Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
Forum Statistics |
» Members: 306
» Latest member: rbcj8941
» Forum threads: 7,075
» Forum posts: 13,115
Full Statistics
|
Online Users |
There are currently 277 online users. » 0 Member(s) | 273 Guest(s) Applebot, Bing, Facebook, Google
|
Latest Threads |
The Catholic Trumpet: Wit...
Forum: The Catholic Trumpet
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 09:03 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 50
|
Apologia pro Marcel Lefeb...
Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 08:51 AM
» Replies: 21
» Views: 5,394
|
Louis Veuillot: The Liber...
Forum: Uncompromising Fighters for the Faith
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 08:28 AM
» Replies: 28
» Views: 5,038
|
Vatican announces new vot...
Forum: New Rite Sacraments
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 08:24 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 40
|
Fr. Ruiz Sermons: Saints ...
Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons June 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
06-29-2025, 01:28 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 57
|
Fundraiser For The Orator...
Forum: Rev. Father David Hewko
Last Post: Stone
06-29-2025, 08:25 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 471
|
Third Sunday after Pentec...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
06-29-2025, 08:19 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 14,916
|
June 29th - Feast of Sts....
Forum: June
Last Post: Stone
06-29-2025, 08:17 AM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 10,994
|
England’s First Martyr St...
Forum: The Saints
Last Post: Stone
06-29-2025, 08:13 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 51
|
Please pray for Mr. Means
Forum: Appeals for Prayer
Last Post: Stone
06-29-2025, 06:16 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 93
|
|
|
Biden’s EO is designed to ‘deprive American citizens and organizations of their rights' |
Posted by: Stone - 04-20-2021, 07:02 PM - Forum: Socialism & Communism
- No Replies
|
 |
Biden’s executive order on Russia is designed to ‘deprive American citizens and organizations of their rights’
Biden's recent Executive Order is the most dangerous of them all. It is designed to allow the Biden administration to deprive American citizens and organizations
of their rights and property by arbitrarily linking those persons to real, imagined, or vaguely defined activities of the Russian government.
April 20, 2021 (AmericanThinker) – On April 15, President Biden signed an Executive Order on Blocking Property with Respect to Specified Harmful Foreign Activities of the Government of the Russian Federation. Contrary to its title, this Executive Order (EO) is not about Russia. It is designed to allow the Biden administration to deprive American citizens and organizations of their rights and property by arbitrarily linking those persons to real, imagined, or vaguely defined activities of the Russian government.
The Biden administration unilaterally makes the determination and requires neither criminal acts nor intent. The punishment is blocking assets and a prohibition on any dealing with the accused person. Spouses and adult children of individuals found guilty by accusation under this EO are punished, too.
The EO was preceded by some distracting manoeuvres, both diplomatic (hostile rhetoric toward Russia) and military (sending naval ships toward the Black Sea and recalling them back, as if dealing with Russian threats). Thus, many people assumed that the EO was directed at Russia, and completely missed the fact that it is directed at dissent here, at home.
Over the past four years, the Democrat Party, Fake News, and Big Tech have been frequently portraying their opponents as Russian trolls or Russian misinformation operators. The Russian collusion narrative, initially invented to overthrow the Trump administration, has been used to smear many conservative movements. Now this effort has been crowned by an Executive Order.
Biden’s administration has been recently pushing so many other radical changes, such as packing the Supreme Court, eliminating the filibuster, restricting Second Amendment rights, etc., that the real ramifications of this new EO went completely unnoticed. In my opinion, this EO is the most dangerous of them all. It allows the Biden regime to eliminate its opposition, quickly and quietly.
Section 1 of the EO enumerates prohibited activities and defines guilty persons as those “determined” by the Secretary of Treasury and/or Secretary of State in consultation with the Attorney General to be:
(a)(ii) responsible for or complicit in, or to have directly or indirectly engaged or attempted to engage in, any of the following for or on behalf of, or for the benefit of, directly or indirectly, the Government of the Russian Federation:
(A) malicious cyber-enabled activities;
(B) interference in a United States or other foreign government election;
© actions or policies that undermine democratic processes or institutions in the United States or abroad;
(D) transnational corruption;
Some of the language in this EO borrows from another: EO-13224 -Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions With Persons Who Commit, Threaten To Commit, or Support Terrorism. George W. Bush signed EO-13224 on September 23, 2001, in response to 9/11.
However, Biden’s EO is as similar to Bush’s EO as an atomic bomb is to a sniper rifle. Bush’s EO targeted financing terrorism. It defined terrorism clearly and narrowly. It minimized legal jeopardy to US persons. It did not strip away the standard for criminal liability requirements of action and intent. It did not target spouses or children of accused individuals. Additionally, Bush made a legally meaningful promise to use it with due regard to culpability and the Bush administration used it with restraint. Even so, Democrats criticized it harshly, opposed it, and fought it in courts.
In contrast, Biden’s new EO is directed mostly at US persons. It criminalizes speech and political activities, based on whimsical and arbitrary definitions. The Biden administration can define “malicious activities,” “democratic processes or institutions,” and the activities that undermine them as it wants.
The Biden administration is also free to interpret what constitutes “interests of the Russian Government.” Such broad and vague language allows the Biden regime to select US citizens and political organizations arbitrarily, and then deprive them of their property and rights without anything reminiscent of due process. The EO does not even require that anybody commit an actual crime somewhere. False cyber-attribution or fake bounty claims are sufficient. Biden’s remarks to the EO showed no regard to the culpability of any targeted US citizens or other persons.
Leftist pseudo-elites have been eager to ban speech based on allegations that such speech may be beneficial to Russia. Such ideation has been present among Big Tech influencers for a long time. This EO effectively gives Big Tech, banks, and credit card companies a new pretext to deplatform conservatives and anyone else who opposes the Biden regime by claiming that they are now engaged in illegal activity.
Biden’s EO appears to allow the Democrat party to deny Americans the right to advocate against it in future federal elections. This might be accomplished through a “determination” that Russia is interfering in elections against democratic candidates. Thus, any US citizens who also oppose Democrats could be found to acting for Russia’s benefit, directly or indirectly.
The list of prohibited activities justifying a Biden administration “determination” to deprive American persons of their property and other rights (referred to here as a “Deprived Person”) states:
[a] (iii) to be or have been a leader, official, senior executive officer, or member of the board of directors of:
… © an entity whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order;
For comparison, Bush’s EO only covered the leaders of terrorist-supporting entities, not multiple officials, executives, or directors.
Unprecedently, Biden’s EO targets children and spouses:
[a] (v) to be a spouse or adult child of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to subsection (a)(ii) or (iii) of this section;
and countless associations:
[a] (vi) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of:
(A) any activity described in subsection (a)(ii) of this section; or
(B) any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order ...
[a] (vii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, … any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.
Notice the infinite reach these subsections afford. Those connected to a “Deprived Person” can receive the same designation, and so on. There is no limit to the number of iterations.
“Deprived Persons” essentially become untouchables, as dealing with them in any way is expressly prohibited without additional determinations:
Sec. 2. The prohibitions in section 1 of this order include:
(a) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; and
(b) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.
Giving legal representation, hosting the website, selling food, and giving medical care to a “Deprived Person” is automatically prohibited. Section 4 prohibits transactions that “cause a violation” of this EO, even absent intent or knowledge. This serves as a hint to pre-emptively cut ties with anyone the Biden regime targets.
Section 9 exempts UN bodies and “related organizations” (NGOs) from any responsibility for interfering in US elections and other activities under this order.
The Russian Federation is mixed into the EO only for distraction and as a primer, triggering expanding layers of culpability.
I do not expect any putative human rights organizations or large media outlets to hold the Biden regime accountable for how it applies this EO or to defend its victims. So far, these outlets have either ignored it or defended it.
|
|
|
UK gov’t. predicts ‘third wave’ of COVID deaths ‘dominated’ by those who are vaccinated! |
Posted by: Stone - 04-20-2021, 07:34 AM - Forum: COVID Vaccines
- Replies (3)
|
 |
As an introduction, in the video below Pamela Acker references the article that follows and notes how utterly incredible it is that the vaccines which are supposed to have 97% efficacy are not predicted to help in an expected 'Third Wave' of Covid in the UK. Rather, she highlights the UK government's prediction that the 60-70% of people who have received two doses of the vaccines will be most affected by a 'third wave' of Covid deaths. Video starts where Miss Acker begins speaking on this subject. [A big thank you to Ruthy for sharing this info!]
UK gov’t. predicts ‘third wave’ of COVID deaths ‘dominated’ by those who are vaccinated
‘This is not the result of vaccines being ineffective, merely uptake being so high,’ the government agency argued.
LONDON, April 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — In official documents released by the U.K. government, models for the planned “third wave” of COVID-19 predicted that any hospitalizations and deaths would be “dominated” by people who had already been vaccinated.
On March 31, the U.K. Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling, Operational sub-group (SPI-M-O), released the latest document containing modeling predictions about the effect that the gradual easing of restrictions would have on the spread of infection, and subsequent hospitalizations and deaths. The data are taken from forecasts provided by Warwick University, Imperial College London, and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
A surprising statement was contained in the document, as the various institutions predicted the impact of a “third wave” of the virus upon the country’s health service, and the result on the population.
“The resurgence in both hospitalizations and deaths is dominated by those that have received two doses of the vaccine, comprising around 60 percent and 70 percent of the wave respectively. This can be attributed to the high levels of uptake in the most at-risk age groups, such that immunisation failures account for more serious illness than unvaccinated individuals.”
A subsequent paragraph reaffirmed this admission, noting that in the predicted third wave, “most deaths and admissions in a post-Roadmap resurgence are in people who have received two vaccine doses.”
The document attempted to explain its prediction of how “vaccinated” individuals could account for a substantial majority of predicted hospital admission and deaths, by blaming these statistics on age, and the probability of 10 percent of people being left without protection against infection after the virus: “This is because vaccine uptake has been so high in the oldest age groups (modeled here at 95 percent in the over 50-year-olds). There are therefore 5 percent of over 50-year-olds who have not been vaccinated, and 95 percent x 10 percent = 9.5 percent of over 50-year-olds who are vaccinated but, nevertheless, not protected against death.”
However, despite this, SPI-M-O did not cast any aspersions on the injections themselves: “This is not the result of vaccines being ineffective, merely uptake being so high.”
The reasoning used in this line appears in stark contrast to that used throughout the majority of the last 12 months, when deaths occurring in 28 days after a positive COVID-19 test (which incidentally have been widely decried as completely unreliable), are deemed to be due to the virus, yet SPI-M-O decided not to make any correlation between the injections and the predicted deaths.
Sharing SPI-M-O’s document on Twitter, Joel Smalley of the anti-lockdown research group HART commented: “In their forecast, the key metrics of hospitalisations and deaths are dominated (60 percent-70 percent) by those who are fully vaccinated. Yeah, no typo. Because vaccine failure in the most at-risk where uptake is high will be more serious than susceptibility of the lower-risk unvaccinated.”
While these paragraphs (32, 55, and 56) seem to suggest that the elderly who have had the injections would account for the majority of hospitalizations and deaths, in paragraph 31, SPI-M-O differentiated between the causation of potential new infections, and those affected by the third wave.
The section in question blamed the “resurgence” on “some people (mostly children) being ineligible for vaccination; others choosing not to receive the vaccine; and others being vaccinated but not perfectly protected (including those who have only received one dose, rather than two).”
Although the worrying statement amount the majority of deaths found among the injected populace comes as part of modeling, SPI-M-O’s statement reflects the growing discussion on the significant amount of adverse effects and deaths after COVID-19 injections.
In a strongly worded letter to the British Medical Journal (BMJ), a London-based consultant warned about the “unprecedented” levels of sickness among health care staff after the injection.
In addition to mentioning the high levels of staff falling sick, Dr. K. Polyakova mentioned how some were developing “neurological symptoms which is having a huge impact on the health service function. Even the young and healthy are off for days, some for weeks, and some requiring medical treatment. Whole teams are being taken out as they went to get vaccinated together.”
“What is to say that there are no longitudinal adverse effects that we may face that may put the entire health sector at risk?” she asked.
Her warning is seemingly being proved increasingly and sadly true, as disproportionately numerous reports of deaths after injections are quietly amassing.
By March 28, there were over 556,609 adverse side effects reported in the U.K. after the injection since the rollout began December 8. A total of 786 people had died after the injections, with some 5,899 cardiac disorders and 116 cardiac arrests also occurring.
An additional 92 people became blind, 55 spontaneous abortions occurred, and 9,998 psychiatric disorders were recorded.
There were 6,740 blood disorders, 608 cases of anaphylactic reactions, with 77 instances of anaphylactic shock, and 2,003 immune system disorders.
Indeed, as data from the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) shows, 2,342 people have died after the injections in the United States by April 1. A total of 56,869 adverse reactions were reported, with 4,872 of them requiring a hospital visit.
Given that only 11,050 deaths after injections have been reported to VAERS since records began in 1990s, this means that since the rollout began December 14, deaths after COVID-19 injections have already accounted for more than 20 percent of the 21-year records.
With figures such as these, the COVID-19 injections are seemingly far more harmful and deadly than the initial polio vaccines launched in 1955. After the administration of the Cutter Polio vaccine, 51 children were paralyzed and five died, prompting the vaccine recall.
Similar prompt action was seen in 1976 in response to Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) that came following a Swine Flu vaccine.
The Center for Disease Control and Prevention records that the “increased risk was approximately one additional case of GBS for every 100,000 people who got the swine flu vaccine.” Given that more than 40 million people were having the swine flu jab, “federal health officials decided that the possibility of an association of GBS with the vaccine, however small, necessitated stopping immunization until the issue could be explored.”
So far, there have been 90 instances of GBS reported in the U.K. after COVID-19 injections, meaning that there is one reported case of GBS in every 6,185 reactions.
[Emphasis mine.]
|
|
|
Leaked powerpoint from Saskatchewan gov’t suggests sedating the disabled for COVID shot, w/o consent |
Posted by: Stone - 04-20-2021, 06:36 AM - Forum: COVID Vaccines
- No Replies
|
 |
Leaked powerpoint from Saskatchewan gov’t suggests sedating the disabled for COVID shot, without consent
The use of sedation is floated for individuals with disabilities who are 'highly anxious' and opposed to receiving needles
The opening slide of the the presentation on vaccinating the disabled
by Inclusion Saskatchewan and the Government of Saskatchewan. The presentation was leaked to LifeSite.
REGINA, Saskatchewan, April 19, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A training course for social workers put out with oversight from the government of Saskatchewan seems to approve of sedating “highly anxious” individuals with intellectual disabilities so they can be given a coronavirus vaccine, without their consent. A government worker worried about the lack of clarity regarding the need for consent leaked the presenation to LifeSiteNews.
An April 1 presentation jointly created by the Government of Saskatchewan and by Inclusion Saskatchewan (INSK), a non-governmental, community-based organization, teaches social workers how to work with “individuals with diverse needs” in order to obtain their consent to receive a COVID vaccine.
“INSK made a Plain Language Supported Decision Making document to help guide conversations with individuals as they make a decision about receiving the COVID-19 vaccine,” a slide in the presentation states. “People should provide informed consent where possible,” another slide states.
The course was put together by government employees Berit Pugh and Hayley Huartson, both from the Ministry of Social Services. It was also put together by Megan Wells, Director of Inclusion for Inclusion Saskatchewan.
The presentation encourages using “supportive techniques” and creating a positive environment for those with intellectual disabilities who might be opposed to taking the jab. “Have music going, coffee and donuts afterward, or celebrate by sharing photos with loved ones,” the presentation states.
Near the end of the course, the use of sedation is floated for individuals with disabilities who are “highly anxious” and opposed to receiving needles.
The following question is posed on slide 29 (view slide here): “What about the use of sedation?”
Notes beneath the slide indicate that sedation can be used. There is no mention of obtaining consent.
“If people regularly need sedation for procedures, this may be considered for the vaccine,” the notes state.
“Some people do not get flu shots, even with the most creative approaches, accessible health education, and amazing emotional support provided from their preferred people simply because the fear of needles is so high,” the notes continue.
“These individuals are often the ones who also need to get hospital dental work under general anesthesia, etc, and my only faint hope for these individuals to be immunized is that by the time their next hospital dental date comes up (every 2-4 years), we may be able to request a vaccine dose be given at the same time.”
LifeSiteNews reached out to the province’s Health Minister Paul Merriman by phone and email for clarification on whether consent from individuals with disabilities would be required before they are given a COVID vaccine while sedated for other medical interventions. No response was provided.
LifeSiteNews also reached out to Inclusion Saskatchewan for comment with no response.
|
|
|
Study: Facemasks are Ineffective to Block Transmission of COVID-19... |
Posted by: Stone - 04-20-2021, 06:16 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- No Replies
|
 |
Stanford Study Results: Facemasks are Ineffective to Block Transmission of COVID-19 and Actually Can Cause Health Deterioration and Premature Death
A recent Stanford study released by the NCBI, which is under the National Institutes of Health,
showed that masks do absolutely nothing to help prevent the spread of COVID-19 and their use is even harmful.
NIH published a medical hypothesis by Dr. Baruch Vainshelboim (Cardiology Division, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System/Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, United States).
NOQ Report uncovered the study:
Quote:Did you hear about the peer-reviewed study done by Stanford University that demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that face masks have absolutely zero chance of preventing the spread of Covid-19? No? It was posted on the the National Center for Biotechnological Information government website. The NCBI is a branch of the National Institute for Health, so one would think such a study would be widely reported by mainstream media and embraced by the “science-loving” folks in Big Tech.
Instead, a DuckDuckGo search reveals it was picked up by ZERO mainstream media outlets and Big Tech tyrants will suspend people who post it, as political strategist Steve Cortes learned the hard way when he posted a Tweet that went against the face mask narrative. The Tweet itself featured a quote and a link that prompted Twitter to suspend his account, potentially indefinitely.
The NCBI study begins with the following abstract:
Quote:Many countries across the globe utilized medical and non-medical facemasks as non-pharmaceutical intervention for reducing the transmission and infectivity of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Although, scientific evidence supporting facemasks’ efficacy is lacking, adverse physiological, psychological and health effects are established. Is has been hypothesized that facemasks have compromised safety and efficacy profile and should be avoided from use. The current article comprehensively summarizes scientific evidences with respect to wearing facemasks in the COVID-19 era, providing prosper information for public health and decisions making.
The study concludes (emphasis added):
Quote:The existing scientific evidences challenge the safety and efficacy of wearing facemask as preventive intervention for COVID-19. The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective to block human-to-human transmission of viral and infectious disease such SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, supporting against the usage of facemasks. Wearing facemasks has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects. These include hypoxia, hypercapnia, shortness of breath, increased acidity and toxicity, activation of fear and stress response, rise in stress hormones, immunosuppression, fatigue, headaches, decline in cognitive performance, predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses, chronic stress, anxiety and depression. Long-term consequences of wearing facemask can cause health deterioration, developing and progression of chronic diseases and premature death. Governments, policy makers and health organizations should utilize prosper and scientific evidence-based approach with respect to wearing facemasks, when the latter is considered as preventive intervention for public health.
Here is the table for physiological and psychological effects of wearing a facemask:
![[Image: 84D90F9C-AC8B-43A8-BF16-910769211E2C.jpeg]](https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/84D90F9C-AC8B-43A8-BF16-910769211E2C.jpeg)
Here is the full study:
Facemasks in the COVID-19 era: A health hypothesis by Baruch Vainshelboim
What an absolute joke. American has been led down an insane path of wearing masks that don’t prevent the transmission of COVID-19 and cause more health risk than ever imagined.
|
|
|
TRUTH OVER FEAR - online summit |
Posted by: SAguide - 04-19-2021, 11:50 AM - Forum: Great Reset
- Replies (1)
|
 |
COVID-19 and
THE GREAT RESET
Truth over Fear On-line Summit
APRIL 30 - MAY 2, 2021
We Are Being Lied To
ON A MASSIVE SCALE
______________
Truth Over Fear summit is a three-day online gathering of 40+ frontline
doctors, scientists, attorneys, researchers, and journalists, who will
share invaluable and eye-opening insights into the truth behind the
headlines, Covid-19, the rushed vaccine, and the role played by both in
the Great Reset.
Big Tech does not want you to hear this information and is working
hard to censor us. Most of our presenters have been silenced. In fact,
the same day we published this summit, YouTube terminated our
account and we are now shadow banned everywhere.
_________________________________
You, and only YOU, have the right to make INFORMED
decisions for yourself and your loved ones.
Do not let anyone take those rights away from you.
We the People need to stand up and say ENOUGH.
For more information and to register: https://www.restoretheculture.com/?r_done=1
|
|
|
Global Reset: U.S. Pledges to Stand with China and Declare Climate Emergency |
Posted by: Stone - 04-19-2021, 07:38 AM - Forum: Great Reset
- Replies (1)
|
 |
Global Reset: U.S. Pledges to Stand with China and Declare Climate Emergency
Breitbart | 18 Apr 20210
The United States and China have agreed to cooperate and “curb climate change with urgency” in the lead-up to President Joe Biden hosting a virtual summit of world leaders to discuss the issue. The announcement of “strong pledges” by Washington and Beijing was made Sunday in a joint statement issued by the two countries.
John Kerry and his Chinese counterpart Xie Zhenhua agreed to the common declaration of intent during two days of talks in Shanghai last week, according to AP.
The two countries “are committed to cooperating with each other and with other countries to tackle the climate crisis, which must be addressed with the seriousness and urgency that it demands,” the statement said.
Meeting with reporters in Seoul on Sunday, Kerry said the language in the statement is “strong” and that the two countries agreed on “critical elements on where we have to go.”
But the former secretary of state said, “I learned in diplomacy that you don’t put your back on the words, you put on actions. We all need to see what happens.”
Noting China is the world’s biggest coal user, Kerry said he and Chinese officials had a lot of discussions on how to accelerate a global energy transition. “I have never shied away from expressing our views shared by many, many people that it is imperative to reduce coal, everywhere,” he said.
Reuters reports Li Shuo, senior climate adviser for the environmental group Greenpeace, said China could soon respond to a new U.S. pledge with one of its own, building on the “momentum” of the Shanghai talks.
“The statement in my view is as positive as the politics would allow: It sends a very unequivocal message that on this particular issue (China and the United States) will cooperate. Before the meetings in Shanghai this was not a message that we could assume,” Li said.
The Biden administration publicly affirmed its desire to embrace the United Nations and all its causes back in February when Secretary of State Antony Blinken and U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres had their first call to confirm the U.S. was back in the Paris Climate Accords and the World Health Organization, as Breitbart News reported.
Biden has personally invited 40 world leaders, including Chinese President Xi Jinping, to his April 22-23 climate summit.
The U.S. and other countries are expected to announce more ambitious national targets for cutting carbon emissions ahead of or at the meeting, along with pledging financial help for climate efforts by less wealthy nations.
|
|
|
Third Week after Easter [Monday thru Saturday] |
Posted by: Stone - 04-19-2021, 07:02 AM - Forum: Easter
- Replies (6)
|
 |
Monday of the Third Week After Easter
℣. In resurrectione tua Christe, alleluia.
℣. In thy resurrection, O Christ, alleluia.
℟. Cœli et terra lætentur, alleluia.
℟. Let heaven and earth rejoice, alleluia.
The first stone of the Church is laid; and on this Foundation Jesus now begins to build. The Shepherd of the Sheep and Lambs has been proclaimed; it is time to form the Fold. The Keys of the Kingdom have been given to Peter; it is time to inaugurate the Kingdom. Now this Church, this Fold, this Kingdom, designate a society which is to be called Christian, after the name of its Founder. This society, composed of the disciples of Christ, is destined to receive within it every individual of the human race; and if all do not actually enter, it is not in consequence of any ban of exclusion. It will subsist to the end of time; for there can be no elect out of her pale. It will be One; for Christ says not: “I will build my Churches;” he speaks but of One. It will be Holy; for all the means of sanctification are in her keeping. It will be Catholic, that is, Universal, in order that being known in all times and places, men may be able to hear her teachings and follow them. It will be Apostolic, that is to say, that how long so ever this world may last, it will come down, by lawful succession, from these men with whom Jesus is, during these forty days, arranging everything that is connected with its establishment.
Such is to be the Church, out of which there is to be no salvation for those who, having known her, have refused to become her members. A few days hence, and the world will hear of her existence. The spark that is now but in Judea, will soon become a fire spread throughout the whole earth. Before the close of the century, not only will there be members of the Church in every province of the vast Roman Empire, but even in countries where Rome has never planted the standard of her proud eagles. Nay more, this miraculous propagation is to be perpetual;—in every age, new apostles will set forth, and win new victories for this immortal Church. Nothing human is lasting; but the Church’s ceaseless duration will excite the spleen of incredulity and baffle all its calculations. Persecutions, heresies, schisms, apostasies, and scandals—all will strive to work her ruin; but she will survive them all. The descendants of her bitterest foes will call her “Mother.” Thrones and dynasties, nations and even whole races, will be carried away by the tide of time; she alone will subsist throughout the ages, stretching out her arms to receive all men, teaching ever the same truths, repeating, even to the last day, the same Symbol of Faith, and ever faithful to the instructions given her by our Risen Jesus during these forty days preceding his Ascension.
How shall we worthily thanks thee, O God, our Savior, for thy having, even at our first entrance into life, made us members of this thy immortal Spouse, which alone possesses thy heavenly teachings and the means whereby is wrought salvation! We have no need to search for thy Church; it is in and by her that we live the supernatural life even here below, and of which the perfection is to be given to us in heaven, provided we be faithful to grace. Oh! show thy mercy to those countless souls who have not had the privilege we have enjoyed, and whose entrance into thy Church is to cost them many a painful sacrifice. Strengthen them with light; give them courage; rouse them from indifference; bless their efforts; that thus, O Divine Shepherd! thy Fold may increase, and thy Church, thy Spouse, may be as thou hast promised she ever shall be, the joyful Mother of Children!
Let us continue our homage to the mystery of the Pasch, borrowing another Canticle from the inexhaustible Adam of Saint-Victor.
Sequence
Lux illuxit dominica,
Lux insignis, lux unica,
Lux lucis et lætitiæ,
Lux immortalis gloriæ.
The Sunday’s Light has shone upon us: the brilliant Light, the Light above all other, the Light of light and joy, the Light of immortal glory.
Diem mundi conditio
Commendat ab initio,
Quam Christi resurrectio
Ditavit privilegio.
This is the Day privileged from the very beginning of the world: the Day enriched with the prerogative of Christ’s Resurrection.
In spe perennis gaudii,
Lucis exsultent filii,
Vindicent membra meritis
Conformitatem Capitis.
Let the Children of Light exult with the hope of everlasting joy: let the Members so act as to merit to be like their Head.
Solemnis est celebritas,
Et vota sunt solemnia;
Primæ diei dignitas
Prima requirit gaudia.
Our Feast is solemn, so are our prayers. The grandest of days should have the grandest joy.
Solemnitatum gloria
Paschalis est victoria,
Sub multis ænigmatibus
Prius promissa patribus.
The Paschal victory is the most glorious of Feasts. It was promised to our Fathers, under many types.
Jam scisso velo patuit
Quod vetus lex præcinuit
Figuram res exterminat,
Et umbram lux illuminat.
Now the veil is rent, and all is made visible that was foretold in the Old Law. The reality effaces the figure; and light throws light on the shadow.
Quid agnus sine macula,
Quid hœdus gesserit,
Nostra purgans piacula,
Messias nobis aperit.
The Messias—he that came to wipe away our sins—has revealed to us the mysteries of the spotless Lamb and the Kid.
Per mortem nos indebitam,
solvit a morte debita;
Prædam captans illicitam,
Præda privatur licita.
By his undeserved death, he delivered us from the death we so truly deserved. By making a prey of Him on whom Death had no claim, was deprived of the prey that was justly his own.
Carnis delet opprobria
Caro peccati nescia;
Die reflorens tertia
Corda confirmat dubia.
The Flesh, that knew no sin, cancelled the sins of ours: it rose again on the third day—and the Flower, reblooming, refreshed all wavering hearts.
O mors Christi mirifica,
Tu Christo nos vivifica!
Mors morti non obnoxia,
Da nobis vitæ præmia.
Amen.
O admirable Death of Jesus! give us to live in Jesus. O undying Death! give us the prize of Life. Amen.
|
|
|
Concerns of Lipid Nanoparticle Carrying mRNA Vaccine into the Brain: What to Make of It? |
Posted by: Stone - 04-19-2021, 06:35 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- Replies (1)
|
 |
A pro-vaccine article that expresses concerns regarding the unwanted outcome of the mRNA vaccines reaching the brain.
Please refer to the original article for full list of hyperlinks [not all were included below].
* * *
Concerns of Lipid Nanoparticle Carrying mRNA Vaccine into the Brain: What to Make of It?
Detailing the arguments for and against this concern with input from experts.
Microbial Instincts via Medium.com | Mar 19 , 2021
We are all-in into vaccinating as many people as possible against Covid-19, with mRNA vaccines at the forefront. So, we might as well go all-in into understanding the little intricacies of how mRNA vaccine encapsulated by lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) might interact with delicate cell types — such as neurons in the brain — that a few experts have raised.
Before going further, the conclusion herein is that the actual risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or Covid-19 largely outweighs the hypothetical risks of the LNP-encapsulated mRNA vaccine. But there are still a few concerns left unanswered, which deserve more transparency.
Current vaccines rely on spike protein
Nearly all the vaccine candidates for Covid-19 — such as the mRNA, DNA, viral vector, recombinant protein, viral-like particles, and peptide-based vaccines — rely on the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein to induce immunity.
- The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines consist of an mRNA genetic material encased within LNPs that can fuse with muscle and immune cells upon injection. The released mRNA then instructs the cells to make spike proteins, which are expressed on the cell surface to trigger various aspects of the immune system.
- The AstraZeneca-Oxford and Johnson & Johnson adenoviral vector vaccines use a harmless modified adenovirus to deliver DNA into the cell to make SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins to induce immunity.
- The Novavax peptide-based or protein subunit vaccine uses purified spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2 to induce immunity.
- The Sinovac and Sinopharm inactivated vaccines use dead SARS-CoV-2 virions with the spike proteins intact to induce immunity.
While these vaccines all rely on the SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins to train the immune system in one way or another, only the mRNA vaccines use the innovative LNP technology to deliver the mRNA into cells.
For simplicity, the spike protein mentioned from hereon belongs to SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes Covid-19.
Lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) hypothetical risks
The mRNA vaccine is injected intramuscularly through the arm. This method is preferred because large muscle cells have high vascularity, so the injected biomaterial can easily reach the systemic bloodstream and lymphatic system.
LNPs fuse with and enter mammalian cells easily. As mentioned, the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines use LNPs to encapsulate the mRNA genetic material for more efficient cell delivery.
Thus, the combined intramuscular injection and LNP technology would enable the mRNA vaccine to reach a broad range of cell types. The mRNA might even reach delicate cells or places that we don’t want them to, such as neurons in the brain or spinal cord.
In fact, LNPs are often used to overcome the problem of the BBB blocking medical drugs from entering the brain. Given that the BBB and blood-spinal cord barrier are lipid-soluble, the LNP-encapsulated mRNA vaccine might be able to enter the brain and spinal cord.
As a result, brain cells that express the spike protein might be marked as foreign by the immune system. For example, cytotoxic T-cells, which kill virus-infected and cancerous cells, might see the spike protein-expressing brain cells as a threat. Unlike muscle cells and many other cell types, neurons in the brain rarely regenerate.
Jacob Wes Ulm, MD, Ph.D., a geneticist, explained this concern in detail in a letter to the British Medical Journal, as well as in a public comment to an article about mRNA vaccines on January 2021:
Quote:…it seems that they [mRNA vaccines] can enter a much broader tissue range compared to even attenuated virus vaccines…And since the mRNA vaccines would induce SARS-CoV-2 viral spike protein expression, that seems to mean that people who get the mRNA vaccines are going to have a much greater range of cells and tissues vulnerable to cytotoxic [T-cell] attack…with side effects that may not manifest for years (with cumulative damage and chronic inflammation).
“This is where the picture gets aggravatingly murky,” Dr. Ulm added, mentioning that there seems to be no comprehensive data on the cellular localization — i.e., which types of cells the biomaterial enters— of the LNPs used by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna.
Although there have been past studies on the cellular localization of LNPs (more on this below), different LNP formulations would enter different cell types, Dr. Ulm stated, so “we don’t know where in the body they’re going,” adding that:
Quote:The nightmare scenario would be if e.g. the mRNA vaccines’ lipid nanoparticles are, indeed, crossing the BBB and getting endocytosed into critical glial cells, like oligodendrocytes, or even worse, into neurons themselves in the brain and spinal cord, putting a bullseye on these critical cells for cytotoxic [T-cells].
In fact, one 2017 study vaccinated mice against influenza viruses with LNP-encapsulated mRNA vaccine. While the mRNA vaccine immunizes the mice, the study found traces of the mRNA in the brain at 0.4 ng/ml. However, the amount of mRNA found in the muscle injection site, proximal lymph nodes, distal lymph nodes, and spleen were much larger at 5680, 2120, 117, and 87 ng/ml, respectively.
That said, this is also consistent with what the European Medicines Agency’s (EMA) assessment report of the Moderna mRNA vaccine has reported:
Quote:Low levels of mRNA could be detected in all examined tissues except the kidney [in rats]. This included heart, lung, testis, and also brain tissues, indicating that the mRNA/LNP platform crossed the blood/brain barrier, although to very low levels (2–4% of the plasma level).
Therefore, these reports suggest that the LNPs can carry bits of the mRNA vaccine into the brain. But we still don’t know what would happen after the mRNA vaccine enters the brain (more on this below).
Notably, for the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine, the assessment report by the U.K. government is a bit vague, stating that:
Quote:Information regarding the potential distribution of the test articles to sites other than the injection site following IM [intramuscular] administration has been provided and is under review as part of the ongoing rolling assessment.
Last month, I received an email from Goh Kiang Hua, MD, a consultant general surgeon and Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons (FRCS), asking if I’ve come across any scientific data on what happens to the cell that makes and expresses the spike proteins upon receiving the mRNA vaccines.
I couldn’t find such any, except for the abovementioned EMA’s report that I found posted in an mRNA discussion google group that William Steward, Ph.D., founded.
Dr. Ulm couldn’t either, publically commenting that:
Quote:I used to work in gene therapy and recall how we’d obsess on tissue tropism for our vectors before considering clinical trials, so I’m bewildered that this information seems almost absent for an almost entirely new vaccine modality…Without knowing more about the specific LNP formulations and their cellular and tissue trafficking patterns, we just can’t say much of anything with certainty.
Note that tissue tropism or trafficking patterns mean which tissue or cell types the biological material might enter, similar to cellular localization.
The surgeon then mentioned cases of immune thrombocytopenia — a life-threatening blood clot or platelet disorder — occurring shortly after mRNA vaccination. While no causative link has been confirmed, he considered that maybe the LNPs had carried the mRNA vaccine into the megakaryocytes (platelet-producing cells) in the bone marrow. The megakaryocytes then express the spike protein, only to be marked for destruction by cytotoxic T-cells. Platelets then become deficient, causing thrombocytopenia. Of course, he emphasized that these are just speculations.
This may be an ‘off-target effect’ of mRNA vaccines. For example, a literature review published in Pharmaceutics in January 2020 stated:
Quote:Cell-specific delivery of mRNA would be beneficial for the development of mRNA-based therapeutics. This can enhance the delivery of mRNA molecules to the targeted cells and hence reduce the required mRNA dose, as well as reducing potential off-target effects.
Overall, I see that many experts have raised hypothetical concerns of where and which cell types the LNPs might carry the mRNA vaccine into. Depending on where the mRNA ended up, the subsequent mRNA-induced spike protein expression might possibly trigger biological reactions we don’t want.
For more context about this issue, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) has also covered it last week, featuring Dr. Ulm’s concerns on the cellular localization of LNPs.
Screenshot of an article published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) on 10th March 2021.
Why it might not be a problem
A few past studies have investigated the cellular localization of LNPs carrying an mRNA that encodes luciferase, a protein detectable via imaging scan. With this method, researchers can visually see where or which cell types the LNPs had carried the mRNA into. In a word, the luciferase visualization is a proxy for mRNA cellular localization.
- A 2015 study administered LNP-encapsulated mRNA into mice via various routes. The intramuscular route is one of the most effective ones, resulting in mRNA localization mostly in the liver and, to a lesser extent, the muscles, spleen, and lungs. The mRNA-induced luciferase protein expression peaked at about 5-hour and declined thereafter.
- A 2017 study injected LNP-encapsulated mRNA vaccine into mice and found that the mRNA disseminated mostly into the muscles, lymph nodes, spleen, and liver. But this study also found traces of mRNA in the heart, bone marrow, kidney, lung, stomach, rectum, intestines, testes, and brain. The mRNA-induced protein expression peaked at about 6-hour.
- A 2019 study injected LNP-encapsulated mRNA vaccine into macaque monkeys intramuscularly. The mRNA ended up entering the liver the most, followed by the spleen and muscles. The luciferase protein expression only lasted about 8 hours and then declined.
- A 2021 study administered LNP-encapsulated mRNA vaccine into mice via various routes, including intramuscularly. Scanning the mice's body revealed some degree of luciferase expression. While specific body parts were not mentioned, the brain didn’t appear to be one of the areas the mRNA entered. The mRNA-induced protein expression was highest within the first 24 hours and mostly gone by day 6.
Nevertheless, whether the LNP formulation of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines is the same as these studies remains unknown.
But we can see a trend in these studies — that intramuscular LNPs injection tends to deliver the mRNA into the muscles, liver, spleen, and lymph nodes. This cellular localization pattern is also consistent with the EMA’s assessment report of the Moderna mRNA vaccine, although they also found tiny mRNA traces in other cell types, such as the heart and brain.
Thus, we can be assured that the brain is most likely not the main tissue or organ that the Pfizer-BioNTech’s and Moderna’s LNPs enter.
In a detailed post in the mRNA discussion google group, Dr. Goh reasoned that the mRNA vaccine is unlikely to reach the brain from the arm injection site owing to the many obstacles along the way.
The mRNA vaccine would have to first escape from the densely packed muscle cells at the injection site into the lymphatic system and bloodstream. And living cells present throughout such route could take up the mRNA vaccine anytime. “Along the way, especially in the capillary beds of the lungs where the blood flow is slow, the LNPs face multiple hurdles as the whole route is lined by living cells,” he explained.
“If the LNPs survive the journey so far, the next stage is equally if not more treacherous.” The mRNA vaccine then has to resist tremendous force as the heart pumps blood throughout the body. “If the LNPs disintegrate from the turbulence, the mRNAs will be rapidly destroyed by ribonucleases,” he said. But, “those that remain intact will be sent to the WHOLE body.” Still, he further cautioned that “the structural integrity of these LNPs after being expelled from the [heart’s] left ventricle is doubtful.”
That said, here is where the brain or other organs might encounter the LNPs.
However, the brain is shielded by the BBB. So, even if the LNPs are about to enter the brain, the BBB cells could take up the mRNA vaccine, and the spike protein production might just be limited to the BBB.
Assuming the mRNA vaccine crossed the BBB successfully and entered the brain, we still don’t know what might happen after that.
Maybe the mRNA gets degraded once it enters the brain. Maybe the neurons will take up the mRNA and express spike protein on its surface, triggering cytotoxic T-cell attacks. But this is further assuming, Dr. Goh pointed out, that the T-cells would also cross the BBB. In fact, T-cell trafficking into the brain is highly regulated to prevent unwanted inflammation, so it’s not easy for T-cells to cross the BBB. The next question would be if such neuronal injury is severe enough to trigger diseases. Maybe the neuronal injury is just a little stressor that may not be detrimental health-wise.
Still, one could argue that immune cells in the brain, like microglia, might attack neurons that take up the mRNA vaccine. We know mRNA vaccine activates T-cells, but whether brain immune cells are also activated has not been studied.
It’s also worthy to note that mRNA doesn’t stay in the cell for long; it’s gone after being translated into proteins. Indeed, studies studying mRNA vaccine — in the bulleted points above — show that the mRNA-induced protein expression peaks within a few hours and then declined sharply, lasting only for a few days. As T-cells belong to the adaptive immune system, they take about 7–15 days to activate.
Dr. Goh further reminded us that participants in phase I clinical trial are still being followed up closely for nearly a year now. “This is probably the most closely watched vaccine roll-up ever in the history of vaccinology,” he stated. “To date, thankfully, there has been no signal of any long-term issues of concern.”
What to make of all this?
Overall, authorities and pharmaceutical companies may want to provide more transparency on the hypothetical concern of LNPs carrying the mRNA vaccine into areas we don’t want them to.
However, if such concerns are legitimate, it’s hard to imagine that health authorities and pharma have overlooked them. The more likely scenario may be that such concerns were considered but deemed of low concern for reasons discussed above.
Ultimately, human organ systems are complex. Theories or hypotheses alone do not always translate to the real biological phenomenon. We have seen far too many times that in vitro (test tube or cell culture) and in vivo (animal) study results failed to be replicated in humans. And these in vitro and in vivo studies are usually based on theories or hypotheses that scientists wanted to test out.
Lastly, we must also weigh the LNP mRNA vaccine's hypothetical risks against the coronavirus’s actual threats. Not only is Covid-19 life-threatening among the vulnerable populations — such as older adults, people of color, and people with underlying medical conditions — but long-Covid or post-Covid syndrome is another serious threat to the young and fit.
Steve Pascolo, Ph.D., co-founder of CureVac, is one of the earliest researchers to advocate for mRNA vaccines' potential in 2004. He also has an impressive publishing record on mRNA vaccines and was kind enough to respond to my email inquiring about this topic. Dr. Pascolo admits that some cells that take up the mRNA and express spike proteins on their surface might get destroyed by cytotoxic T-cells. But he added:
Quote:…that is what happens to a much higher grade and in all organs when we get infected by SARS-CoV-2…or vaccinated with live viral vaccines…With the mRNA vaccine (30 micrograms in the muscle) the eventual destruction of cells by CD8 [cytotoxic T-cells] would always be very minor compared to what happens in infection when the viruses infect virtually all cells in all organs and the immune system is fully activated to get rid of it…”
Thus, the mere 30 micrograms of mRNA vaccine injected intramuscularly pale in comparison to the actual virus infection in the capacity to trigger cytotoxic T-cell attacks in the brain or elsewhere. And yes, SARS-CoV-2 is capable of invading the brain and many other organs.
Indeed, experts in the mRNA discussion google group who first raised the hypothetical risks of LNP-encapsulated mRNA vaccines are still pro-vaccine, agreeing that SARS-CoV-2 or Covid-19 is the larger threat.
To conclude, this article doesn’t intend to undermine the mRNA vaccine but to better understand its subtle intricacies that might be important. Hopefully, there will be more research on this matter. If at all such concern is an issue, which is unlikely, we could still find ways to circumvent it. If not, then we can safely dismiss one worry we have. Either way, it’s worth knowing.
Thanks to the mRNA discussion google group — William Stewart, Ph.D., Goh Kiang Hua, MD., Christopher Shaw, Ph.D., and J. Wes Ulm, MD, Ph.D. — and Steve Pascolo, Ph.D., for their valuable input into this article.
For risk analyses of mRNA vs. Covid-19, you may be interested in this one: Hypothetical Lasting Health Problems of mRNA Vaccine vs. Coronavirus Which risk would you take?
[Emphasis mine.]
|
|
|
Dentists Claim “Mask Mouth” is rotting people’s teeth |
Posted by: Scarlet - 04-18-2021, 09:48 PM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- No Replies
|
 |
“Mask Mouth” is rotting people’s teeth, New York City Dentist Claims
TOMS RIVER, NJ – They’re calling it “Mask Mouth”, a new trend being seen by dentists who are once again seeing patients since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. One prominent New York City dentist is now saying prolonged wearing of face masks to protect yourself from COVID-19 infection could also be rotting your gums and teeth.
“We’re seeing inflammation in people’s gums that have been healthy forever, and cavities in people who have never had them before,” said Dr. Rob Raimondi, a co-owner and dentist at One Manhattan Dental. “About 50% of our patients are being impacted by this, we decided to name it ‘mask mouth’, after ‘meth mouth.’ ”
Raimondi said mask mouth can lead to gum disease, even strokes and heart attacks.
“People tend to breathe through their mouth instead of through their nose while wearing a mask,” said his partner Dr. Marc Sclafani. “The mouth breathing is causing the dry mouth, which leads to a decrease in saliva, and saliva is what fights the bacteria and cleanses your teeth.”
The dentists say while wearing masks, people tend to drink less water and have been consuming more coffee and alcohol during the lockdown, both of which increase the damage of mask mouth.
They say you can mitigate your exposure to mask mouth by drinking more water, cutting out coffee and alcohol and using a dehumidifier in your bedroom at night.
for more information:
video: Masks and Oral Health
article:
Mouth Problems Associated with Mask-Wearing
|
|
|
|