Mainstream science mulls 'global moratorium' on COVID vaccines as cancers rise

quote:

---

Calling for governments to enact a "global moratorium" on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines could have been a death sentence for a scientist's career not long ago. Now it opens the door to a prestigious science publisher.

The Springer Nature medical journal Cureus, sibling to Nature and Scientific American, published a peer-reviewed paper by high-profile mRNA vaccine critics last month, showing the growing mainstream openness to data and arguments once nitpicked if not ignored by publishers and suppressed by academia and Big Tech.

The feds have struggled to keep interest high in each new formulation of the COVID vaccines, with fewer than 12% of minors, 22% of adults and just 41% of those 65 and up taking the 2023-2024 vaccines, according to the latest weekly National Immunization Survey.

The dam of The Science, which once limited the flow of research questioning the integrity of trial data and wisdom of one-size-fits-all vaccination recommendations to a trickle, now struggles to stop a worldwide deluge as new cracks emerge seemingly every week.

While early reports from the mRNA trials said the novel vaccines "could greatly reduce COVID-19 symptoms," re-analysis of Pfizer's trial data "identified statistically significant increases" in serious adverse events (SAEs) in the intervention group, which then became unmistakable after emergency use authorization, the Cureus paper says.

---

quote:

---

"The risk-benefit imbalance substantiated by the evidence to date contraindicates further booster injections and suggests that, at a minimum, the mRNA injections should be removed from the childhood immunization program until proper safety and toxicological studies are conducted," the paper also states.

U.S. approval of mRNA vaccines "on a blanket-coverage population-wide basis had no support from an honest assessment of all relevant registrational data and commensurate consideration of risks versus benefits," the authors wrote.

---