune mediated disease flares: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33946748/

Local and systemic reactogenicity of Pfizer in patients with systemic lupus and rheumatoid arthritis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34476603/

Incidence of disease flare after Pfizer vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in remission: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34472714/

11% of patients with rheumatic and MSK diseases report disease flare following 2 dose mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34346185/

Hematology

Superior ophthalmic Vein Thrombosis and Thrombocytopenia following AstraZeneca: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8265377/

Autoimmune hemolytic anemia: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34150386/

Autoimmine hemolytic anemia following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34258873/

ITP and AIHA following Moderna: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8274740/

ITP Exacerbation in 12% of chronic patients: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34075578/

ITP Exacerbation in previous stable patient following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34307734/

ITP following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34155844/

ITP following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34382388/

Secondary ITP and resulting hemorrhage and hematoma after minor oral surgery after Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34314875/

ITP and diffuse papular rash following Moderna: https://www.scienceopen.com/document_file/691feaa0-8e64-40c4-9553-40382bd5ac48/PubMedCentral/691feaa0-8e64-40c4-9553-40382bd5ac48.pdf

ITP following Astrazeneca: https://ashpublications.org/blood/article/doi/10.1182/blood.2021012790/476455/Immune-Thrombocytopenic-Purpura-after-vaccination

ITP in 1st trimester of pregnancy 13 days following vaccination in the US: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34420249/

84yoM with ITP following Pfizer: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11739-021-02778-w

41yoF with ITP following Pfizer: https://casereports.bmj.com/content/14/5/e242220

69yoF with refractory ITP following Pfizer: https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/Citation/2021/08000/Immune_Thrombocytopenic_Purpura_Associated_With.24.aspx

20yoF with ITP following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34381692/

54yoF with ITP following Pfizer: https://www.cureus.com/articles/56899-newly-diagnosed-idiopathic-thrombocytopenia-post-covid-19-vaccine-administration

74yoM with ITP following Moderna: https://www.dovepress.com/severe-refractory-immune-thrombocytopenia-occurring-after-sars-cov-2-v-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-JBM

26yoF with ITP and acute liver injury following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34330722/

26yoF with ITP following Moderna: http://pubs.sciepub.com/ajmcr/9/8/3/index.html

63yoF with ITP following Johnson and Johnson: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34469919/

68yoF with ITP following Moderna: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8385179/

86yoM with ITP following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34446449/

41yoM with ITP following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34377889/

3 cases of ITP following Pfizer and Astra Zeneca: https://www.mjhid.org/index.php/mjhid/article/view/4669/4043

3 cases reports of ITP following Pfizer and J&J: https://ehoonline.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40164-021-00235-0

3 cases: recurrent AvWD and acquired hemophilia A after Moderna, PNH flare following Moderna, and ITP flare following Moderna: https://ashpublications.org/bloodadvances/article/5/13/2794/476324/Autoimmune-and-complement-mediated-hematologic

3 cases of ITP in elderly patients following vaccination: https://www.hindawi.com/journals/crihem/2016/7913092/

36 Cases of ITP following Pfizer and Moderna: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8011062/

PE, TIA, and thrombocytopenia after J&J: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34261635/

DVT and PE and positive HIT panel following mRNA Vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34117206/

3 patients with venous thromboembolism following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34352418/

Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia following Moderna: https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/full/10.7326/L21-0244

TTP Following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34264514/

Acquired TTP following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34309715/

TTP in an adolescent following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34405400/

Thrombocytopenia in a teen with sickle cell disease following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34331506/

Safety warning for AstraZeneca in patients with sickle cell disease: https://mjhid.org/index.php/mjhid/article/view/4708?fbclid=IwAR2kMtsqqwiYyxxQ9XxIvDFdOSt-yTPqjAro-fgaEp460JeHd0QwBxx4DPg

5 cases of prothrombotic immune thrombocytopenia after AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34323939/

20 cases of Thrombocytopenia following Pfizer and Moderna: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajh.26132

Review of 50 cases of thrombocytopenia following Astrazeneca, Pfizer, Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34332437/

68yoF with extensive thrombosis after AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34400433/

Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia after AstraZeneca: Autopsy findings: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34355379/

Fatal ICH due to Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34402235/

Five cases with a combination of cerebral venous thrombosis, intracerebral hemorrhage and thrombocytopenia following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34393988/

Confusion and abdominal pain due to VITT following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34346657/

Fatal thromboembolism in a patient with preexisting thrombocytopenia following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34344867/

Malignant CVA due to VITT following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34341358/

3 cases of immune thrombocytopenia following AstraZeneca in Thailand: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34483267/

Treatment Guide to Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia Following Vaccination: https://www.hematology.org/covid-19/vaccine-induced-immune-thrombotic-thrombocytopenia

Successful venous thromboprophylaxis in a patient with AstraZeneca induced VITT: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34496889/

Autoimmunity roots of the thrombotic events following COVID vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34508917/

Thrombosis post COVID-19 vaccinations: Potential link to ACE pathways: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34479129/

Platelet activation and modulation in thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome associated with AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34474550/

The known knowns and known unknowns of vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34472568/

Skin, nose, and gingival bleeding episodes after AstraZeneca: a large population-based cohort study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34479760/

Haemophagocytosis and atypical lymphocytes on bone marrow biopsy following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34312842/

3 cases of HLH following AstraZeneca: https://jcp.bmj.com/content/early/2021/07/22/jclinpath-2021-207760

Coagulopathies after vaccination against SARS-COV-2 may be derived from a combo of spike protein and adenovirus vector-triggered signaling pathways: https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.00089?fbclid=IwAR2orycgbxqSNXLR9A4XjNwEAZBumiRbRKsfW8KL5qiJCXSWwqmLiMtc4Z4

The roles of platelets in COVID-19-associated coagulopathy and vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34455073/

Oncology

Axillary lymphadenopathy following mRNA vaccination:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34156552/

Ipsilateral axillary adenopathy following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34333959/

4 cases of axillary adenopathy following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34303188/

Axillary adenopathy following AstraZeneca resulting in possible misinterpretation of PET scan in metastatic melanoma patient: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34414110/

163 cases of axillary adenopathy following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34257025/

Incidence of axillary adenopathy on Breast Imaging following Vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34292295/

Supraclavicular lymphadenopathy following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34414929/

Cervical lymphadenopathy following Pfizer:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8204135/

13 cases of Cervical lymphadenopathy: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8241354/

50yoM with adenopathy following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34406229/

Review of 24 cases of lymphadenopathy and their ultrasound findings in the US: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34356507/

Kikucki-Fujimoto disease following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34395192/

Mammographic and sonographic findings in the breast and axillary tail following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34340203/

Vaccine related unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy:pattern on screening breast MRI: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34325221/

Evolution of lymphadenopathy at PET/MRI after vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34310229/

Axillary lymphadenopathy after COVID vaccination in patients with thoracic malignancy: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34506955/

DOTATATE PET-avid axillary lymph node after injection of the Johnson & Johnson: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34269723/

DOTATOC-avid lymphadenopathies induced by mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34363083/

3 cases of supraclavicular and axillary lymphadenopathy induced by vaccination on 18F-Fluorthanatrace, 68Ga-DOTATATE, and 18F-Fluciclovine PET/CT: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34507331/  

FDG uptake in axillary lymph nodes after vaccination: a pitfall case of highly suspicious lymph nodes metastases of malignant melanoma: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34412144/ 

Avid left axillary nodes and intense diffuse splenic uptake and moderate diffuse bone marrow uptake on PET 1 week after vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34269722/

Vaccination effect on tracer uptake with FDG-PET/CT: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34297113/

Abnormal PET following vaccination: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/pbc.29262

Positive PET following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34301777/

False Positive FDG PET CT after vaccination in a woman treated for metastatic breast cancer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34308402/ 

The day after mass COVID vaccination: higher hypermetabolic lymphadenopathy detection on PET/CT and impact on oncologic management: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34503150/

Temporal metabolic response to mRNA vaccinations in oncology patients: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34463888/

Thymic hyperplasia after mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34462647/

Fatal systemic capillary leak syndrome after Johnson and Johnson vaccination in a multiple myeloma patient: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34459725/

Moderna vaccination mimicking lymph-node progression in a patient with melanoma: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34433198/

Post vaccination lymphadenopathy: report of cytological findings from fine needle aspiration biopsy: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34432391/

Rituximab-induced acute lympholysis and pancytopenia after Moderna in a 71yoM with b-cell lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34429981/

Dermatology/Plastics:

60yo with Steven Johnson Syndrome: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34081806/

Steven Johnson Syndrome following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34384729/

Pemphigus Vulgaris:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34169588/

Morbilliform Rash:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34167874/

Pityriasis-rosea like eruption post-vaccination in a young male: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34165237/

Pityriasis rosea following Pfizer:  https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jdv.17498

66yoM with Pityriasis rosea after Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34435935/

1 case of Pityriasis rosea and 3 cases of urticaria following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34478204/

A case series of Pityriasis rosea following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34363731/

Two cases of papulo-pustular rosacea-like eruptions following Pfizer and AstraZeneca:  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34416044/

Pityriasis rubra pilaris following Astra Zeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34310778/

Pityriasis rubra pilaris in 72yoM following Astra Zeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34420983/

Pityriasis Rubra Pilaris like eruption following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34379821/

3 cases of new onset acral hand lesions following mRNA vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34310777/

2 patients with eczematous cutaneous reactions following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34236729/

New onset synovitis and palmoplantar psoriasis flare up after Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34236728/

Exacerbation of Hailey-Hailey Disease following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34436620/

New onset lichen planus following Pfizer: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jdv.17504

Lichen striatus: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34423105/

Purpura annularis telangiectodes following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34236717/

Flagellate Purpura following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34416052/

Symmetrical drug related intertriginous and flexural exanthema like eruption following AztraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34399001/

Vitiligo following Pfizer: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ced.14842

Vitiligo in a Ulcerative Colitis Patient following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34498300/

Bacillus Calmette-Guerin scar flare after mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34344774/

Palms and Soles Itchiness following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34391695/

Resistant pruritis skin rash following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34358176/

Necrotic eschars at injection sites one week after 2nd dose of Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34337117/

Facial Pustular Neutrophilic Eruption following mRNA vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34319363/

Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis induced by Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34466640/

AstraZeneca induced acute localized exanthematous pustulosis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34487574/

Delayed local skin reactions: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2102131?fbclid=IwAR0P6wjXiO4swT4wz0lEJCBx7v14e2Si-O9AbOuhlVisVHFhc_kGEy7pyj0

Delayed skin reactions following mRNA vaccine: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8288253/

11 patients with delayed skin reaction after mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34433495/

Additional 12 Patients with Delayed Local Reactions: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2102131

16 patients delayed hypersensitivity reactions after Moderna: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamadermatology/fullarticle/2779643

138 Delayed Hypersensitivity Reactions following vaccination: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8294276/

Delayed local Hypersensitivity reactions: a 6 month retrospective study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34288056/

Delayed cutaneous hypersensitivity reaction following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34351606/

Cutaneous skin manifestation following Moderna with Hypersensitivity reaction Histopathology: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34414254/

2 cases of delayed local reactions following Moderna: https://journals.lww.com/infectdis/Fulltext/2021/07000/Delayed_Skin_Rash_After_Receiving_SARS_CoV_2_mRNA.19.aspx

4 cases of cutaneous hypersensitivity reactions following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34485656/

5 Japanese cases of delayed large local reactions to Pfizer vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34459023/

13 cases delayed local reactions following mRNA vaccine: https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciab518/6291929

COVID Vaccine arm: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/heal-the-mind-heal-the-body/202101/what-s-the-new-phenomenon-called-covid-vaccine-arm

COVID arm following Moderna: histologic features: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34242422/

Covid vaccine arm may present after both mRNA vaccines vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34416053/

405 cases of dermatologic reactions following Pfizer, Moderna, and Astra Zeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34254291/

Erythema Migrans like rash after Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34250736/

Bullous Drug Eruption Rash following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34294590/

Bullous eruption following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34416058/

Bullous Fixed Drug Eruption following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34482558/

Atypical erythema multiforme related to Pfizer vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34473839/

Soft Tissue Filler Inflammatory Reaction after vaccination:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34174156/

Immune Response to fillers and breast implants after vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34174765/

Breast Implant seroma after mRNA vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34405902/

L Breast Implant Capsular Contracture following Moderna vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34373851/

COVID-toes after mRNA vaccination:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34162525/

Leukoclastic vasculitis: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/art.41910

Urticarial Vasculitis following vaccination: https://journals.lww.com/amjdermatopathology/Citation/9000/Unique_Case_of_Urticarial_Skin_Eruptions_After.97698.aspx

Urticarial Vasculitis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34369046/

Small vessel vasculitis after Astra Zeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34310763/

Cutaneous small vessel vasculitis following J&J: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34337124/

Cutaneous lymphocytic vasculitis following mRNA vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34327795/

Pfizer induced reactivation of varicella and resulting small vessel vasculitis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34310759/

2 cases of skin color discoloration following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34310755/

A case series of rare cutaneous adverse events following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34363637/

Moderna Vaccine Induced Skin Rash: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34423142/

A Case series of Cutaneous vaccine reactions at Loma Linda University: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34423106/

Clinicopathological features of cutaneous reactions after mRNA vaccines, 11 cases: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34459036/

3 cases of vesiculobullous non-IgE-mediated cutaneous reactions to Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34363258/

A narrative review of cutaneous and hypersensitivity reactions: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34424434/

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines and the Skin: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34483343/

Ophthalmology:

Acute Macular Neuroretinopathy after AstraZeneca:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41433-021-01610-1.epdf...

Acute macular neuroretinopathy following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34485760/

Acute Central Serous Retinopathy after Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34151047/

Panuveitis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34213988/

Reduction of Visual Acuity following Pfizer: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00011-021-01476-9?fbclid=IwAR3zAvenOwPAZmuVsx9CM7bFwOliHerfJK3M3nQCMe-3BWoT4QdNCWK7cNo

Corneal graft rejection after Pfizer vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34426655/

Bilateral Retinal Detachments 10 days after mRNA vaccination 22yoF : https://www.jem-journal.com/article/S0736-4679(21)00611-9/fulltext

Central Retinal Vein Occlusion occuing immediately after 2nd dose of mRNA vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34426861/

Transient Oculomotor palsy following mRNA. Vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34369471/

Anterior Uveitis following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34289406/

21 cases of Uveitis following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34369440/

A case of bilateral arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy and a case of bilateral acute zonal occult outer retinopathy after mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34394876/

Vaccination and Bilateral Multifocal Choroiditis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34406890/

34yoM with bilateral multifocal choroiditis following 2nd dose vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34344280/

Acute painless bilateral blurring of vision following Pfizer due to Vogt-Koyanagi-Hara disease: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34505819/

Eyelid erythema after Pfizer vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34426009/

Reactivation of herpes simplex keratitis following AstraZeneca vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34493563/

2 cases of Ipsilateral zoster opthalmicus after Moderna and Johnson and Johnson: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34471577/ 

Bilateral immune mediated keratolysis following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34483273/

COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccinations, and subsequent abnormalities in the retina: causation or coincidence? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34473193/

ENT

3 cases of Tinnitus following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34120553/

18 cases of idiopathic sensorineural hearing loss, tinnitus, and/or vertigo following Moderna/Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34267103/

Tinnitus/cochleopathy following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34297133/

Lipschutz ulcers after AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34366434/

ID

Herpes Zoster following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34397201/

Herpes Zoster reactivation following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34316506/

Ramsy Hunt syndrome following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34344559/

A case series of Herpes Zoster following AstraZeneca: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34363717/

2 cases of herpes zoster following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34428545/

2 cases of herpes zoster in healthy young adults following vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34363257/

3 cases of Herpes Zoster following Vaccination (Moderna and AstraZeneca):  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34293165/

3 cases of Herpes Zoster after covid vaccination in patients with chronic urticaria being treated with cyclosporine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34510694/ 

4 cases of Herpes Zoster (2 pfizer, 2 astrazeneca): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34310754/

6 cases of Herpes Zoster following Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33848321/

A case of varicella-zoster virus after Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34390376/

Varicella zoster reactivation and mRNA vaccines as a trigger: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34316507/

40 cases of HSV and VZV reactivation following mRNA vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34487581/

Miscellaneous:

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in an adult following Pfizer (MIS-V): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34326117/

3 cases of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome after Pfizer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34034858/

Hypertension following mRNA vaccination:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8206586/

POTS following Pfizer: https://www.cureus.com/articles/56242-a-case-of-postural-orthostatic-tachycardia-syndrome-secondary-to-the-messenger-rna-covid-19-vaccine

Vaccine induced interstitial lung disease in 86yoM after mRNA vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34362838/

Vaccine induced interstitial lung disease: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34510014/

Pulmonary Embolus following Moderna: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34452028/

Concerns for Pfizer vaccine failure to wildtype variants after Delta and vaccine induced enhanced illness, as demonstrated in a mice model: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.22.457114v1.full.pdf

International call for vaccine adverse reaction investigation: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351670290_SARS-CoV-2_mass_vaccination_Urgent_questions_on_vaccine_safety_that_demand_answers_from_international_health_agencies_regulatory_authorities_governments_and_vaccine_developers?fbclid=IwAR1Gwfel6khY8ObziHNTGZriwS0Gez0CCp8zjaHllCJ9lfceD2EkJdMKmYw

Concerns about the lipid nanoparticle in the mRNA contributing to adverse reactions: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.04.430128v1.full?fbclid=IwAR2yUJH9kAb01O2PJ46AfBvQANuGiQvZd3ROs4R8qNJF6CZ4f255hDdRsSY

Medscape Health Care Professional Adverse Reactions: https://www.medscape.com/sites/public/covid-19/vaccine-insights/how-concerned-are-you-about-vaccine-related-adverse-events?src=soc_fb_share&fbclid=IwAR1zS9dnzVFRxBghSFv3hjdtinVxBkQJiopbY4fbFCKvyEgsw9TXokQ7b0I

Facebook link to reactions: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100068922816380

Link to all my slide presentations

Proof of the statements I made on Fox News Aug 10

Here is presentation of proof of the statements I made on Fox News on August 10, 2022. See that article for more detail. Source PDF

Best video clip

Best 1 hour interview

Best slide deck

The elephant in the room: Source and PDF

Best 90 minute speech

Starts at 1:02 into the video (i.e., 1 hour and 2 minutes in). Multiple standing ovations.

Best podcast

Great new podcast-style interview of me by David Gornoski.

Must-read substack articles

Check out the “Favorites” section of my Substack.

Top videos

Senator Johnson COVID-19 A second opinion panel on Jan 24, 2022

Defeat the Mandate rally speakers on Jan 23, 2022 (starts at 2:19:28 onward)

Defeat the Mandate rally speech (Los Angeles) (starts at 6:14:35 onward)

Expert Panel Discussion on COVID-19 and Medical Freedom hosted by Pennsylvania Senator Doug Mastriano. Pennsylvania State Senate testimony. I am on at 30:24 in the video. A two-minute version is posted on Telegram and Rumble). Here is a full clip of my testimony. Here is the full Pennsylvania Senate session. My million dollar offer which was limited to the FDA and CDC outside committee members is around 40 minutes into the video.

My social media accounts

I am banned for life from Medium, LinkedIn. I don’t use Facebook or instagram. I can be found on:

1. Substack (stevekirsch.substack.com)
   Steve Kirsch newsletter; the place where I post the bulk of my content

2. GETTR (stkirsch)

3. Gab (stkirsch)

4. Telegram Channel (stkirsch)

5. Truth Social (stkirsch)

6. Twitter @stkirsch: I’m restored as of 12/16/22.

7. TrialSiteNews (stories by stevekirsch)
   List of all my articles on TSN including my original “Should you get vaccinated?” article that I wrote on May 25, 2021 that caused my entire scientific advisory board to quit. I occassionally write there. Most of my work is on substack.

8. YouTube channel: Censorship limits what can posted there. It’s slim pickens.

9. Rumble channel
   All the videos I’ve created on vaccine safety including showing how incompetent the CDC and FDA are in their safety monitoring as well as my interviews of notable people.

10. Website: Skirsch.io

Slide decks

1. Vaccine essentials (source slides)
   My most recent deck. Organized into sections for safety, efficacy, mandates, masks, early treatments, censorship, and corruption. Guess what? People who break the rules and do the opposite of what they are told are doing way better than people who follow the CDC and NIH guidance. It details how nonsensical the vaccine, mandates, and masks are.

2. Vaccine policies (source slides)
   Summary of some the latest research organized in a concise tabular form.

3. All you need to know (source slides)
   This was my original go-to deck for everything. Has lots of great material not replicated in other decks.

4. 180 questions about the COVID vaccines that nobody wants to answer (slides PDF, slides source)
   This was originally my deck for the FDA committee, but I expanded it to a list of 180 things that will baffle your pro-vax friends.

Video interviews

The New American (December 6, 2021)
Vaccines kill more than they save

Brighteon interview (posted December 3, 2021)
Vaccines, mandates, masking, … the usual stuff.

COVID Shots Are the Deadliest ‘Vaccines’ in Medical History
Interview with Joseph Mercola published Nov 21, 2021. People have told me this is REALLY good. So if you can just watch one video, this is the one to watch.
Video Story Transcript

For a complete list of videos, including the famous Darkhorse podcast with Dr. Robert Malone (short and long versions), see Vaccine resources.

DarkHorse podcast videos

I did the DarkHorse podcast with Robert Malone and Bret Weinstein on June 10, 2021.

A condensed version of the famous DarkHorse podcast with Bret Weinstein and Robert Malone (only 1 hour).

A repost of the original 3.5 hour DarkHorse podcast is available on Rumble

Advice

How to treat
Covers COVID, long-haul COVID, vaccine injution dedicated to vaccine safety.

1. treatearly.org: Foundation dedicated to early treatments.

Research papers

Estimating the numbe this article because they can’t dispute it. I show 8 different ways to estimate the number killed by the vaccine. If you are the first person to publish a paper in a peer reviewed journal with impact factor > 1 that is not retracted in 60 days detailing how all 8 methods were flawed and the correct number for each of the methods, I’ll pay you $1M.

Cost-benefit analysis by age
Peter McCullough asked me to do the cost-benefit calculation by age. It shows that the vaccines aren’t sensible for anyone: they kill more people than they save for all age groups.

Why so many Americans are refusing to get vaccinated
Over 180 reasons why Americans are refusing to get vaccinated. Great conversation starters with your pro-vax friends who will talk to you.

Fluvoxamine resources

See the Fluvoxamine data repository

See also Fluvoxamine evidence and Fluvoxamine articles

More content

For a complete list of resources including the short and long Darkhorse podcase with Dr. Robert Malone, see Vaccine resources.

1. It works. As of November 13, fluvoxamine has been proven to work in every trial that has published results, including outpatient and inpatient studies. It was recommended back in January 2021 by a key opinion leader (KOL) panel to be used, but it took a year for the KOL meeting notes to be published because they were rejected by 10 journals. After publication of the recommendation in December 2021, the NIH did absolutely nothing change their recommendation. The drug’s mechanisms of action were explained to the KOL panel which voted 2>1 in favor of fluvoxamine. The NIH did nothing despite the fact the that NIH, FDA, CDC, and academic institutions participated in the panel

   this is NOT about the science. The medical community doesn’t care about saving lives. The NIH never did a risk benefit analysis of this drug. Physicians who use the drug for COVID now swear by it. The Wall Street Journal thinks it should be used (and that the NIH is wrong for waiting for more clinical trials).

2. It is very safe: There is no evidence fluvoxamine is harmful and led to a worse outcome. Zero. There are reports of people who can’t tolerate the drug, but they stop using it and nothing bad happened. Generally, at 50mg BID x 14, it is very tolerable as long as the patient is instructed to lay off the caffeine. I took it myself at that dosage and noticed zero side effects. I couldn’t tell I was on the drug. My experience is very typical. If you do have a side-effect, it is usually mild nausea which goes away when you stop taking the drug. People who report not tolerating the drug are typically prescribed too high a dose. The 50mg BID dose was quite effective, but it has to be started early (as soon as symptoms start). If you start later, doctors use higher dosages and compliance becomes a bigger problem.

3. Proven in clinical use all over the world. Doctors who have used fluvoxamine in the US and other countries swear by it. Added to FLCCC protocols and Fareed-Tyson protocol among others.

4. Dosing. My favorite dosage is 50mg twice a day for 14 days. This was shown to be very tolerable (no side effects in 99% of patients) and extremely effective (no hospitalizations and death if you start it ASAP after first symptoms). This is what the Seftel trial at Golden Gate fields used.

5. Food/drugs to avoid while on fluvoxamine. Completely avoid caffeine, alcohol, tylenol, and benadryl. You can experience serious side effects if you do not pay attention to interactions such as if you are currently on another SSRI of a different type. ALWAYS check with your doctor and report any medications you are taking before or plan to take after you start taking fluvoxamine. For example, tylenol+caffeine+fluvoxamine can lead to serotonin syndrome.

6. Adverse reactions/side effects. If you are experiencing any odd adverse reactions, you’ll need to consult with your doctor ASAP. In some cases, you’d want to taper down the dosage. In other cases, stop cold turkey. Some people report mild nausea while on the drug (stops when stop the drug). Some people are jittery, but usually that is because the doctor either prescribed a dosage higher than 50mg twice a day or didn’t notify the patient to completely avoid the list in the previous paragraph, or the patient is simply sensitive to the drug (50mg twice a day can be too much for some people). Decreasing the dosage or stopping the medication will mitigate symptoms within hours. One user reported dilated pupils and increased heart rate (which could be nerves about the dilated pupils). This looks ominous, but it harmless. The paramedics will think you are on drugs. Stopping the meds will return you to your normal self. So check the side-effects list to be familiar with which side-effects are associated with which drug so if you have a side-effect, you’ll know which drug to reduce or eliminate. Always be self aware when using fluvoxamine. I’ve used it personally at 50mg twice a day and experience no adverse events at all. That’s pretty typical, but your mileage may vary.

7. Long haul. No long haul symptoms if you start the drug ASAP after first symptoms. P-value was 10^-14 on that study (done by Dr. Seftel). It doesn’t get much better than that.

8. The effect size is huge if the drug is given early right after symptoms start. The Lancet paper showed that if you were treated early enough and took the drug as prescribed (it only works if you take it), it was shown to reduce your chance of death by 12X making it far more effective than any other drug for COVID. If the drug is started right after symptoms, we’ve seen 100% prevention in hospitalization. If you start 5 days after symptoms, all bets are off. It could do nothing.

9. The evidence is solid. There are 4 outpatient studies that have been done (2 at WashU (see Phase 2 trial results published in JAMA), one in Berkeley, CA by David Seftel, one in Brazil published in the Lancet, and one in-patient study done in Croatia. Three of the four outpatient trials have been reported out: all were successful. The WashU Phase 3 study hasn’t been disclosed yet, but they had compliance problems with their patients this time around (phase 2 was local so the patients got the drug early and also were very compliant and the placebo group was truly taking nothing). There were no studies reported out so far where fluvoxamine made things worse or neutral. All the supporting observational studies were positive as well.

10. The differences are obvious to untrained eyes. The most stunning study of fluvoxamine ever done was at the Golden Gate Fields racetrack in November 2020, right after the WashU trial was published in JAMA. They were all given the drug soon after symptoms and the placebo group was “pure” in that they were not taking any COVID drugs. Nobody who took the drug got sick at all, most all wanted to return to work within 3 days after starting treatment. The group who declined the drug were very sick with 12.5% requiring hospitalization and one died. The track management was so impressed, they asked for prescriptions. After two weeks (since it was a tight knit community, everyone could see what was happening to the two groups), every track worker who got sick with COVID, demanded the drug. So it was both obvious and convincing the difference between the groups to the workers and the track management.

11. Have the drug on hand. Get your prescription in advance of getting COVID. That way you can start immediately. Timing is everything with respect to outcomes. The sooner you start, the better the outcomes.

12. Avoid caffeine, benadryl, tylenol, and alcohol. If you take fluvoxamine, please avoid caffeine while on the drug. You will be wired for 24 hours if you don’t heed my advice. If you can’t lay off the java, then try fluoxetine (Prozac).

13. Substitutions. You can use fluoxetine as well (aka Prozac). Dosage there is 30mg once a day. Some countries don’t have fluvoxamine so this is the alternative. Also, for people who can’t tolerate fluvoxamine for whatever reason (nausea, jittery, etc), this is the alternative. Other SSRIs work as well, but fluvoxamine activates the Sigma-1 receptor the most of the SSRIs which is why it was chosen. Fluoxetine is just as effective.

14. In-patient use. Fluvoxamine works on hospitalized patients too, but no US hospital will let you use it (sound familiar? just like ivermectin). Reason is the hospital gets release from liability if they follow NIH guidelines. NIH doesn’t want you to get the drug since it would compete with Molnupiravir, so fluvoxamine will never make the NIH guidelines.

15. We’ve known it works since August 24, 2020. That is when the phase 2 results were published. Since FLV is a safe drug, it should have been widely discussed with patients that there is virtually no downside and a huge reduction in hospitalization if the drug is given early. Every earlier study of fluvoxamine (such as observational studies) showed it work and the mechanism had been shown. Once the Phase 2 result came out, it should have been embraced by doctors. The medical community did nothing (with a few exceptions like Dr. Seftel).

16. The infectious disease scientists lied to me. They all promised me when fluvoxamine passed Phase 3 trials, nearly everyone would use it. That was a lie. Pretty much nothing changed when the Phase 3 trial confirmed fluvoxamine worked. . Fluvoxamine was reportedly added to just 2 practice guidelines (Ontario and Johns Hopkins). Medicine isn’t about saving lives anymore. Those days are gone.

17. Why fluvoxamine isn’t used. The reason that it isn’t used is because the medical community ignores evidence-based medicine principles. Doctors wait for government permission (EUA or added to the NIH guidelines) before using a drug. It does not matter how many lives will be saved. Medicine has been transformed to doing whatever the NIH/FDA says, regardless of how many lives will be lost. See this Wall Street Journal op-ed.

18. Doctors who are most familiar with the drug would prescribe it to their patients. I’ve talked to doctors who are extremely familiar with the drug and all the trial results and they would prescribe it to their patients. But they don’t want their names used.

19. Silence from the medical community. Nobody in the medical community is speaking out about how hypocritical the medical community is for ignoring the positive Phase 3 trial results and instead following whatever the NIH or FDA says. So much for “evidence-based” medicine. We pretty much practice “government agency opinion medicine” all over the world now, with just a few exceptions.

20. Government agencies are ignoring the science. NIH and WHO refuse to acknowledge it works since it will cause vaccine hesitancy if it is known that there is a drug that turns COVID into a mild disease. That’s why they didn’t change their recommendation when the Phase 3 trial was published in Lancet. I fully expected both organizations to do absolutely nothing. They knew in advance it was coming and on the day the paper was published they ignored it entirely.

21. Comparison with molnupiravir. Fluvoxamine is way better than Molnupiravir, but the NIH doesn’t approve drugs on effectiveness. It’s whether Merck can make a killing that matters. Think about it … Molnupiravir has a 50% risk reduction whereas fluvxoamine is over 90%. Fluvoxamine has a 40 year safety track record. Molnupiravir followed patients for only 30 days because they know the drug is dangerous. The NIH picks the drug that makes the most money for the drug companies regardless of long-term safety… Molnupiravir!

22. Lack of action. All this was known back in January 2021 when a key opinion leader panel of experts from NIH, CDC, FDA, academia, and journal editors voted by over 2:1 to recommend that fluvoxamine be recommended to physicians to discuss with patients. All the medical journals refused to publish the meeting notes (rejected by 6 journals). We could have saved a lot of lives.

23. Doctors have no excuse for not prescribing. If you ask your doctor for any evidence that fluvoxamine doesn’t work or is harmful (like a DB-RCT which is the only thing they trust), they will show you nothing. But they will refuse to give it to you even after being proven in a Phase 3 trial that was approved by the WHO. It used to be that a Phase 3 study would do it. No more. It’s all about NIH saying it is OK.

24. Medicine today is driven by government opinion, not science. Most doctors won’t use it until NIH greenlights it, no matter what the science says. Medicine today isn’t about saving your life. It is about following orders and making money for the drug companies and protecting the doctor from liability and losing his medical license.

25. If you have trouble getting a prescription, perhaps you have OCD? If you can’t get a prescription for COVID, then perhaps you have OCD? Compulsive hand washing? Compulsive fiddling with your mask? Or just depression about the vaccine mandates? All can merit a fluvoxamine prescription based on traditional diagnoses. So you can address your OCD and if you get COVID, you’ll can up the dose.

26. There are other non-prescription things you should always have on hand. See my article on treatments. Vitamin D, NAC, betadine, aspirin, and Nigella sativa are all super cheap, effective, and available without a prescription. I have all of these on hand and I load up on vitamin D3 every day.

I’m sorry to sound so cynical. I’m just telling you the truth. I learned this the hard way. Fauci wants the vaccine to be the only option, Cliff Lane works for Fauci, and Cliff follows his orders. This is why Cliff doesn’t talk to me.

And he won’t talk to you either if you ask nosy questions like “Cliff, my risk benefit analysis shows you should be rushing to recommend this drug. Can I see your risk-benefit analysis?”

Note: normally I have lots of hyperlinks to all the sources, but I’m pressed for time. My website www.skirsch.io has tons of info on fluvoxamine with all the links.

Not all of us agree will agree on all issues. We are all experts in different areas.

The mainstream experts think we are spreading misinformation. But we have no interest in doing that. We just look at the data and come to a different conclusion. We are open to being persuaded we made a mistake. But so far, nobody pushing the mainstream narrative will engage in a scientific discussion on what the data actually shows. All we hear are crickets. Even when TrialSiteNews offered to host the debate, nobody showed up.

The quickest way to end the misinformation is to show us that we are wrong. Why doesn’t anyone want to do that?

1. Dr. Robert Malone, widely recognized as the inventor of the mRNA vaccine. He immediately recognized the dangers of the current vaccines when the biodistribution data was revealed after a FOIA request. He was one of the first people to go on record warning the world about vaccine enhanced infection and replication which was later confirmed.

2. Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, one of the few virologists in the world to warn the world about vaccinating with a non-sterilizing vaccine against a virus capable of mutation in the middle of a pandemic. Nobody at the NIH paid any attention. They still are ignoring him. Why we listen to people who don’t know what they are talking about and continue to ignore people who get it right remains a mystery.

3. Dr. Byram Bridle, a highly respected viral immunologist at University of Guelph, did the FOIA request that exposed the biodistribution data showing the vaccines do not stay at the injection site like people thought, but instead cause the production of a toxin in all parts of the body including the brain.

4. Dr. Peter McCullough, Professor of Medicine, is the author of over 1,000 peer reviewed publications, He serves as editor of two journals and sits on the editorial boards of multiple specialty journals.

5. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., an American environmental lawyer, author, and anti-vaccine advocate. He’s been trying for 20 years to find someone to debate him on vaccine safety. No one will (except Alan Dershowitz but it ended badly for Alan). He wrote a book about Anthony Fauci recently. He’s ranked #2 on the Disinformation Dozen.

6. Joe Mercola is an osteopathic physician. He’s ranked #1 on the Disinformation Dozen and was also labelled “The Most Influential Spreader of Coronavirus Misinformation Online” by The NY Times.

7. Dr. Ryan Cole, one of the few pathologists who has been unafraid to speak out about the dangers of the COVID vaccines.

8. Dr. Bret Weinstein host of the DarkHorse podcast, expert in evolutionary biology and co-author with Dr. Heather Heying of the forthcoming book, “A Hunter-Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century.” 

9. Dr. Chris Martenson, pathologist and host of Peak Prosperity on YouTube. Chris’s videos on YouTube are the most insightful videos about the virus and the vaccines.

10. Dr. Pierre Kory is our ivermectin expert, and one of our experts on early treatment. 

11. Professor Norman Fenton is a British mathematician who is currently Professor of Risk Information Management at Queen Mary University of London and is also a director of Agena, a company that specialises in risk management for critical systems. In this video, he explains how he went from hero to zero after he pointed out all the flaws in the vaccine narrative. He notes that many of his fellow mathematicians privately support him, but are not willing to do so publicly.

12. Dr. Clare Craig is co-director of HART. She made a fabulous video on the Pfizer clinical trial data.

13. Dr. Paul Alexander has expertise in the teaching of epidemiology (clinical epidemiology), evidence-based medicine, and research methodology. He is a former professor at McMaster University in evidence-based medicine; former COVID pandemic advisor to WHO-PAHO in Washington, D.C. (2020); and a former senior advisor on COVID pandemic policy at the U.S. government’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in Washington, D.C.

14. Dr. Ira Bernstein, a physician in Canada who has observed two deaths in 700 vaccinated patients and staff that can be easily shown to be attributable to the vaccine. That is a 1 in 350 death rate. One of those deaths was a previously healthy 24 year old who died in his sleep. Bernstein replicated Hoffe’s D-dimer test.

15. Dr. Jessica Rose is an expert on the VAERS system. Her video on VAERS have never been challenged. She has a published paper on VAERS with several more on the way.

16. Dr. Meryl Nass, is a physician and VAERS expert.

17. Dr. Sin Hang Lee, an expert on DNA sequencing.

18. Mathew Crawford, is a mathematician and statistician who writes frequently about the pandemic including two articles on a serious CDC math error that no other person had noticed (Part I and Part II)

19. Dr. Charles Hoffe, is a physician in Canada: he had 1 vaccine death in 900 patients and then did the study on d-dimer and discovered that the vaccine elevated D-dimer in most patients, an adverse vaccine effect. D-dimer is usually normal in nearly all patients.

20. Marc Girardot, is a member of PANDA. https://www.pandata.org/team/. PANDA is a politically and economically independent organization, focused on science-based explanations and tests them against international data. Marc has published extensively on the pandemic.

21. Dr. George Fareed, a physician in southern California who developed an extremely effective protocol for treating COVID-19 infections with a 99.76% risk reduction which is far more effective and safer than any vaccine

22. Tyson Gabriel is our mask expert. He produced this 1 hour instructional video. Nobody wants to challenge him to a debate on mask wearing.

23. Stephanie Seneff, senior research scientist at MIT. Although her field is computer science, she has an amazing breadth of knowledge in biology.

24. Aditi Bhargava, Professor, ObGyn and CRS, UCSF.

25. Vinu and Vinay Julapalli are brothers. Vinu is the gastroenterologist and Vinay is the cardiologist at Houston Methodist and are involved in lawsuits against the hospital over physician sovereignty. They are both appalled at what they are seeing happening to their profession especially with respect to how unvaccinated patients are treated (as second-class citizens). They’ve seen 2 to 3X the number of STEMIs in June-August than any time in history.

26. Dr. James Lyons-Weiler is an academic biomedical research scientist and policy analyst focused on the pursuit of knowledge to reduce human pain and suffering without profit motive.

27. Dr. Toby Rogers, an expert on risk-benefit analysis. He writes the uTobian substack.

28. John Beaudoin, he analyzed the Massachusetts death data which he reported here. He writes the Coquin de Chien’s Newsletter.

29. Joel Smalley, writes COVID Facts - Challenge the Narrative. He’s been looking for data that exonerates the COVID vaccines for more than a year. He’s still looking.

30. Kevin McKernan, CSO at Medicinal Genomics Corporation. None of the people who claim there is no virus will debate him.

31. JJ Couey, Research Assistant Professor, Neurobiology, University of Pittsburgh

32. Dr. Zana A. Carver, Assistant Professor of Biology at Columbia Basin College with research expertise in toxicology and pharmacokinetics.

We will debate any qualified experts with comparable credentials in an open public fair debate to defend any of our viewpoints on vaccine safety, whether vaccines are a good idea, the efficacy of early treatments, whether ivermectin really works, why fluvoxamine should be used, whether masks work, etc.

The only problem is that NOBODY will debate us. They will claim privately that everything we say is false, yet they REFUSE to debate us in an open public debate.

We’ve asked the CDC, FDA, NIH, mainstream media talking heads, members of Congress, members of the medical community, etc. No takers.

So I increased the incentive and on November 18, 2021 sent out this email:

One of my Twitter followers wrote:

He’s exactly right.

Here’s the real reason they won’t debate us: