mRNA Vaccinations: Covid-19 was only the Overture

mRNA Vaccinations: Covid-19 was only the Overture

Messages about excess mortality keep popping up on social networks. In the comments on this, hope often resonates that we have in our hands proof of the harmful effects of mRNA vaccinations against Covid-19. This is understandable, because many critical observers note: people in their environment die "unexpectedly", often at a younger age. People around them develop persistent inflammatory diseases, cancer that was thought to have been cured suddenly flares up again, autoimmune diseases are on the rise. Since many of these patients have received mRNA vaccinations, it seems reasonable to conclude that there is a causal connection here. One hopes for proof, even if the dead do not come back to life and the sick do not recover. One hopes for proof to be able to convict the "perpetrators", the pharmaceutical industry, the licensing authorities in the EU and in the member states, the medical profession, which has collaborated or looked the other way.

This article deals with a very delicate and highly sensitive topic. It is based on the thesis that we must not stare at the death and illness statistics in order to combat the highly problematic and, in my view, unethical goings-on of the pharmaceutical industry in connection with the development of mRNA vaccines. The statistics direct our gaze back to what has already happened. While we are looking for evidence in the numbers, the technostructure is already striking the next blow.  Covid-19 was just the overture.

Part 1: Why we can read almost nothing from the death statistics
During the Covid-19 crisis, we were taught to stare incessantly at numbers. There is no country in Europe that has not introduced a "Dashboard Covid".[1] Along with this comes the ever-promoted causal link that Covid-19 leads to death: People have died and are dying during Covid-19 illness or from its late effects.[2]

Anyone who has dealt medically and legally with the question of provability of vaccination damage in connection with Covid-19 knows about the problem of airtight proof. Especially when there is no direct chronological proximity between vaccination and death or the diagnosis of a disease.

In many European countries, a post-mortem examination is rarely ordered - especially if there is no suspicion of external causes. Autopsies are most likely to be performed in hospitals for reasons of medical science. However, according to valid estimates by the Professional Association of Physicians, a post-mortem examination is ordered by the courts in only about 2% of all deaths in Germany, and a clinical post-mortem examination in only 1 to 3% (as of 2017).[3] The European Society of Pathology also identified a general trend towards fewer autopsies, and in many cases there is even a lack of valid data.[4] The situation does not seem to be any better in France, where the "unofficial estimates" are between 1.5 and 4%. [5]

In the death statistics, the data on the causes of death are therefore also highly inaccurate. It is also difficult to obtain up-to-date and valid data here. The most recent publications of the OECD [6] or the WHO [7], for example, end in 2019.

Mortality statistics were only rediscovered with the Covid-19 pandemic and misused primarily for the purposes of medical and political propaganda. One example is the portal EuroMOMO [8], a European mortality monitoring measure. It aims to detect and measure excess deaths related to seasonal flu, pandemics and other public health threats. It says: "The weekly results from EuroMOMO (were) used by international health agencies such as the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) and the World Health Organisation (WHO) for their rapid risk assessments and other updates and guidance to countries during the pandemic." [9]

The medical community (The Lancet here) also suddenly came out in favour of national autopsy registries during the Covid-19 crisis: "A national autopsy registry can provide multicentre quantitative information on COVID-19 deaths at the national level, supporting medical research, policy-making and public debate." [10]

So we know that only in very rare cases is a post-mortem performed to find out the actual cause of death. We know that in most European countries, assignment to causes of death (such as cardiovascular disease, cancer, etc.) is usually done by hospitals and doctors on a discretionary (or last treated) basis. We know that we would need many more autopsies to investigate what people really die of in the end. We know that we have many co-factors to consider, from microplastics in the blood [11] to the long-term health effects of the Chernobyl nuclear accident. [12]
So if we look to mortality statistics for evidence that mRNA vaccination is dangerous, we are barking up the wrong tree.

Part 2: Why we need to keep an eye on mRNA technology
As I said, Covid-19 was just the overture. We need to keep our eyes on the present. There are growing signs that more and more vaccines will be produced and administered using mRNA technology in the future.

Just recently, the MIT Technology Review cheered that Moderna, for example, is developing mRNA vaccines for RSV (respiratory syncytial virus), HIV, Zika, Epstein-Barr virus and other types of virus. BioNTech is researching vaccines for tuberculosis, malaria, HIV, shingles and influenza. Both companies are working on treatments for cancer.

Why this is all happening so fast now is explained simply in this MIT Technology Review article: these vaccines are cheap, fast and easy to make. The aforementioned pharmaceutical companies are convinced that, in theory, you can create mRNA for pretty much any protein - and thus potentially fight any infectious disease. At the top of the agenda is a universal vaccine that would protect against multiple strains of influenza and at the same time be effective against the coronavirus. The researchers of this universal mRNA flu vaccine from the University of Pennsylvania are confident that more mRNA vaccines will be coming to clinics in the near future. They are planning ahead for the next global disease outbreak, which could well be a flu virus. [13]

Press releases on BioNTech's website [14] in recent weeks confirm this trend: combined mRNA vaccine candidates against influenza and COVID-19, the BNT165 malaria vaccine programme, a BNT163 prophylactic vaccine candidate against herpes simplex virus-2, among others, are currently being tested. Intensive research is being conducted on next-generation COVID-19 vaccines with vaccine candidates for an expanded range of T-cell responses and duration of protection. The pharmaceutical company has recently entered into several strategic partnerships worldwide to establish mRNA research centres and manufacturing facilities (including Australia, Africa and Singapore). In January, BioNTech acquired 100% of the shares of InstaDeep [15], a leading global technology company in artificial intelligence and machine learning: "The transaction includes an upfront payment of approximately £362 million in cash and BioNTech shares to acquire 100% of the remaining shares in InstaDeep, excluding the company shares already held by BioNTech." [16]

On February 2nd, 2023, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz visited the company's first in-house plasmid DNA production facility in Marburg. Plasmid DNA is a key starting material for the production of mRNA-based vaccines and therapies: "This strengthens BioNTech's in-house manufacturing capacities for mRNA-based products." [17]

Part 3: What potential dangers are still looming?
The tricky thing about mRNA technology is that we know far too little about the potential dangers and long-term health consequences. For the medical layman, it is easy to understand why, for example, the criminal complaint against Swissmedic [18] states: "The mRNA vaccine not only contains dangerous components, it also produces them itself, including the spike protein. This is distributed in all organs and blood vessels of the body and can lead to blood clots and subsequently to thromboses, embolisms and strokes. The human clinical trials were started before the potential risks of mRNA vaccination (e.g. for increased incidence of cancer or DNA damage) had been soundly investigated and dispelled in animal studies."

A comprehensive evidence report was prepared on this criminal complaint, which can also be accessed on the French version of the website [19]: Here it is pointed out, among other things, that
  • it cannot be ruled out that the mRNA administered by means of "vaccination" is integrated into the human genome in a roundabout way;
  • no valid data are available on how long and where the applied mRNA, the lipid nanoparticles and their components and the spike proteins produced circulate in the body after the "vaccination" and what the consequences of this are;
  • in the future, not only replicating but even "self-replicating mRNA" may be used; this has the ability to replicate itself in the human body.
The last point in particular fills the authors of the evidence report with concern: if data on pharmacokinetics were to be waived for these "vaccines" as well, this would be extremely worrying. Predictions on the amount and duration of mRNA production in the human body in the case of self-replicating mRNA are hardly possible.

However, these concerns do not seem to be shared by the European and national regulatory authorities. The EMA recommended standard approval for the Comirnaty and Spikevax Covid-19 vaccines in September 2022 [20], there is only additional monitoring. On the official website of the EMA, for example for Comirnaty, it is stated that the vaccine can be used during pregnancy and breastfeeding. According to the EMA, the side effects mentioned were essentially reduced to mild to moderate manifestations such as pain and swelling at the injection site, fatigue, headache, muscle and joint pain, chills, fever and diarrhoea, which "usually improve within a few days after vaccination". [21]

Another problem arises from the accelerated approval. [22] This shortens the time frame in which the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) examines an application for marketing authorisation. Applications may be eligible for an accelerated assessment if the Committee decides that the product is of high interest for public health and therapeutic innovation. There is also conditional marketing authorisation and marketing authorisation in exceptional circumstances.

Backward step with incalculable consequences
So let us summarise: Pharmaceutical companies made billions in profits with generous government support during the Covid 19 crisis. They are now pushing ahead with research and development of mRNA technology for vaccines of all kinds. EU and national authorities are supporting this through accelerated and conditional approval procedures, citing great public health interest or the threat of a pandemic emergency.

The medical consequences of these mRNA vaccinations are still largely unexplored. Given the minimal autopsy rates in Europe, there is no improvement in sight here either.

mRNA vaccines can be produced quickly and cheaply. Against the backdrop of severely battered health systems in many European countries, the pharmaceutical companies - with or without a pandemic - will sell their products as a panacea.

Politically, we are dealing with a worldwide scandal of the highest order. The legal and medical requirements for the development, testing and licensing of drugs and vaccines have been made very strict in Europe for good reason. In this context, we need only recall the dengue fever vaccination scandal and Sanofi Pasteur. With Covid-19 and the global "health emergency", these strict requirements were considerably relaxed. Pandora's box has been opened.

This is a more than dangerous development that we must keep an eye on and fight against: by insisting that our sick be thoroughly examined; by insisting that our dead be autopsied; and by deciding for ourselves whether or not to take the risk of mRNA vaccination.

This analysis was first published in: Le Courrier des Stratèges on February 3rd, 2023













[12] The winds prevailing at the start of the release on 26 April 1986 transported the radionuclides that had escaped from the reactor in a first radioactive cloud over Poland to Scandinavia. A second radioactive cloud moved over Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Austria to Germany. The third cloud finally reached Romania, Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey. (;jse...)