you are not alone.
deceptions maintained, to any degree, is a failure.
Jesus, aka the Truth, should not be withheld from anyone purely seeking.
Top Epidemiologist Testifies: ‘Bioweapons Industry’ Created Covid & Vaccines
https://slaynews.com/news/top-epidemiologist-testifies-bioweapons-industry-created-covid-vaccines/
A world-renowned epidemiologist has given an explosive testimony before a Senate roundtable where he alleged that the Covid virus and mRNA vaccines were created by the “bioweapons industry.”
Dr. Harvey Risch, the Professor Emeritus of Epidemiology at Yale University, explained that the pandemic was engineered as part of an elaborate scheme to boost funding for bioweapons research by making the industry appear to be serving in the interests of public health.
According to Risch, the COVID-19 leak from a U.S. Taxpayer-funded bioweapons lab in Wuhan, China, provided the perfect pretext for the bioweapons industry to justify its existence by stepping in and posing as humanity’s savior.
The revelations came during a roundtable meeting hosted by Republican Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) on Monday.
The event was titled: “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What Are They Hiding?”
👀Dr. Harvey Risch Says the COVID Virus & Vaccines Were Used to Justify Continued Funding of the U.S. Bioweapons Industry
“This work and the WIV leak was what I consider to be the fruit of our bioweapons industry that has been performing secretive and nefarious biological… pic.twitter.com/AtU1bGCY0t
— Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) February 26, 2024
During his testimony, Risch explained how the bioweapons industry has been exploiting a loophole in the Biological Weapons Convention treaty of 1975.
The treaty allowed for “small quantities of offensive bioweapons…to be developed in order to do research on vaccine countermeasures.”
“This loophole was then exploited by our bioweapons industry for the last 50 years,” Risch explained.
“The bioweapons treaty limited offensive bioweapons to agents that would address vaccine development, so-called dual-use agents, or dual-use research.
p1
“And this was the premise and motivation of the various virology grant applications…”
Risch also pointed out that commercial vaccines are typically deployed before a pandemic starts, “not in the middle of one.”
“So, my hypothesis, what I believe is that both the virus origin cover-up and the forced vaccination of the entire planet or orchestrated to protect the integrity of the bioweapons industry,” the Yale professor said.
Risch continued by explaining why the virus’s origins needed to be covered up by the bioweapons industry.
Please leave this field empty
Slay the latest News for free!
We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.
“Once the general public understood the reckless and cavalier behavior of this industry that had operated under a false and misrepresented pretense of vaccine development that has never been successfully commercially realized it would then clamor to shut down the industry,” he said.
“And so the suppression of knowledge of the industry’s reckless involvement in the Wuhan leak is an obvious cover-up and we have proof of that cover-up…”
Professor Risch continued:
“And my conclusion then is: the reason why the whole population had to be vaccinated is to show that the bioweapons industry supposedly did have a rationale for vaccine development as part of its claim to dual-use research.
JOIN THE FIGHT - DONATE TO SLAY NEWS TODAY!
“The vaccines then are the evidence that the bioweapons industry was properly justified from the beginning.
“Without a successful vaccine to show for itself in the time of a pandemic crisis, especially one caused by a leak from a bioweapons industry source itself, it would be clear to everyone that the rationale for the industry’s existence was a fraud in the first place.
“And so the Covid vaccines themselves supplied the defense against the charge that the bioweapons industry was not actually dual-use, but offensive only, violating the 1975 treaty.
“So the vaccines had to be dramatically pushed out to be the universal solution to show that the bioweapons industry was actually working for the public good and in this context, it did not matter what collateral damage the vaccines caused.
“All or had to be was the public thinking public thought of this theater that the industry had been doing its work to produce usable vaccines not offensive bioweapons.”
The roundtable also featured expert testimony from mRNA technology inventor Dr. Robert Malone and data specialist Ed Dowd.
The event is Sen. Johnson’s latest effort to get answers for the American people.
Sen. Johnson and his team have been investigating the links between Covid shots are the soaring sudden deaths and major health complications that have been spiking across the country.
As Slay News has reported, Johnson has been pushing to expose the truth behind the government’s involvement in the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent mRNA vaccine rollout.
In January, Johnson went public with explosive federal government data showing the alarming death rates associated with Covid mRNA injections.
Johnson’s investigators conducted an in-depth analysis of data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
According to Johnson, the data indicates that the COVID-19 injections are 55 times more deadly than the flu vaccine.
2 of 2
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/27/mhra-covid-vaccine-side-effects-mps-all-party-parliamentary/
Medicines regulator failed to flag Covid vaccine side effects and must be investigated, say MPs
All-party group believe MHRA were aware of heart and clotting issues in February 2021 but did not highlight the problems for several months
The medical regulator failed to sound the alarm over Covid vaccine side effects and should be investigated, MPs have said.
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is responsible for approving drugs and devices and monitors side effects caused by treatments.
But the all-party parliamentary group (APPG) on pandemic response and recovery, an influential group of MPs, has raised “serious patient safety concerns”. It has claimed that “far from protecting patients” the regulator operates in a way that “puts them at serious risk”.
Some 25 MPs across four parties have written to the health select committee asking for an urgent investigation. In reply, Steve Brine, the health committee chairman, has said an inquiry into patient safety is “very likely”.
In a letter to Mr Brine, the APPG said that there was reason to believe that the MHRA had been aware of post-vaccination heart and clotting issues as early as February 2021, but did not highlight the problems for several months.
Denmark and several other European countries suspended the AstraZeneca vaccine over clotting fears in March 2021, but the MHRA only published safety advice on April 7, by which time 24 million people had been vaccinated.
Timeline: how rare blood clots were linked to the AstraZeneca jab
4 January: Brian Pinker, 82, becomes the first person to receive the get the vaccine outside of a clinical trial at Oxford’s Churchill hospital.
Expand to read more
The watchdog also saw a “signal” for the heart problems myocarditis and pericarditis in February 2021, but did not include the conditions in safety updates until June 2021, MPs said.
“In effect, the MHRA licences medical products as safe knowing it lacks the processes to properly monitor adverse events,” the APPG wrote.
“In the case of Covid-19 vaccines, given the comparatively novel technology and record manufacturing speed, could the MHRA have even properly scrutinised the licensing data or known the short term safety?
“Historically trust and confidence in vaccines and vaccine safety has been high in the UK, but it seems that the experience of the Covid-19 vaccines has undermined this and by association trust in the regulator and the pharmaceutical industry.
“Now more than ever a wide-reaching and in-depth review is needed.”
p1
Underestimates complexities
The group also warned that the MHRA Yellow Card reporting system – which encourages patients and doctors to flag-up medicine side effects – “grossly” underestimates complexities, and in some instances picks up just one in 180 cases of harm.
An analysis by Stockport NHS Foundation Trust found that in the North West of England, 1,058 people had been admitted to hospital with stomach bleeds caused by anticoagulant medication over five years, yet just six Yellow Card reports were made during the period.
Side effects from drugs account for one in every 16 hospital admissions in Britain, and cost the NHS more than £2 billion each year.
But trials are often too small to pick up adverse reactions, particularly when they are driven by rare genetic mutations, meaning it is vital to continue monitoring drugs in the community.
The MHRA recently said it would investigate why blood thinners were causing dangerous side effects in between two and five per cent of patients.
The APPG said it was also concerned that MHRA regulation of medicine was funded by the pharmaceutical industry and said the body had shifted from focusing on scrutiny to trying to help drugs get approved.
‘Watchdog to the enabler’
Dame June Raine, the chief executive of the MHRA, who announced she would be stepping down last week, has previously said the agency was transitioning from “watchdog to the enabler,” a phrase which MPs said warranted its own investigation.
Graham Stringer MP, co-chair of the APPG on pandemic response and recovery, said:
“The MHRA oversees a failing system that is slow to act, causing harm to patients and beset with conflicts of interest.
“We cannot allow it to continue. That’s why we have written to the health select committee calling for an urgent investigation into the MHRA.”
The APPG said that concerns raised directly with the MHRA had been met with “an habitually dismissive and evasive response”.
Dr June Raine, the MHRA chief executive, said: “We have made significant steps to put patients at the heart of all our work.
“These include incorporating patient views and lived experience into our safety reviews; involving patients in the early stages of planning medicines development and building a new responsive reporting system for patients to tell us about any adverse incidents. We have also led on legislative changes to strengthen surveillance for medical devices and medicines, meaning patient safety is embedded firmly into law.
“Our progress so far in making changes based on meaningful patient involvement gives us a solid base to build upon as we continue on this important journey.”
“We are committed to enabling innovation that brings transformative medical products safely to patients.’’
2 of 2