Since the global rollout of COVID-19 vaccinations, societal divisions have deepened, and within the medical fraternity, tensions have escalated. Dr. Chetty, hailed for his dedication to patient care and adherence to the Hippocratic Oath, found himself at the centre of controversy as he prioritised individual treatment over mandated protocols.

Treating over 14,000 COVID-19 patients, Dr. Chetty achieved remarkable results—none of his patients required hospitalisation or succumbed to the virus. Yet, despite his success, he faced a barrage of attacks and disciplinary action from the HPCSA, accused of professional misconduct for not conforming to recommended vaccination protocols.

Critics argue that Dr Chetty’s persecution is not based on ethical violations but rather stems from his refusal to toe the official line dictated by governments and pharmaceutical companies. They point to the HPCSA’s charge against Dr. Chetty as evidence of a politically motivated agenda, highlighting the council’s failure to acknowledge his groundbreaking research and lifesaving treatments.

In response to the growing outcry, voices from within and outside the medical community have rallied in support of Dr. Chetty, condemning the actions of the HPCSA and demanding a fair assessment of his contributions to healthcare. Calls for transparency and accountability resonate as concerns about the suppression of alternative treatment approaches and the erosion of medical freedoms mount.

As the controversy surrounding Dr. Chetty intensifies, it is a stark reminder of the delicate balance between medical autonomy and institutional oversight. In a climate marked by uncertainty and fear, the plight of doctors like Dr. Chetty underscores the importance of upholding principles of integrity, compassion, and scientific inquiry in the pursuit of public health.

The post Persecution of Doctor Sparks Outcry: Health Council Accused of Political Motives appeared first on Alt News Network.

In the wake of the ever-increasing evidence of deaths, miscarriages and ruinous health effects suffered by those who received the mRNA jab, it is utterly iniquitous to credit the two Nobel laureates for “vaccine development during one of the greatest threats to human health in modern times” when there was no pandemic because 99% of the Covid-infected survived.

If the two recipients of the award, Drs Katalin Kariko and Drew Weissman, had any regard for the Hippocratic Oath which concerns the preservation of human life, they would reject the decision of the Nobel Assembly of Sweden. Here’s why:

• Research of 17 highly vaxxed countries by Drs Hickey and Rancourt of Ottawa University found an unprecedented rise in all–cause mortality (The Defender, September 20).
• Dr Paul Offit, a prominent FDA consultant and adviser to the White House, has refused to take the new mRNA booster because he is concerned about the spike in proteins and myocarditis that boosters are causing.
• An analysis published on Musk’s X on September 18 showed that excess cardio-vascular rates increased by 30% in 2021 and by 44% in 2022 in the UK.
• A new study published by the Epoch Times on September 9 shows that mRNA leads to immunity impairment which means a general decrease in the body’s ability to combat bacteria. As a result, a new acronym has been coined: VAIDS – vaccine-acquired immunity deficiency syndrome.
• The CDC has admitted that in 2021 and 2022, 120,000 children died from the side effects of the mRNA vax.

Worldwide, there is irrefutable evidence of the total ineffectiveness of the mRNA vax in preventing Covid and being the “cure”. On the contrary, it is increasing mortality rates, causing sudden deaths particularly amongst the healthy and having drastic side effects on the lives of millions.

As such,  Big Pharma, the FDA, the CDC, the WHO, the mass media, the bought politicians, doctors and scientists who promoted and subjected millions to the mRNA vax are guilty of perpetrating the greatest medical fraud in history. Thus, the reality of the Nobel Prize award for the mRNA vax amounts to dignifying a bio-weapon.

The post Nobel Medical Award Dignifies A Bio-weapon appeared first on Alt News Network.

You read that right: the first victims of “COVID” in Queensland were those who had complied with all medical recommendations in order to “protect” themselves against contracting the Fauci Flu.

The first 183 deaths during the “pandemic,” which started there on March 13, 2020, and continued until January 27, 2022, were in people who should have been immune to COVID, provided the shots genuinely work as advertised. This is according to internal government documents.

Furthermore, the documents demonstrate that Queensland officials were aware, as early as January 2022, that COVID vaccinations did not offer protection against the alleged “virus.” Despite this, none of them ever brought it up in public while they shot the crowd.

“The list shows that the first locally acquired COVID-19 death was one in their 80s and another in their 30s, with both having received two doses of the vaccine in December 2021 and January 2022, respectively,” reports reveal.

Lawsuit demands; END the Queensland covid jab mandate for public health, aged-care facility workers

Seven “COVID”-related deaths were reported in Queensland early in the scamdemic; all of the victims had contracted the illness outside of the country prior to the start of the vaccination program.

Queensland’s border reopened in December 2021 after being blocked for over two years. By that point, 80% of the state’s population had received an injection, and by the end of 2021, about 90% of adults over the age of 16 had as well.

The goal of the current case, which revealed all these delicious information about Queensland corruption, is to have the state cancel its September 2021 order mandating that all personnel who work in the fields of public health and aged-care facilities receive a vaccination against the Chinese Virus.

“I graduated from medical school 40 years ago and in all that time have never had a single complaint about me presented to a medical board or AHPRA,” said psychiatrist Peter Parry, a case specialist who in his three-decade career has never once been subjected to disciplinary action – until now.

Because COVID-19 shots are “not normal vaccines,” Parry decided to refuse them. According to the conventional definition of a vaccination, they aren’t even vaccines.

“We hope, by bringing evidentiary material and expert witness testimonies before the Supreme Court, that the justices will look at the evidence and rule in our favor,” he added. “If successful, large numbers of experienced nurses, allied health, and doctors will be able to return to assist an overstretched Queensland public health system.”

In addition to these requirements, Queensland’s Premier Annastacia Palazczuk ordered that unvaccinated people be denied access to the exercise of certain rights in places like hospitals, assisted living facilities, libraries, and public gathering places.

In order to use these services and exercise these freedoms, proof of “vaccination” was necessary, which violated Aussies’ right to conduct their daily lives without first receiving an experimental chemical injection that could kill them.

“The COVID vaccines were an IQ test – how did you do?” one commenter asked, making an excellent point with few words.

Source: Natural News

The post State Records Show Australia’s first COVID Deaths Were FULLY VACCINATED appeared first on Alt News Network.

We won’t go into the ramifications of such a rule on individual liberties or the seemingly endless body of research showing that masks are ineffective at preventing the spread of respiratory diseases.

They never worked. Their ongoing use is a sign of indoctrination or a side effect of persistent virtue signalling, and their mandate was a political decision made to give the bogus Covid “pandemic” the appearance of reality.

The mask debate, such as it was, is over.

No, the “evidence” offered to support the position is the only component of this development worth discussing, and believe me when I say that the quotes are perfectly justified.

The “study” titled “Consistent mask use and SARSCoV2 epidemiology: a simulation modelling study” was published in the Medical Journal of Australia this week. It makes the case for the advantages of long-term masking.

The word “simulation modelling study” is definitely the most important one there. For the uninitiated, “simulation modelling studies” entail entering data into a computer program and then asking it to draw conclusions.

Obviously, they are only as trustworthy and helpful as the information you use. In fact, by giving them the “right” (wrong) data, you can easily make them create whatever result you desire.

They told the computer at the beginning of this particular modelling exercise that respirators lowered transmission by 80% and cotton masks by 53%:

Odds ratios for the relative risk of infection for people exposed to an infected person (wearing a mask v not wearing a mask) were set at 0.47 for cloth and surgical masks and 0.20 for respirators.

In essence, they informed their computer that sickness is prevented by masks…after which he asked the computer, “Okay, computer, now that you know masks prevent disease, what would happen if everyone wore them constantly?”

The computer then informed them that no one would become ill, obviously.

They did this since it was illogical for it to state anything other.

But there’s more to it than that.

The next layer of interest is where they got their input data from?

After all, several research have been conducted on masks throughout the years, and 98% of them have concluded that they are ineffective.

So, did our people decide on a real-time control trial that was peer-reviewed and was based on data from a double-blind lab test?

Maybe one of the a dozen or so trials like this one that are listed in our 40 facts article?

Did they possibly average the outcomes of several studies?

No, a phone survey was employed.

One phone survey.

This phone survey, published last year and conducted in late 2021.

In this *ahem* “scientific study,” participants were randomly chosen from among individuals who had previously undergone “Covid” testing and asked, “Did you wear a mask?” and then publicized the result — “masks reduce transmission by 53%” — as if it had any significance.

It’s interesting to note that one of the authors is a Pfizer grant recipient if you go down to the “affiliations” section.

More concerning, and for some reason not acknowledged as a conflict of interest, is the fact that the California Board of Public Health produced the entire report.

Before this “study” even began, California has already had a mask requirement for almost a year.

This is not “science”; rather, it is a computer model that was created using the results of a debatable phone survey that was carried out by a government organization with a personal stake in the outcome. It is completely worthless, but despite this, it is published in journals, cited by “experts,” and possibly even the foundation for new regulations.

In this way, “The ScienceTM” operates. And even while Covid may have made a lot of people aware of this problem, it is not just a “Covid” problem. This kind of “research” has been published on a variety of subjects for years, if not decades. It is especially common on subjects with political overtones.

John Ioannidis, a Stanford professor of evidence-based medicine, published a paper titled “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False” in 2005.

This is entirely about the distinction between science and “The Science” and has nothing to do with the “pandemic”. So let’s investigate that difference.

“Science” is a way of looking at things. a methodical approach to information collection, hypothesis testing, and drawing conclusions from the available data.

“The Science” is a self-sustaining industry of academics who need jobs and owe favours.

An ongoing “quid pro quo” arrangement between the researchers, who desire accolades, knighthoods, tenure, book deals, research grants, and the opportunity to engage in popular television commentary elaborating on complex concepts, and the businesses, governments, and “charitable foundations” who already possess all of those things.

This system doesn’t produce research that is meant to be read; instead, it generates tweetable headlines, links, and sources for “journalists” to embed.

An impression of strong support that disintegrates as you read the text, look at the approach, or look at the data.

Self-reporting surveys, falsified information, and “modelling studies” that produce predetermined outcomes. Affiliated authors who have been paid by the government or business interests to offer “evidence” in support of theories that are politically expedient or extremely profitable.

This mask study is a prime illustration of that.

• Layers of nothing interlaced to give the appearance of something.
• They want you to believe it rather than read it because of this.

The post This Pro-Mask “Study” Is Why You Should Never “Trust The Science” appeared first on Alt News Network.

264 adverse events following immunizations (AEFIs) were recorded for every 100,000 COVID-19 vaccines provided, according to the state’s vaccine safety surveillance report (pdf).

The COVID-19 vaccines are 23.8 times more likely to cause adverse events than non-COVID-19 vaccines, with 11.1 AEFIs being reported for all other immunizations.

The rate of adverse events varied among different types of COVID-19 vaccines.

The Spikevax (Moderna) vaccine recorded 281.4 AEFIs per 100,000 doses, Comirnaty (Pfizer) recorded 244.8, and the Vaxzevria (AstraZeneca) vaccine, which was removed from the vaccine program after reports emerged of blood clotting in younger people, recorded 306.

Adverse events following vaccination can range from mild, such as a sore arm, to serious conditions, such as anaphylaxis, thrombosis with thrombocytopaenia syndrome (TTS), Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), myocarditis, and pericarditis.

Collaboration Continues With 3-in-1 Super Jab

Meanwhile, despite these concerns, the Australian government’s partnership with Moderna to produce vaccines using experimental messenger RNA technology to prepare for the next pandemic means these vaccines are here to stay.

The company has been forming a trifecta jab to address the main respiratory viruses—influenza, COVID-19, and RSV to maintain its market share amid the falling revenue of vaccine companies as the health crisis subsides.

Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine sales of US$18.4 billion in 2022 are expected to dive to $5 billion this year.

Recently, it was granted expedited approval by Australia’s authority for medicines for its mRNA-1345 (RSV vaccine), meaning that the company will be able to launch the vaccines in Australia before any other country in the world.

A spokesperson from Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration told the Epoch Times that Moderna was granted an accelerated approval process on March 30 after satisfying all of the following criteria:

• • the medicine is new
  • the medicine is for the treatment, prevention, or diagnosis of a life-threatening condition
  • no other medicines that are intended to treat, prevent or diagnose the condition are included in the Australian drug register or there is substantial evidence that this medicine provides a significant improvement in efficacy or safety of the treatment, prevention or diagnosis of the condition compared to those goods already included in the register
  • there is substantial evidence that the medicine provides a major therapeutic advance.

However, phase 3 clinical trials for Moderna’s mRNA version of the seasonal influenza vaccine have been underwhelming, showing a high rate of side effects.

Although the vaccine generates a strong immune response against the A strains of the flu, its efficacy against B strains is not better than existing approved vaccines.

Additionally, 70 percent of trial participants who received the shot reported adverse reactions such as headaches, swelling, and fatigue compared to 48 percent for the conventional flu vaccine.

The post COVID Vaccines Show 24 Times More Adverse Reactions Than Others appeared first on Alt News Network.

• “One of the things we’re researching is like, why don’t we just mutate it [COVID] ourselves so we could make — preemptively produce new vaccines, right?” said Jordon Trishton Walker, Pfizer Director of Research and Development, Strategic Operations – mRNA Scientific Planner. That is what we must do. However, there is a risk involved if we do that. As you can understand, nobody wants a pharmaceutical firm-altering virus.
• Don’t tell anyone, Walker warned. Make a commitment not to inform anyone. The experiment would include infecting monkeys with the virus, causing them to keep infecting each other, and then taking serial samples from them.
• Walker: “You have to be really cautious to make sure that the COVID virus you mutate doesn’t produce anything that spreads indiscriminately. To be honest, I believe that this is how the virus first appeared in Wuhan. The sudden appearance of this pathogen defies logic. It is nonsense.”
• “From what I’ve heard, they [Pfizer scientists] are optimizing it [the COVID mutation process], but they’re going slow because everyone is extremely cautious — clearly they don’t want to accelerate it too quickly,” said Walker. Since it is evident that you do not want to announce that you are researching potential future mutations, I believe they are also just attempting to do it as an exploratory thing.

NEW YORK – 25 January 2023: Jordon Trishton Walker, a Pfizer executive, reveals that his company is looking into ways to “mutate” COVID via “Directed Evolution” in order to delay the creation of subsequent vaccines. Project Veritas has now released a new video exposing Walker.

1,000,000+ views in 90 minutes #DirectedEvolution setting the internet on fire 🔥🔥🔥 pic.twitter.com/xaRvlD5qTo

— Project Veritas (@Project_Veritas) January 26, 2023

According to Walker, Gain-of-Function, which is defined as “a mutation that imparts new or enhanced activity on a protein,” is distinct from directed evolution. In other words, it implies that, depending on the mutation or scientific experiment carried out on it, a virus like COVID may become more potent.

The Pfizer executive discussed his company’s plans for COVID vaccines with a Veritas journalist while noting that if this information became public, people would not be pleased.

“One of the things Pfizer is investigating is like, why don’t we just mutate it [COVID] ourselves so we could build — produce new vaccines beforehand, right? That is what we must do. But if we do that, there’s a risk that, as you might guess, nobody wants a pharmaceutical corporation altering viruses,” Walker added.

According to what I’ve heard, the COVID mutation process is being optimized by Pfizer experts, but they’re moving slowly since everyone is being quite cautious — clearly, they don’t want to accelerate it too quickly. You obviously don’t want to publicize that you are figuring out future mutations, so I believe they are just trying to do it as an experimental activity,” he said.

“Don’t tell anyone. Promise you won’t tell anyone. The way it [the experiment] would work is that we put the virus in monkeys, and we successively cause them to keep infecting each other, and we collect serial samples from them.”

Walker drew parallels between this current Pfizer project and what may have happened at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.

“You have to be very controlled to make sure that this virus [COVID] that you mutate doesn’t create something that just goes everywhere. Which, I suspect, is the way that the virus started in Wuhan, to be honest. It makes no sense that this virus popped out of nowhere. It’s bullsh*t,” he said.

“You’re not supposed to do Gain-of-Function research with viruses. Regularly not. We can do these selected structure mutations to make them more potent. There is research ongoing about that. I don’t know how that is going to work. There better not be any more outbreaks because Jesus Christ,” he said.

Walker also told the Veritas journalist that COVID has been instrumental for Pfizer’s recent business success:

Walker: Part of what they [Pfizer scientists] want to do is, to some extent, to try to figure out, you know, how there are all these new strains and variants that just pop up. So, it’s like trying to catch them before they pop up and we can develop a vaccine prophylactically, like, for new variants. So, that’s why they like, do it controlled in a lab, where they say this is a new epitope, and so if it comes out later on in the public, we already have a vaccine working.

Veritas Journalist: Oh my God. That’s perfect. Isn’t that the best business model though? Just control nature before nature even happens itself? Right?

Walker: Yeah. If it works.

Veritas Journalist: What do you mean if it works?

Walker: Because some of the times there are mutations that pop up that we are not prepared for. Like with Delta and Omicron. And things like that. Who knows? Either way, it’s going to be a cash cow. COVID is going to be a cash cow for us for a while going forward. Like obviously.

Veritas Journalist: Well, I think the whole research of the viruses and mutating it, like, would be the ultimate cash cow.

Walker: Yeah, it’d be perfect.

Walker continued by outlining how it is not in the interests of the American people for Big Pharma and government officials, such as those at the Food & Drug Administration [FDA], to have common goals:

Walker: [Big Pharma] is a revolving door for all government officials.

Veritas Journalist: Wow.

Walker: In any industry though. So, in the pharma industry, all the people who review our drugs — eventually most of them will come work for pharma companies. And in the military, defense government officials eventually work for defense companies afterwards.

Veritas Journalist: How do you feel about that revolving door?

Walker: It’s pretty good for the industry to be honest. It’s bad for everybody else in America.

Veritas Journalist: Why is it bad for everybody else?

Walker: Because when the regulators reviewing our drugs know that once they stop regulating, they are going to work for the company, they are not going to be as hard towards the company that’s going to give them a job.

Source: Project Veritas

The post Watch: Pfizer Executive Admits On Camera ‘Mutate’ COVID via ‘Directed Evolution’ To Profit From Vaccines appeared first on Alt News Network.

The so-called experts were responsible for following the dictates of Big Pharma to negate science in plunging South Africa into lockdowns, masks and vaccines when science decreed that the effects of those measures were worse than Covid itself. These so-called experts ignored the voices of scientific integrity exemplified by the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration – Dr Martin Kulldorf of Harvard, Dr Sunetra Gupta of Oxford and Dr Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford, along with 60,000 scientists and medical doctors – who bravely debunked the Big Pharma/ globalist narrative.

The opinion of one of the “experts,” Professor Nigel Garrett quoted in The Mercury’s report, is particularly relevant seeing as he and two of his colleagues, Drs Lessells and Msomi, conducted a workshop last July in which they ardently promoted masks and vaxxing. They were challenged in these columns on August 22 to respond to the irrefutable evidence that their prescriptions were misleading and contrary to science. Their failure to respond was not surprising given the sources of funding upon which their research institutions rely.

In terms of the bigger picture, what needs to be appreciated is the agenda underlying what is being propagated as pandemics. By promoting fear and alarm, the objective is population control. Although it has been conceded that Covid-19 was nothing more than the virulent flu from which 99% of those infected survived, the ulterior motive of those in Big Pharma, the WHO, the CDC, the bought politicians and scientists, is to coerce the masses into having the concoction called “the vaccine.”

Irrefutable proof of the fact that the so-called vaccines are hazardous to health is available from the statistics of the passive vaccine adverse effects reporting system (VAERS). More than 30,000 people have died from the jab, and over 500,000 have experienced extreme illness and impairment.

Yet, the likes of Professor Garrett and Adrian Gore of Discovery (see: Biznews, January 6) insist on promoting vaxxing, despite proof that it neither prevents re-infection nor produces immunity. Worse still, vaxxing and boosters are depleting natural immunity which is why ill health afflicts the vaxxed far more than the unvaxxed.

Journalist Brian Pottinger’s appeal, made last February, for a TRC-type investigation into the Covid, pandemic, and vax narrative, is overdue.

The post Covid “Experts” Deserve Disdain appeared first on Alt News Network.

Gottlieb funnelled his demands using the same Twitter lobbyist the White House did – fresh evidence of overlap between Pfizer selling mRNA shots and the government forcing them on the public.

Gottlieb, a Pfizer director, on August 27, 2021, noticed a tweet that pushed against his narrative (that of making a profit). Claiming this tweet could hurt the sales of Pfizer’s mRNA vaccines.

The tweet correctly explained that natural immunity was superior to vaccine immunity.

This tweet came from Dr Brett Giroir, a physician who had briefly followed Gottlieb as the head of the Food & Drug Administration.

This suggestion could raise questions about the shots. 

Stepping in, Gottlieb emailed Todd O’Boyle, a top lobbyist in Twitter’s Washington office and Twitter’s point of contact with The White House.

Gottlieb wrote, “The Post was ‘corrosive.'” and continued to cite, “…this tweet will end up going viral and driving news coverage.” It was clear Gottlieb did not want this out.

It’s now clear #COVID19 natural immunity is superior to #vaccine immunity, by ALOT. There’s no science justification for #vax proof if a person had prior infection. @CDCDirector @POTUS must follow the science. If no previous infection? Get vaccinated! https://t.co/jFc0yHpF2f

— Brett Giroir (@DrGiroir) August 28, 2021

Since the release of the Twitter Files, it is clear Elon will not leave one stone unturned. Since Elon gained Twitter, he has continued to release internal communication between the leading authorities and Twitter. 

A recent Substack article written by Alex Berenson goes into more detail on this topic. He found the email in a search for records he ran on Twitter last week. 

O’Boyle forwarded the email to Twitter’s “Strategic Response” team, failing to mention that Gottlieb was a Pfizer board member with financial interests in pushing the mRNA shots. 

A week later, Gottlieb struck again, complaining to O’boyle about a tweet from Justin Hart, who had a Twitter following of over 100,000.

The tweet read. “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but a viral pathogen with a child mortality rate of <>0% has cost our children nearly three years of schooling,”.

Sticks and stones may break my bones but a viral pathogen with a child mortality rate of ~0% has cost our children nearly three years of schooling. 😡

— Justin Hart (@justin_hart) September 4, 2021

This time, though, Gottlieb’s complaint fell on deaf ears. 

At the same time, Gottlieb was pressing Twitter to act against Berenson, who disclosed on Substack on October 13, 2022, drawing on documents that Twitter’s pre-Musk regime provided him with as part of a lawsuit against Twitter. 

In an interview with CNBC, Gottlieb did not deny pressing Twitter on Berenson.

“I’ve raised concerns about social media and the threats that are being made on these platforms,” says @ScottGottliebMD on Alex Berenson being kicked off Twitter. “I’m unconcerned about debate being made. I’m concerned about physical threats being made for people’s safety.” pic.twitter.com/hxpALiT6dZ

— Squawk Box (@SquawkCNBC) October 14, 2022

As it turns out, Gottlieb is not just a Pfizer board member.

He is one of seven members of the board’s executive committee and the head of its regulatory and compliance committee, which oversees “compliance with laws, regulations, and internal procedures applicable to pharmaceutical sales and marketing activities.”

Pfizer has a long history of violating drug industry laws and ethics rules. In 2009, it agreed to pay $2.3 billion, the largest healthcare fraud settlement in American history, for fraudulently marketing several drugs.

In 1996, it conducted a clinical trial of an antibiotic in Nigeria in which 11 children died and which became the inspiration for John le Carre’s novel, The Constant Gardner.

How will Pfizer react to the black-and-white proof from Twitter’s records that one of its most influential board members secretly tried to suppress debate on the mRNA jabs that have been by far its best-selling product since 2020?

The post Twitter Files: Pfizer Board Member Pressed Twitter To Hide Posts On Natural Immunity appeared first on Alt News Network.

Predictably, the Sahpra statement downplays the particular symptoms that caused the second reported fatality. How many others have not been reported and why? Be that as it may, the significance of Sahpra’s admission of vaccine risk is that it contrasts with the blaring narrative of the past eighteen months hailing the safety and efficacy of the Covid jabs.

Nonetheless, what was unscientifically dismissed and vilified as ‘misinformation,’ can no longer be suppressed. The Centre for Disease Control, doyen of the medical profession, has conceded that since the jab myocarditis cases in boys in the 12-15 age group, have tripled in the past year. The UK Government has banned vaxxing children younger than 12 after belatedly recognising their high natural immunity to Covid.

Government data from the state of Victoria, Australia, where 95% of the population was vaxxed, shows a 20% increase in deaths this year compared to the 2017-2021 period. Data emanating from Germany and Italy shows death rates in excess of the pre-2020 period. But medical authorities are reluctant to ascribe that to the vaccines for fear of endangering their Big Pharma funding.

Transparency and accountability have become the biggest casualties of our time regarding the agenda of those who have aggressively, unscientifically and unlawfully mandated the vaccine jab. But the truth is dripping out. As German philosopher, Arthur Schopenhauer, remarked: “All truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”

The post Significance Of COVID Vax Data appeared first on Alt News Network.

Limits on gatherings, and border checks – including for vaccination status – have also been dropped.

Health minister Joe Phaahla repealed the relevant regulations with a simple notice in the Government Gazette, the import of which was not immediately evident because of the technical nature of the notice.

The post Face Masks, Border Checks And Gatherings Ban Dropped appeared first on Alt News Network.