Australian Docs Peer-Reviewed Study: Gene-Based COVID Jabs Cause Excess Mortality, Must Be Stopped
Updated
The relentless and sinister agenda-driven efforts by those still boldly promoting the dangerous COVID-19 “vaccines” as safe and saving millions of lives—with no data to support their claim—are essentially a crime. In reality, the devastating truth of the reckless jabs is getting harder to ignore—the gene-damaging, toxic shots do more harm than good. Recently, this fact was emphasized in a bombshell peer-reviewed study just published in Pathology Research and Practice.
Following their investigation, the study authors, two Australian physicians, Dr. Peter Rhodes and Dr. Peter Parry, immediately confirm the lack of efficacy against infection and transmission displayed by the toxic jabs as well as the equivalent benefits of natural immunity over the unethical mandatory and forced nature of the gene-based shots. They note that innate immunity is a form of individual freedom and is also the context in which all vaccine development should occur. Especially gene-damaging experimental vaccines. For those still blind to the deception, let’s not forget that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has denied and swept under the rug the fact the jabs are gene therapy.
The doctors reveal in the study that the haste and scale of development, production, and coerced distribution of the improperly tested COVID-19 shots is unprecedented and is a clear violation of human rights. Their study points out what we and others have shouted for years: “Key phase III clinical trials for these products are yet to be fully completed, despite administration to billions of people.” Indeed, as seen in the United States and around the globe, mass vaccination absolutely correlates with excess mortality. The study courageously states:
“Mass vaccination of workforces has been mandated, and vaccine mandates correlate with excess mortality. Many independent data sets concur – we have experienced a pandemic of viral illness, followed by a pandemic of vaccine injury.
For Australia, matters have operated the other way around. Vaccination followed later by the main viral wave. Australian excess mortality data correlates with this. Neither risk nor cost can justify these products for the vast majority of people. Lack of efficacy against infection and transmission, and the equivalent benefits of natural immunity, obviate mandatory therapeutics.”
With mRNA for everything on the horizon thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic (which blows wide open the door to literally merging humans and technology), Parry and Rhodes join many other esteemed health warriors in calling for a halt to the COVID jabs along with a much-needed pause to reassess the “new era of pathology that lies ahead.” Dr. Peter McCullough remarked that Rhodes and Parry’s paper, titled “Gene-based COVID-19 vaccines: Australian perspectives in a corporate and global context,” is crucial because issues in medicine consistently need balance and discussion. Mentioning the corruption resulting from Big Pharma’s profit-driven ties to the reliability of today’s scientific research, McCullough explained:
“A paper drawing the opposite conclusion of so many others is worth review, discussion, and consideration in academic medical centers all over the world. Probably years after the vaccine debacle, historians will search for such papers and public comment where physicians and scientists were making calls of concern for public safety in a time when the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex was running the table in academic medicine.”
Indeed, the paper points out that “conflicted and circular relationships are rife within the corporate world,” with Big Pharma, mainstream media, charities, and scholarly institutions working together to manipulate public opinion. And, of course, many tax-payer-funded agencies of the U.S. government also go to great lengths to ensure the false narrative. The Pfizer pharmacovigilance report released by FOIA in 2022, thanks to the hard work of Del Bigtree’s ICAN and its lead attorney, Aaron Siri, reveals the deep level of debauchery between the pharmaceutical industry—in this case, Pfizer—and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Referencing that incredible, eye-opening document release, the paper states:
“The U.S. Food & Drugs Administration (FDA) had pleaded in Court that such information be withheld for up to 75 years. In less than three months, the summary table noted 42,086 people had reported adverse events, many had not resolved and 1223 were recorded as fatal.”
With total fines levied against the pharmaceutical industry since 2000 well into the trillions, Rhodes and Parry affirm that the medical profession practices under an “illusion of evidence-based medicine.” They join the ranks of other public health officials like former chief editor of The New England Journal of Medicine Marcia Angell, Richard Horton of The Lancet, and former BMJ chief editor Richard Smith, who describes medical journals as “an extension of the marketing arm of pharmaceutical companies.” In January 2022, BMJ’s Peter Doshi wrote an editorial calling for a full release of anonymized clinical trial data—inaccessible to doctors, researchers, and the public during the COVID-19 pandemic—resulting in a loss of trust in the system. Parry and Rhodes surmise that, without a doubt, that trust is lost, writing:
“Distorted data is regularly published in medical journals. A meta-analysis found across a range of specialties that a 4-fold odds ratio exists for a sponsored drug trial to find in favor of the drug versus an independent trial for the same agent. The global pandemic response in wealthy Western countries has relied on clinical trials published by wealthy sponsors.”
For example, the study highlights the millions Pfizer gave in the first six months of 2021 to more than 500 medical associations, universities, and community organizations to lobby for COVID-19 vaccine mandates. Again, as with the deep state scheme to destroy small farmers and ranchers, their acceptance of Big Pharma’s millions to push untested vaccines is a perfect example of money over-ruling obvious deception. Sadly, as the world watches its youth experience unheard-of cases of myocarditis, the ease of acceptance of the suppression of adverse events data and global excess mortality data resulting from “these gene-based therapeutics” is perhaps indicative of corporate “willful blindness,” the authors remarked.
Concerned about the future and advancing mRNA technologies, Parry and Rhodes disapprove of the unnecessary layers of tragic complications piled on during the pandemic, specifically the “draconian vaccine policies” that extend well beyond the risk of the COVID-19 virus itself. As the World Health Organization tweaks its amended “Pandemic Preparedness Treaty,” they remark that the term “informed consent” does not appear anywhere. What does that mean for humanity when the next pandemic hits? As the freedom-stripping agenda at play materializes as a real threat, the world needs more unbiased peer-reviewed studies like this one to validate our heavily censored voices and expose the corruption facing humanity. Parry and Rhodes conclude that, before it’s too late, trust in medicine must be restored, remarking:
“We are in a unique period of medical history. Central medical assumptions are threatened. Whether the morals and ethics of individualised care, localised professional relationships between patients and their doctors, or the right to open discussion and debate of raw data and transparent scientific literature. Data on vaccine-related injury and excess mortality continue to mount. Mandates, if not lifted, will become a serious political embarrassment. A survey of ours, currently in preprint, is indicative of the harms that can be caused by mandated experimental vaccines. With the significant expansion of gene-based technologies already visible ahead, it is high time to reaffirm previously established medical ethics and the freedoms of the human condition.”