Religion and Vaccine Arguments

[tim]

https://markcrispinmiller.substack.com/ ... den-deaths

See how many CLUSTERS of “sudden deaths” we’ve noted just this year. How many will it take to get the press to start reporting it, and everybody else to notice it?

140+ articles make all too clear that the whole world is going through an unacknowleged Holocaust

[tim]

Ed Dowd has said that the excess deaths are continuing and at the rate it is holding it is a national security risk.

[tim]

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/the- ... d-the-mrna

The Fraud That Launched the mRNA Era

A forensic audit of Pfizer's trial data, newly released Argentine regulatory documents, and what they reveal about the "safe and effective" claim the entire mRNA platform rests upon

A MIDWESTERN DOCTOR
OCT 11, 2026

Story at a Glance:

Before COVID, mRNA had failed for decades and both companies developing it were in financial trouble. However, an emergency framework built years in advance made it possible to rush their vaccines to market. Now there is a major push to replace much of the vaccine schedule with lucrative mRNA vaccines, despite the platform being immensely problematic and still poorly understood.
The mRNA platform’s acceptance rests on the claim that its trials proved it “safe and effective,” yet the same tactics routinely used to rig clinical trials were used throughout them, from the misleading “95% effective” figure to injured participants having their injuries recoded as unrelated conditions.

Using trial data released by court order, a team of independent researchers and whistleblowers spent years auditing Pfizer’s trial. Within the limited records procured, extensive irregularities were documented throughout the trials including 1,203 participants vanishing from the records, 1,209 adverse events re-filed as COVID symptoms, undisclosed deaths in the vaccine group, unequal COVID testing between the groups, and the public receiving a more dangerous formulation of the vaccine which was never tested prior to being released.

Newly released documents from Argentina’s FDA show the trial’s largest site had twenty violations, including 52 participants given nearly double the planned dose, which finally resolves one of the trial’s longstanding mysteries.
Fortunately, the tide has turned. Federal health officials are now acknowledging vaccine injuries, investigators have gained the power to obtain the evidence long kept hidden, and public opinion has shifted to the point that it is finally possible to openly discuss what was done.

[tim]

https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/emergi ... -childhood

Emerging Datasets Linking Childhood Vaccination to Autism

Dr McCullough sits down with Steve Kirsch to review the findings

Kirsch’s central argument is temporal asymmetry as the fingerprint of causation:

If vaccines were irrelevant, autism onset should be evenly scattered across the calendar relative to shots.
Instead, onset clusters in the days after vaccination and almost never in the days before.

Coupled with a dose-response relationship (more shots → higher odds), he asserts every Bradford Hill criterion is met.
McCullough frames it with the encephalitis model: vaccine → fever → subclinical brain inflammation (encephalitis) → autistic child (post-encephalitic). That’s the mechanistic story the datasets are meant to support. This is consistent with the McCullough Foundation Report: The Determinants of Autism Spectrum Disorder.

[tim]

https://pierrekorymedicalmusings.com/p/ ... career-but

Ōmura’s laboratory discovered the soil organism that gave the world avermectin, and from it, ivermectin. My COVID work had intersected with his, if not nearly duplicated it. Like me, he did not stay quiet during COVID. From the very beginning of the pandemic, he reached out to Merck, imploring them to fund trials. Like me, he and his colleagues published a major, highly positive review of the dozens of ivermectin studies available at the time. He also wrote a book about ivermectin’s role in COVID, though its title, Ivermectin: Can It Become a Lifesaving Treatment for COVID-19?, was more optimistic than mine, The War on Ivermectin.

The world’s press, which had been perfectly happy to celebrate him in 2015, decided it didn’t want to hear from him in 2021. Only when I met him did I learn how complete that silence had been, even at home. His book became a bestseller in Japan, yet the Japanese media barely covered it, and no one invited him to give a single interview. No major publisher would take it. A Nobel laureate in his own country, writing about the drug that won him the prize, couldn't find a mainstream publisher.

I had seen a glimpse of that silencing from the other side of the world, years before we ever met. Because of my highly public advocacy for ivermectin and my role in the FLCCC, I slowly became fairly visible on Twitter, reaching over 600,000 followers. My single most popular tweet to date was me reporting that YouTube had taken down an interview with Ōmura about using ivermectin. Check out the retweet count, for a man not named Elon Musk:

That tweet was paired, in an old post, with a video clip I want to reshare: a fiery diatribe by Professor Masanori Fukushima, Professor Emeritus of Kyoto University, delivering a scathing and scientifically accurate critique of pretty much every aspect of the COVID vaccine campaign. The world had only a handful of truly prominent academics bold enough to publicly criticize their country’s COVID response, and no one came close to Fukushima’s fury (it’s even angrier than my ivermectin Senate testimony). When I watch it, I feel like I did as a kid watching the training montage in Rocky, with the theme music cranked up. Best line: “a bunch of incompetent scholars who cannot be called scholars... a total disregard for science and medicine.” Amen.

[tim]

https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/vaccin ... endangered

Vaccine Cartel Begins Injecting Endangered Baby Elephants With Experimental mRNA Shots

Zoos across America have begun subjecting their elephants to elephant herpesvirus (EEHV) gene therapy procedures.

The experimental mRNA injection rollout has now reached endangered baby elephants. On October 8, 2026, the Saint Louis Zoo announced that a 1½-year-old Asian elephant named Jet had received his third dose of an experimental mRNA injection targeting elephant endotheliotropic herpesvirus (EEHV).

Developed by Baylor College of Medicine in collaboration with zoo researchers, the gene therapy uses lipid nanoparticles to deliver four synthetic mRNA sequences encoding EEHV viral proteins.

Experimental mRNA Gene Therapy Is Expanding Across American Zoos

The research program involves institutions including Houston Zoo, Cincinnati Zoo, Fort Worth Zoo, Rosamond Gifford Zoo, and White Oak Conservation. Saint Louis Zoo has now publicly confirmed vaccinating its young elephant.

A peer-reviewed study published in the Journal of Virology in July 2026 evaluated the gene therapy in nine Asian elephants. Elephants received up to FOUR injections containing 400 micrograms of mRNA each. Three of six initially antibody-negative elephants failed to develop detectable antibody responses after their first two injections and required additional booster shots.

Vaccinated Elephants Still Contracted EEHV

Perhaps most notably, a second peer-reviewed study published in the Journal of Virology documented that two juvenile elephants at Cincinnati Zoo developed confirmed EEHV infections after receiving two doses of the experimental mRNA injection.

Both animals received their injections in October and November 2024 before testing positive in February and March 2025. The findings show that the mRNA gene therapy does not reliably prevent EEHV infection in elephants.

The expansion of dangerous mRNA technology into endangered wildlife already facing the threat of extinction marks a disturbing new frontier in veterinary medicine.

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation

Support our mission: mcculloughfnd.org

Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.

[tim]

https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/the-an ... ection-who

The Annual Influenza Injection: Who Really Profits When 40% of America Lines Up

Volumes falling, prices rising, and the cheapest products mysteriously disappearing. Coincidence?

The Influenza Vaccine Business: Brands, Prices, and the Money Behind the Needle

Roughly 40% of Americans rolling up a sleeve means somewhere in the neighborhood of 130–135 million doses moving through the U.S. market in a season. That’s not a public health program with a marketing budget. That’s a product line, and a lucrative one.

Vaccine Oligopoly

The U.S. flu market is essentially a four-player oligopoly:

Sanofi — Fluzone, Fluzone High-Dose (for 65+), and the multi-dose vials that anchor institutional purchasing
CSL Seqirus — Flucelvax (cell-based) and the legacy egg-based Afluria, which the company is now sunsetting
GSK — Fluarix and FluLaval
AstraZeneca — FluMist, the nasal spray, and the only real non-injection option at scale
That’s it. Four companies. No meaningful independent competition, no transparent price discovery, and a purchasing structure where a handful of distributors and government contracts set the terms for everyone.

What It Costs

Prices vary wildly depending on channel — private list price, distributor contract, government bulk purchase — which is exactly how you keep the real numbers murky.

Egg-based standard trivalent/quadrivalent: roughly $20–$21 per dose at list
Flucelvax (cell-based): $43.54 per dose list price for 2026/27 — a deliberate premium positioning
Fluzone High-Dose: sits above standard pricing, marketed on the “stronger immune response” angle for the 65+ cohort
FluMist: priced in the standard range but with the convenience premium baked in
Note the pattern: the industry has been retiring cheap egg-based products and pushing cell-based and adjuvanted alternatives at double the price. CSL is literally discontinuing Afluria while expanding Flucelvax. That’s not a scientific necessity. Is that medical progress or margin engineering?

The Revenue Picture

Here’s where it gets interesting.

U.S. market value: roughly $2.98 billion for the 2025 season, projected toward $5.45 billion by 2030 on base-case modeling
Global market: around $9 billion in 2025, forecast to $12–13 billion by 2030–2032
Sanofi’s U.S. flu revenue alone: approximately $1.54 billion in the 2025/26 season
CSL Seqirus: over $1 billion in U.S. revenue
So of that ~$3 billion U.S. pie, two companies take the overwhelming majority. The “40% uptake” figure isn’t a public health target — it’s a revenue floor that manufacturers lobby, market, and contract to protect.

What the Numbers Don’t Tell You

A few things worth sitting with:

Volume fell, value rose. Distributed doses dropped from ~145 million to ~132 million — yet aggregate revenue held or grew. That’s pricing power, not demand.
The mRNA push is next. GSK is advancing a dual-antigen mRNA flu candidate into Phase 3. Moderna already has one marketed. The next price tier is being built right now.
Liability architecture. The U.S. government’s vaccine injury compensation system means manufacturers carry minimal product liability exposure. The risk is socialized; the revenue is privatized. That asymmetry is the core of the business model.
Forecast accuracy is a feature, not a bug. Strains are selected months ahead based on surveillance data, and effectiveness varies season to season — but the revenue doesn’t vary with effectiveness. That’s the tell.
Bottom Line

The influenza vaccine market is a $3 billion U.S. business and a $9–13 billion global one, controlled by four companies, increasingly priced upward through product substitution, and underwritten by government purchasing and liability protection. The “40% uptake” expectation isn’t just epidemiology — it’s a sales target dressed as a public health campaign, and the companies behind it have every incentive to keep the number climbing.

[tim]

https://blog.maryannedemasi.com/p/break ... _id=746368

BREAKING: Misconduct at Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine trial site in Argentina

Previously undisclosed documents expose dosing errors, disputed safety records and ethics violations at one of Pfizer’s largest Covid-19 vaccine trial sites.

Dosing errors and protocol chaos

Trouble surfaced on 11 August 2020, when a volunteer assigned to receive a placebo was mistakenly injected with Pfizer’s experimental vaccine.

The research team discovered the error and contacted Pfizer to correct the participant’s treatment assignment in IMPALA, which is the automated medication allocation system.

But when he returned for his second injection on 3 September, the system again assigned placebo. He was not informed of the mistake until 23 September, more than six weeks after receiving the incorrect injection.

By then, a much larger medication error had already unfolded.

On 23 August, pharmacy staff incorrectly diluted the experimental vaccine, resulting in 52 volunteers receiving approximately 58 micrograms of mRNA instead of the prescribed 30 micrograms — almost double the intended dose.

In a letter to Polack dated 31 August, Pfizer blamed human error, saying the pharmacist or unblinded administrator “did not read the label correctly” before administering improperly diluted vaccine.

The mistake was discovered during routine medication checks by a Pfizer pharmacist, prompting a temporary recruitment hold.

Pfizer’s 31 August 2020 letter documenting the dosing error (original English document).

But recruitment resumed the very next day after staff retraining, even as Pfizer continued investigating the incident and considering further corrective measures.

Pfizer said it contacted all 52 volunteers who received the higher dose that same day and found no increase in reported adverse events, although it was too early to rule out complications that might have emerged later.

Pfizer also recommended unblinding affected volunteers so they could decide whether to continue receiving the vaccine.

Argentina’s National Administration of Drugs, Foods, and Medical Devices (ANMAT) was not satisfied.

After questioning Pfizer and the research team about inadequate training and vaccine preparation procedures, the drug regulator ordered them to suspend recruitment again on 9 September until further notice, demanding an informed-consent addendum explaining the risks and benefits of receiving another dose.

When inspectors examined the trial more closely, they uncovered problems extending well beyond medication errors.