According to American-German lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, all cases of fraud in German companies are meagre in comparison to the level and depth of damage that has been caused and continues to be caused to humanity by the Covid-19 regulations and this orchestrated crisis. A German Corona Investigative Committee has been working tirelessly since July 10, 2020 to answer some important questions, this Committee has been listening to a large number of international scientists’ and experts’ testimony to find answers to questions about the corona crisis, which more and more people worldwide are asking.
Under the initiative of a group of German lawyers, a commission of inquiry into Covid-19 was opened to initiate an international class action lawsuit under Anglo-Saxon law. Dr Reiner Fuellmich is the lawyer who has managed to convict the car giant Volkswagen for the modified catalytic converters. This same attorney successfully convicted Deutsche Bank as a criminal enterprise, the bank agreed to pay more than $ 130 million in damages, as a consequence.
Crimes against humanity were first defined in connection with the Nuremberg trials after World War II, that is, when they dealt with the main war criminals of the Third Reich. Crimes against humanity are today regulated in section 7 of the International Criminal Code. The three major questions to be answered in the context of a judicial approach to the corona scandal are:
1. Is there a corona pandemic or is there only a PCR-test pandemic? Specifically, does a positive PCR-test result mean that the person tested is infected with Covid-19, or does it mean absolutely nothing in connection with the Covid-19 infection?
2. Do the so-called anti-corona measures, such as the lockdown, mandatory face masks, social distancing, and quarantine regulations, serve to protect the world’s population from corona, or do these measures serve only to make people panic so that they believe – without asking any questions – that their lives are in danger, so that in the end the pharmaceutical and tech industries can generate huge profits from the sale of PCR tests, antigen and antibody tests and vaccines, as well as the harvesting of our genetic fingerprints?
3. Is it true that the German government was massively lobbied, more so than any other country, by the chief protagonists of this so-called corona pandemic, Mr. Drosten, virologist at charity hospital in Berlin; Mr. Wieler, veterinarian and head of the German equivalent of the CDC, the RKI; and Mr. Tedros, Head of the World Health Organization or WHO; because Germany is known as a particularly disciplined country and was therefore to become a role model for the rest of the world for its strict and, of course, successful adherence to the corona measures?
Answers to these three questions are urgently needed because the allegedly new and highly dangerous coronavirus has not caused any excess mortality anywhere in the world, and certainly not in Germany. But the anti-corona measures, whose only basis are the PCR-test results, which are in turn all based on the German Drosten test, have, in the meantime, caused the loss of innumerable human lives and have destroyed the economic existence of countless companies and individuals worldwide. In Australia, for example, people are thrown into prison if they do not wear a mask or do not wear it properly, as deemed by the authorities. In the Philippines, people who do not wear a mask or do not wear it properly, in this sense, are getting shot in the head.
The PCR Test Fraud and COVID-19 will be the Case of the Century
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich has taken on a grand responsibility which he is driven to carry for the misjustices carried daily as a consequence of the PCR Test Fraud and COVID-19 government and media fraud, that humanity has been subjected to. Fuellmich is not alone, he is supported by the work of an international team of court judges, doctors, scientists, economists, entrepreneurs, experts and business lawyers who will plead the biggest tort case of all time, the Covid-19 fraud scandal is the biggest fraud of the century.
Yeadon warns: The systems being put in place could progressively expand to control access to sporting facilities, museums, shopping malls, supermarkets, public transport, and even shut down one’s ability to make a financial transaction.
April 29, 2021 (America’s Frontline Doctors) — Former Pfizer Vice President and Chief Science Officer Dr. Michael Yeadon has issued a dire warning to the world regarding vaccination programs and related political measures, arguing that it is likely designed to bring about “utterly totalitarian control of the entire population forever.”
Yeadon cited many examples of what is already built into Green Passport systems imposed upon Israel and expanded around the world. In addition, he provided the link to a video report that demonstrates how “the situation we are experiencing right now, the fear of a virus and ensuing measures that restrict liberties is exactly the situation that has been repeatedly and intensely trained and rehearsed in the past years with all kinds of infectious disease simulations.”
Those who think vaccine passports are good or at least ok, I’m addressing you.
If you were a vulnerable person and have been vaccinated, you’re protected. You don’t need to know others’ immune status. Note, even if they’ve been vaccinated, that doesn’t guarantee they can’t carry a single virus particle and donate it to you. So it doesn’t help you or make your safer to know everyone else has been vaccinated.
If you’ve declined vaccination, for example, because you’re not at risk from this virus, noting younger people are at MORE risk from influenza than from COVID-19, you also don’t need to know anyone else’s immune status.
Vaccination protects those who need it. Vaccine passports protect nobody.
But vaxpass is useful to our overlords. It’ll be the worlds first common format database, operable anywhere from Bolton to Bogota, containing your unique digital ID and an editable health status flag (initially about vaccination status).
Who controls that database and any algorithm governing what it permits and denies has absolutely totalitarian control over every aspect of your life.
Imagine a future in which a valid Vaxpass is required to enter a sport ground or museum. Invalid Vaxpass, no entry.
Now imagine the rules are hardened up (they will be). Now you can’t enter large shopping malls or hotels without a valid pass.
Further? Sure, why not. The algorithm is tweaked and now you cannot enter large supermarkets or any public transport.
A tyrannical step might be a Visa/MasterCard tweak that requires a valid Vaxpass BEFORE a terminal will open up for a purchase transaction.
Now you can’t even buy a bottle of water. Or fuel. Or anything.
Feeling outgunned, outnumbered, overpowered, smothered, and censored? Many people who oppose Covid lockdowns and all their associated restrictions feel this way. It’s hard not to. You can hardly post on social media without triggering warnings, corrections, and sometimes outright blocks.
Bans are part of the mix too, the complete deplatforming of people merely because they want their freedoms back. It’s creepy. We never thought we would see these days but here we are.
Meanwhile, the mainstream media continues to push restrictions – mask mandates and vaccine passports – just as it has for the past 14 months. The technology of intimidation is getting more sophisticated.
But how true is it that anti-lockdown people are a small and increasingly marginalized minority?
The Wall Street Journal is one of the world’s largest circulation newspapers, with twice the physical circulation of the New York Times. Its editorial page has been consistently against lockdowns nearly from the beginning.
Fox News has been running anti-lockdown commentary for a full year. It very easily dominates all cable TV news, hosting 6 of the top 10 shows. It is trouncing CNN, for example, which is struggling for viewers.
The top-rated commentary show for this year and last has been Tucker Carlson Tonight, which offers gripping anti-lockdown interviews and commentary on every show, including interviews with scientists and activists left and right.
Elon Musk, among the most prominent tech entrepreneurs in the world, has fiercely spoken out against lockdowns.
Joe Rogan has the most popular podcast in the English language, and he has been consistently against lockdowns and Covid mandates for a year, most recently telling his audience the common-sense point that healthy young people should not be forced to be vaccinated since the virus is no threat to them.
The Onion once ruled satire on the web but the site has been terrible on lockdowns. Its traffic has been sinking steadily. The anti-lockdown Babylon Bee started low and has soared to new highs, often beating The Onion. The Babylon Bee has been ruthless in satirizing Covid hysteria, and is being rewarded for doing so.
The Epoch Times has as much web traffic as the Wall Street Journal and has been fantastic on lockdowns, running a full 45-minute long interview with Great Barrington Declaration signatory Jayanta Bhattacharya.
Polls show strong opposition to all stringency measures among Republicans (40% want immediate opening of everything) and much less opposition among Democrats. It’s tragic and wrong that there should be any partisan divide on what is a question of science and good sense but that’s what happens when you politicize a disease.
The scientists who drafted the Great Barrington Declaration were pilloried last year but now cannot come close to keeping up with interviews, testimonies, article requests, and media contacts. Last year this time, they were quiet scientists; now they are among the most famous epidemiologists in the world.
Even the CDC is playing catchup to the anti-lockdown position, adjusting its advice on the J&J vaccine in light of Martin Kulldorff’s article in The Hill, even as they shoved him off their vaccine evaluation commission.
Protests are rarely reported by the national media but they are happening. The Five Freedoms campaign pushed by the DailyClout is gaining traction. Those freedoms are: no vaccine passports, no mask mandates, no emergency law, open schools up 100%, and freedom of commerce, worship, and petition.
Noncompliance is nationwide. Many parts of the country were speakeasies since last April but now the push to live life normally is spreading even to New York, where the Hardcore scene this past weekend publicly flouted all regulations and is thus being investigated.
The most important reason why anti-lockdowners should not feel demoralized is that the facts are overwhelming on the side of freedom and traditional public health principles.
By John Paluska, Founder of The Washington Gazette
Shortly after Florida’s House passed a ban on mandatory vaccine passports, Iowa is following suit with the Iowa House passing a law that does the same and more. The measure was passed by a wide margin of 52 votes for to 33 votes against, with 15 people who didn’t vote. The bill makes it illegal for any state government to put vaccine information into a passport. It also makes it illegal for any organization to require vaccine passports.
1. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, a business or governmental entity shall not require a customer, patron, client, patient, or other person who is invited onto the premises of the business or governmental entity to furnish proof of having received a vaccination for COVID-19, as defined in section 686D.2, prior to entering onto the premises of the business or governmental entity. This section does not prohibit a business or governmental entity from implementing a COVID-19 screening protocol that does not require proof of vaccination for COVID-19.
2. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, grants or contracts funded by state revenue shall not be awarded to or renewed with respect to a business or governmental entity that violates subsection 1 on or after the effective date of this Act.
Other states have already banned Vaccine Passports, and 40 states currently have legislation that is being considered that will do the same thing. However, some states, such as Wisconsin, have banned mandatory vaccines.
By John Paluska, Founder of The Washington Gazette
The Florida House has just passed a law that would make Governor DeSantis’s ban on vaccine passports permanent. The law, which was previously passed in the Senate, would ensure nobody would be required to show a vaccine passport in order to do anything in Florida. Even though the bill already passed in the Senate, it needs to be voted on again because the House made some changes to it.
(1) A business entity, as defined in s. 768.38 to include any business operating in this state, may not require patrons or customers to provide any documentation certifying COVID-19 vaccination or post-infection recovery to gain access to, entry upon, or service from the business operations in this state. This subsection does not otherwise restrict businesses from instituting screening protocols in accordance with state or federal law to protect public health.
(2) A governmental entity as defined in s. 768.38 may not require persons to provide any documentation certifying COVID-19 vaccination or post-infection recovery to gain access to, entry upon, or service from the governmental entity’s operations in this state. This subsection does not otherwise restrict governmental entities from instituting screening protocols in accordance with state or federal law to protect public health.
(3) An educational institution as defined in s. 768.38 may not require students or residents to provide any documentation certifying COVID-19 vaccination or post-infection recovery for attendance or enrollment, or to gain access to, entry upon, or service from such educational institution in this state. This subsection does not otherwise restrict educational institutions from instituting screening protocols in accordance with state or federal law to protect public health.
Recently other states have passed similar laws that ban Vaccine Passports. These states include Texas, which banned them on April 6. Additionally, other states like Wisconsin are currently working to ban mandatory Coronavirus Vaccines.
Canadians have been presented with statistics, charts and reporting galore about the ongoing challenges posed by COVID-19. What about the lockdowns though? Are they actually working? And are their benefits outweighing their harms?
It’s a conversation that politicians, health officials and others have done their best to ignore. But anyone who reads a new wide-reaching study by a Canadian economics professor will no longer be able to avert their gaze.
Lockdowns are accomplishing little benefit, but colossal damage. That’s the conclusion of a research paper by Simon Fraser University Economics Professor Douglas W. Allen, who concludes “it is possible that lockdown will go down as one of the greatest peacetime policy failures in Canada’s history.”Professor Allen’s paper is an examination of over 80 research papers from around the world that studied lockdowns. He found that many of them employed false assumptions, greatly overestimated the benefits of lockdowns and underestimated their harms.
Perhaps the greatest error in the reports and modelling, according to Allen, is the assumption that places without lockdowns would involve people taking zero precautions.“Lockdown jurisdictions were not able to prevent non-compliance, and non-lockdown jurisdictions benefited from voluntary changes in behavior that mimicked lockdowns,” Allen observes.
Any Canadian who has snowbird friends reporting back from the front lines in Florida — the first U.S. state to end its lockdown and mask mandate — knows that there are still many people choosing to follow precautions, it’s just that those who don’t are not fined or arrested like they are in many parts of Canada.
Allen breaks down one report that shows “the variation in stay-at-home orders across the U.S. and found that lockdowns had only modest effects on Covid-19 transmission rates.”
Among the 20 studies that did acknowledge the difference between mandatory and voluntary measures, “all of them find that mandated lockdowns have only marginal effects and that voluntary changes in behavior explain large parts of the changes in cases, transmissions, and deaths.”
So not only are the benefits of lockdowns negligible at best, but their harms are overwhelming. Not that Canadian officials bothered to check.
“Over the course of the Covid-19 pandemic, there has been no public evidence that either the federal or provincial governments of Canada have considered both the benefit and cost sides of their policy decisions,” the report notes. “To my knowledge, no government has provided any formal cost/benefit analysis of their actions.”
A number of U.S. states recently warned that they were running out of people willing to take a Covid vaccine. New reports suggest that a fairly significant proportion of Americans who have received their first dose of a vaccine are unwilling – or believe there is no need – to take a second. Reasons include a fear of the side effects and the belief that one dose offers enough protection against Covid. The New York Timeshas the story.
Millions of Americans are not getting the second doses of their Covid vaccines, and their ranks are growing.
More than five million people, or nearly 8% of those who got a first shot of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines, have missed their second doses, according to the most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That is more than double the rate among people who got inoculated in the first several weeks of the nationwide vaccine campaign.
Even as the country wrestles with the problem of millions of people who are wary about getting vaccinated at all, local health authorities are confronting an emerging challenge of ensuring that those who do get inoculated are doing so fully.
The reasons vary for why people are missing their second shots. In interviews, some said they feared the side effects, which can include flu-like symptoms. Others said they felt that they were sufficiently protected with a single shot.
Those attitudes were expected, but another hurdle has been surprisingly prevalent. A number of vaccine providers have cancelled second-dose appointments because they ran out of supply or didn’t have the right brand in stock.
Walgreens, one of the biggest vaccine providers, sent some people who got a first shot of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine to get their second doses at pharmacies that only had the other vaccine on hand.
Several Walgreens customers said in interviews that they scrambled, in some cases with help from pharmacy staff, to find somewhere to get the correct second dose. Others, presumably, simply gave up.
Many states anticipated that vaccine hesitancy rates would increase as the rollout progressed and are now implementing a number of schemes to try to ensure that uptake remains high.
In Arkansas and Illinois, health officials have directed teams to call, text or send letters to people to remind them to get their second shots. In Pennsylvania, officials are trying to ensure that college students can get their second shots after they leave campus for the summer. South Carolina has allocated several thousand doses specifically for people who are overdue for their second shot.
A new report has determined the Pfizer vaccine may cause Alzheimer’s and other conditions
In a shocking new report on the COVID-19 vaccines, it has been discovered that the Pfizer coronavirus vaccine may have long term health effects not previously disclosed, including “ALS, Alzheimer’s, and other neurological degenerative diseases.”
“The current RNA based SARSCoV-2 vaccines were approved in the US using an emergency order without extensive long term safety testing,” the report declares. “In this paper the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine was evaluated for the potential to induce prion-based disease in vaccine recipients.” Prion-based diseases are, according to the CDC, a form of neurodegenerative diseases, meaning that the Pfizer vaccine is potentially likely to cause long term damage and negative health effects with regards to the brain.
This is especially concerning since the Pfizer vaccine is an mRNA vaccine, an untested type of vaccine which creates new proteins and can actually integrate into the human genome, according to a report from the National Library of Medicine. In other words, degenerative brain conditions may appear at any time in your life after receiving the vaccine.
“The RNA sequence of the vaccine as well as the spike protein target interaction were analyzed for the potential to convert intracellular RNA binding proteins TAR DNA binding protein (TDP-43) and Fused in Sarcoma (FUS) into their pathologic prion conformations,” explains the report. TDP-43 is a protein known to cause dementia, ALS and even Alzheimer’s, according to Alzpedia. Similarly, the FUS protein is known to cause ALS and Hereditary Essential Tremors, according to the Human Genome Database.
The experiment done for the report was to determine whether or not these two harmful proteins embed themselves into our DNA, as an mRNA vaccine is expected to do. The report determined that “the vaccine RNA has specific sequences that may induce TDP-43 and FUS to fold into their pathologic prion confirmations,” meaning that both proteins have the potential to embed themselves into our DNA and cause harmful neurological diseases.
The report’s abstract summary concludes that “The enclosed finding as well as additional potential risks leads the author to believe that regulatory approval of the RNA based vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 was premature and that the vaccine may cause much more harm than benefit.” The report itself ends with this warning: “The vaccine could be a bioweapon and even more dangerous than the original infection.”
The constant portrayal of COVID-19 as a threat has caused distortion in people’s perception of their risk of dying from it, if they are unlucky enough to catch it. The risks of dying are dependent on age and comorbidities, e.g.:
Healthy 35-year-old woman
If unlucky enough to catch coronavirus, chance of surviving = 99.9991%
The chance of dying is less than the fatality risk of a general anaesthetic for a procedure
55-year-old man with co-morbidities*
If unlucky enough to catch coronavirus, chance of surviving = 99.2135%
The chance of dying is less than the risk of an average 55-64 year old dying of any cause this year
Healthy 75-year-old woman
If unlucky enough to catch coronavirus, chance of surviving = 99.8251%
The chance of dying is less than the risk of being injured in a car accident each year
85 year old man with co-morbidities*
If unlucky enough to catch coronavirus, chance of surviving = 79.9154%
The chance of dying is less than the risk of living for one year in a care home
*comorbidities included in the study were: cardiovascular diseases, chronic kidney diseases, chronic respiratory diseases, chronic liver disease, diabetes mellitus, cancers with direct immunosuppression, cancers with possible immunosuppression, HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, chronic neurological disorders, sickle cell disorders.
This data will be an overestimate as it comes from table 1 of this study published in August 2020. The study estimated an overall infection fatality rate in Western Europe to be over 1% and even Professor Neil Ferguson agrees that it is more like 0.8% with WHO estimates now substantially lower than that.
You can calculate your own risk of a fatal infection using the Oxford University QCovid calculator, although it is worth bearing in mind that these figures were based on the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in the spring 2020 peak, and test positivity rates in England are now just 4% of that level. Therefore results from this calculator are likely to be higher than the actual current risk.
No-one can die of COVID-19 without catching the virus. The chances of catching it currently are minimal as there are so few genuine cases (in other words, people with symptoms, usually severe). Even after testing millions of school children and surge testing in certain London boroughs the test positivity remains stubbornly low.
Deaths are now at levels last seen in July. Due to the lag time between infection and death, reported figures on mortality do not indicate current infection rates but rather reflect the situation at least three weeks prior to this. The exceptionally low daily deaths we are now experiencing reflect the lack of emergency. Despite this, only 15 people are currently allowed to attend a wake and the Queen had to sit alone during her husband’s funeral service, whilst professional football players can celebrate goals with displays of enthusiastic hugging and embracing.
There is no evidence that any variant is more deadly. Papers, that have been picked up by the press and that suggest otherwise have not accounted for underlying morbidities which we know have a significant impact on deaths.
New guidance for Covid vaccination in pregnancy On 16 April PHE issued new guidance on COVID-19 vaccination for pregnant women so as to include the advice that pregnant women: “should be offered Covid-19 vaccine at the same time as the rest of the population, based on their age and clinical risk group”.
This seems totally contrary to established precautionary principle, given that:
Pregnant women were not included in any of the trials, and animal trials conducted have been extremely limited. Real world studies have insufficient data. We therefore cannot be sure they are safe.
The current clinical trials do not complete until end-2022 earliest, the current vaccines are not approved products and are being administered under emergency waivers.
The trial data available to date indicate extremely modest reductions in absolute risk on an individual basis (<1%) in the populations studied.
The infection fatality rate for women of child-bearing age is <0.05% with no convincing evidence of any greater risk in pregnancy, although there is some increased risk of preterm birth for symptomatic women.
There are a number of signals which could be of concern to fetal health emerging from real-world use – not limited to the AstraZeneca vaccine or any age groups or other known risk factors – prompting guidance from the British Society of Haematologists.
Following the thalidomide tragedy in the 1960s, important changes were made to the way drugs were tested and approved across the world. The Yellow Card Scheme was set up so side effects from medications could be tracked and crucially, trials for substances marketed to pregnant women had to provide evidence that they were safe for use during pregnancy. Before March 2020, when COVID-19 became the government’s sole health focus, it was understood that medication should only be used during pregnancy if absolutely essential.
“Why are so many babies dying of Covid-19 in Brazil?” This alarming headline appeared in BBC Global News, regarding a child who died from COVID-19 complications in Brazil. It has had considerable coverage but, as with all deaths, it needs to be seen in context. Brazil is a vast country with a population of 230 million and 375,000 COVID-19 deaths to date. The article states that 1,300 babies have died of COVID-19 which therefore represents 0.34% of COVID-19 deaths. In the UK and six other countries following child deaths throughout the pandemic, the UK had 7 deaths in children under 10 years, all of whom had severe life-limiting conditions, which accounts for 0.19% of all cause deaths for this age group. Also the background infant mortality rate in Brazil at 17.5/1000 is four times higher than that of the UK.
The BBC report focuses on a tragic account highlighting the problems for access to appropriate hospital care, in low and middle income countries. Even when the toddler was obviously getting sicker, the parents were too afraid to take him to hospital, a problem echoed in the UK. By the time they did so, he required immediate intensive care, necessitating a long transfer journey to the regional centre where appropriate treatment could be given. It is clear that the vast majority of children who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 have no or very mild symptoms. For those children in the UK who do develop the rare post-covid inflammatory multiorgan syndrome (PIMS), a complete recovery has been the norm. The RCPCH has a very useful information pack for parents.
The article says “Researchers said that despite previous infection and the presence of antibodies, vaccination is still necessary to boost immune responses, prevent reinfection and reduce transmission.”. The paper itself was not cited by The Telegraph, although it must surely be this one published in The Lancet.
HART experts are not aware of credible evidence of widespread symptomatic reinfection, in other words reinfection leading to illness. And indeed, the study in question equates infection with PCR results rather than actual illness.
Natural immunity generates a much broader range of immunity than the currently formulated spike protein vaccines, particularly for young, fit people, to whom the researchers believe the risk applies. They are urged to “take up the vaccine whenever possible” – despite the fact that natural immunity is effective and long-lasting against illness for respiratory viruses such as SARS-CoV-2.
It is also an assertion that is not backed up by the study which did not test what the level of reinfection would look like in a vaccinated population. The study states that ‘it is possible that both previously infected and vaccinated individuals might later become infected’- which surely is not an argument for vaccinating healthy young people, who are at a vanishingly small risk of suffering serious illness.
Media coverage of variants The use of variants to perpetuate the fear narrative is misleading and becoming an unhealthy obsession. First cited months ago to cancel Christmas, variants are now being used as the primary reason to keep borders closed and to make the case for vaccine boosters.
To date, the mainstream reporting of variants is littered with words like ‘might’, ‘could be’, ‘possibly’ when talking about how deadly and transmissible they may or may not be. These ‘maybe’ ideas never seem to evolve into actual scientific proof. In a world of social distancing, we may in fact be distorting the competitive advantage of the more transmissible/less virulent variants, preventing the virus from evolving into a more benign form. Meanwhile, these interventions are destroying livelihoods, demolishing our culture, threatening our democracy and, by the government’s own admission, putting thousands of lives in danger.
Variants are normal and unavoidable. A study published in June analysed 48,000 samples and found 350,000 different mutations. They are not extraordinary, nor are they necessarily cause for alarm. The only reason we know about these in this particular virus is due to the ongoing and pervasive focus on them. Had we scrutinised any other previous respiratory virus in the same way, we would no doubt have found similar. The fact also remains that if a variant becomes too different via mutations, usually it can no longer function as a virus.
The emotive idea of ‘mutant variants’ has been used to enforce more and more control on the lives of UK citizens. What is puzzling, is the lack of immunology or virology expertise called upon when discussing the topic in the media. Rather, they refer to experts from other unrelated fields. The misinformation that ensues, and becomes embedded in the minds of the general public, seems like media bias to increase fear. There is a desperate need for journalists to present accurately researched information on this topic, from highly qualified individuals within relevant fields.
In February, 2021, Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, M.D. and a number of his colleagues warned the European Medicines Agency about the potential danger of blood clots and cerebral vein thrombosis in millions of people receiving experimental gene-based injections. A must watch!