TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

According to the latest report, US government data confirms a 143,233 percent increase in cancer cases due to COVID vaccination.

Speaker 0 reports that the largest oncologic safety assessment of the COVID shots was just published in OncoTarget, a major cancer journal. They say the article was hit with cyberattacks just before publication, preventing online posting, and that the FBI was contacted. The piece then appeared in PubMed, but is described as having gone down again after another cyberattack on the journal. The core findings, as claimed, are that the researchers collected all of the cancer evidence associated with the COVID shots and found over three hundred confirmed vaccine-related cancer cases documented in peer-reviewed literature. This number is described as not representing the total seen in real-world data, but rather the count of cases identified by scientists within peer-reviewed sources, thereby supporting the claim that the phenomenon is real. The cancers span every type imaginable, with lymphoma accounting for about forty percent of the cases. Two large population-level studies are highlighted, totaling about ten million people. These studies reportedly show a major increased risk of multiple cancers in vaccinated populations compared to unvaccinated populations, with up to seven types of cancers increased. A military dataset consisting of around 1.2 million people is cited, in which lymphoma was reported to have increased drastically in 2021 among military members who were mandated to receive the shots. The summary characterizes the paper as so damning that it is presented as evidence that these shots are carcinogenic, and attributes the cyberattacks and other online disruptions to efforts to suppress these findings. The speaker emphasizes the sequence of cyber warfare activity around publication, the breadth of cancer types reported, and the notable increases in cancer incidence in large vaccinated populations, including a significant rise in lymphoma within the military cohort.

The SB40 sequence was not declared to regulators and poses a potential cancer risk because any DNA that promotes cell growth can lead to unregulated cell growth, which is cancer. Concerns have been raised about the link between the vaccine and cancer. It is crucial to study and sequence cancers that have developed after vaccination to determine if there is a connection. This remains an important unknown that needs urgent investigation.

VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, collects data on vaccine-related adverse events. Analysis shows that in 2021, 98% of cancer-related reports were linked to COVID vaccines, significantly higher than other vaccines. A comparison with the flu vaccine revealed virtually no cancer cases associated with it, highlighting a stark contrast. Research indicates that PD L1, a receptor produced by cancer and immune cells, may contribute to this issue. Elevated PD L1 levels were observed two days after vaccination, suggesting an activated immune system may suppress responses to both COVID and cancer. This nonspecific immunosuppressive effect raises concerns about the potential for increased cancer risk following vaccination.

The speaker describes a nationwide study conducted in South Korea, stating that every resident was included in the research. The study compared individuals who received the vaccine to those who did not, and the analysis was stratified by dose number (one dose, two doses, three doses, and four or more doses). A central claim of the speaker is that this study provides the strongest signal to date supporting vaccine acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, referred to as VADES. According to the speaker, as each dose was administered, the immune function of individuals declined. By the time of the fourth dose, the speaker asserts there was a significant increase in the risk of other infections, quantified as about a 550% increase, including infections such as the common cold, tuberculosis, and upper respiratory tract infections. The speaker notes that the effect was most pronounced in young people, specifically ages zero to nineteen, who reportedly had the highest risks of these other infections. The implication presented is that the injections are causing immune collapse and exhausting T cells, leading to immune dysregulation described as IgG4 class switching. The immune system is said to become dysfunctional as a result. Additionally, the speaker mentions that, consistent with other studies they reference, genes related to immune function are claimed to become shut down. The overall assertion is that these findings point to a troubling pattern of immune impairment associated with multiple vaccine doses, culminating in the claimed immune dysfunction and increased susceptibility to other infections. The speaker emphasizes the magnitude and reliability of the sample size, stating that having an entire country’s population as the study cohort constitutes the strongest possible sample size. The summary of the presented claims centers on dose-dependent immune decline, a marked increase in non-target infections after the fourth dose, greater impact on children, evidence of immune system exhaustion and dysregulation, and purported genetic downregulation of immune pathways, all described as arising from the vaccination regimen in this nationwide South Korean study.

Kevin McKernan recently discovered that there is contamination in the mRNA shots with cDNA, including a cancer-promoting segment called SV40. SV40 turns on cancer genes in the human body and impairs tumor suppressor systems. This means that the shots not only promote cancer through SV40 but also inhibit our ability to fight cancer. The increase in cancer rates is undeniable, but the question remains: how much of this is due to the vaccines?

Speaker 0 argues that the original study relied heavily on statistical modeling, rather than presenting basic raw proportions. When they examined the raw proportions, they found that every single one of the 22 chronic disease categories was proportionally higher in the vaccinated group, including cancer. The speaker notes that the study claimed there was no difference in cancer, treating cancer as a control, but asserts there was a difference in cancer when looking at raw data. They claim that for rare outcomes, the modeling used in the study is not very reliable, and no basic proportional analysis was performed by the original authors. However, when they conducted such an analysis themselves, they found cancer was fifty-four percent higher in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated children. The speaker concludes that there is biological plausibility behind these findings.

This is not conspiracy theory. This has been published in the BMJ by Retzaf Levy, and they go through this process: one where they ran these vaccines in the trial and how they changed that when they decided to go and inject the rest of the world. This is traditionally a mortal sin in vaccine manufacturing or in any sort of biologic manufacturing. The process is the product. You change the process, you have to go through trials again. And the EMA even asked them to do that, although they failed to. They asked for another trial of 250 people once they changed the process and that data was never delivered. So this bait and switch is very important for you to understand why the trial data is of absolute zero consequence to what we're actually seeing in the field. Those numbers are a caricature of what they're actually doing with these injections. They know something. Pfizer very early on they had the data on this from their trial, they knew this was going to happen and they quickly went out and acquired cancer companies. They put $43,000,000,000 into the acquisition of C Gen and they put $2,260,000,000 to acquire Trillium Therapeutics. Trillium was focused on blood cancers that have a CD one forty seven marker on them. Okay? That is one of the markers that is known to be involved in COVID. So, they have a very interesting window on those malignancies and, they're buying up the cancer companies that are probably gonna play the biggest role in benefiting from the mess that they've created. So, in summary, the Pfizer vaccines on the market are not the same formulation as what was tested in the clinical trials. This is a big bait and switch and it's a fraud. So you can't believe anything they're saying about the vaccine efficiency, which we have seen even those numbers decay over time. This is probably why. They're not really what they trialed. They gave you something different. There is significant DNA contamination that's found. Like, 10 out of 11 studies have found this, and the ones that haven't found it have some financial conflicts. So, I think the consensus is out. 10 out of 10 out of 10 of the real studies, are finding this. Several are through peer review, which have not been easy to get through peer review. The peer review journals do not like these papers. They get beat around in peer review for months to years, but they're making their way out now. There is also significant DNA contamination now found in five peer reviewed studies that were not looking at this. They were looking at people's blood and tissue and it was accidentally in there. Other people had to go sleuth it out. We've got cancer on the rise and there's several papers that report cancer post vaccination. Like, right at the site of injection, they'll see neoplasms. Alright? There is there's something going on here. This can't be ignored saying it's a coincidence anymore. Now this is these are liability free and they're often mandated. Okay? This may be the largest carcinogenic hit ever to the human population. And we have these on childhood schedules. We're giving these to pregnant women. This has gone absolutely off the rails.

The speaker claims SV40 in literature turns on cancer genes. They further claim the spike protein impairs tumor suppressor systems P53 and BRCA, promoting cancer and inhibiting the ability to fight it. The speaker suggests cancer rates are up, and the question is how much is due to vaccines. They state that repeated shots every six months increase the chances of getting loaded with synthetic genetic material that will cause harm, including heart disease, neurologic disease, blood clotting, immunologic problems, and cancer.

The speaker claims that this is not conspiracy theory and cites a BMJ publication by Retzaf Levy, which describes a process in vaccine development: vaccines were trialed under one formulation, but when the decision was made to deploy them globally, the process was changed and the product injected to the rest of the world. The speaker asserts that changing the process requires new trials, yet the EMA asked for an additional trial of 250 people after the process change, and that data was never delivered. This is described as a “bait and switch,” asserted as crucial for understanding why trial data is of zero consequence to what’s seen in the field, implying that real-world outcomes do not match trial data and that the numbers from trials are a caricature of field performance. The speaker claims Pfizer had early data indicating what would happen and acted on that by acquiring cancer companies: $43,000,000,000 into the acquisition of C Gen and $2,260,000,000 to acquire Trillium Therapeutics. Trillium is described as focused on blood cancers with the CD147 marker (CD Adaptor 147) on them, a marker claimed to be known to be involved in COVID. The implication is that Pfizer is building an investment portfolio in cancer companies that would benefit from the consequences the speaker alleges they caused. In summary, the vaccines on the market are said to be not the same formulation as what was tested in clinical trials, labeling this a “bait and switch” and a fraud, and asserting that vaccine effectiveness numbers are not reliable because the products differ from trial formulations and because those numbers decay over time. The speaker alleges significant DNA contamination, stating that 10 out of 11 studies have found this, with the remaining studies allegedly constrained by financial conflicts. The claim is that consensus among real studies supports DNA contamination, with several studies through peer review, which the speaker notes is difficult for those papers to pass through peer review. It is claimed that five peer-reviewed studies not originally examining contamination found DNA in blood and tissue upon sleuthing. The speaker asserts that cancer is on the rise and that several papers report cancer post-vaccination, including neoplasms at the site of injection. The claim is that this situation cannot be dismissed as coincidence and is described as “liability free” and often mandated. The speaker posits that this may be the largest carcinogenic hit to the human population, with vaccines on childhood schedules and given to pregnant women, stating that “this has gone absolutely off the rails.”

There's concern about increased cancer risk after Covid vaccines, noting lack of UK data comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated. A study from Italy reported increased incidence of cancers six months after Covid vaccinations. The source is Experimental and Clinical Sciences Journal, peer reviewed. The paper states: "People that had vaccinated with at least one dose, their chances of getting colorectal cancer the hazard ratio was one point three four. In other words thirty four percent more likely to get it." This is at a six month follow-up. It also claims: "Breast cancer fifty four percent more likely to get breast cancer in the vaccinated group." "Bladder cancer sixty two percent more likely to get it than the unvaccinated group."

The speaker cites two population studies on COVID-19 vaccines and cancer risk, claiming they show massive increases in multiple cancers. The first study, from Italy, followed 300,000 Italians for about 30 months and reported about a 23 percent increased risk of overall cancer hospitalizations, with increases of about 40 to 60 percent in breast cancer hospitalizations, colorectal cancer, bladder cancer, and leukemia/lymphoma. A new study from South Korea, involving over eight million Koreans, purportedly corroborates the Italian data and expands on it. It reports about a 26 percent increase in overall cancer risk and increases across six major types of cancer, including gastric, thyroid, colorectal, and breast cancer, as well as other cancers described as very rare. The speaker frames these findings as an absolute disaster and claims they confirm that the vaccines have unleashed a turbo cancer epidemic. They state that the datasets corroborate these results and that the observed effects can be explained by gene expression chaos documented in other studies, along with genomic integration observed in stage four cancer patients. The speaker characterizes the situation as a disaster that needs immediate acknowledgment.

A study from Japan suggests a potential link between mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and increased cancer mortality. Researchers observed a statistically significant increase in age-adjusted mortality rates for all cancers and specific cancers, including ovarian, leukemia, prostate, lip oropharyngeal, pancreatic, and breast cancers in 2022. This increase occurred after two-thirds of the Japanese population received a third or later dose of mRNA vaccines. The researchers state the increased mortality is not due to COVID-19 infection itself or reduced cancer care during lockdowns, but potentially an effect of the vaccine. The study notes that several case reports have described cancer developing or worsening after vaccination, discussing possible causal links between cancer and mRNA vaccines. The data reflects deaths from cancer, not necessarily new cases, potentially representing aggressive forms of cancer. Graphs were shown indicating excess mortality for breast, pancreatic, lip oropharyngeal, prostate, leukemia, ovarian, and all cancers.

The speaker discusses data from the VAERS database, highlighting a significant increase in cancer-related conditions following COVID vaccination compared to other vaccines. They mention the overexpression of PD L1, a molecule linked to cancer, post-vaccination. PD L1 can suppress immune response, potentially increasing cancer risk. The speaker emphasizes the concerning implications of this finding.

Several data sources indicate a rise in cancer, including John Bowdoin's analysis of death records showing increased neoplasms. Ethical skeptic and David Wiseman's analyses of excess mortality and CDC data also support this. Cancer treatment drug sales are up, aligning with the timing of vaccine program rollouts. The GAIBO study, later removed from a preprint server, examined excess mortality in Japan, the most heavily mRNA vaccinated country. It found that post-vaccination excess mortality exceeded the combined impact of the tsunami and Hiroshima. The magnitude of excess mortality remained consistent despite declining vaccine uptake, suggesting a cumulative effect. The types of cancer also shifted to a younger demographic. Another peer-reviewed paper from Japan confirms the excess mortality, contributing to a decline in life expectancy for the first time in a long while. Only 5-7% of the excess mortality in Japan is attributed to cancer, with other causes like stroke and myocarditis being more prevalent.

Two early population studies examining COVID-19 vaccines and cancer risk reported substantial increases in various cancers. The first study, conducted in Italy, followed about 300,000 individuals for roughly 30 months and found: - About a 23% increased risk of overall cancer hospitalizations. - Increases of about 40% to 60% in hospitalizations for breast cancer, colorectal cancer, bladder cancer, and for leukemia/lymphoma. A newer study from South Korea, encompassing over eight million people, examined cancer risks after vaccination and corroborated the Italian findings while expanding on them. It reported: - About a 26% increase in overall cancer risk. - Increases across six major cancer types, including gastric (stomach), thyroid, colorectal, and breast cancers, as well as other cancers described as very rare. The speakers characterize these results as an absolute disaster and claim that the data corroborate all experimental evidence. They state that these findings confirm that the vaccines have unleashed a turbo cancer epidemic. Further explanations offered include: - The datasets corroborate the observed cancer increases. - The authors suggest these increases can be explained by “gene expression chaos” documented in their other studies. - They also cite “genomic integration” seen in stage four cancer patients as part of the mechanism behind the observed cancer risks. The overall message presented is that there is a widespread, vaccine-associated rise in cancer incidence, supported by the Italian and Korean population data, and reinforced by their cited molecular and genomic observations. The speakers conclude that this situation is a disaster that must be acknowledged immediately.

The speakers discuss the vaccination landscape around human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, focusing on a controversial issue they claim has been known and disseminated since early on: contamination with DNA (DNA residuals) from Deinococcus or related genetic material in vaccines and the implications of aluminum adjuvants used in Gardasil/Gardasil 9. - They begin by asserting that HPV vaccines, including Gardasil/Sil, have been the subject of remarkable legal actions worldwide, including four major lawsuits in Japan. They note that historically, in Japan, many young women and girls stood as plaintiffs, and that the core problem they highlight is the DNA contamination issue (referred to as “ディー エ ヌ エー 混 入 汚 染 問 題”). - The claim is that from early on, the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare and others acknowledged this contamination as central. They reference a 2012 paper that reportedly made the DNA contamination problem very clear, naming pathogens such as Human Papillomavirus, HPV, and DEIN? They describe that vaccine particles (HBV? HPBL DNA fragments) were found to be directly bound to aluminum adjuvant particles in Gardasil, implying a mechanism by which residual DNA could be involved in adverse effects. - The speakers say that the 2012 study, and subsequent work, led to attention from doctors worldwide who listened to the voices of women and girls and wondered what was happening with the vaccine recipients. They claim that samples showed that residual HPV DNA fragments were consistently present and directly linked to aluminum adjuvant particles, and that “PCR” detection indicated the same DNA sequences across samples. They mention that the 2012 paper’s findings were followed by reporting that, by 2014, vaccination had been suspended in Japan earlier than many would have expected. - They recount a process in which major scientists from various countries (France, the UK, and others) were involved in investigating adenoviral or genetic components (they reference Shihan? and others) and that the Japan-based researchers, including Ishii Ken, were central figures. They describe meetings, PowerPoint presentations at a hotel, and a sequence of visits to the UK and the US (including HR-related planning with U.S. FDA and the UK authorities) that were interrupted by closures in the Obama era, leading to documentation and discussions about the safety concerns. - The speakers claim that by the 2012 report and again by 2014, all vaccine samples from multiple countries contained residual DNA, and that Japan became a hub for disseminating awareness of these issues globally. They state that the issue was present not only in the early Gardasil (Gardasil-4) but also in later forms, with references to Gardasil-9 and the idea that the DNA contamination and adjuvant interactions could contribute to immune and neurological symptoms in recipients, particularly in women and girls. - They discuss changes to WHO and FDA guidelines on residual DNA limits, noting a progression from 10 picograms to higher thresholds over time, implying corporate interests in allowing higher residual DNA quantities in vaccines. They emphasize that the shift in limits is tied to pharmaceutical companies’ needs, not human biology changes, and argue that Japan highlighted the problem of Deinance-DNA contamination during the cervical cancer vaccine era, signaling that researchers, journalists, and victims were aware long before others. - Finally, Speaker 1 adds that two points became clear a year earlier: the disruption of messenger RNA–type vaccines as a response to safety concerns, and the subsequent rise in adverse outcomes after widespread vaccination, including deaths, which they claim intensified opposition to these vaccines. Note: The summary presents the speakers' claims and sequencing of events as described in the transcript without evaluation or endorsement.

The Japanese study suggests an increase in cancer mortality, especially after the third mRNA vaccine dose. Specific cancers like ovarian, leukemia, prostate, liporal pharyngeal, pancreatic, and breast cancers showed higher mortality rates in 2022. Researchers suspect a link between mRNA vaccines and cancer development. The study focuses on cancer deaths, not new cases. The impact on future cancer rates remains unknown. Transparency and data disclosure from governments are crucial. The British prime minister asserts the safety of COVID vaccines.

Speaker 0: The very first two population studies that looked at COVID nineteen vaccines and cancer risk both found massive increases in multiple cancers. And these two studies, one of them is from Italy. One of them followed 300,000 Italians for about thirty months. That was the first one that found about twenty three percent increased risk of overall cancer hospitalizations. And they also found increases about forty to sixty percent increases in breast cancer hospitalizations, in colorectal cancer, as well as bladder cancer, and leukemia lymphoma. Now we have this new study that just came out that out of South Korea that looked at over eight million Koreans and looked at the cancer risks after vaccination there, and they corroborated the Italian data and even expanded on it. And they found about twenty six percent increase in overall cancer. But they also found increases across six major types of cancer including gastric, thyroid, colorectal, breast, all sorts of cancers were increased, very rare cancers. So this is an absolute disaster, and it corroborates all the experimental evidence. It's now confirmed that these shots have unleashed a turbo cancer epidemic. The datasets corroborate, and we can now explain it with the gene expression chaos we are seeing as documented in our other studies as well as the genomic integration we are seeing in stage four cancer patients. This is a disaster. This has to be acknowledged immediately.

Speaker 0: Let's start with I had predicted, unfortunately, and I hate that I am right. I predicted before the vaccines were ever launched to the public that they would have a profound impact on the immune system. And as a result of that alone, would likely cause increased cancer rates just because of their immunological impact. So let's start, if you would, just by talking a little bit about what you are seeing in the data, in the numbers with regard to cancers, what kinds of cancers, those sorts of things. And then maybe we'll get into the weeds, you and I, about perhaps some of the pathology of that, why that might be, some theories for why we're seeing these numbers. Speaker 1: You know, Doctor. Kelly, I've been tracking these turbo cancers as they're being called, these very aggressive cancers that are showing up in young COVID vaccinated people. The youngest case I've reported is a 12 year old boy who had a Moderna vaccine and came down with, end stage brain cancer that killed him in less than a year. I'm seeing it in teenagers in university and college students who are mandated to take COVID vaccines. People in their twenties, thirties, forties, fifties are coming down with stage four cancers. These cancers are presenting at a late stage, stage three, but usually stage four. These are lymphomas, leukemias, these are breast cancers, colon cancers, lung cancers, hepatobiliary cancers, testicular cancers in young men, ovarian cancers in women, kidney cancers, renal cell cancers, melanomas, skin cancers, and sarcomas as well. So these are the types of cancers that are showing up in a younger cohort than oncologists expect. They're showing up at a late stage. The tumors can grow very large. So some of these tumors are described as football sized, even watermelon sized, you know, these are ten, fifteen centimeter tumors, and they're very aggressive and and they really they spread very rapidly. Even when the surgeons are trying to get at them, trying to surgically excise them so that they could control the tumor, what they usually find after surgery is that the tumor has already spread. It's already spread to the lymph nodes, it's already spread to the lungs or the bones, very aggressive cancers, and really related to the COVID-nineteen vaccine specifically, and mRNA vaccines, the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Speaker 0: One of the things, me just step back for a second, because one of the things that might not be known to our audience is that all cancers are not created equal with regard to the population that they hit. You know, for example, we not uncommonly and tragically see certain blood cancers in children leukemias, for example. It wouldn't be uncommon, to to see a brain tumor, brain cancers sometimes in young children. It would be extraordinarily uncommon to see a colon cancer in somebody before the fourth or fifth decade. Very uncommon to see a lung cancer before the fourth or fifth decade. Those sorts of things, extremely uncommon to see. So some of these cancers that we are seeing, and I think you're getting at that, things like these colon cancers, we are now seeing colon cancers in people in their late teens, twenties, and thirties. And again, as you said, very aggressive colon cancers. So it's not just that cancers per se, but it's seeing cancers in in groups of people in whom they'd never seen before. So let's in terms of just to put some magnitude on it. In terms of give us some sense of the magnitude versus what we would have considered to be the baseline numbers. Speaker 1: You know, it's very hard to get a sense of this because it's almost impossible to get good cancer data from from the governments. Know, Ed Dowd has talked about this, the difficulty of getting good data. You know, I've tried to get cancer data here in Canada from Statistics Canada, from the Canadian Cancer Society, and they are not reporting any data from 2021 or 2022. It seems they're holding this data back. And so I'm left with anecdotal evidence. When Ed Dowd, you know, he'll report from US insurance data that disability rates, in the working population, let's say, eighteen to sixty four, who abided by the COVID vaccine mandates, disability rates are 500% higher compared to the working population who dropped out of the workforce and didn't want to get the vaccines. Well, a big portion of those disabilities are these cancers, are these cancer diagnoses. And so, you know, I'm seeing an explosion of these cancers. I'm seeing it in doctors. I'm seeing it in nurses. I'm seeing it in other vaccine mandated professions. So all types of healthcare workers, I'm seeing it in teachers, I'm seeing it in police officers, firefighters, the military. You know, you see it in flight attendants, for example, you know, you had these airlines that wanted to have 100% vaccinated workforce. So really anywhere where there were very strict COVID vaccine mandates, that's where I'm seeing these explosions of these very aggressive cancers. And I can tell you, this year, '23, seems to be much worse. There's many more cases of these turbo cancers than in 2022 or 2021. The trend is upwards. The numbers are on the rise. You can see this on websites like GoFundMe. If you go on GoFundMe and you put stage four cancer and you can pick whatever cancer you want, you could put, you know, breast cancer, you could put lung cancer, colon cancer. Not only are you seeing the shocking ages, young ages of these individuals who are reporting their cancers and their fundraising because, you know, they lose their jobs when they're undergoing chemotherapy, for example, by you see just how many people are suffering are coming down from these cancers, especially in 2023. It's just unbelievable. It's a tsunami of cancer diagnosis.

It is possible to understand what is happening with vaccines without a statistics degree. VAERS was in place during the rollout of many vaccines, including measles, rubella, and COVID. One speaker had not heard federal officials reference VAERS. The idea with VAERS seems to be that people are complaining and should be quiet. The technology in these shots was brand new and never deployed before at scale, and the trials were a joke. It is hard to get up-to-date cancer numbers. While one speaker does not see a lot of cancer in their practice, friends at MD Anderson say they have never seen anything like the young people coming in with very advanced tumors. That is what we have to be worried about now.

This study looked at the population of South Korea and there were over 8,000,000 people who were vaccinated there and they drew from that population as well as several 100,000 who were not vaccinated for the comparison control group. They did a multivariate analysis where they found other variables associated with cancer and canceled those out. They eliminated any people who had had cancer or suspicion of cancer previously, so all these folks had never had cancer and they followed them for one full year from the time of their most recent injection or one full year from a picked reference date for the control group. What they found was quite astonishing because overall at twelve months, there was a substantially higher number of cancers found in the vaccinated group, and this comprised six different cancers that had a higher risk. You can see this on the forest plot that I’ll have up on screen, that this included thyroid cancer, gastric cancer, colorectal cancer, lung cancer, prostate cancer. All of those were elevated in the vaccinated group and the prostate and lung cancer were more than a fifty percent increase. This new technology is very risky and we can't say conclusively that it caused cancer, but certainly this is a very alarming finding and needs more research to back it up.

Nicholas Holcher, an epidemiologist and foundation administrator at the McCullough Foundation, appears on the WiderWake Media Podcast to discuss what he calls harms from the mRNA COVID vaccines and to critique mainstream approaches to the pandemic and public health policy. - Vaccine definitions and mRNA technology - Pre-2000 definition: a vaccine is an injectable or oral product that introduces a killed part of a virus or an inactivated form to the body so that encountering a wild-type version would not infect or would cause a less severe illness. - He asserts that mRNA injections are not vaccines: they are a gene transfer platform using modified messenger RNA with long persistence in the body (via N1-methylpseudouridine), delivered in lipid nanoparticles. He claims these bubbles distribute systemically, including to the brain, heart, bone marrow, and reproductive system, and that they instruct cells to produce a spike protein, effectively turning organs into “toxic spike protein production factories.” He says this leads to autoimmune attack on those tissues and contributes to adverse events, including myocarditis, strokes, immune destruction, and “turbo cancers.” - History and purpose of mRNA in vaccines - According to Holcher, work on this technology existed for decades but animals testing showed high mortality or sterilization in ferrets and mice, preventing approval except under a declared global emergency. He contends the COVID-19 crisis enabled emergency use authorization across Western countries, with ulterior aims to inject the globe with mRNA technology. - Global impact and uptake - He estimates about 70% of the global population received at least one COVID-19 injection (mRNA or viral vector). He notes Eastern countries used non-mRNA platforms (e.g., AstraZeneca/J&J in some places; Sinovac elsewhere) but that uptake in the West was high. - Harms and evidence - Excess deaths: cites a study by Dennis Brancourt et al. estimating around 17 million deaths worldwide as a result of COVID injections (as of September 2023); he claims US deaths could be in the hundreds of thousands to millions. - Turbo cancers: cites multiple studies in 2023 showing increased risk of seven cancer types (colorectal, bladder, breast, thyroid, prostate, etc.) in vaccinated groups; cites a major cancer journal, OncoTarget, reporting hundreds of turbo cancer cases across 27 countries, with Pfizer contributing most cases. Holcher also mentions his own group’s work with Neo7 Bioscience documenting genomic integration of vaccine-derived mRNA in a stage IV bladder cancer patient (31-year-old woman) with a segment of mRNA found in circulating tumor DNA on chromosome 19; another study reported thousands of dysregulated genes in post-vaccine cancers, including p53, KRAS, and BRCA. - Definition of turbo cancer: per Merrick et al., rapid, aggressive tumor progression with sudden onset and early metastasis, often in younger individuals, and resistant to treatment. - Fertility, pregnancy, and autism - Fertility: cites studies suggesting fertility impacts, including Karaman et al. finding depletion of primordial follicles in rats after mRNA vaccination; Manichi et al. reporting 33% lower conception rates in vaccinated women in Denmark; a study indicating a ~20% drop in sperm concentration and motility with no recovery over five months. - Autism: asserts a large body of evidence linking vaccines to neurodevelopmental disorders, citing a 136-study review with 107 studies finding positive associations between vaccines and neurodevelopmental issues, including autism, attributed to toxicity and immune system disruption, particularly in children with high vaccine exposure and reduced detox capacity (CYP450 impairment). - Other topics tied to vaccines and public response - The COVID-19 period and vaccine skepticism: claims the pandemic catalyzed a large anti-vaccine movement because people were compelled to take an experimental gene therapy product. - Sam Altman and gene editing: discusses Altman’s Preventive venture with the aim to reduce heritable diseases via in utero gene editing but warns of the path to designer babies and the potential for harm in early-iteration edits, citing prior CRISPR experiments on human embryos that produced deformed offspring or nonviable results. - AI, workers, and future society: predicts two-tier society with implanted or enhanced individuals and a replacement of human labor by robots and AI systems; discusses military and surveillance ambitions in gene editing and AI augmentation. - Mental health and digital life: references a randomized trial showing that turning off mobile Internet improved depression scores and well-being to an extent comparable to or greater than antidepressants. - World Health Organization (WHO): notes the US has pulled out of the WHO, arguing this is good for the US but potentially harmful for others still in the organization; expresses concerns about the pandemic treaty and ongoing global health governance, including vaccine passport-style surveillance. - FDA and public health policy: acknowledges some shifts (e.g., cutting doses from the childhood schedule) but argues the FDA remains compromised and too aligned with vaccine industry interests; criticizes the removal of a potential black box warning for vaccines and calls for more accountability. - Resources and contact - Holcher invites listeners to follow him on X (Twitter) at @nichulsher and to read their work on focalpoints.com and through McCullough’s network. Note: The transcript presents Holcher’s claims and interpretations about vaccines, turbo cancers, autism, fertility, and policy changes. The summary reproduces these points without endorsement or evaluation.

Speaker 0 argues that, when re-examining the data from the original study, the raw numbers reveal a different pattern than what the study’s modeling suggested. Specifically, they state that, in the raw proportions, every single one of the 22 chronic disease categories was proportionally higher in the vaccinated group. This includes cancer, which the study reportedly treated as a control condition and claimed there was no difference for. According to Speaker 0, the study’s use of cancer as a control is at odds with the raw data they observed. They claim that there was a difference in cancer outcomes, contrary to the study’s implication of no difference. They emphasize that, with rare outcomes, the modeling employed in the original analysis is not very reliable, and as a result, the study did not perform any basic proportional analysis. Speaker 0 states that when they performed a basic proportional analysis themselves, cancer was fifty-four percent higher in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated children. They mention that this result is “explained biologically” and assert that there is biological plausibility behind it. Key points: - Raw proportions show all 22 chronic disease categories higher in the vaccinated group, including cancer. - The original study used cancer as a control and claimed no difference, which Speaker 0 disputes based on the raw data. - Modeling for rare outcomes is described as not very reliable. - A basic proportional analysis by Speaker 0 indicates cancer is 54% higher in the vaccinated group versus the unvaccinated. - A biological explanation or plausibility is asserted for the observed cancer difference in the vaccinated group.

Speaker 0: Doctor Sun Shiang is concerned about suppression of natural killer function, which we can talk about in a section. 'there was a, I believe it was a colon cancer that was the DNA was sequenced, and there was the plasmid within the DNA of that colon cancer.' 'Yep, that was Kevin.' He adds, 'I would immediately start sequencing tumours in people who'd had multiple shots,' noting, 'this is a species level problem because of the number of people that were injected.' Doctor Xion Xiong writes about eight, nine and ten year olds with colon cancer and a 13 year old in his clinic dying of metastatic pancreatic cancer, and compares pre COVID and post COVID VAERS data. He 'counted all the colon cancer reports in VAERS from 2018 to 2020 for all vaccines combined,' versus VAERS from '2021 to 2023.' He finds 'an 8,300 percent increase' and a PRR of '11.5.' He concludes, 'VAERS is like leaves rustling in the wind, but it's a signal,' a 'pharmacovigilance tool designed to do this,' and, 'If it's over one or two, depending on your limit, you have a definitive association and possibly a causal effect.'