top of page

Emergency Petition IMMEDIATE Action Required: Significant Covid-19 Testing Flaws, Vaccine Safety

Updated: Aug 11, 2021

Guest Petition compiled by Health Professionals

Health Professional Emergency Petition IMMEDIATE Action Required: Significant Covid-19 Testing Flaws & Vaccine Safety Issues:


1,117 signatures were collected in support of petition. Petition has been distributed to relevant health care organizations and leadership. Thanks to all who distributed petition and forwarded information to relevant licensing board leadership.

Petition Summary Review


All Public Health Officials, Political Representatives, State Health Departments & Health Licensure Boards, Hospital Administrators, Health Professional Licensing Boards, Covid-19 Testing Labs, College Health Program Administrators, Hospital Administrators & All Relevant Health Professional Organizations, School Health Directors and Journals:

There is significant evidence of severe issues with Covid-19 testing methods, directives, and protocols and serious safety concerns with Covid-19 vaccinations which are being actively ignored by health professional leadership, political representatives, and professional governing bodies.

Health professionals who attempt, in good faith, to engage leadership with these documented and evidence based concerns are being ignored, dismissed, or censored.

Evidence clearly indicates that implementation of current Covid-19 testing & Covid-19 vaccines and protocols is unnecessary and not serving the interests of individual and public health with significant documentation of harm resulting from these protocols.


We, the undersigned, request an IMMEDIATE suspension of public health directives pertaining to Sars Cov2, the virus attributed to cause Covid 19 infections, and a full independent review and investigation into pandemic policies created on the highly unreliable emergency approved PCR, Antibody, & Antigen testing which is not reliable or accurate to detect the virus it is employed to diagnosis and rationalized on research studies & trial designs that do not meet the minimum standards of scientific integrity to inform public disease, etc). health policy directives (peer review, control group, adequate population size, reliable testing measures for end outcome measurement and diagnosis of

Peer Review by 22 international experts of the scientific paper on which the PCR Testing for Sars CoV2) is based found ten severe flaws with the methods and concluded:

" 'In light of our re-examination of the test protocol to identify SARS-CoV-2 described in the Corman-Drosten paper we have identified concerning errors and inherent fallacies which render the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test useless'.

"The design errors described here are so severe that it is highly unlikely that specific amplification of SARS-CoV-2 genetic material will occur using the protocol of the Corman-Drosten paper".

PCR testing is the central test employed for diagnosis of Covid 19 infection in the U.S..

The World Health Organization, FDA, and CDC have released statements and documents that affirm the Corman Drosten Review conclusions, as documented in detail in petition body below.

We further submit evidence demonstrating PCR tests have been set at high cycle threshold levels by government policy makers (CDC, FDA WHO) which will create mass false positives results for Covid-19 infections by default, and health officials, fully aware of the problem, failed to correct for the issue even after the issue was exposed on August 29, 2020 in the New York Times.

Additionally, Dr. Anthony Fauci, Chief Medical Advisor to President Joe Biden, admitted in an interview on July 16, 2020 that high cycle threshold settings would create false positive results by default& stated anything over a 35 setting would be 'dead nucleotides' period, a dead and non-infectious material (see full petition below) demonstrating a full awareness of the severity and implications of this issue.

Officials are using methods and evidence known to be highly unreliable and inaccurate to justify sweeping public health mandates, civil rights restrictions, and interventions on severely compromised data.

New York Times Article Published August 29, Updated on January 19, 2021, this text is archived to be included in the original NYT article release:

"In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus" (full documentation in petition body)"

Additionally, the CDC has stated in the past, asymptomatic individuals should not be diagnosed with PCR testing or advised against utilizing the test for asymptomatic contacts of infected individuals due to serious potential for false positive results, as documented on November 11, 2011 in this CDC Best Use Guide For Pertussis Diagnosis with PCR testing:

(further documented below)

"Testing Patients with Signs and Symptoms of Pertussis: Early signs and symptoms of pertussis are often non-specific, making it difficult to determine clinically who has pertussis in the earliest stages

( However, only patients with signs and symptoms consistent with pertussis should be tested by PCR to confirm the diagnosis. Testing asymptomatic persons should be avoided as it increases the likelihood of obtaining falsely-positive results. Asymptomatic close contacts of confirmed cases should not be tested and testing of contacts should not be used for post-exposure prophylaxis decisions".

Nothing has inherently changed about PCR method or protocol to explain this inexplicable change in guidance by the CDC for recommendation for PCR test application, interpretation, and use.

Further, there is extensive documented evidence of mass contamination with early PCR tests. The CDC admitted it knowingly released flawed testing for mass public use.

Millions of tests were recalled in the US & globally due to safety and contamination issues due to bacterial and viral contamination. There has been no accounting to the public by government health officials for the use of contaminated and unreliable tests last spring.

We assert these issues have created serious and potential individual and public health harm, and create legal liability issues for health professionals charged with implementing protocols that go against the evidence based standards required for safe, legal, and ethical practice.

Further, there is significant and credible evidence that a mass vaccination program with emergency approved vaccinations is unnecessary and will contribute to individual and public health harm.

Much of this evidence has been available for public review for months, some since before the Covid 19 pandemic policies were implemented. It is incumbent upon professional and public leadership to actively educate themselves, especially since Covid-19 testing and vaccinations are approved for emergency use only, and have not been vetted with the normal safety procedures.

Evidence has been organized into the following seven categories:

Section 1.

Serious Sars CoV2 (Covid 19) Testing Method &

Protocol Errors: PCR, Antibody, & Antigen

Covid-19 Health Policy Based on Severely Flawed Science and Data


No Asymptomatic Transmission:

Asymptomatic Presentation of Positive Covid-19 Test Result Due to Faulty Tests, Testing Methods & Protocols


Serious Contamination Testing Issues with Early Covid-19 Testing Kits

Mass Contamination & Recall of Millions Early PCR Tests & Other Covid-19 Test Kits Resulted in Mass Faulty Data & Public Health Safety Concerns:


Liability Concerns for Health Professionals:

Mass Public Evidence of Severe Issues with Covid-19 Health Directives Used in Litigation, Imperils Health Care Professionals Ordered to Implement Unsound Health Protocols:


Censorship & Political, Professional, Media Misinformation & Attack

Advancing Individual & Public Health Harms, Denigrating Health Professionals and Citizens


Sars CoV2 Covid-19 Emergency Approved Vaccines

Unnecessary & Unsafe: Post-Vaccine Injury and Deaths Go Uninvestigated and Unreported


Mass Individual & Public Health Harms

Result of Covid-19 Directives Based on Severely Flawed Science and Data



Sars CoV2 (Covid 19) Testing Method & Protocol Errors:

Covid-19 Health Policy Based on Severely Flawed Science and Data

Severe Errors, Flaws with Tests, Incorrect Testing Recommendations Documented with Covid-19 PCR, Antigen, and Antibody Test Methods Render Tests Unreliable, Inaccurate, and Unsuitable for Diagnosis of Covid-19 infections:

RT PCR Testing for Sars CoV2 - Virus Attributed to Covid-19 infection:

RT PCR testing for the detection of Sars CoV2 (virus attributed to Covid 19 symptoms) was approved on an emergency use basis on January 22, 2020, one day after submission of paper out-lining the science for Emergency Approval without appropriate peer review PCR testing was approved, peer reviewe occurred on November 22, 2020.

Peer review was curate by the International Consortium of Scientists Life Science division with top twenty two expert researchers in relevant fields including Dr Michael Yeadon, former Vice President of Pfizer, and found ten serious flaws with testing forcing the review committee to conclude:

'In light of our re-examination of the test protocol to identify SARS-CoV-2 described in the Corman-Drosten paper we have identified concerning errors and inherent fallacies which render the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test useless'.

The review committee has submitted a request for a full retraction of the scientific paper on which the RT PCR tests are based.

Cease and desist orders have been filed against the paper's author, Corman Drosten due to the severe individual and public health harm that has resulted due to the inaccuracies in his paper providing severely flawed protocols for diagnosis of Sars Cov2 Covid 19 infections.:

Atty Reiner Fuellmich Cease & Desist to Corman Drosten Document:

RT PCR tests work by detecting the presence of a shortened strand of RNA attributed to the Sars CoV2 virus through amplification of testing sample material. Every cycle that the test material is run through decreases the amount of available material, so when run through too many cycles, the material detected is nothing more than non-infectious dead matter.

Since Fauci's admission on 7/16/2020 , the public has been informed that the RT PCR tests were recommended by public health organizations (FDA, WHO, CDC) to be run at cycle threshold levels (40 cycles with some US labs running test up to 45 CT) which will produce mass false positive results by default.

According to the CDC, false positives have the potential to create significant harms:

"In the event of a false positive result, risks to patients could include the following: a recommendation for isolation of the patient, monitoring of household or other close

contacts for symptoms, patient isolation that might limit contact with family or friends and may increase contact with other potentially COVID-19 patients, limits in the ability to work, delayed diagnosis and treatment for the true infection causing the symptoms, unnecessary prescription of a treatment or therapy, or other unintended adverse effects.".


Additional public health harms not stated by the CDC include unnecessary implementation of public health protocol that are documented to be creating mass psychological and physical health harms. (See section below on public health harms)

The New York Times highlighted this issue last August when it revealed that studies adjusting for Cycle Threshold rates in RT PCR test samples taken from three US states returned false positive rates between 85 to 90%.on this ONE error alone.

"In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus":

90% testing error rate on a single testing recommendation error thus create significant individual health harms as stated by the CDC

Despite these shocking statistics, the official public health organizations responsible for directing Covid 19 response did NOT change recommendations to lower CT rates and every state except Florida, the CT rate was NOT recommended for inclusion in reports report at all until December 14, 2020.

Not all labs are yet following this recommendation:

Coronavirus Cases Plummet When PCR Tests Are Adjusted

Government & public health officials are fully aware of the issue:

Dr Anthony Fauci who was a lead member of President Donald Trump's Corona virus task force, & currently acts as Chief Medical Advisor to President Joe Biden stated in a video on July 16, 2020 that PCR Cycle Threshold rates above 35 are just 'dead nucleotides, period', i.e. a dead and non infectious material.

He also untruthfully answered interviewer when questioned if Cycle Threshold rate were included in lab reports stating 'yes'.

July 16 2020 episode of “This Week in Virology” science podcast hosted by Columbia University virologist Vincent Racaniello:

Quote from Fauci from above interview:

Interviewer: Is the threshold cycle, uh, is reporting that a pretty standard practice in doing a diagnosis now rather than just a positive or negative?

Dr Anthony Fauci; (nods head yes) Yeah.

Fauci goes on to admit in this interview individuals receiving PCR test report will not receive cycle threshold number with positive test result

Interviewer then asks: But, they've got it (referring to care provider responsible for diagnosis):

Dr. Anthony Fauci: They've got it...they've got it

Interview has been archived & may be viewed here:

However, the New York Times reported on 8/29/20:

" number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients, although it could tell them how infectious the patients are....

It was not until the World Health Organization partially addressed the RT PCR testing errors and issued a statement on 12/14/2020 adjusting criteria for positive diagnosis through PCR testing that Cycle Threshold rate should be included with lab reports although they failed to lower Cycle Threshold hold rate recommendations to levels which would prevent the problem entirely:

As the positivity rate for SARS-CoV-2 decreases, the positive predictive value also decreases. This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as positivity rate decreases, irrespective of the assay specificity. Therefore, healthcare providers are encouraged to take into consideration testing results along with clinical signs and symptoms, confirmed status of any contacts, etc"

The WHO statement of symptom inclusion as part of diagnostic criteria is stunning, as this criteria should be basic practice for any diagnostic review.

Diagnostic tests are screening tools and should NEVER substitute for thorough review of all presenting clinical symptoms and lab test data. Citing asymptomatic infection on the sole basis of results from a Sars CoV2 PCR, antigen, or antibody test does NOT meet the minimum medical standards for competent diagnosis of disease or illness. This statement constitutes an open admission by the WHO that asymptomatic PCR tests are not adequate proof infection with Sars CoV2 and invalidates the argument for 'asymptomatic transmission'.

Additionally, since the high cycle threshold rate is only one of the ten flaws cited by International Consortium of Science curated peer review of PCR testing, ALL positive test should not be considered reliable for diagnosis of Covid 19 infections deemed 'useless' for this purpose.

WHO deleted original statement which has been archived by multiple sources and issued new statement on 1/14/21 omitting recommendation to include symptom criteria as part of diagnosis:

It was predicted that case rates and hospitalizations attributed to Sars CoV2 infection would drop with the new WHO recommendations and, this indeed has occurred since the official recommendation came out in December

Public health officials and media outlets are now stating that 'herd immunity' and 'vaccines' are responsible for this drop in cases that was forecast to occur due to simple change in testing protocol recommendations, failing to inform the public of a very critical information to understanding pandemic numbers.

Severe Flaws Antigen & Antibody Testing:

RT PCR testing is not the only severely flawed testing method that is being utilized for the detection of the Sars CoV2 virus.

The Rapid Antigen Testing has a very high false positive error return when used in populations with low infection prevalence according to the FDA:

"Remember that positive predictive value (PPV) varies with disease prevalence when interpreting results from diagnostic tests. PPV is the percent of positive test results that are true positives. As disease prevalence decreases, the percent of test results that are false positives increase.

For Example:

"At 0.1% prevalence, the PPV would only be 4%, meaning that 96 out of 100 positive results would be false positives.'

The majority of communities who ordered and implemented the use of Rapid Antigen testing had very low infection prevalence at the time of implementation of mass Antigen testing for Sars CoV2.

According to the FDA, the subsequent positive results would return mostly false positives. There is no reliability in determining true positive rates through antigen testing due to use in low infection populations yet these positives are included in official numbers without caveat. Rapid Antigen continues to be implement and recommended in areas of low incidence (population) and this practice

will result in MAJORITY of false positive:

In Massachusetts, for example, there is currently a rate of .3.1% active cases, as of March 11, 2021 according to update center. Due to other testing issues this number is likely completely inaccurate, however, if we go by the official data:

According to the FDA, use of this test in this population would result in approximately 90 out of a 100 false positives with Massachusetts population of 6.9 million people. Individual counties are at much lower rates of Sars CoV2 attributed cases with some at .08%, in these areas testing would produce nar 100% false positives.

Other states are currently at approximately same rates or lower.

Right now, implementation of rapid antigen testing is being expanded around the United States and world despite FDA warning that near majority false positives will be generated by implementing testing in this way.

This is completely unacceptable application of a test method that goes against the government's own FDA warning. Use in low incident populations will create majority false positive results, and there needs to be accountability by public health officials why the test is being employed in this scenario at all.

Lastly, Sars CoV2 Antibody tests are also unsuitable for reliable diagnosis of Sars CoV2:

"A positive result for the SARS-CoV-2 antibody is indicative of an acute or recent infection. A positive result may also be due to past or present infection with non-SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus strains, such as coronavirus hKU1, NL63, OC43 or 229E that cause a mild illness like the common cold"

CDC Health Team Updates

Further, in both the case of positive Sars CoV2 Covid 19 antigen and antibody testing, it is recommended that individuals with positive tests receive a unreliable RT PCR test for confirmation.

In addition to individual public health harmed caused by utilization of tests unsuitable for diagnosis of Sars CoV2, it has created a potential liability situation for the health professionals, nurses and doctors charged with instituting mass testing programs with fundamentally flawed, unreliable methods. It is against ethical, professional, and legal standards for health professionals to implement protocols documented to be severely flawed and have potential to create individual and public health harms.


No Asymptomatic Transmission:

Asymptomatic Presentation of Positive Covid-19 Test Result Due to Faulty Tests, Testing Methods & Protocols

Current Sars CoV2 public health protection protocols (social distancing, lock-downs, masking, etc) are rationalized on the scientifically unsupported theory of asymptomatic transmission. This hypothesis arose from majority of individuals testing positives for Sars CoV2 (Covid 19 infection) with PCR testing do not present symptomatically.

However, as documented above, asymptomatic presentation would be the expected result with PCR test over amplifying sample material through high CT rates resulting in up to 90% false positives per studies reported in NYT; as individual are not ill or contagious.

UP to 86% of Individuals with Positive PCR test have No Core Symptoms of Covid 19 Infection

Additionally, advocates of the asymptomatic spread theory utilize research that is not designed to study for method of transmission of Sars CoV2 but rather evaluates viral load detected on RT PCR tests to hypothesize asymptomatic transmission as a main driver of virus spread. As in this CNN example using a study published in JAMA Medicine:

The study authors admit that their research is not designed to determine method of transmission of virus and states:

"Although the high viral load we observed in asymptomatic patients raises a distinct possibility of a risk for transmission, our study was not designed to determine this," the researchers wrote.

"It is important to note that detection of viral RNA does not equate infectious virus being present and transmissible," the researchers wrote. "

This is a STUNNING statement, as it admits that a positive test result is not reliable proof that the infection originated from Sars CoV2 or the person is infected AT ALL.

This was further documented in the Corman Drosten report above:

The design errors described here are so severe that it is highly unlikely that specific amplification of SARS-CoV-2 genetic material will occur using the protocol of the Corman-Drosten paper

According to this statement from 22 top scientific experts in relevant research fields:

the WHO/FDA/CDC and all government health organizations have been recommending & implementing the use of a test that is highly unlikely to detect Sars Cov2 virus due to severe problems with testing design. Almost the entire basis of the Sars CoV2 Covid-19 pandemic has been rationalized on the results of these tests. This renders all data results from PCR testing severely corrupted.

CDC Admitted in 2011 PCR Inappropriate for Screening Asymptomatic Individuals for Infection:

CDC warned in 2011 that PCR testing should not be used in diagnosis of petussis infections due to significant potential for false positive results.

Nothing inherently has changed about PCR testing method and process to explain for the CDC's change from it former recommendations:

Testing Patients with Signs and Symptoms of Pertussis Early signs and symptoms of pertussis are often non-specific, making it difficult to determine clinically who has pertussis in the earliest stages (

However, only patients with signs and symptoms consistent with pertussis should be tested by PCR to confirm the diagnosis. Testing asymptomatic persons should be avoided as it increases the likelihood of obtaining falsely-positive results. Asymptomatic close contacts of confirmed cases should not be tested and testing of contacts should not be used for post-exposure prophylaxis decisions.

There needs to immediate review by labs to correct for Cycle Threshold rate error on past lab reports and immediate cessation with PCR testing entirely, as it is a completely unreliable method of detection for Sars CoV2.

All Covid-19 testing methods are severely flawed and being employed in a manner that is generating highly corrupted data unsuitable for individual diagnosis of Covid-19 infections.

Testing is generating false positive results by the design of test and the recommended protocols for implementation.

There is extensive documentation that indicates policy makers are fully aware that this testing will produce faulty data, and they have not acted in any matter to seriously correct for SEVERE cycle setting flaw or address the other issues documented in Section 1.


Serious Contamination Issues with Early Covid-19 Testing Kits

Mass Contamination & Recall of Millions Early PCR Tests & Other Covid-19 Test Kits Resulted in Mass Faulty Data & Public Health Safety Concerns:

Contamination and recall of early Covid-19 PCR tests was extensively documented in the Spring of 2020. This includes:

100,00 Recalled Tests in Washington State Due to Bacterial Contamination


"The initial COVID-19 test kits created by the CDC failed because of a contaminated component, according to a review by the Department of Health and Human Services.

A reagent in the first batch of test kits was likely contaminated, according to the report obtained by Sinclair Broadcasting Group. The kits were meant to be used by public health laboratories until commercial labs could develop and mass produce coronavirus tests"

FDA has issued the following list of CoVid Testing

Kits that have been removed from market, the United States has spent billions of dollars on faulty test

Advanced Biological Laboratories (ABL) S.A.

UltraGene Combo2Screen SARS-CoV-2 Assay

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed *

CardiAI Inc.

CoviLampTM Fluorometric Test Kit

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed*

Caspr Biotech Corporation

Direct Caspr Lyo-CRISPR SARS-CoV-2

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed*

Ender Diagnostics AG

Ender MASS COVID-19 isothermal PCR detection kit

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed


Aegle Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed


Biosynex Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed


CLINITEST Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed


Healgen Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed


Verasure Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed

Melbourne Biotech


Removed - Should Not Be Distributed

Meridian Bioscience Inc.

Revogene® SARS-CoV-2 assay

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed*

Nanjing Norman Biological Technology Co., Ltd

Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Antigen Testing Kit (Colloidal Gold)

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed


SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed*

Sanwa BioTech Limited

ALiA SARS-CoV-2 Antigen FIA Test

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed*

Spring Healthcare Services

AG SARS COV-2 Antigen Rapid Test Kit

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed


V-CHEK Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) Antigen Detection Kit

Removed - Should Not Be Distributed

Further, one of the largest PCR test manufacturers, Thermo-Fisher was flagged for false positive errors effecting millions of PCR tests

"Potential accuracy issues with a widely used coronavirus test could lead to false results for patients, U.S. health officials warned".

Dr. Albert Ko of Yale’s School of Public Health said the potential accuracy problems have:

“pretty serious implications” given that Thermo Fisher’s test is used widely both in the U.S. and around the world to screen for coronavirus.


Global Covid 19 Test Contamination Issue:

In the UK, 750,000 RANDOX Covid-19 PCR Tests Recalled Due to Safety Issues, Examined for Contaminated Swabs:

The Independent, 8/8/2020

"Hundreds of thousands of unused coronavirus testing kits are being recalled by the government due to safety concerns".

The packs have been sent out by healthcare giant Randox to care homes and individuals throughout the pandemic. But on Saturday morning the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency asked the company to recall up to 750,000 of the kits after safety issues emerged.

Exactly what those issues are has not been revealed but it is understood the Department for Health and Social Care has asked for the sterility of some swabs to be independently verified . Randox was not removed as a testing vendor after this severe issue with test kit contamination came to public

Randox past involvement in scandals with manipulating diagnostic tests to obtain false convictions of drug driving cases made assignment as a Covid-19 test vendor highly controversial in UK:

More than 40 drug driving convictions overturned in probe over 'data manipulation' at, Randox, forensics lab

1.2 Million Contaminated Tests in Europe Obtained from China

"Kits bought by countries across the continent prove unreliable":

Independent review should occur to ascertain true cause of all deaths attributed to Sars CoV 2, Covid-19 infections where possible due to reliance on diagnostic testing unsuitable to diagnosis virus attributed to Covid 19. 96% of Covid-19 attributed deaths have 3.8 other co-morbidities (see vaccine safety, Covid-19 prevalence section below).

Section 1-3 Conclusion:

All mass testing for Sars CoV2(Covid-19) infections needs to immediately cease due to severe testing flaws. Testing is creating false cases and manufacturing an illusion of pandemic threat.

Government officials need to immediately answer for why they are employing testing they have publicly admitted is creating false data by design and continue to advocate for expansion of this testing, and wasting billions of dollars of tax payer dollars.

Additionally , the evidence of majority false positives resulting from high cycle PCR testing rates proves there is zero need for public mass vaccination Covid program.

Public health officials, government agencies, state health departments, and media organizations must immediately CEASE & DESIST in reporting Covid test results as evidence of a case of Covid-19 infection. It is unequivocally inaccurate, as these tests are not reliable indicators for infection with Sars CoV2


Liability Concerns for Health Professionals:

Mass Public Evidence of Severe Issues with Covid-19 Health Directives Used in Litigation, Imperils Health Care Professionals Ordered to Implement Unsound Health Protocols:

Multiple legal cases have been submitted (or pending submission) in the United States, and internationally due to the very serious flaws and methods with use of Covid-19 testing that is not suitable for the diagnosis of the virus it is designed to detect. In Portugal, the country's high courts ruled that PCR could not be used as evidence to quarantine travelers due to its unreliability for detecting the Sars CoV2:

Top International Attorney Reiner Fuellmich is currently in the process of filing lawsuits in Germany against Covid-19 policy fraud centered around the PCR testing, coordinating his efforts with lawyers all over the world who will be filing the same injunctions.

Atty Fuellmich is noted for his accomplishments in the Deutsche bank and Volkswagon lawsuits. Fuellmich has stated his filings will be made available free of charge for use in legal filings, so it is not unlikely that health official leadership charged with instituting these directives could get caught up in the fray, as lawsuits progress around the world:

Fuellmich asserts that after coordination with renowned experts, the Covid-19 protocols were not driven by top leadership as a health protocol but rather as a power mechanism:

'economists and lawyers of international renown, among others, conducted by the Berlin Commission of Inquiry:

“The hearings of hundreds of scientists, doctors, uiry into the Covid-19 affair since October 7, 2020, have now shown with a probability approaching 100% certainty that the Covid -19 scandal was never a health issue. ”

Rather, it was a matter of strengthening power"

Current lawsuit efforts to expose criminal corruption to could lead to what many are referring to as the Second Nuremberg trials.

Additionally, many smaller lawsuits are being filed individual states with the inclusion of this scientific evidence. Lawsuits are in planning stages or already filed in every state in the country. Vermont case against vaccine mandates filed at federal level utilizing petition sources last week,

Robert F Kennedy Jr is coordinating with lawsuit efforts as well, and recently submitted in a filing in NYC seeking a cessation of public school Covid-19 testing. In a stunning admission, the NYC courts admitted that the PCR test was not able to detect Sars Cov2, but stated it was their best tool:

Indeed, while the judge and NYC authorities acknowledge that PCR testing does not detect COVID infection, they nonetheless assert that it is the best tool they have.

These cases are becoming highly publicized, and leadership is imperiling health care professionals with directives that could result in liability against licensed care providers and severely undermine the credibility of the Health Science professions:

This information is already widely known by large percentage of the citizenry, and the rest of the public will soon become informed once these lawsuits advance to high profile public cases, and leadership is only a delaying an inevitable accounting by refusing to acknowledge what much of the public now understands.

Leadership must immediately address the content of the evidence of litigation and act to ensure health providers are not mandated to implement Covid-19 health directives that imperil health professionals legal, ethical, and licensing standards of practice.


Censorship & Political, Professional, Media Misinformation & Attack

Advancing Individual & Public Health Harms, Denigrating Health Professionals and Citizens

The failure of our public health & political leadership to independently review and inform the public of the extensive objective evidence documenting severe flaws and safety issues with emergency approved testing, vaccines, and isolation protocols is nothing short of egregious.

This is amplified by the behavior of health care professional leadership who lockstep capitulate and cede to unscientific government policy with a clear expectation for compliance, and little to no room for honest expression of concerns by 'underlings'.

There has been a very active effort by the media and public health officials to publicly label anyone who opposes Covid-19 vaccinations, testing, and other mandated protocols on evidence based merit with smear labels of 'conspiracy theory' & 'antivaxer' and to politicize what should be a scientific discussion by framing opposition to Covid policies in partisan and unscientific terms. Unfortunately, many in health care leadership, trained in educational programs that emphasize objective and independent review to ensure safe practice, parrot these narratives without any effort to investigate the actual concerns brought to their attention by subordinates.

Some health care professionals have left the profession rather than employ protocols they believe go against their ethics and professional standards and endanger individual and public health. Many health care professionals are demoralized by the coercion to comply with directives or else be professionally ostracized.

Politicians, public health officials and media have deliberately impeded an open and honest public health dialogue around the necessity and safety of a mass testing a vaccination program with emergency use mRNA vaccines through the use of censorship and intimidation tactics.

This has seriously impeded the public's understanding of Covid-19, as health professionals may be reluctant to speak about credible concerns with Covid-19 policies out of fear of ridicule or professional consequence.

The rhetoric now being used against those who advocate for science based public health policy is becoming incendiary with MSNBC Nicole Wallace Anchor woman stating in a interview on January 22, 2021 that those who have a belief that Covid restrictions are unnecessary have a ideology of domestic extremism and equated this evidence based perspective as to being a domestic terrorism threat. This type of dangerous rhetoric crosses the line and must immediately cease.

"There is until the end of April a persistent threat of domestic threat of domestic extremism....of domestic terrorism...carried out in the ideology that and around this belief that the election was fraudulent, that the Covid restrictions are unnecessary'

Additionally, the Washington Post featured a debunked Op-Ed from California State Senator, Richard Pan, reciting debunked content of the in LA Times to equate vaccine protest with extremism:

Opinion: Anti-vaccine extremism is akin to domestic terrorism

Story was debunked HERE. However, the core point is that equating American protest to a terrorist act is the type of rhetoric one expects to hear in a history review of 30s Germany, not featured content on the Washington Post.

The public must reject such dangerous and inflammatory rhetoric and refuse to allow any individual or media company to divide the American public through hyperbolic speech.

All citizens have deeply harmed by these policies, we resoundingly reject all effort to split our unity in healing through this crisis

Political and health officials who praise health care workers and minority population to push Covid -19 protocols and mass vaccination campaigns are proven insincere when they censor, attack, dismiss, or insult members from these same groups who oppose Covid 19 policy on the evidence.

We will not abide co-opting any group by political and health leaders for the purpose of generating support for legislative policies which harm the very groups politicians and political parties claim to support the most.

The politicians and media have refused to have a discussion on the merits, and when individuals will not cede to inaccurate narratives, public education programs are created to recite the same talking points broadcast 24/ for near a year without any acknowledgement of true and evidence based concerns. This belittles citizens.

Millions Spent on 'Vaccine Education"

Freedom to challenge inaccurate government data and policy is necessary to protect the health and well being of every American citizen (and all citizens around the globe).

Free speech is a public health issue

It is time for a immediate and full public accounting of facts. Leadership must addres valid concerns on current Covid-19 health protocols expressed by health care professionals and citizens alike without the ugly tactics of smear & deliberate misrepresentation of the message. Discredit the messenger campaigns and personal attack are not acceptable and it is alienating the majority of public who increasingly understand the severe issues with the current Covid-19 health protocol directives.


Sars CoV2 Covid-19 Emergency Approved Vaccines

Unnecessary & Unsafe: Post-Vaccine Injury and Deaths Go Uninvestigated and Unreported

The central point is mass vaccination for Sars CoV2 Covid 19 infection is entirely unnecessary.

A review of the severe errors and testing recommendation flaws documented above show the vast majority of Covid-19 cases were not actual infections, but rather, false positive tests results reported erroneously as Covid-19 infections due to incorrect CT setting rate and other testing errors.

Studies that adjusted for the Cycle Threshold error alone found 85 - 90% effective false positive test results. On this one error alone, the pandemic is shown to have been based on faulty test and reporting methods.

Antigen testing has been employed in low incident settings which will create majority false positive through improper application of the testing in these population groups.

Antibody tests are a general test, and equally unsuitable for Sars CoV2 diagnosis.

1. Pandemic does NOT Constitute Significant Public Health Emergency to warrant Emergency Appoval

The government has spent billions of dollars in contracts for mass vaccination programs with emergency approved vaccines utilizing experimental mRNA technology (Moderna & Pfizer) and adenovirus technology (Pfizer) This has been justified on a severe and unprecedented health threat.

However, the government's own PCR test data mirrors fatality rate as that of other seasonal viral infections (even before adjustment for majority false positive rates due do to test errors).

CDC Sars CoV2 Fatality Ratio Chart:

Infection Fatality Ratio: Survival rate

0-19 years: 0.00003 99.97

20-49 years: 0.0002 99.98

50-69 years: 0.005 99.5

70+ years: 0.054 94.5

The government's own CDC figures indicate that Sars CoV2 does not constitute a public health emergency that would warrant bypassing necessary safety protocols and emergency vaccine approval

Additionally, the CDC notes 3.8 other causes in deaths attributed to Sars CoV2:

"For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 3.8 additional conditions or causes per death". Misattribution of true cause of morbidity in Covid deaths has been an ongoing concern as states have adopted death attribution methods that rely on flawed testing or equate dying with a positive Covid-19 test to dying of Covid 19. Given the majority rate of false positives with use of PCR, this data is completely corrupted

Further, some states such as New York are attributing Covid 19 as cause of death without the pretense of lab confirmation at all, a unsuitable standard given that Covid 19 symptoms present the same as many other respiratory illnesses and diseases.

It is near certain that the above fatality rate would drop significantly if testing flaws and misattribution of morbidity to Covid 19 from other underlying causes was corrected. This should immediately be implemented by appropriate agencies.

Symptomatic presentation with a positive Covid-19 PCR test also is incredibly low with up to 86% of individuals tested not presenting symptomatically with a positive PCR test.

"University College London researchers studied data collected by U.K. statistics body, the Office for National Statistics, which has been regularly collecting coronavirus testing data from thousands of British households during the pandemic as part of its “infection survey.” The survey tests households whether they have symptoms or not.

The study, which was peer reviewed, looked at 36,061 individuals who took a coronavirus test as part of the infection survey between 26 April and 27 June 2020. It found that 86.1% of those who tested positive for the virus did not report “core” symptoms associated with the virus (a cough, fever or a loss of taste and/or smell) on the day they took a test. Out of the 115 people that received a positive coronavirus result, only 16 reported the main symptoms that we associate with the virus"

This study utilized data result collected with PCR tests to determine infection rates, and reported the same approximate rates of 'asymptomatic infection' as false positive rates from researchers correcting for Cycle Threshold error (85 to 90%). This shows that the asymptomatic rate is matching the false positive PCR testing rate, and demonstrates that testing error is the reason for asymptomatic presentation with a positive PCR test.

Vaccination will NOT correct for non-existent cases created through testing design flaws & recommendations.

Vaccination is not the appropriate solution with majority 'pandemic' cases based on false positive results from a testing recommendation Cycle Threshold rate error.

The logical and necessary solution is to stop employment of Covid19 mass testing programs that creates majority false positive result and to discontinue all use of tests that create compromised and non credible data sets:

Emergency approval needs to be immediately rescinded for all Covid-19 infections as their is not a significant public health threat to justify bypassing vital and necessary safety protocols, especially for henceforth never approved mRNA technology and Adrenovirus vaccines only approved prior for military use

Review of Vaccine Safety Issue & Public Misinformation Campaign by Pharmaceutical Companies:

The American public has been subject to an incessant campaign by the American media companies, government officials, and pharmaceutical companies to present the need for mass Covid-19 vaccination as a public health solution to Covid-19 infections This campaign has pushed erroneous and incorrect information, taken out of the context of true public health threat, without adequate or transparent disclosure to what these vaccinations actually offer in terms of Sars CoV2 protection.

2. Vaccine Trials Based on Flawed Testing & Trial Design

Trials utilized PCR testing that is not suitable for diagnosis of Sars CoV2, per Cormen Drostan Review Report (cited in section 1), thus utilizing a testing method unreliable and inaccurate for measurement of end point outcomes and diagnosis of virus vaccines are designed to treat.

Use of flawed testing invalidates the core credibility of trial research and all research trials and studies utilizing this testing have corrupted their end results due to severe flaws of the testing methods employed to measure for Sars CoV2 infection.

Emergency Stay was filed on November 25 by Dr. Sing Hang Lee due to this issue:

"Before an EUA or unrestricted license is issued the Pfizer vaccine, or for other vaccines for which PCR results are the primary evidence of infection, all “endpoints” or COVID-19 cases used to determine vaccine efficacy in the Phase 3 or 2/3 trials should have their infection status confirmed by Sanger sequencing, given the high cycle thresholds used in some trials. High cycle thresholds, or Ct values, in RT-qPCR test results have been widely acknowledged to lead to false positives.

2. All RT-qPCR-positive test results used to categorize patient as “COVID-19 cases” and used to qualify the trial’s endpoints should be verified by Sanger sequencing to confirm that the tested samples in fact contain a unique SARS-CoV-2 genomic RNA. Congruent with FDA requirements for a confirmed diagnosis of human papillomavirus (HPV) using PCR, the sequencing electropherogram must show a minimum of 100 contiguous bases matching the reference sequence with an Expected Value (E Value)"

Dr Lee now asserts that Pfizer has misled public on vaccine after FDA refused to account for documented PCR testing errors:

“The FDA has misled the public. The key misleading statements are analyzed below point-by-point according to the sequence of their presentation in the Letter but under the following four categories for the convenience of the readers:

“A. Cherry-picking to eviscerate the guidance for issuance of an EUA for a COVID-19 vaccine.

B. Knowingly promoting inaccurate PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2.

C. Finding excuses for using PCR tests with high false-positive rates for this vaccine trial.

3. NO IMMUNITY TO SARS COV2 OR Transmission Containment offered through Covid-19 vaccinations:

Covid-19 vaccination public campaign has leveraged vaccines as a ticket to 'return to normal' although none of the Moderna, Pfizer, or Johnson & Johnson trials produced substantive evidence that any of the three would provide any immunity or transmission containment of Sars Cov2 and can not be considered accurate in any case due to use of PCR to measure end point outcomes and diagnosis of Sars CoV2.

Dr Anthony Fauci publicly admitted in an article in BRG, dated that the early vaccines are being implemented for symptom suppression of Covid-19 symptoms:

"Dr. Anthony Fauci explained in an interview that the actual goal of the early COVID-19 vaccines isn’t even to block infections, a detail that people should be aware of even before considering whether to get a vaccine or which vaccine to go for.

Instead, scientists are aiming to prevent severe COVID-19 cases or stop symptoms altogether. The virus would still gain entry into the human body, but vaccines will stop it from replicating and prevent symptoms, including life-threatening complications"

“The primary thing you want to do is that if people get infected, prevent them from getting sick, and if you prevent them from getting sick, you will ultimately prevent them from getting seriously ill,” Fauci said during an interview at Yahoo Finance’s All Markets Summit on Monday.

“What I would settle for, and all of my colleagues would settle for, is the primary endpoint to prevent clinically recognizable disease.”

Blocking infection altogether is the secondary endpoint of these clinical trials".

What Fauci and others want to see is the prevention of symptoms that can lead to death"

Vaccines that do not stop transmission of a virus or produce immunity to disease are useless as a public health intervention as they offer no containment of spread of Sars CoV2.

All actions to require vaccinations as a prerequisite to restoring freedom of movement and access to society must immediately cease as the Covid-19 vaccines do not offer a solution to halting public transmission of a viral spread. The foundational premise of this argument for vaccinations as necessary for 'return to normal is fatally flawed on this one premise alone.

4. Vaccine Trials Did NOT Measure for Serious Outcomes:

Despite the claims of public health officials, politicians, and media sources stating that Covid-19 vaccinations will reduce serious outcomes for infections attributed to Sars CoV2, trials did not measure for these outcomes and assessed majority mild cases. All these claims lack substantiating evidence:

\Will Covid Vaccines Save Lives, Trials Won't Tell US:

BMJ 2020; 371 doi: (Published 21 October 2020)Cite this as: BMJ 2020;371:m4037

Peter Doshi reportsAs phase III trials of covid-19 vaccines reach their target enrolments, officials have been trying to project calm. The US coronavirus czar Anthony Fauci and the Food and Drug Administration leadership have offered public assurances that established procedures will be followed.1234 Only a “safe and effective” vaccine will be approved, they say, and nine vaccine manufacturers issued a rare joint statement pledging not to prematurely seek regulatory review.5

But what will it mean exactly when a vaccine is declared “effective”?

To the public this seems fairly obvious. “The primary goal of a covid-19 vaccine is to keep people from getting very sick and dying,” a National Public Radio broadcast said bluntly.6

Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, said, “Ideally, you want an antiviral vaccine to do two things . . . first, reduce the likelihood you will get severely ill and go to the hospital, and two, prevent infection and therefore interrupt disease transmission.”

Yet the current phase III trials are not actually set up to prove either table 1.

None of the trials currently under way are designed to detect a reduction in any serious outcome such as hospital admissions, use of intensive care, or deaths. Nor are the vaccines being studied to determine whether they can interrupt transmission of the virus"

5. 95% Covid-19 Vaccine Effectiveness for Moderna & Pfizer Misrepresented to Public:

The vaccines have been presented to the public on the premise Moderna & Pfizer vaccinations have up to a 95% effectiveness rating This framing may lead the public to erroneously believe they will be immune to Sars CoV2 (Covid 19) upon vaccination rather than at only decreased risk of symptomatic presentation of illness.

It should be noted again, studies show the majority of individual with a positive Sars Cov2 PCR test present with no symptoms of illness (due to incorrect CT setting rate recommendations as documented in section 2. above)

86 to 88% asymptomatic presentation rate is the current reported rate of Sars CoV2 PCR test, only 14% of individuals have symptoms at all. Vaccination that offer a 9% improvement over current symptom manifestation is not a compelling reason for FDA Emergency approval and bypassing necessary safety protocols for new technology.

Additionally, of the small percentage of individuals with a positive Sars CoV2 PCR test, 81% of those cases present as mild according to research studies:

81% of Covid-19 Cases are Mild

According to the above data, Out of a 100 people, it is estimated:

86 will have NO symptoms of Covid-19 attributed infection

12 will have MILD SYMPTOMS of Covid-19 attributed infection

Only TWO out of a hundred are at risk of moderate or severe Covid-19 attributed symptoms.

Risk Benefit Analysis of this data STRONGLY demonstrates that mass vaccination with Covid-19 vaccine do not have a compelling public health benefit to warrant the administration of Covid-19 vaccinations on a mass public scale, nor justification for bypassing FDA standard emergency approval process with potential significant health safety risks through untested mRNA & Adenovirus technology.

Lastly, the 95% effectiveness rate is based on flawed trial designs, utilized end point PCR testing tools unsuitable for detection for Sars CoV2, and utilized a very small sample group of 200 people:

British Medical Journal: Peter Doshi:

“So, the biggest misgiving in the trial is that the "95% effective" stat is taken from the natural infection rate (0.5 - 1% say) which is only 200 people or so possible in each arm. The vaccine makes you feel like you have flu for a while, maybe worse - so you lay low for a good time and don't do things you'd normally do. So that changes your exposure, and the infection rate is lower. You also take meds (such as fever meds that are also pain-relieving) to get over the symptoms of the vaccine - same as you do for a cold (clinical trial members were even told to take such drugs in the trial leaflet) but medications would ameliorate some Covid-19 symptoms (like fever, chills, fatigue, headache and muscle aching) - thus skewing the results in favor of the vaccine trialists, given the fact that the placebo trialists wouldn’t be taking such medications.” ______“The author reports an Absolute Risk Reduction for the vaccines (treatment versus placebo) of less than 1%. The Number Needed to Vaccinate (NNV) is, by definition, the inverse of the Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR).

“So, the NNV is greater than 100. (The inverse of 1/100 = 100). That is, more than 100 people would have to take the vaccine before one extra person would be benefited from getting the two inoculations

6. Covid 19 Vaccines Documented to Cause the Same Side Effects Vaccines are Purported to Suppress in FAR greater number of people:

Authorities admit the goal of the vaccinations is symptom suppression.

The above data documents very few people with a positive Sars CoV2 PCR test will present with any symptoms of a Covid 19 attributed infection, up to 88%. asymptomatic rate.

Inversely, up to 80% of individuals vaccinated with Moderna vaccinations had side effects severe enough to interfere with daily living:

Systemic Reactions: Moderna Vaccine Trial Recipient:

Systemic reactions were reported by the majority of vaccine recipients and at higher rates than placebo recipients. The frequency of systemic reactions was higher in the younger age group than the older age group (81.9% vs 71.9% after dose 2). Within each age group, the frequency and severity of systemic reactions was higher after dose 2 than dose 1. For both age groups, fatigue, headache and myalgia were the most common.

Side Effect Levels were similar in Pfizer vaccine trial recipients, with 77% of vaccination recipient group having at least one systemic reaction:

"Among all vaccine recipients asked to complete diaries of their symptoms during the 7 days after vaccination, 77.4% reported at least one systemic reaction (headache, vomiting, severe fatigue, chills, etc) The frequency of systemic adverse events was higher in the younger than the older age group (82.8% vs 70.6%). Within each age group, the frequency and severity of systemic adverse events was higher after dose 2 than dose 1."

Full chart from CDC here:

Johnson & Johnson also had a high rate of side effects:

55% of recipients reported at least one systemic side effect. Vaccine effectiveness is reported at 66% :

Vaccine side effects have been so severe with Covid-19 vaccination programs school districts are closing after administration to allow for staff recovery:

Two School Districts have shut down due to post vaccination side effects:

Additionally, there are warnings from health officials that moderate to severe side effects after second Covid-19 vaccine dose:

Warning: Second Dose Side Effects Can be Severe:

There is zero individual or public health benefit to implementing a mass Covid-19 vaccination program with vaccines that do not provide immunity to disease, stop transmission of a virus, and cause the very type of symptoms vaccines are purported to prevent.

And, it is to the point of asininity to assert that side effects that mirror the same symptoms the vaccines are administered to stop, in a FAR greater number of individuals than a PCR attribued Covid-19 infection, is a sign the vaccines are 'working' as promoted by public health official, politicians, and the medic

7. Emergency Approval Allowed mRNA & Adenovirus Technology to Bypass Safety Trials, Nuremberg Code Violation Concerns:

Moderna & Pfizer Sars CoV2 emergency approved vaccines (the currently approved products for vaccination for symptom reduction of Sars CoV2 in the United States) utilize entirely new, never before approved mRNA technology.

Johnson & Johnson utilize controversial adenovirus technology that has never been approved outside of military application for use in humans

mRNA technology:

mRNA technology has been mass introduced without either proper safety trials or the necessary, ethical & scientific debate through emergency approval of the Moderna & Pfizer vaccinations.

There is considerable concern around the use of mRNA technology. While public health officials have argued that it is not directly targeting DNA, so it does not constitute genetic engineering,however this is a disingenuous claim as studies have documented modified RNA has a direct impact on DNA:

Many experts argue mRNA technology is NOT a vaccine, and argue that Emergency Approval was a backdoor method to gain approval that it otherwise would have been denied, if it had to meet the usual FDA safety trials and protocols:

In an open letter to the citizens of Israel, Israel National News Issued this warning around mRNA technology:

This is Not A Vaccine:

"Our citizens must first and foremost define the discussion in order to accurately weigh their choices. What they are being asked to inject is not a vaccine as defined by the CDC as “A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease.” [5] Rather, it is an experimental and novel technology. By definition of the FDA [6] as a component used as treatment to affect a body’s function, it is in fact a medical device, a physical device that comes in a molecular sized package. Erroneously referring to this intervention as a vaccine exploits the public's ingrained trust of the vaccination program to solicit knee jerk response and action. It keeps us entrenched in needless debate in place of taking the necessary measures to investigate the impact on our health.

DNA is, in short, the basis for our genetic structure. Inside each cell are codes which transfer its information to make proteins through messenger RNA. Messenger RNA is an intermediary between gene and protein and the protein elicits the immune response, not the RNA. The contents of this shot being given on an experimental basis is a synthetic messenger RNA that is inserted into the human system to activate the cell to manufacture, in this case, a spike protein. [7] An mRNA vaccine is not a vaccine, because it does not elicit an immune response. What it is, is genetic engineering.

"A description of the way mRNA technology works was provide in the Jerusalem Post:

“It uses a sequence of genetic RNA material produced in a lab that, when injected into your body, must invade your cells and hijack your cells’ protein-making machinery called ribosomes to produce the viral components that subsequently train your immune system to fight the virus.”

Public health officials are denying that mRNA is a form of genetic engineering under the premise that the DNA if not directly targeted, however this is a obfuscation of the issue ans studies show modifiend RNA has a direct impact on DNA:


The significant safety concerns of the use of mRNA technology with the Pfizer & Moderna vaccines & severe PCR testing flasws resulted in Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, former investigator into the WHO 2009 Swine Flu vaccination scandal (here), & Dr Michael Yeadon, Former Vice President of Pfizer, filing an Emergency Stay Against all pending

vaccinations. Document expresses extreme concern with numerous potential & unstudied for health issues including possible antibody reactions from mRNA vaccinations that would interfere with placenta formation in women:

"Several vaccine candidates are expected to induce the formation of humoral antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. Syncytin-1 (see Gallaher, B., “Response to nCoV2019 Against Backdrop of Endogenous Retroviruses” - against-backdrop-of-endogenous-retroviruses/396), which is derived from human endogenous retroviruses (HERV) and is responsible for the development of a placenta in mammals and humans and is therefore an essential prerequisite for a successful pregnancy, is also found in homologous form in the spike proteins of SARS viruses. There is no indication whether antibodies against spike proteins of SARS viruses would also act like anti-Syncytin-1 antibodies. However, if this were to be the case this would then also prevent the formation of a placenta which would result in vaccinated women essentially becoming infertile. To my knowledge, Pfizer/BioNTech has yet to release any samples of written materials provided to patients, so it is unclear what, if any, information regarding (potential) fertility-specific risks caused by antibodies is included. According to section 10.4.2 of the Pfizer

Additionally, on March 11, 2021, a group of 12 prominent international scientists and physicians issued a letter demanding documentation accounting for seven severe safety issues with Covid-19 vaccinations be immediately provided or else a vaccination approval retraction must be issued.

"Should all such evidence not be available, we demand that approval for use of the gene-based vaccines be withdrawn until all the above issues have been properly addressed by the exercise of due diligence by the EMA".

They further issued a statement that the release of the vaccines constituted a Nuremberg Code violation:

There are serious concerns, including but not confined to those outlined above, that the approval of the COVID-19 vaccines by the EMA was premature and reckless, and that the administration of the vaccines constituted and still does constitute “human experimentation”, which was and still is in violation of the Nuremberg Code.

Johnson & Johnson: Adenovirus Technology, Ethical Concerns:

Johnson & Johnson is being touted as a 'safer, more well known' alternative to mRNA vaccination however, Adenovirus technology has never been approved for human use outside military application and it is currently only approved for a Rabies vaccination for wild animals.

"Adenovirus vaccines have a lengthy history of use in the U.S. military, but the FDA’s emergency green light for J&J’s COVID injection represents the first time the agency has authorized an adenovirus-vectored 30 years of study behind it — has a “checkered past,” including as a “failed gene therapy.”

Additionally, Johnson & Johnson Covid 19 vaccine has generated controversy due to it use of human embryonic tissue to create its cell culture line (from above linked CHD story):

"The cell line in which Janssen grows its adenovirus vector is a human embryonic cell line called PER.C6. The retinal tissue that launched the cell line was obtained following the elective abortion of a healthy, 18-week-old fetus".

.8. FDA Approval of Experimental mRNA & Adenovirus Technology without Appropriate Vaccine Injury Monitoring System:

FDA allowed launch of mass vaccination campaign with emergency approved mRNA vaccines without the appropriate mechanisms in place to monitor for safety of products.

CDC VAERS reporting system is only US screening method currently in place to monitor for vaccine injuries and side effects. Studies indicate that only 1% of vaccine related injuries are ever reported to the system:

Contrary to media reports that attempt to dismiss validity of vaccine injuries that are reported to VAERS data as insignificant due to voluntary and open reporting status, the vast majority of reports are from health care providers:

Per Military Health System:

The majority of VAERS reports are sent in by vaccine recipients, health care providers, and vaccine manufacturers'.

Go to VAERS information on this page:

Over eighty percent of these reports are generated from these sources. The media needs to immediately stop dismissing credible evidence and discrediting individual reports of family and friends who utilize these report for accountability and public awareness.

However, it is clear that the United States VAERS reporting system is failing to capture a large percentage of post vaccine adverse reactions and death:

The UK mandatory Assets Reporting Center has received over 243,600 reports of adverse health events (as of 3/6/21) while VAERS has only captured 25,072 adverse reactions on Moderna & Pfizer vaccines combined as of 3/5/2020 with 1136 deaths. These numbers strongly indicate that events are not being appropriate captured and reported in the United States.

Assets Data is reporting over 2,030 blood disorders, 1032 cardiac events, 16,037 nervous system disorders as of 3/06/2021

Vaers has also been observed to be suppressing data. VAERS adverse reaction numbers & death reports are significantly lower than the CDC (who has also been observed lowering numbers of reported cases after official release of new data reports. VAERS is also denying ability to review non-zero number data reports indicating potential for much higher death and injury numbers being censored by website design:

1066 Covid Vaccine post vaccination deaths reported as 2/7/2020 on Official CDC website, the CDC website has not updated number as of 2/27/20: (update, number went DOWN)

VAERS reported 1,106 deaths as of 2/27/2021with 101.47% of 1090 events. These statistics do not make sense. Web capture and real time report of VAERS data documented by this journalist on 2/26/2021:

Of the 1,106 post vaccination deaths have now been officially reported by the official CDC VAERS website. One third of these deaths occurred within the first 48 hr post vaccination:

Over 172 of these deaths occurred same day, some within minutes.

In 1976, the Swine Flu vaccination program was halted in nine states after three post vaccination death occurred and the entire program ended soon thereafter.

As of this writing 1,100 deaths have been documented post vaccine and no action has been taken to halt vaccination and conduct necessary safety review

Only 1% of events associated deaths are likely to be captured, so death rate of 1,106 is NOT an insignificant statistic.

Public health officials and media organizations have been extremely dismissive of deaths occurring post vaccination and reciting authority statements dismissing post vaccine deaths as unrelated to vaccines despite no proper post-mortem investigation and autopsy:

As in the case of this New York Post article:

California who died in the observation of the vaccine clinic immediately post vaccine, with this headline

"Woman Gets Covid Vaccine then Suddenly Dies of Something Else'

"Officials say there were no signs or symptoms the woman had a severe allergic to the vaccine. Her cause of death is still being determined'

Not all vaccine deaths will be attributed to allergic reaction, many adverse reactions listed in by the FDA could result in a lethal outcome, including heart attack and stroke.


Especially egregious is the public health official response to Drene Keyes, and immediate denial of her post vaccination Pfizer death in which she was documented in VAERS notes to have have what looks to have been a classic anaphylactic reaction almost immediately post vaccine:

A 58 year old African American woman experienced a known anaphylactic symptom of the vaccine and went into rapid pulmonary edema within 1/2 hour of vaccine administration and died same day. ER physician confirmed anaphylactic response. Health officials refused to conduct autopsy orpublicly release cause of death, a deliberate action to avoid recording a death strongly correlating to vaccine reaction as official cause.

This story is evolving and it appears there was an official effort to coordinate the official story around Ms Keyes death with high level officials involved in issuing official news release statements:

Another example of a man who collapsed post vaccination outside of the clinic:

"A man collapsed and later died after leaving the Javits Center vaccination site in New York City, but health officials say it is not believed to be due to an allergic reaction. The New York State Health Commissioner confirmed it happened about 25 minutes after the individual was vaccinated and following the required 15-minute observation period".

Another example:

Woman dies within one day post vaccination with stroke, a FDA listed potential side effect of the Covid vaccination and the media states the vaccine masked the symptom it may very well have caused:


There are over a twelve hundred of these cases, and most are never reported in the media. All but the most high profile and public post vaccination deaths are simply ignored, even those occurring on the same day as vaccine administration.

9. Mass Reports of Post Vaccination Deaths Occurring in Nursing Homes Around the World, US Fails to Investigate as Other Countries Take Action

Right now, there are reports coming in from countries around the globe of significant death clusters among the elderly occurring in care homes post vaccination.

Public health officials are attributing this sudden spike in deaths to Covid 19 outbreaks based on severely flawed testing methods listed above with no autopsies.

This strategy has allowed governments and pharmaceutical companies to bypass true post mortem analysis required for correlating true cause of death. Media 'fact checkers' then assert lack of evidenceas proof vaccines were not a factor in cause of death. No evidence thus becomes

THE evidence vaccines are safe. This is not the 'commitment to vaccine safety' we were promised by governments and health officials.

In countries that are completing the necessary health surveillance of post vaccination deaths and conducting autopsies, the deaths have been directly correlated to the vaccines.

'The Norwegian Medicines Agency announced in a press release that as of Thursday, the Norwegian health registry has received reports of 23 people who died shortly after receiving their first dose of the vaccine.

Autopsies Revealed Vaccines Contributed to Deaths:

Of those deaths, 13 have been autopsied and revealed that the common side effects associated with the vaccine may have contributed to more severe reactions among frail, elderly people'

“But we will maybe not give them to the most vulnerable of the elderly, because that might speed up a process where they were what we would say at the end of life phase anyway,” so, “that probably is not what we will continue to do.”

At the time of these elderly deaths, Pfizer/Biotech vaccine was the sole vaccination available in Norway.

This vaccine is the EXACT vaccination used in the United State.

Elderly Care Homes in United States, Other Nations Following Same Post Vaccination Death Pattern as Seen in Norway, Whistle Blowers Speak Out:

The same pattern of elderly care homes deaths is now being reported all over the world.

Spain: Health officials in Spain reportedly halted administration of second Pfizer vaccine after forty-six nursing home residents

Health officials in Spain reportedly halted administration of second Pfizer vaccine after forty-six nursing home residents who had received their first dose of Pfizer-BioNTech’s fast-tracked vaccination against COVID-19 at the beginning of January had died by the end of the month, Spanish media have reported.

A German Whistle Blower contacted Reiner Fuellmich to expose elder coercion, abuse, and post vaccination deaths in Germany. Attorney Fuellmich is one of the top international lawyers in the world currently collaborating with lawyers in many countries to expose pandemic fraud issues.

..within four weeks after the first vaccination with the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine, eight of 31 seniors, who suffered from dementia but were in good physical condition according to their age before the vaccination, died. The first death occurred after only six days, and five other seniors died approximately 14 days after vaccination.

In the UK, reports elderly care home deaths have increased by 46% since the Covid vaccination administration began. Media attributes these deaths to Covid with no credible substantiating evidence or autopsy.


Meallmore Lodgecare home reports outbreak of 35 residents and staff following Covid-19 vaccination in early January time as the firstvaccine dose was administered to residents and staff

United States:

New York State: a care home reports 32 deaths, which started after implementation of Covid vaccine administration at the site.

The above is, by far, a full accounting of the post Covid-19 vaccination death clusters being reported in the United States and other nations being attributed to Covid 19 infections on the basis of testing peer review deemed 'useless' for diagnosis of Covid 19/SarsCoV2.

Proper post mortem review should occur going forward post vaccination deaths

Additionally, despite government and media denials of vaccine correlation to post vaccination deaths, the WHO subcommittee for monitoring vaccine safety was sufficiently concerned to hold an emergency meeting. Though they concluded against the evidence that Covid-19 vaccinations should continue, they stated they will continue to monitor reports of post vaccine injury and use this information to inform their process.

" The GACVS subcommittee will continue to monitor the safety data from these vaccines and update any advice as necessary"

Flawed vaccine trials severely under represented frail elderly in trials and the use of these individuals to ascertain safety of emergency approved vaccinations is not only unethical, it could violate the standards of the Nurember Code as this is monitoring effects of entirely new mRNA technology, not just a vaccines.

Additionally, true voluntary consent can't be given without full and accurate disclosure of information presented in honest and understandable context to individuals receiving these vaccinations:

Mass mobilization of high ranking and prominent health professionals is occurring to address the very serious and publicly documented Covid-19 vaccinations safety concerns, outlined in this section, with legal action pending in the U.S. and globally due to the gravity of the issue.

Vaccinations should be halted and an independent safety review conducted by third party investigators

SECTION 7: Mass Individual & Public Health Harms:

Result of Covid-19 Directives, Health Policies Based on Severely Flawed Science and Data

First, as documented in section 2, there is absolutely NO substantive evidence that Sars Cov2 is transmitted through 'asympomatic transmission' and overwhelming evidence that the symptomless presentation of individuals with positive PCR tests is due to the testing protocols and methods, itself.

Therefore, all social distancing and masking protocols should immediately cease.

Mass individual and public health harms have been documented to have results from the policies & directives documented above. This section is not an exhaustive resource into this subject, however the following warrants documentation:

A brief review of the history of the lockdown is necessary for it is necessary for the public to have the actual context for how lockdown protocols were justified.

We will not refer this period to 'quarantine' as quarantine protocol is instituted for isolation of the sick to protect healthy population. It is limited in scope, and it has a very set standard of practice and a very short window to be effective as a disease containment strategy to avoid a larger outbreak.

This current lockdown has not been a quarantine but the largest mass order of government restriction of freedom of movement in human history.

Quarantines have long been rejected by civil rights, medical, and humanitarian groups due to severe potential for misuse by authorities and the simple fact, it is not an effective widespread measure, working best in very time limited and specific circumstance with individual or very small population sizes

The CDC changed its quarantine regulations in 2016 against advisement of health and civil rights experts after the panicked and unscientific quarantine exposed how the protocol can be abused:

The Ebola Quarantine:

"When the government imposes movement restrictions in a manner that respects scientific evidence and upholds constitutional rights, these measures can in theory be effective at curbing the spread of disease. Yet when the government institutes these measures without regard for scientific evidence and individual rights, public health suffers. The Ebola quarantines imposed in 2014 demonstrate the risk. Although decades of study revealed that Ebola cannot be transmitted unless an individual is symptomatic, fear and the political pressures of an election season led states to quarantine asymptomatic individuals for weeks without justification.

As detailed in a report co-authored by the ACLU and the Yale Global Health Justice Partnership, these quarantines caused international medical organizations to experience as much as a 25 percent drop in recruitment of American health care workers. Volunteers worried that they would lose their jobs if they had to spend an additional three weeks in quarantine upon their return to the United States, and many were unwilling to be kept away from their children and loved ones for such an extended—and unnecessary—period

In addition to the systemic harms of reactionary public health policies, we have seen firsthand the very personal harms of quarantines driven by public fear rather than scientific evidence. As students at Yale Law School, we provide legal representation to eight individuals who were quarantined in Connecticut in 2014: two public health workers and a family of Liberian immigrants. Though none had been exposed to Ebola or posed any threat to public health, the state confined these individuals to their homes for weeks. The state failed to provide these individuals with food or other basic necessities and failed to inform some that they had the legal right to challenge their quarantine orders in court. To this day, Liberian Americans in Connecticut experience shame and stigma as a result of wrongly being labeled a threat to public health"

Fear has not just been a reaction, but a driving directive.

Public health officials, politicians, and media officials utilized a 24/7 fear narrative to drive compliance with government mandates, and utilized bad modeling from Neil Feurgosen to proclaim 2,000,000 American would die if the country did not submit to immediate lockdown protocol. Feurgosen has a long and highly publicized record of being drastically wrong on past pandemic predictions, including the 2009 Swine Flu virus which resulted in a rushed vaccination program that injured several hundred children before it was withdrawn:

In 2009, a government estimate, based on Ferguson’s advice, said a “reasonable worst-case scenario” was that the swine flu would lead to 65,000 British deaths. In the end, swine flu killed 457 people in the U.K.

Lockdown policy has been based on bad models, bad test results driven by the mass contamination that resulted in inaccurate test results by early CDC tests (see section 30) and the current use of highly inaccurate Covid-19 testing models. Without asymptomatic transmission and no real wide spread Sars Cov2 infections in the populace, lockdowns did nothing to protect public health, and studies show areas that did not lock fared better than those that did. This is potentially explained by the higher rate of testing with unreliable testing methods that artificially elevated death and infection rates in these areas (see section 1,2, 3 above):

Lockdowns Don't Work

It is now thoroughly documented that there is no reduction of Sars CoV2, Covid-19 covid positive test results through lockdown, masking, and social distancing protocols. There is NO documented benefit however there is extensive evidence of calamitous health harms to individual and public health.

Great Barrington Declaration:

This is not the only petition that has solicited health care experts to act to immediately cease lockdowns (although this petition calls for much broader and immediate action).

The Great Barrington Declaration has over 41,500 medical practioners and 13,800 health scientist along with over 755,000 concerned citizens demanding an immediate end to 'devastating health harms' as a direct result of lockdown policy.

"Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice".

Lockdown policies in Africa seriously threaten public health & threaten poverty and hunger

10,000 Children Estimated Die Monthly Due to Unnecessary Restrictions Around Covid-19:

All around the world, the coronavirus and its restrictions are pushing already hungry communities over the edge, cutting off meager farms from markets and isolating villages from food and medical aid. Virus-linked hunger is leading to the deaths of 10,000 more children a month over the first year of the pandemic, according to an urgent call to action from the United Nations shared with The Associated Press ahead of its publication in the Lancet medical journal.

Restrictions Create Devastating Toll on Mental Health:

In Japan more people died from suicide in one month than entire number of people who had Covid-19 attributed deaths:

Suicide, domestic abuse, & overdoses increasing at alarming rate in US;

And, the lockdowns have killed millions of people:

this is a subject that has been extensively covered in many other publications, and this list by no means is an exhaustive source of the many public and individual economic, psychological, social, and physical harms created by lockdown policy, the list is meant to briefly highlight core concerns

Masks: Scientifically Unsupported Policy with Potential to Cause Health Harm:

A brief word on masks.

Masks use is predicated on asymptomatic transmission, an unsubstantiatedtheory that has been debunked by major peer review study. They are completely unnecessary.

Masking has been justified on highly flawed research studies that use PCR testing to measure for endpoint outcome and diagnosis which render this research non-credible and invalid for informing public health opinion.

In addition, most studies utilized to mandate masks are non-peer reviewed with very low population size and no control groups.

It has been very troubling to watch public health officials repeatedly push research (in all areas of Covid-19 science) that does not meet the minimum standard for informing public health policy over established and credible research that meets the meets or exceeds this standard. In every area, health officials have been able to create a false 'debate' by treating all research as suitable for inclusion of public health policy debate and this needs to immediately end.

No credible study exists to prove any benefit for the prevention of disease transmission in a community setting through the use of masking. The long standing and credible science on this issue that acted to guide early masking policy in the United States did not change last spring.

Former US Surgeon General Jerome Adams was correct when he stated last year:

"What the World Health Organization and the CDC have reaffirmed in the last few days is that they do not recommend the general public wear masks," Adams told Fox News' "Fox and Friends."

"There was a study in 2015 looking at medical students. And medical students wearing surgical masks touch their faces on average 23 times. We know a major way that you can get respiratory diseases like coronavirus is by touching a surface and then touching your face."

There are potential evidence based proven health risks to the use of masks which the public health officials and media refuse to examine or report:

German Neurologist Margareta Griesz Warns of Serious Neurological Health Disorders with mask use

English Translation Video:

Dr Margerata-Griesz website:

There are many more credible peer review studies that provide evidence of potential health harms of masking.


Due to the above evidence, we demand an immediate cessation of all mass testing and vaccination programs related to Covid 19.

Public health officials are jeopardizing every health professional by mandating they institute directives that may cause significant individual and public health harm.

Government agencies have no legal right to order health officials implement policy that goes against ethical and legal standards for safe and evidence based practice.

We further request a full independent review from entities outside the agencies and government organizations who have directed this policy into the issues raised in this petition. Immediate public accountability is necessary to restore trust in public health and government institutions.

Around the globe, 100,00s of thousands of scientists, doctors, researchers, nurses, and medical professionals from every field have publicly spoken out about the mass harms Covid-19 policies are creating only to be ignored, censored or attacked.

This is NOT a fringe issue, it is a MAJORITY issue.

Hundreds of millions of citizens around the globe have raised their voices in increasing alarm only to be dismissed with partisan narratives and censorship instead of honest review of evidence and facts.

We will not tolerate this any longer.

Follow the Science is not a political slogan. Credible science requires a strict moral as well as scientific ethic to serve truth and the public good. This criteria that has been abandoned by the governments and public health organizations mandating these policies.

All efforts to suppress, censor, and attack medical professionals and citizens who are attempting to provide information on the merits of evidence must immediately cease. Data is archived by many sources. Any attempt to misrepresent any individual signing petition or facts stated in this petition will be noted for legal review:

Respectfully Submitted for Your Review,

The Undersigned: (scroll down for download link)

(Petition Signature Update and Tally Page Posted SOON - MANY are signing on fast)!

DOWNLOAD Petition Text:

Download DOCX • 86KB

Petition Signature Collection Sheet: Name, Address, Health Profession (if appliable) email (forward copy of petition of website to access links):

Petition-Template-1 (1)
Download ZIP • 38KB

9,180 views11 comments


Google is presently paying $10447 to $13025 every month for working on the web from home. I have joined this activity 2 months back and I have earned $15248 in my first month from this activity. I can say my life is improved totally!

Look at it what I do---------->>


Do you wanna earn money without investing money? That’s how I started this job and Now I am making $200 to $300per hour for doing online work from home.

Apply Now here……….


I get paid more than $120 to $130 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this i have earned easily $15k from this without having online working skills.

This is what I do.........


After leaving my previous job 11 months ago, I’ve had some good luck to learn about this website which was a life-saver for me… They offer jobs for which people can work online from their house. My latest paycheck after working for them for 4 months was for $71600… Amazing thing about is that the only thing required is simple typing skills and access to internet.

Go to this site...........


I am making a good salary online from home.I’ve made 97,999 dollar’s so for last 5 months working online and I’m a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

For more detail Visit........

bottom of page