The Military's Anthrax Vaccine Appears to Have Been a Beta Test for COVID-19
Independent investigation also proved there were experimental hot lots
In my previous posts, I have alluded to the tendency of history to repeat and how each scam from the past is used as a prototype for the current con. I originally created this substack to bring awareness to the fact the smallpox vaccine campaigns were a very similar disaster to the COVID vaccine campaigns. Over a century ago, those deadly vaccines actually made smallpox worse, and as public resistance grew, governments responded increasingly draconian mandates and all of that only stopped because of mass protest by the working class.
There are a few other striking examples of where an “emergency” situation was used to enact cruel and legally questionable medical campaign on a vulnerable demographic. My familiarity with these campaigns and my previous advocacy for many of the forgotten victims of western medicine made me able to predict the seemingly unthinkable situation we are in now. Of these events, the military anthrax vaccine campaign appears to have the closest parallels to our current situation, especially considering that many of the exact same parties responsible for that debacle have done the identical thing with COVID-19.
Note: although I am relatively certain the Anthrax vaccines caused Gulf War Syndrome, there are three different hypotheses to explain why this happened which each have a strong case to be made for them and despite a great deal of research and personal communications with those who had direct knowledge of this issue, I am not sure which is the correct explanation. The hypothesis detailed in this article is that Gulf War Syndrome arose as a result of squalene being used as an experimental adjuvant. Another hypothesis is that the vaccinated servicemen were disabled by a weaponized mycoplasma. The final one is that Bioport cut corners to produce the vaccines because the vaccine was full of contaminants that clogged the filters traditionally used to filter the vaccine material and solved this problem by insufficiently purifying the vaccine product resulting in a very dirty vaccine making it the servicemen.
The story of the military anthrax vaccine campaigns is horrific and even a few years ago would have been challenging to believe it could have ever happened. An extremely dangerous medical experiment was conducted in absolute secret on large segments of the military so that a new wave of highly profitable vaccines the NIH was heavily invested in could be brought to market. Massive casualties emerged (in those who received hot lots), and the military did everything they could to cover it up.
Eventually outside investigators obtained clear proof that a phase 1 dose response trial (this is the initial part of testing a drug where “small” numbers of volunteers are given a medication to assess its safety for further testing) was being conducted. Despite this the military continued this experiment for over a decade, and while there were large numbers of victims, the numbers were small enough to sweep everything under the rug. Now in the present day, it appears that some of the technologies used for operation Warp Speed are the same ones that were developed during this experiment.
Much of this article is sourced from the phenomenal journalism by Gary Matsumoto within “Vaccine A: The Covert Government Experiment That's Killing Our Soldiers -- and Why GI's Are Only the First Victims.” An abridged version can also be found within Chapter 16 of Vaccine Epidemic: How Corporate Greed, Biased Science, and Coercive Government Threaten Our Human Rights, Our Health, and Our Children. Both books are only a decade old and accurately predicted much of what was soon to come.
I understand everyone working on this project has limited time. However, I would strongly urge any attorneys involved to review the details within Vaccine A, as I believe they will prove crucial for future litigation. I have put an immense amount of time I don’t really have into drafting this, and I would greatly appreciate your assistance in getting it to the appropriate parties.
This article will be broken into the following sections:
-Hot mRNA Lots
-History of Unethical Human Experimentation
-The Anthrax Vaccines
Hot mRNA Lots:
When Operation Warp Speed was announced, I was hopeful it would give therapeutics the FDA had stonewalled in the past a chance to shine, and apprehensive it would allow unsafe, untested pharmaceuticals to enter the market. After I and others attempted in vain to attain regulatory approval to conduct non-commercial clinical trials for viable solutions for the pandemic, we each saw the regulatory barriers that had been removed were only to support pharmaceutical profiteering and not to promote public health.
The thing I failed to appreciate until recently was the significance of the military being intimately involved with Operation Warp Speed. I hadn’t paid much attention to this, as I thought it was done to expedite the production and distribution of medical supplies. What I’ve realized recently is that this allowed a lot of horrible people in our government to shape Operation Warp Speed around their pet projects that would normally never be permitted to happen.
Everything about COVID, particularly the PR campaigns for the vaccines screamed to me that something very bad was in the works. Many of us watched as everything was coordinated to create a once in a lifetime opportunity, step by step, to push through a variety of otherwise unacceptable medical experiments and practices. As mRNA technology likely represents a potential multi-trillion-dollar source of revenue and the pharmaceutical industry is desperate for innovations (it is getting very difficult to develop new traditional drugs), bringing mRNA to market seemed a likely goal of Operation Warp Speed.
When the COVID vaccines were being developed, one of my early questions was “how are they going to dose the mRNA?” Within pharmacology, a concept known as therapeutic window exists. Briefly, all medications at certain doses are toxic, and all medications need a certain (therapeutic) dose to work. Some medications have a much higher toxic dose than therapeutic dose, so anyone can take the medication at home without worrying about toxicity. Other more dangerous medications have much closer therapeutic and toxic doses, and hence must be given in a controlled setting.
As best as I could gather, a major problem with mRNA technology had been that to produce enough protein in the recipient, the mRNA and their lipid nanoparticles had to be given at a dose that had significant side effects. This poor therapeutic window I suspected was a key reason why despite significant investment, this technology had never been able to make it to market.
To some extent the issue now seems to have been addressed by enhancing the amount of protein each mRNA would produce. This was done by attaching pseudouridine to the mRNA so it would not be broken down as quickly (although it also has been argued this was done so a unique and therefore patentable modification existed) and codon optimization. These two innovations also appear to have created new sets of problems, and the R&D situation largely reminded me of the challenges the designers of the anthrax vaccine faced. The pandemic, like the Gulf War, had created a once in a lifetime opportunity for questionable data gathering and as one of my colleagues put it: “The vaccine isn’t free. If the government is putting this much money into it, they must want a lot of data in return.”
As the rollout began, I noticed individuals had very different responses to the vaccinations, which seemed to suggest placebos and more toxic or less toxic lots were present. Similarly, one of my colleagues (who I consider to be a superb diagnostician) told me he was absolutely certain some of his patients had received placebos. At the same time, as I began witnessing a horrifying emergence of severe adverse events, I also observed multiple cases of close relatives who lived together (such as a husband and wife) having the same, sometimes fatal reaction.
If we were to assume 0.1% of vaccinations result in death, then mathematically, the odds are very close to 0 that in my relatively small sample size (roughly 40 deaths) I would be seeing cases of the same severe adverse event happen to two people who lived together (I also saw a few other non-fatal things cluster like this). While there were a lot of possibilities to explain this observation, the best fit hypothesis I had was, as was the case with the anthrax vaccine, there were dangerous hot lots that both members of the household had likely gotten when they were vaccinated together. From reading numerous reports from online forums, I have found I am not the only person who had encountered this clustering of adverse events.
Once this dawned on me, I checked VAERS and couldn’t believe most of the deaths and severe injuries from the vaccine were associated with specific lots…and nothing was being done. Later, as this began to be investigated, it was also discovered most of these hot lots appeared to be in red states, which matched the clustering of adverse events within my sample (these were concentrated in Ohio). However, I believe it is critical to not overstate your conclusions, and having talked to numerous data analysts, at the time, while there is data suggest this may be happening, I do not believe there is sufficient data within VAERS to prove red states are being prioritized for more harmful vaccinations.
Around the same time, some of Pfizer’s drug approval documents from the European FDA (the EMA) were leaked. One regulatory concern discussed in these documents was the stability of the mRNA product (which has likely gotten worse now as most of the strict refrigeration protocols are often not followed and the scaling production of vaccines up from the small number needed for clinical trials verses that needed for billions of people will inevitably lead to production mishaps). Another was that the FDA had found differences between lots from different facilities. These made me wonder if part of the variation in toxicity between the lots was from manufacturing issues that were being swept under the rug by Operation Warp Speed, something members of the FDA responsible for inspecting vaccine production had voiced serious concerns about.
Further support for this theory arose from the recent J&J manufacturing fiasco, where the company they had contracted to produce their vaccine, Emergent Biosolutions was required by the (very lenient) FDA to dispose of millions of improperly produced doses. This manufacturer (previously known as Bioport) has deep connections to the military. The company was also responsible for producing the military’s anthrax vaccine, and had also been repeatedly penalized and cited by the FDA for serious production quality issues with that vaccine.
Bioport, like the COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers now, was also given complete legal immunity to any issues from their vaccine which likely incentivized ignoring safety and appropriate production of the vaccine. Oddly enough, the manager responsible for quality control at the Emergent Biosolutions plant producing J&J’s COVID vaccine, according to Whitney Webb, had no background in pharmaceutical manufacturing or quality control, and rather had served as a head of military intelligence in Iraq and Afghanistan.
While I have been seeing signs of something very nefarious in the works since late 2019, I still hoped against hope this was all simply my own paranoia. The moment when reality crashed into my face was a presentation put together by Craig Paardekooper.
For those who do not have time to watch it, he showed that in addition to VAERS having evidence suggestive of hot lots, there is also data in VAERS that suggested Pfizer, J&J, and Moderna had been testing hot lots with various degrees of lethality in collusion with each other. As time progressed, the toxicity of these lots became more precise, and at one point Pfizer conducted a dose response study that could be observed within VAERS. As this had recently been done to a large segment of the military with the anthrax vaccine, I was open to this possibility, but the fact that something like this could actually be occurring was still very difficult for me to stomach.
With the VAERS data, I acknowledge you could potentially argue the hot lots initially identified arose due to some type of bias. However, I’ve looked at each of the counter arguments to the clustering of hot lots (Jessica Rose makes a very good one) and at this time I believe Craig’s findings raise serious concerns. I have also spoken with members of Craig’s team (there are intelligent individuals with a background in this field working together) and they appear to be being very careful to not overstate their conclusions.
In Craig’s subsequent work, using the data he found in VAERS that suggested Pfizer had conducted a dose response study, he was able to identify a simple code from those lots that correlated with toxicity. This had also happened previously with the anthrax vaccines. A while back I also saw a video where a recently retired Slovenian nurse made a similar claim. At the time I didn’t know what to make of it or if it was even authentic (which has thus far not been established), but I immediately remembered it after I saw Craig’s work.
Recently, the topic of hot lots has come back into focus after reviewers of the Pfizer FOIA documents found proof that mRNA was being given at different doses. While this would support the theory I am advancing, I believe this specific conclusion was an example of confirmation bias. When I looked at the table in question, I realized it simply reflected public knowledge of the fact Moderna uses a higher mRNA dose than Pfizer, and different vaccination doses with different billing codes have been developed depending on the age of the recipient. This does not in any way prove the existence of hot lots, only that data has been gathered to develop appropriate dosing of mRNA.
History of Unethical Human Experimentation:
I have often wondered if the reason the Tuskegee syphilis experiments have received so much attention in the press was to distract from the fact that even more hideous experiments have been performed on vulnerable populations. Some of those done by Fauci (such as the violent administration of experimental HIV medications to non-consenting orphans in New York that caused them to die in agonizing ways) have been brought the public’s attention because of The Real Anthony Fauci. Some are discussed in a classic Wikipedia article on the subject. Many other experiments I have come across are for all purposes unknown, and I am sure there are many more I have never heard of.
The development of medical science has been a struggle of humanity fraught with many mishaps and disasters for those involved. At the same time, the collective suffering our forefathers experienced, often due to abhorrent medical interventions, eventually made it possible to develop profound improvements in the quality of life for the human species.
There has hence been a continual debate if it is appropriate to advance medicine through barbaric experimentation. One example would be animal experimentation. The life experience of myself and many others has shown us animals are often sentient, and despite this, much of medical research involves barbaric and often completely unnecessary experimentation on animals. The topic of animal experimentation birthed the “anti-vivisection” movement, which amongst other things, argued that medicine developed through evil would inevitably enact that same evil on its intended recipients, something which often comes true.
Human beings appear to have a limited number of social connections they can maintain an emotional connection to. As a result, when individuals are in small groups, they typically prioritize the liberty and well-being of those around them. Yet, when people assume positions of authority where they are responsible for a large number of people, dehumanization frequently occurs and the people they are responsible for become abstract entities whose collective good becomes prioritized over the rights of each individual. I have observed this entire process in so many ways I am convinced it is an intrinsic aspect of human nature.
As the progression of science is so crucial to the advancement of civilization, and our form of science is largely based on biological experimentation, it is hence a recurring theme that highly unethical human experimentation occurs. In recognition of this fact, when you complete the training program required in the USA to conduct research on human subjects, the importance of not conducting research on vulnerable groups who lack the ability to refuse to be experimented upon is a key focus of the program.
At the same time, when viewed from a perspective emphasizing “collective good,” vulnerable captive groups represent the ideal groups to conduct experiments on. The experimental group can be tightly controlled, preventing many of the common issues with data accumulation (ie. subjects dropping out of the trial). They also are less likely to resist taking a toxic medication and when something bad happens, they don’t have anyone who will ask questions about what happened to them.
In the past, prisoners, the mentally handicapped, orphans in foster care and those indefinitely confined within medical facilities were frequent targets for horrific experimentation. Until about half a century ago, it was common to see experiments of this nature be condoned by society and published in leading medical journals and few objections were raised towards those studies.
However, overtime, public protest occurred and eventually experimentation on these vulnerable groups was largely stopped, leading to much of it being outsourced to Africa. As this reduced the supply of “ideal” domestic research subjects, the only remaining subject pool, the military, was regularly utilized. Military culture is based around obeying orders from your superiors even if it puts your life in danger and always completing your required period of enlistment. In short, members of the military often lack the ability to refuse to a medical intervention, something many are all too eager to take advantage of.
Within the military, it has always been considered acceptable for some soldiers to die on the battlefield to achieve a victory. This logic in turn has been extended towards it being acceptable for a certain number to be maimed or killed in experiments that yield results of vital strategic importance. However, that often blends with corruption, leading to profiteers conducting numerous ghastly experiments that are not necessary for national security. War profiteering, the focus on my previous article, is a dark side of our democracy that when understood, helps to place many of these events into context.
After the events of the anthrax scandal happened, and a senate investigation was conducted, laws were passed to prevent the future forced administration of experimental (non-FDA approved) medications on soldiers. Despite that, existing legal structures still make this feasible to do, such as soldiers being unable to sue the military for injuries from forced medications (due to the questionable Feres Doctrine), the declaration of “emergency situations” overriding soldiers’ right of consent, and the military being allowed to inflict harsh punishments on soldiers for dereliction of duty when they refuse vaccinations. These punishments included large fines and prison sentences that were levied against soldiers who refused the vaccination.
There are many tragic cases we have all heard in the military with the COVID vaccines. One of my friends spent 6 months fighting the mandate and produced a strong legal case showing the specific manner in which Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin had mandated these vaccines violated both the law and rulings from federal judges (there actually was a legal pathway Austin could have followed).
His exemption request was eventually approved and then rescinded after a very high-ranking member of the military stepped in and overrode his exemption, not unlike the events at Dover Airforce Base. My friend now, like many others in the military is vaccine injured and unable to perform his duties. Many similar events played out during the anthrax campaign and both vaccination campaigns had a devastating effect on both our military readiness and general morale in a profession that is built upon troop morale and patriotism.
Additionally, as excellently summarized within The Real Anthony Fauci, Anthony Fauci has played a key role in transforming the NIH and FDA into becoming pharmaceutical production pipelines where many regulatory officials are bribed to create, test and approve these drugs. Within this paradigm, required safeguards for human subjects (Fauci’s wife is actually the chief bioethics official for clinical trials in the USA) are frequently disregarded or waived. A significant aspect of Fauci’s career has been to work hand in hand with the military, both through directly conducting illegal research on their behalf (ie. gain of function research) and indirectly by waiving the ethical safeguards for experimentation on members of the military.
There are so many questionable experiments that have been performed on soldiers I cannot even begin to summarize them (Vaccine A lists many). For example, in the days of nuclear bomb testing, to study the effects of fallout, the military would station troops in trenches near the detonation sites and inform them the fallout was safe, then give orders to charge following detonations. One of my patients (a marine) told me this happened to his grandfather who was told by his superiors the fallout was safe; he subsequently died from an agonizing cancer. However, while many “bad” experiments have been done, I believe the anthrax and COVID vaccines are in a class of their own due to how many people they have affected.
In the words of now retired USAF captain Richard Rovert, who tried to protect the servicemen at Dover Airforce Base from anthrax vaccination:
“I write about some of the most vulnerable of society's members: our men and women in uniform…Unfortunately, these brave defenders of our freedom are defenseless against the mandatory use of dangerous vaccines, such as the anthrax vaccine. For the past sixty-four years, the United States military and other government agencies have used our servicemen and women as test subjects, often in secret and without informed consent. Moreover, there is no end in sight; there are additional biodefense vaccines waiting in a pipeline to be tested on our soldiers.
Sadly, this is not a conspiracy theory. This is documented fact. In December 1994, right after the first Gulf War, the United States Senate released a report titled, "Is Military Research Hazardous to a Veteran's Health?" This report outlined the unethical use of servicemen and women as test subjects. The report revealed that the Pentagon had quietly used soldiers in clinical trials and did not record the resulting information in their medical records, preventing the soldiers from receiving appropriate follow-up care. Many were simply left to die.“
A frequently cited poem from the Holocaust states:
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Each time something bad is done, it is first normalized on a vulnerable group, but before long shows up on your doorstep. What Fauci did to the gay community during the AIDS epidemic was horrendous, but few spoke out for them because they were a heavily marginalized community at the time. He subsequently did the same thing in many other places (ie. in Africa with Ebola), and eventually to the entire country. Much of what he’s done to the world over the last few years would never have happened if as a society, we had stood up for these forgotten people.
Captain Rovert also was aware of this and predicted the near future:
“I want you to burn these two letters and two numbers into your consciousness (MF59) so you will remember them because squalene will next be used in civilian vaccines”
Every major power has experimented with chemical and biological weapons as they are an essential aspect of modern warfare. This really took off in the United States following World War 2, as we provided amnesty to Japanese and German war criminals in return for them sharing the data they had obtained from their experiments. Since that time, almost every major power has tried to develop a bioweapons arsenal on par with their adversaries, leading to many things that should never have been developed getting made.
Typically, biological weapons are targeted to acute infectious diseases, with the most lethal and easy to deploy prioritized alongside their countermeasures. In Vaccine A, I learned Russia pioneered another approach based on splicing parts of essential human tissue onto common pathogens, so once the initial disease was cleared, a severe autoimmune disease is triggered (this is what occurs naturally in Rheumatic fever). The Russians sought to create a time delayed bioweapon, with their most common tissue target being myelin, with which they successfully created severe neurodegenerative disorders such as Multiple Sclerosis (MS).
This immediately brought two diseases to mind: COVID-19 and Lyme. In the case of Lyme, as documented in Lab 257, there is evidence to suggest it was accidentally leaked from a US biolab (leaks are much more common than the public realizes). Lyme disease is commonly associated with MS, and as authors such as Lida Mattman PhD have documented, spirochetes are frequently present in the CSF of individuals with MS. Homology in turn exists between the lyme spirochete and myelin, although I do not have the background to understand the full implications of that homology.
A key difference between SARS CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) was the structure of its spike protein, which many suspected was engineered. A curious aspect of the spike protein was its extraordinary degree of molecular mimicry with a wide range of human tissues. This was a key reason why authors urged caution for the mRNA spike protein approach to vaccination as there was a high risk of autoimmunity (which according to leaked EMA documents appears to have never been tested prior to human studies). Autoimmune conditions in turn frequently follow both vaccination and natural COVID-19 infections (vaccination however appears to be a more common trigger).
On the acute front, anthrax’s ability to form spores makes it well suited for deployment against enemy targets. Anthrax typically infects the skin (cutaneous anthrax), but in some cases can become pulmonary anthrax. Pulmonary anthrax is a horrific, highly lethal disease and has been a priority for acquisition in almost every biological weapons program.
Numerous incidents, such as accidental pulmonary anthrax leaks in the Soviet Union which killed many has made developing a vaccination for it a national security priority. Anthrax has unfortunately been a very challenging pathogen to develop an effective vaccination against. Additionally, as far as I know, anthrax, which can often be treated with antibiotics has never been used on American soldiers, so the actual necessity of producing a vaccine against it is highly debatable.
At the time the Gulf War started (which was ultimately to prevent Saddam Hussein from invading Saudi Arabia’s oil fields), the US military greatly outclassed the Iraqi army. This was proven during the Gulf War, where with almost zero casualties we rapidly slaughtered Iraq’s army. Military planners’ primary concern with confronting Saddam Hussein was the real risk he would use anthrax on American soldiers, something we had no way to defend against. Unfortunately, while Hussein never used anthrax, our solution to this problem resulted in the Gulf War being one of the injurious wars in US history. Exact estimates vary but are normally over 100,000; for example Captain Rovert of the USAF determined 1 in 4 of the 697,000 Gulf War veterans developed Gulf War Syndrome.
A variety of approaches exist towards making vaccinations. Some emphasize utilizing a single antigen (frequently produced through genetic engineering), while others emphasize utilizing a combination of many different antigens from a pathogen. Adjuvants are often needed to increase the immune response, particularly in vaccines that only have one antigen (as these trigger a weaker immune response).
In most cases aluminum (which creates a variety of significant health problems) is used as an adjuvant. From my own decade long review of the vaccine literature, I believe that a vaccination approach that utilizes single antigens in combination with adjuvants has three major problems:
1) It is a recipe for autoimmunity (which has significantly risen globally in sync with vaccination).
2) The immune response that is developed reduces the body’s flexibility to mount other immune responses, leading to an increased susceptibility to different strains of the same disease or other infectious diseases.
3) When these vaccines work, they rapidly promote evolution of more pathogenic variants that are resistant to the antigen within the vaccine.
During the 1990s, a variety of vaccines were developed which were based upon using genetic engineering to produce a specific protein sequence of the chosen disease. For example, Fauci, the military and the NIH made significant investments on a HIV vaccine that utilized the GP-120 sequence of HIV (something numerous researchers noticed also is found on the COVID-19 spike protein, which for example led Luc Montagnier to argue this meant COVID-19 was part of a vaccine development program).
Despite enormous investment, most of these vaccines never made it to market because they required a stronger adjuvant than aluminum to function (and some proteins like GP-120 were unable to attach to aluminum). One alternative that was frequently looked at were oil-based (also known as lipids based) adjuvants, as they produced a much stronger immune response that was sufficient to enable this new field of pharmaceuticals. Interestingly, while we regularly ingest these substances without issue (possibly due to the specialized manner digested fats enter the blood stream), when injected, tiny doses of oil are sufficient to elicit very strong immune responses.
Robert Redfield who advocated for this approach in his lipid adjuvated HIV vaccine, was subsequently investigated for research fraud and doctoring data to get his faulty HIV vaccine approved. In these circles, no bad deed goes unrewarded, and Redfield later became director of the CDC. There he played a key role in enabling Fauci’s COVID policy, and according to one source had a pact with Fauci and Birx (who also was involved in developing that failed HIV vaccine) that all of them would quit if one was fired.
Unfortunately, as documented in Vaccine A, lipid based (and cholesterol based) adjuvants have a very high toxicity. They frequently produced severe autoimmunity and had a variety of other side effects that overlie with the COVID-19 vaccine side effects such as producing anaphylactic shock (if you want to know more, its all discussed within this post about Novavax). By the early 1990s, squalene had been identified as the most promising oil-based adjuvant, but it still was too toxic to bring to the market. This issue partly arose from the fact that these adjuvants created autoimmunity to vital lipids throughout the body in the same way molecular mimicry does in Rheumatic Fever.
As the traditional anthrax vaccine had many shortcomings, an alternative approach utilizing a single antigen compounded with squalene had also been under investigation. This approach had the advantage of providing the solution necessary to confront Hussein’s anthrax threat in time for the Gulf War and the disadvantage of being too toxic for human use. A month after Hussein invaded, the head of the Armed Forces Epidemiological Board wrote in a letter to the commander of United States Army Medical Research and Development Command: “Operation Desert Shield presents unique research opportunities,” and the rest was history.
Despite the severe harm these adjuvants caused, the technology has remained in usage (Novartis bought the company that produced the main Squalene adjuvant). MF59, a Squalene adjuvant formulation for example have been used in Novartis’s FLUAD vaccine, which has had issues including previously being put on hold in 2014 after 13 elderly Italian individuals died following vaccination. It has recently come into use in parts of Europe now (numerous scientific journal articles can be viewed on vaccines containing MF59). During Italy’s COVID-19 outbreak, my colleagues received correspondences from local physicians. The Italian physicians reported their sickest patients who were least responsive to treatment had previously received an annual influenza vaccination and I recall numerous discussions occurred over whether there had been a change in its formulation.
A key aspect of Operation Warp Speed was providing broad financial support so the typical length of time required for vaccine production could be bypassed. One component of the program was to fund numerous potential vaccines in the hopes that at least one would succeed. Curiously, many of these vaccine candidates utilized the same squalene adjuvants which had been so problematic in the anthrax vaccinations. Many of you may remember the news stories arguing over if the COVID vaccines would or would not kill a massive number of sharks. This was a topic of discussion because sharks are one of the primary sources of squalene and the projected demand for the vaccinations requiring this adjuvant was enormous.
While COVID vaccine toxicity is typically linked to the spike protein it produces, the high reactogenicity and cytotoxicity of its lipid nanoparticles was also proposed as a potential safety issue. Vaccine A (written in 2010) does a remarkable job documenting that the severe toxicity of injected lipids was well known decades ago and much worse than the public was led to believe.
Consider the following quotes from this recent 2016 article where Moderna’s CEO was interviewed:
“It’s highly risky. Big pharma companies had tried similar work and abandoned it because it’s exceedingly hard to get RNA into cells without triggering nasty side effects.”
“Delivery — actually getting RNA into cells — has long bedeviled the whole field. On their own, RNA molecules have a hard time reaching their targets. They work better if they’re wrapped up in a delivery mechanism, such as nanoparticles made of lipids. But those nanoparticles can lead to dangerous side effects, especially if a patient has to take repeated doses over months or years.
“Novartis abandoned the related realm of RNA interference over concerns about toxicity, as did Merck and Roche [Merck and Roche are amongst the worst offenders for putting toxic but profitable drugs on the market].”
“I would say that mRNA is better suited for diseases where treatment for short duration is sufficiently curative, so the toxicities caused by delivery materials are less likely to occur,” said Katalin Karikó, a pioneer in the field who serves as a vice president at BioNTech [which is Pfizer’s vaccine].
When I reviewed the EMA leaks, one of the things which jumped out at me was that the lipid nanoparticles used to package the mRNA were selected solely for functionality and no mention was made of assessing safety to determine the appropriate formulation. Rather…the safety was just assumed on Pfizer’s end and assumed again by the regulators who approved it as part of the vaccine product. As this information is often difficult to find, I will quote the key paragraph on the lipid nanoparticles from the EMA documents:
Among the screened cationic lipids, ALC-0315 exhibited suitable physical characteristics regarding particle size, homogeneity, and RNA encapsulation efficiency. Based on this, the ALC-0315/ALC-0159/DSPC/cholesterol prototype was submitted for in vivo screening. The results demonstrate improved potency of the ALC-0315 prototype as compared to an internal benchmark (ALC-0218). ALC-0315 was identified as a highly potent cationic lipid and brought forward for further product development. In vivo experiments after IM administration of the final ALC-0315/ALC-0159/DSPC/cholesterol LNP at molar ratio 47.5/10/40.7/1.8, confirmed expression of mRNA for this route of administration.
Quickly for reference:
-On my initial search, I was unable to locate any safety data on ALC-0315 (a lipid)
-On my initial search, I was unable to locate any safety data on ALC-0159 (a lipid). ALC-0159 was a concern for many as it contained Polyethylene Glycol, a known allergen within the population.
-On my initial search, I was unable to locate any safety data on DPSC (Distearoylphosphatidylcholine). However, based on the characteristics of other injectable lipids, there is a potential this could cause Antiphospholipid Syndrome, which creates frequent blood clotting.
-As covered in Vaccine A, minute injections of cholesterol have been shown to provoke severe autoimmune reactions and frequent anaphylaxis (further discussed and documented within this article).
When the vaccines came to market, after the first day they were administered to healthcare workers in England, reports arose of unexpected incidents of anaphylaxis, leading to a warning for this being placed on the vaccine. As there was both a theoretical risk for this, and a large trial had already been conducted (anaphylaxis is one of the few medication side effects that is never missed), I found it impossible to believe this side effect had not been detected and assumed significant underreporting occurred in the clinical trials.
Given the speed at which anaphylaxis developed in many of the cases (including some I know of within my circle of friends), I think it is unlikely sufficient time had elapsed for the spike protein to have been produced internally and trigger this allergy. This left the lipid mRNA nanoparticles and the mRNA itself as possible culprits. The most common suspect was the PEG on ALC-0159. Knowing now that injectable lipids and cholesterol have been frequently associated with autoimmunity and anaphylaxis, I disagree with the regulators decision to assume their safety and believe this entire class of injectables should be treated with suspicion.
One of the major challenges with the COVID vaccine rollout has been the difficulty in assessing their safety. No functional database for evaluating adverse events has been made available. Many databases such as the military’s, Medicare’s, and Pfizer’s only became available following whistleblowers leaking the data or a judge ordering its release. The legally required gold standard, VAERS, is plagued with issues that have not been corrected for decades. These issues (ie. VAERS does not have the staff to process most of the adverse events being reported to them now leading to months of backlog) have made VAERS unable to capture the majority of the adverse events. Yet, in most cases when VAERS is discussed, its issues are focused upon to suggest it over-reports.
For example, at the start of the COVID vaccine rollout, once an explosion of adverse events occurred, the mathematical criteria for VAERS reporting a safety signal was arbitrarily changed so that none of the increases in adverse reactions would constitute safety signals. A formula was put in to only count the dramatic increase in an adverse reaction compared to previous vaccines if that reaction alone increased, but not to count the signal if multiple reactions increased, thereby exempting systemically toxic immunizations from safety signals.
The information necessary to evaluate the safety of the COVID vaccines that needed to be disclosed has not been “to protect proprietary information,” an approach the pharmaceutical industry has refined over the years to avoid revealing incriminating information. A basic expectation for a program like the current vaccine campaign backed by the force of law would be for vaccines to be regularly tested by independent organizations to verify their content and quality.
Throughout the rollout, due to its “extremely limited availability,” the vaccine product was kept under lock and key making it very difficult to obtain samples for testing. I know of numerous cases where vaccine product was nonetheless obtained, and labs refused to test it for fear of reprisal such as losing their laboratory certification. I presently know of three examples where they were tested.
A physician colleague I am close friends with informed me midway through the rollout they were contacted by the owner of a pathology lab who tested the vaccines himself and found concerning results in the content he could not report publicly as that would put his business in danger. A German pathology institute hosted a conference that showed concerning unidentified metallic objects within the vaccines that were visible with light microscopy (other individuals have also reported similar findings). Lastly, the Japanese government recalled a large batch of Moderna vaccines after they inspected them and found stainless steel particles present within.
Given the extreme lack of testing on these vaccines, it is unlikely we will ever know many crucial details about them, such as the does being utilized in each lot or the presence of additional ingredients (ie. lipid adjuvants), many of which require significantly more complex testing than light microscopy to detect.
The Anthrax Vaccines:
Many are familiar with the condition “Gulf War Syndrome,” a severe disease which afflicted many Gulf War veterans. Enough were injured to create calls for investigation, but unlike COVID, not enough were injured to mobilize the general public to demand actual accountability. To this day, it is simply classified as a “syndrome” that no cause has been established for and many forgotten veterans languish in permanent disability.
In spite of its nebulous classification, the condition largely overlaps with that of severe systemic autoimmune diseases. Few know that only the members of the armies which received the anthrax vaccine developed Gulf War syndrome (the French who served alongside the other soldiers did not nor did civilians in the area). Similarly, many members of the military who never deployed to Iraq but were vaccinated also developed the disease, and conditions resembling it continued to appear in the armed forces following anthrax vaccination campaigns over the next decade.
The earliest case of illness resembling Gulf War Syndrome I have come across occurred in an M.D. who testified to congressional investigators that he had received the placebo arm in an earlier herpes virus vaccination trial, with the placebo he received being the problematic oil adjuvant squalene. Having a vaccine’s adjuvant also be in the placebo arm is a common way trial investigators conceal the adverse events of vaccinations (this is commonly referenced in regard to Merck’s HPV vaccine).
Attempts have been put forward by the military, the VA and independent investigators to link the disease to every possible cause (including nonsensical ones) except the anthrax vaccinations. While I have looked at each suspect and believe some of the other suggested triggers may have played a role in worsening the illness each veteran experienced, at the end of the day, trying to associate any other cause with the disease is nothing more than grasping at straws. The anthrax vaccine is the only agent those who developed the disease were consistently exposed to, and many of the symptoms of gulf war syndrome were known side effects of the experimental adjuvant squalene. These effects included chronic fatigue, severe joint pain, a wide range of neurological issues including suddenly fainting on the line of duty, seizures, memory loss, persistent rashes or sores and typically were autoimmune in nature.
When the initial deployment of the vaccine occurred, it was only given to certain soldiers (rather than all of them), likely to create a comparison group. Some commanding officers recall being told they were being provided with a “better” anthrax vaccine to protect them from anthrax, but most witnesses at the time said the vaccine was shrouded in secrecy. When the vaccine was administered, no documentation was provided to the soldiers (many spent years after the war trying to find their unlocatable vaccination records), and lengthy investigation revealed the only proof they received was “Vaccine A” being hand-written on their vaccine cards (“Vaccine B” for the botulism toxoid was also tested at the time but did not elicit significant adverse effects like “Vaccine A”).
Lengthy congressional investigation found the responsible branches of government to be highly resistant to providing necessary information. Subsequent investigation by the GAO (the one department willing to investigate) confirmed much of the story and noted the uncharacteristic evasiveness of the department of defense in revealing any information to investigators. The GAO was also the agency that, after years of adverse events accumulating, was finally able to get the manufacturer Bioport to list some of the side effects on its package.
In the years following the Gulf War, many unsuccessful investigations occurred to try to establish the cause of illness. This period of time is synopsized by Captain Rovert:
“Our soldiers' calls for help have not only been ignored, but their own government, the one they swore to serve and protect, has tried to discredit them. For many years, veterans of the first Gulf War and their families have begged for help and answers. Meanwhile, in a misguided effort to mislead Congress, the press, and the American people about the extent of the damage done to personnel during the conflict, the Pentagon launched Operation Bronze Anvil, a propaganda program designed to deflect any inquiries into the Gulf War Illness-anthrax vaccine connection and to harm the reputations of those who spoke out about the connection. This effort has branded honorable U.S. servicemen and women complaining of anthrax vaccine reactions as malingerers, liars, whiners, and malcontents.”
A rheumatologist working in private practice in Tennessee, Kevin Asa MD was one of the first to recognize gulf war syndrome was an autoimmune disease, something many of his colleagues in practice had not recognized (for example, it is typically so unusual for healthy young men to develop Lupus, the diagnosis was often not even considered). After some investigating, he and his wife Pam Asa PhD (an immunologist) eventually discovered each of these patients had been given a new vaccination they, as mentioned in the preceding paragraph, had no information on. In each case this vaccine appeared to be the trigger for their autoimmune diseases. As the Asas were not affiliated with an institution (where as now, this type of research is immediately suppressed), they were in the unique position to expose this scandal.
As the most likely candidate was a new experimental adjuvant, with further research Pam Asa identified the most likely culprit was squalene. She contacted one of world’s leading virologists, Dr. Robert Gary of Tulane University, who was able to develop an assay to test for antibodies to squalene. This test was positive in each sick patient she saw who had received “Vaccine A” and negative in the general population. A variety of attacks were then conducted against the assay to discredit it (which I assessed to be baseless). Subsequent testing on many more veterans provided similar results, and eventually a group of veterans who were ordered against their will to be vaccinated provided their blood before and after the vaccination. Their subsequently positive results provided definitive proof that this vaccination triggered the development of antibodies to squalene.
Despite mounting concerns against the anthrax vaccine, it was continued to be used on an experimental basis, with the most notable instances being in the late 1990s at military bases around the country, and in the second Iraq war. Dover Air Force Base in Delaware (Biden’s state) was chosen as one of the initial sites to receive the vaccine. Before long over 15 cases of autoimmune disease (multiple sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis were common) and 30 other cases of illness collectively bearing an uncanny resemblance to Gulf War Syndrome had emerged in the recently vaccinated, requiring many servicemen to seek complex medical care.
The Wing Commander of the base Colonel Felix M. Grieder requested answers from the pentagon. On May 5, 1999 after being told by their representative “I don’t know, and I don’t care,” Grieder suspended the program. Six days later, senior officers of the military held a town hall at the base where they cited the safety and efficacy of the vaccine and lied through their teeth as they unequivocally denied the presence of squalene within it (video footage of these events is contained within the brief documentary at the end of this article). Oddly though, one of the senior officers did briefly admit the military possessed an experimental anthrax vaccine with squalene but it had not been used on anyone at Dover. Taking them at their word, Grieder reinstated the program. Grieder, a commander previously expected to rise in the ranks to a senior position had his career torpedoed for resisting the anthrax vaccine mandates.
The FDA subsequently tested some of the suspect lots for squalene and in September of 2000, revealed it was present in 5 lots (4 of which had been sent to Dover). Separate squalene antibody testing accurately predicted its presence in those lots, and also identified three other suspect lots (2 of these were sent to Dover) which were never formally tested for squalene. Later, during the mobilization for the second Iraq war, a large number of anthrax vials were dumped overboard, likely by protesting soldiers, and when a news program had them tested by an independent lab, squalene once again was found to be present.
Following the FDA testing, the military tacitly admitted the presence of squalene but insisted on its safety (for example the printed statements on military websites previously denying its presence changed). The FDA testing (this report could be accessed at “http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/80n0208/80n-0208-c000037-15-01-vol151.pdf” as recently as 2012 but now can only be accessed as an archived file) found the following (the code at the start is the lot number):
FAV 020 11 parts per billion of squalene
FAV 030 10 parts per billion of squalene
FAV038 27 parts per billion of squalene
FAV043 40 parts per billion of squalene
FAV047 83 parts per billion of squalene
In phase 1 dose response studies, a dilution series (ie. 1:2:4:8) is frequently used. Given the small concentrations being worked with and the various margins of errors, experts in the field agreed these values could only have emerged if a very carefully prepared dose response study was being conducted. Additionally, it should be noted the ascending lot numbers correlated with ascending squalene concentrations. The one major point of confusion for me with this is that Squalene as MF59 is dosed at a much higher level in the FLUAD vaccine (9.75 mg squalene per 0.5 ml injection) and that vaccine, while being associated with some severe adverse events, has proven much safer than the anthrax vaccines.
When Craig Paardekooper subsequently analyzed the VAERS data on Pfizer hot lots that had characteristics suggesting they were part of a dose response study, enough data was available to determine how the lot toxicity was coded for within their lot number (he has since published additional resources on this topic). Like the anthrax vaccine, they also followed a simple ascending pattern.
I recognize VAERS analysis is a controversial subject and there is the potential for a variety of errors. However, given the magnitude of signals of harm occurring, and that there are past precedents for hot lots existing, as no better system has been made available, the presence of dangerous vaccines must be treated as a tentative hypothesis until additional information becomes available. We are in this situation because those responsible for the vaccination program are aggressively withholding the data necessary to evaluate these vaccines, and as such the burden of proof falls on them to prove safety, not on others to prove harm.
In conclusion, many severe complication occurred following anthrax vaccination. Of these events, my attention has focused upon three (that have also been observed following COVID vaccination): MS (due to bioweapons programs seeking to cause MS), ALS (a rare disease I have also come across twice in my small sample of vaccine injuries), and pilots losing the ability to fly mid-flight (as this has the potential to be catastrophic).
Many horrific tragedies have also occurred. As the focus of this piece is on the broader context of the anthrax vaccination program, I have excluded them for the sake of brevity. Many people are still suffering (including commenters on this substack) and we as a country are now paying the price because their story was never heard. The articles I am posting here are getting a much larger audience than I anticipated, and if anyone who was personally affected by the anthrax vaccines feel additional details need to be added to this story, please mention them in the comments.
That all said, there are 2 stories I felt should be shared:
The first from Captain Rovert:
“I will forever have etched upon my memory the vision of a young enlisted woman screaming and crying as she was forcibly held down while the needle delivering the anthrax vaccine was pushed into her body. I will never forget the sad day when my dear friend, Technical Sergeant Clarence Glover, died after anthrax vaccination. My memory holds the stories of those whose skin literally burned off due to anthrax vaccine-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome and of the infants under my care who were born with severe birth defects after their pregnant mothers were vaccinated with the anthrax vaccine.”
The second was documented in Vaccine A:
Army Sergeant Scott Siefkin was 37-year-old in excellent health when he deployed for the Gulf War and suffered from an ailment that mystified his doctors for almost a year after his return. At first his body temperature would rise and fall without explanation. In spring of 1993 rashes appeared that were initially tiny bumps that resembled a heat rash. No cause could be found, and the rashes disappeared before returning, and by fall he had raw painful lesions inside his mouth that looked like cigarette burns, one on the side of his tongue and another on the side of his cheek.
Due to the ulcers in his mouth, he most lost the ability to eat and by winter had lost 40 pounds. When prednisone, a treatment for autoimmune conditions was tried, “his body swelled until it seemed like he would burst” and his family members had difficulty recognizing him.
He then developed sores on his feet which made it difficult to walk, and his raised red bumps had turned to blisters roughly the size of half dollars that would break open with the slightest degree of contact, or as his youngest sister said “it was as if his blood were boiling to the surface of his skin”.
He soon showed signs of infection and was admitted to the hospital where he was diagnosed with lupus and transferred to a burn unit where his diseased skin (99% of it) was removed from his body. While his skin healed, he was covered in a graft of pig skin. Unfortunately, as soon as his skin started to regrow, it was immediately lost.
Scott was kept alive on a feeding tube, morphine and antibiotics.
“Throughout the ordeal, Scott never lost his sense of humor, but even that became a burden to him. When he smiled, his lips would bleed. His parents, his wife, his sisters and his friends couldn’t kiss or hug him; they could not lay a finger on him for fear of causing him pain or giving him a fatal infection. The sight of him without skin was so hideous that the family would not let Scott’s children see him. His suffering was almost indescribable, yet when he expressed worry, it was always for his family, not himself.”
Seven weeks after the removal of his skin he died, with his cause of death listed as lymphoma, kidney failure and sepsis.
Meryl Nass MD (Robert Malone’s colleague who had her license revoked by her medical board for saving lives with Ivermectin and speaking out against the current vaccine program), has spent years fighting for Gulf War vets injured by the anthrax vaccine and in 2007 provided testimony at a congressional hearing that succinctly summarizing this entire debacle. One reader who had been in communication with Dr. Nass was told that based on her experience in observing years of litigation for the gulf war veterans that went nowhere, she is not optimistic our current legal system is structured to be able to provide the remedies many of those injured by the COVID vaccines are expecting.
For those of you who would like to know more on this subject (or want something to share for friends who won’t read articles), this excellent, brief 44 minute documentary covers many of the themes highlighted here. It contains the video footage of senior members of the military repeatedly lying through their teeth to the soldiers at Dover Air Force Base, the penalties soldiers faced for not complying, and many of the personal stories of severe life altering vaccine injuries that were swept under the rug.
Thank you again for reading this and sharing this story where you can (as I am unable to do so on social media). I feel very hopeful together we can all play our part in bringing forward a better future.
Thank you for reading The Forgotten Side of Medicine! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.