Tucker Carlson: Dr. Joseph Ladapo Interview Tucker Carlson 2/5/24 : Could foreign DNA enter your cells through the mRNA COVID vax and change your DNA -- and humanity ...
(Image by YouTube, Channel: World History Explained) Details DMCA
This article that follows is by Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver
Mathew D. "Mat" Staver is an American lawyer and former pastor of several Seventh-day Adventist churches who became a Southern Baptist. He is a former dean of Liberty University's law school. In 1989, he founded the nonprofit organization Liberty Counsel, where he serves as chairman. In 2000, he represented absentee voters in the Bush v. Gore election case. A Young Earth creationist who believes that intelligent design should be taught in public schools, Staver also denies Darwinian evol ution! [That old controversy that United Nations Santa Fe thought had in 1925 been 'laid to rest" by Clarence Darrow in the 2023 Scopes Trial, when Clarence, played by Spencer Tracy, cross-examined the opposing Counsel, William Jennings Bryant who solemnly declared in an unforgettable moment of 'denouement" in the 1960 masterpiece film, INHERIT THE WIND, THAT HE CARED 'MORE ABOUT THE 'ROCK OF AGES THAN ABOUT THE AGES OF ROCKS,' TO THE TREMENDOUS APPLAUSE OF THE TENNESSEANS IN THAT 1925 COURT ROOM! SPENCER TRACY'S GIRLFRIEND AND COHABITANT WAS THE VENERABLE KATHERINE HEPBURN, and there is a great segment in Go East Young Man, a book by the longest serving USA Supreme Court Justice, appointed by Woodrow Wilson, whose bench term was from 1939 until 1965.]
Staver has argued before the Supreme Court of the United States twice, before most of the federal courts of appeals, and has testified before the United States Congress In 2005, he opposed the nomination of Harriet Miers to the United States Supreme Court. Staver served as the dean of the Liberty University School of Law from 2006 to 2014.[12][13]
In 2011 he was added to the Commission on Accountability and Policy for Religious Organizations, which was established by Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley.
____________________________________________
ORLANDO FL - For the first time in a published and peer-reviewed paper, scientists are calling for a "global moratorium on modified mRNA products" after surveying data from Pfizer's and Moderna's COVID-19 "vaccine" trials. The scientists found that the trials were rushed, presented low efficacy, were contaminated with residual DNA impurities, and that the "vaccines" present many "biological mechanisms" that can cause serious adverse events. The authors also advised the COVID shots should be removed from the Childhood Adolescent Immunization Schedule until proper safety studies are conducted.
The authors wrote, "We urge governments to endorse and enforce a global moratorium on these modified mRNA products until all relevant questions pertaining to causality, residual DNA, and aberrant protein production are answered."
The group of independent researchers who authored the paper are biologist and nutritional epidemiologist M. Nathaniel Mead; research scientist Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D.; biostatistician and epidemiologist Russ Wolfinger, Ph.D.; immunologist and biochemist Dr. Jessica Rose; biostatistician and epidemiologist Kris Denhaerynck, Ph.D.; Vaccine Safety Research Foundation Executive Director Steve Kirsch; and cardiologist, internist, and epidemiologist Dr. Peter McCullough.
The paper, titled "COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign," was published last week in the web-based and peer-reviewed Cureus Journal of Medical Science. One of the authors, Dr. Rose, stated this paper is the first peer-reviewed paper to call for global suspension of the COVID-19 mRNA shots.
The authors analyzed published research from the COVID-19 "vaccine" trials, and data and studies on the shot's manufacturing process, efficacy, and adverse events citing nearly 300 references, which according to Dr. McCullough, is nearly 10 times the average amount for any given study.
During the rollouts, federal officials touted initial scientific reports stating the COVID shots were "safe and effective" with a "95 percent efficacy" claim. However, the authors concluded the shots "never underwent adequate safety testing" according to "previously established scientific standards". Several key findings from the paper involving the manufacture, testing, and reporting on the shots include:
The COVID-19 "vaccine" trials were rushed and compromised by incentives.
The authors noted that many health departments have stated that a normal timeframe for evaluating the safety of a vaccine is 10-15 years, and that no vaccine has ever been released on the market without at least four years of safety testing. However, the paper stated that at the beginning of the pandemic, "$29.2 billion (92 percent of which came from U.S. public funds) was dedicated to the purchase of COVID-19 mRNA products." After that, Pfizer completed its rapid authorization process in just "seven months". To be "expeditious", the authors stated that the pharmaceutical companies then prioritized reducing illness symptoms over whether determining the shots were in and of themselves harmful.
The authors wrote, "Perhaps the most important trial benchmark obviated by the rapid authorization process was the minimum 6-12-month observation period typically recommended for identifying possible longer-term vaccine-related adverse effects."
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
