Cancer rates following global nuclear war Vs exposure to experimental gene therapies: Which is worse?

Any extracts used in the following article are for non commercial research and educational purposes only and may be subject to copyright from their respective owners.

---

Background:

1000 millisieverts = 1 gray

A millisievert (mSv) is a decimal fraction of the SI-derived unit of equivalent radiation dose, effective dose, and committed dose. One sievert is the amount of radiation necessary to produce the same effect on living tissue as one gray of high-penetration x-rays. Quantities that are measured in sieverts represent the biological effects of ionizing radiation. 1 sievert is the energy absorbed by one kilogram of biological tissue, which has the same effect as one gray of the absorbed dose of gamma radiation. Therefore the sievert can be expressed in terms of other SI units as 1 Sv = 1 J/kg.

A gray (Gy) is the SI-derived unit of absorbed dose and specific energy (energy per unit mass). Such energies are usually associated with ionizing radiation such as gamma particles or X-rays. It is defined as the absorption of one joule of energy in the form of ionizing radiation by one kilogram of tissue. In the SI basic units, a gray is expressed as m²⋅s⁻².

As discussed previously, more or less the same pathophysiological pathways are activated once free radicals have been generated, whether due to ionising radiation or spike protein binding to ACE2, upregulating ANGii and then NADPH oxidase.

There are some differences of course. Beta surface burns of contaminated skin aren't an issue and water molecules aren't being struck & involved in peroxide generation. But as the LNPs are systemic any tissue can be affected in a cumulative dose dependent manner. ACE2 expression must correlate too with damage, but bystander and paracrine induced damage is involved so other tissues aren't immune to damage, just as you find with IR.

In both humans and macaques the equivalent whole body dose to damage lymphocytes by apoptosis is around 2-4 Gys, or the equivalent to 20-40,000 X-rays, 2 to 4 times the recommended lifetime exposure limit:

Impact of irradiation and immunosuppressive agents on immune system homeostasis in rhesus macaques (2015)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC4557385/#!po=1.36364

Transient lymphopenia is also a recognised A/E of gene therapy transfection with BNT162b2. We explored the cytotoxicity previously and it gives an idea of the IR equivalent dose to cause similar pathology:

Spike protein (inc vax) induced immunodeficiency & carcinogenesis megathread #7: transient lymphopenia

https://doorlesscarp953.substack.com/p/spike-protein-inc-vax-induced-immunodeficiency-345/comments?s=w

The link between inflammation, PAH etc, autoimmune disorders & cancers: Reactive Oxygen Species

https://doorlesscarp953.substack.com/p/the-link-between-inflammation-pah/comments?s=w

CD4+ helper T cell cytotoxicity and “SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines induce persistent human germinal centre responses” was reviewed in the last paper. This persistence of a cytotoxic protein is acting more like an injested radionuclide than a single high dose of ionising radiation:

A single-cell atlas reveals shared and distinct immune responses and metabolism during SARS-CoV-2 and HIV-1 infections

https://doorlesscarp953.substack.com/p/a-single-cell-atlas-reveals-shared?s=w

The many carcinogenic pathways have been reviewed in my previous work. Downregulation of tumor suppressors and immune responses feature throughout, as does mitochondrial DNA damage and induced double strand breaks.

Even nanodots of graphene oxide have been consistently identified by Raman spectroscopy of multiple vial samples. We are waiting for further details or I would post these here too.

Then we have reverse transcription and LINE-1 upregulation, also a known carcinogenic trigger:

Spike protein (inc vax) induced immunodeficiency & carcinogenesis megathread #22: New Understanding of the Relevant Role of LINE-1 Retrotransposition in Human Disease and Immune Modulation

+ hepatic & haemoglobin toxicity

https://doorlesscarp953.substack.com/p/spike-protein-inc-vax-induced-immunodeficiency-ef8?s=w

As a bioweapon designed to kill slowly it's beautifully engineered! Either some very sick minds at work or grossly incompetent in judging consequences, maybe a bit of both?

---

Expected Incidence of Cancer Following Nuclear War (1988)

Nikolai P. Bochkov, M.D., and Per Oftedal, PH.D. (1988)

Soviet Academy of Medical Sciences, USSR, and University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

The carcinogenicity of ionizing radiation has been investigated in some detail both under experimental conditions and through direct observations of irradiated persons. The high incidence of occupational cancer in roent-genologists who did not suspect the treacherous properties of ionizing radiation has been well known since the 1920s. The data on radiation-induced cancer have been systematically examined by the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), by the National Research Council Committee on Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR), and by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP).

The calculation of expected incidence of cancer following nuclear war can be based on experimental data on radiation-induced cancer, observations of occupational cancer, and the data from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Data on cancer incidence in populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki obtained during checkups of survivors of A-bombs, from analysis of case histories, and from pathological certificates allow one to draw objective conclusions on the cancer rate induced by radiation. The following results were obtained.1,2,3

An increase in leukemia incidence began in both cities about 3 years after exposure and reached a peak around 1951-1952. Later the leukemia rate among exposed persons declined. The rate in the Nagasaki-exposed survivors has not exceeded that of the control population since the early 1970s. There is still evidence of continuation of a slightly increased leukemia rate in Hiroshima among exposed survivors. There are complex differences between the types of leukemia in relation to age at the time of the bombing, city of exposure, and duration of the latent period following exposure. Through 1978, total excess incidence of leukemia deaths due to radiation among all A-bomb survivors is estimated to be about 95 percent of the leukemia deaths not associated with radiation—that is, the overall rate is nearly twice as high as it would have been without atomic radiation exposure. It is revealed that the younger the age at the time of the bomb, the greater the risk of leukemia during the early period and the more rapid the decline thereafter.

A clear relationship between the incidence of leukemia and radiation dose is present for both cities, but the effect is more pronounced in Hiroshima than in Nagasaki. The lowest doses with a demonstrable leukemogenic effect appear to be in the 0.2-0.4 gray (Gy) (20-40 rads) range in Hiroshima.

…In regard to malignant solid tumors, the following conclusions can be made. Analyses of mortality have shown a significant excess of deaths from malignant solid tumors. The relative risk for various malignant tumors to be induced by radiation (2 versus 0 Gy) varies considerably by site. A significant increase is evident for leukemia; cancers of the lung, breast, and stomach; and multiple myeloma. It is also suggested, though not yet confirmed, that there is an increase in risk for cancers of the esophagus, colon, urinary tract, and salivary glands. Incidence data suggest that breast and thyroid tissues are especially sensitive to the carcinogenic effect of ionizing radiation.

Death rates from all malignant tumors increased with dose in both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but the increase with dose was higher in Hiroshima than in Nagasaki. In most cases the relative risks for various organs are not significantly different from one another at the level of age of mortality.

Radiation-induced solid tumors appear only after a latency period. The length of the latency period seems to decrease with dose increases. Malignancies other than leukemia exhibit different latency patterns over time. Radiation-induced cancers do not become apparent until the usual cancer age is reached. For example, even for those individuals who had already reached the age for lung cancer at the time of the bombing, the shortest latency period was 10-15 years, and in this case, no shortening of the latency period was evident in the high-dose group.

The process of radiation carcinogenesis could be modified by factors such as age at the time of the bombing; attained age; sex; and exposure to tobacco smoke, hormones, and the like. If age at death is fixed, the absolute risk is clearly greater for those who were younger at the time of exposure.

The strongest effect among women has been an excess risk of breast cancer. The effect appears strongest for those exposed before the age of 20 years and less among women aged 20-39 at exposure, and it may not exist among women exposed at older ages. For women aged 20-30 at exposure, the minimal induction period appears to have been between 5 and 10 years.

The increase in cancer mortality appears to be fairly general, including cancers of the lung, esophagus, stomach, colon, and urinary organs and multiple myeloma. The magnitude of the radiation effect varies by site. The excess risk of radiogenic breast cancer begins at ages when cancer rates normally become appreciable, and after 5-10 years among persons already at or near ages of appreciable cancer risk when exposed. Most solid tumors differ from breast cancer, however, in that an excess risk is seen among the oldest survivors as well as among those exposed at younger ages.

The total excess cancer mortality from radiation-induced cancer through 1978 among all survivors is estimated to be 3.4 percent (340 excess deaths from radiation-induced cancers, compared with more than 10,000 not associated with radiation).

The calculation of expected cancer incidence is based on the main conclusions of UNSCEAR, BEIR, and ICRP, which prognosticated the cancer incidence in case of nuclear war. According to these recommendations, radiation-induced carcinogenesis does not have a dose threshold, but the incidence dose rate is linear or linear-quadratic. It is necessary to stress that radiation exposure does not induce any specific ''radiation-type" of cancer but just enhances the incidence of spontaneous malignant tumors.

The principle of calculating the expected cancer incidence following nuclear war is not based on specific scenarios of nuclear war but draws on more general approaches based on radiation dose and the age structure of the population.

The expected cancer rate in a nuclear war depends on the irradiation dose. In the case of modem nuclear war, the doses of gamma- and neutron-irradiation will be substantially greater than those in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A number of scenarios of nuclear wars have been published (from 1 to 10,000 megatons [Mt]) and respective levels of irradiation have been calculated for different explosions and heights above certain localities.4

The main conclusion from all scenarios is the following. The survivors near the target areas of a conflict involving 10,000 Mt of nuclear explosives will be exposed at least to doses of 0.5 to 1.0 Gy (50-100 rads) and greater, which by far exceeds those to which the inhabitants of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were exposed. Naturally, the proportion of exposed persons will be a great deal higher. Practically all the nuclear war survivors throughout the world will be irradiated. Even in territories distant from the explosion sites the people will be exposed to radiation from radioactive fallout at doses up to 0.1 Gy (10 rads) and higher.

…The most noticeable oncological effect would be that of leukemia. The excess risk would be relatively high compared with the normal risk, and it would occur within 2-30 years after nuclear war. However, the total number of deaths from radiation-induced leukemia would be large.

Radiation-induced solid tumors tend to occur at ages at which such cancers normally occur; that is, radiation causes more cancer deaths to occur, but not at earlier ages than usual. Because most cancer deaths occur among the elderly, the effect of a 5 percent excess mortality or 17 percent increase in cancer mortality would not have a marked effect on the average life span.

…The rate of natural occurrence of cancer in the population of an industrialized country is 15 percent. The global fallout of fission products from blasts of 10,000 Mt would increase the cancer rate in the surviving world population by slightly more than 1 percent.

…In summary, a general nuclear war would presumably expose populations of industrial and densely populated areas around the world to levels not less than 1.0 Gy.3 The rest of the world would be exposed to delayed fallout. Based on a total explosive force of 10,000 Mt, survival in the target areas would be about 50 percent. It might be expected that there would be 100 million survivors in each of the target areas of North America, Western Europe, the USSR, and various scattered smaller areas. About 400 million survivors would be irradiated with doses leading to a 17 percent increase of the present cancer incidence, from 15 percent to about 18 percent. This means that about 12 million cases of cancer due to radiation would arise in target areas. In the rest of the world an increase of about 1 percent from 15 percent to about 15.2 percent might lead to some 7 million extra cases. Cancer induction would thus add to the suffering of the postwar world. The general health detriment implicit in such an increase in cancer frequency would, under ordinary circumstances, be regarded as gravely significant.

In conclusion, we would like to stress the following. When cancer develops in new victims, life becomes very difficult for all survivors. They begin to fear the fatal end. Naturally, immediate casualties after nuclear attack will be much greater than oncological consequences, but if even one child develops cancer or leukemia, this will not lighten the burden of responsibility on those who might want to launch a nuclear war. As the great Russian humanist Fydor Dostoyevsky said, "No goods of civilization are worth the tears of a single tortured child.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK219166/#_NBK219166_pubdet_

All chilling stuff and a poignant last comment, especially considering what they are doing to our kids, but a 1-3% increase in cancers isn't as great as you might expect, I know I didn't.

So getting to the nitty gritty, how are cancer rates increasing due to repeated dosing of experimental gene therapy transfection agents?

I will be honest, the following is strong data due to uniformity of collection and being, hopefully, unbiased, a lack of conflicts of interest & regulatory capture and if it is representative can only be described as a crime against humanity, genocide.

Plus remember this is from a generally extremely fit, young selection of individuals who have to be to perform their roles in demanding combat conditions.

Extrapolate to older, less healthy individuals and the outcome must be worse by many factors.

And to have this data now so early after transfection, and so far above baseline presents an extremely alarming, strong signal. It is somewhat corroborated too by other anecdotal reports coming in from hundreds of MDs who cannot speak out publicly for fear of having their registrations cancelled.

As we saw earlier, even the quickest soft tissue cancers like lymphoma or leukemia usually take at least 2 years post exposure, and solid tumors can take decades. If present in organ transplants & grafts though they can become symptomatic in mere months.

---

Sen. Johnson to Secretary Austin: Has DOD Seen an Increase in Medical Diagnoses Among Military Personnel?

February 3, 2022

DOD whistleblowers reveal data showing increases in medical conditions among service members; raise concerns about COVID-19 vaccine safety

WASHINGTON— On Tuesday, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), ranking member of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, sent a letter to Department of Defense (DOD) Secretary Lloyd Austin highlighting concerning reports from three DOD whistleblowers about injuries to servicemen and women potentially related to the COVID-19 vaccines. At the senator’s January 24 roundtable titled COVID-19: A Second Opinion, the senator heard testimony about data from a DOD database showing dramatic increases in medical diagnoses among military personnel.

The senator wrote, “Based on data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), Thomas Renz, an attorney who is representing three Department of Defense (DoD) whistleblowers, reported that these whistleblowers found a significant increase in registered diagnoses on DMED for miscarriages, cancer, and many other medical conditions in 2021 compared to a five-year average from 2016-2020. For example, at the roundtable Renz stated that registered diagnoses for neurological issues increased 10 times from a five-year average of 82,000 to 863,000 in 2021.”

Senator Johnson also raised concerns that “some DMED data showing registered diagnoses of myocarditis had been removed from the database.”

The full text of the letter can be found here and below.

https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/services/files/FB6DDD42-4755-4FDC-BEE9-50E402911E02

Read more coverage regarding the senator’s oversight efforts at The Blaze: Military spokesman claims 5 random years of DOD medical surveillance system were plagued by a giant glitch¹

https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-military-spokesman-claims-5-random-years-of-dod-medical-surveillance-system-were-plagued-by-a-giant-glitch

February 1, 2022

The Honorable Lloyd J. Austin III

Secretary

Department of Defense

Dear Secretary Austin:

On January 24, 2022, I held a roundtable featuring world renowned doctors and medical experts who shared their perspectives on COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and safety and the overall response to the pandemic. At that roundtable, I heard testimony from Thomas Renz, an attorney who is representing three Department of Defense (DoD) whistleblowers, who revealed disturbing information regarding dramatic increases in medical diagnoses among military personnel. The concern is that these increases may be related to the COVID-19 vaccines that our servicemen and women have been mandated to take.

Based on data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), Renz reported that these whistleblowers found a significant increase in registered diagnoses on DMED for miscarriages, cancer, and many other medical conditions in 2021 compared to a five-year average from 2016-2020. For example, at the roundtable Renz stated that registered diagnoses for neurological issues increased 10 times from a five-year average of 82,000 to 863,000 in 2021. There were also increases in registered diagnoses in 2021 for the following medical conditions:

Hypertension – 2,181% increase

Diseases of the nervous system – 1,048% increase

Malignant neoplasms of esophagus – 894% increase

Multiple sclerosis – 680% increase

Malignant neoplasms of digestive organs – 624% increase

Guillain-Barre syndrome – 551% increase

Breast cancer – 487% increase

Demyelinating – 487% increase

Malignant neoplasms of thyroid and other endocrine glands – 474% increase

Female infertility – 472% increase

Pulmonary embolism – 468% increase

Migraines – 452% increase

Ovarian dysfunction – 437% increase

Testicular cancer – 369% increase

Tachycardia – 302% increase

Renz also informed me that some DMED data showing registered diagnoses of myocarditis had been removed from the database. Following the allegation that DMED data had been doctored, I immediately wrote to you on January 24 requesting that you preserve all records referring, relating, or reported to DMED. I have yet to hear whether you have complied with this request.

At the roundtable, Renz revealed the names of the brave whistleblowers who uncovered this information in DMED: Drs. Samuel Sigoloff, Peter Chambers, and Theresa Long. Any retaliatory actions taken against these individuals will not be tolerated and will be investigated immediately. In order to better understand what, if any awareness DoD has about COVID-19 vaccine injuries to service members, I request you provide the following information:

Is DoD aware of increases in registered diagnoses of miscarriages, cancer, or other medical conditions in DMED in 2021 compared to a five-year average from 2016-2020? If so, please explain what actions DoD has taken to investigate the root cause for the increases in these diagnoses.

Have registered diagnoses of myocarditis in DMED been removed from the database from January 2021 to December 2021? If so, please explain why and when this information was removed and identify who removed it.

Please provide this information as soon as possible but no later than February 15, 2022. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/2022/2/sen-johnson-to-secretary-austin-has-dod-seen-an-increase-in-medical-diagnoses-among-military-personnel

---

So in satisfaction of our question:

“Cancer rates following global nuclear war Vs exposure to experimental gene therapies: Which is worse?”

The answer at this stage appears to be with the latter by an enormous 3-900%, barring any sound explanations to the contrary?

But it would correlate too with the pathophysiology involved.²

---

Toxicity of spike fragments SARS-CoV-2 S protein for zebrafish: A tool to study its hazardous for human health? (2022)

Zebrafish injected with fragment 16 to 165 (rSpike), presented mortalities and adverse effects on liver, kidney, ovary and brain tissues.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34942250/

Sometimes events overtake you, I hate to be right on this. And the pathophysiology predicts it won't just be Chinese makes that are causing this.

For the poor it's a death sentence, and a pointless waste of a young life as the virus was never any risk to them at all:

Children in China Diagnosed With Leukemia After Taking Chinese Vaccines

By Eva Fu

March 11, 2022 Updated: March 13, 2022

After receiving her first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, Li Jun’s 4-year-old developed a fever and coughs, which quickly subsided after intravenous therapy at the hospital. But after the second shot, the father could tell something was wrong.

Swelling appeared around his daughter’s eyes and did not go away. For weeks, the girl complained about pains on her legs, where bruises started to emerge seemingly out of nowhere. In January, a few weeks after the second dose, the 4-year-old was diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

“My baby was perfectly healthy before the vaccine dose,” Li (an alias), from China’s north-central Gansu Province, told The Epoch Times. “I took her for a health check. Everything was normal.”

He is among hundreds of Chinese that belong to a social media group claiming to be suffering from or have a household member suffering from leukemia, developed after taking Chinese vaccines. Eight of them confirmed the situation when reached by The Epoch Times. Names of the interviewees have been withheld to protect their safety.

The leukemia cases span across different age groups from all parts of China. But Li and others particularly pointed to a rise in patients from the younger age group in the last few months, coinciding with the regime’s push to inoculate children between 3 and 11 years old beginning last October.

Li’s daughter had her first injection in mid-November under the request of her kindergarten. She is now undergoing chemotherapy at the Lanzhou No. 2 People’s Hospital where at least 20 children are being treated for similar symptoms, most of them between the age of 3 and 8, according to Li.

“Our doctor from the hospital told us that since November, the children coming to their hematology division to treat leukemia have doubled the previous years’ number and they are having a shortage of beds,” he said.

Li claimed that at least eight children from Suzhou district, where he lives, have died recently from leukemia.

The hospital’s hematology division could not be immediately reached for comment.

National Pressure

Roughly 84.4 million children between the 3-11 age group have been vaccinated as of Nov. 13, according to latest figures from China’s National Health Commission, accounting for more than half of the population in that age bracket.

There had been some resistance from Chinese parents when the campaign to vaccinate children first rolled out. They expressed concern about the lack of data about the effects of Chinese vaccines on young people. The vaccines are supplied by two Chinese drugmakers, Sinopharm and Sinovac, which carry an efficacy rate of 79 percent and 50.4 percent, respectively, based on available data from trials conducted on adults.

There’s limited information about the health effects of these vaccines on children, and the World Health Organization said in late November that it has not approved the two vaccines for emergency use on the underaged.

But parents who were reluctant to vaccinate their children have faced pressure to comply. Some said they lost work bonuses or were given a talk by their supervisors. In other cases, their children faced punishment varying from losing honors or even getting barred from attending school, as in the case of Wang Long’s 10-year-old son.

“The school told us last year to take him for vaccination on such and such date, or he can’t go to class,” Wang, from eastern China’s Shandong Province, told The Epoch Times.

The boy received his second dose on Dec. 4. A month later, he began experiencing fatigue and low fever. He is now at Shandong University Qilu Hospital, being treated for acute leukemia, diagnosed on Jan. 18.

Censorship

On WeChat, the all-in-one Chinese social media platform, Li has come to know over 500 patients or their family members sharing the same predicament.

The local disease control center, when called by Li and others, had promised an investigation. But these probes invariably ended with the officials declaring the leukemia cases as “coincidental” and thus unrelated to the vaccines.

The authorities said the same in 2013, following the deaths of over a dozen toddlers after Hepatitis B jabs.

But Li and others in a similar situation are far from being convinced.

“I dare say they didn’t do any verification but only went through the motions,” said Li.

Li suspects that authorities are giving him the runaround. The officials told him a panel of experts would start an investigation within his province, but when he called the provincial level health agency, they disavowed any knowledge, saying reports of these cases had never reached them.

Li and others seeking scrutiny of this issue also stand little chance to get their voices heard in the vast Chinese censorship machinery that constantly filters out anything deemed harmful to the communist regime’s interests.

“The information gets blocked the instant we try to post something online. You can’t send it out,” said Li.

When China’s two top political bodies met last week for its most important annual gathering in what Beijing called the “Two Sessions,” Li pitched in the WeChat group the idea of petitioning in the capital to get the authorities’ attention.

That message drew the authorities’ notice immediately.

“The police called us one by one,” said Li. “They said we have made things up and ordered us to withdraw from the chat group.”

The group was soon disbanded. An information sheet containing details of over 200 leukemia patients, filled out by members of the group, is no longer accessible.

According to Li, there are signs indicating that authorities are well aware of this issue. Doctors, when receiving patients presenting with similar symptoms, would first ask them if they had taken the vaccine, he said, citing information he learned from the WeChat group.

“Got it, they would say, and that’s the end of it,” he said of the doctors’ questioning.

Li got the same reaction when calling the hotline for Chinese state broadcaster CCTV in the hopes of getting media exposure.

“As soon as we said the children had taken COVID-19 vaccine, they asked me if she had gotten leukemia. They knew,” said Li. “They said that they got too many calls because of this.”

Desperation

The cost for treatment is estimated at around 400,000 to 500,000 yuan ($63,093 to $78,867), more than 20 times the average annual income.

Wang, whose 10-year-old was diagnosed with leukemia, is the sole breadwinner for his family and is already under strain making mortgage repayments. He received about only 1,000 yuan ($157) through the state social assistance program to help pay for his son’s treatment.

“I stayed at the hospital until 4 a.m. the night before,” said Wang, adding that the crushing news has quite “broken” the boy’s mother.

“Had he inherited it from the family, we’d accept it as our lot,” Wang said. “But he got sick because of the vaccine. I just can’t reconcile it.”

Li, meanwhile, has been borrowing money from his relatives for the hospital fees. Some of the money trickles in in bills of 20 and 30 yuan, the equivalent of a few dollars, he said.

Li has heard no response from officials or the media.

His friend who works at the local health commission overseeing the distribution of vaccines has told him to not put much hope in the matter.

“The officials knew that you could get leukemia, but the ‘arm is no match for the thigh,’” the friend told him, referring to a Chinese metaphor. “This is a national issue.”

The Health Commission of Lanzhou City, the Health Commission of Gansu Province, the Gansu Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the Lanzhou Disease Prevention and Control Center, the Jiuquan City Disease Prevention and Control Center, Sinopharm, and Sinovac did not answer multiple calls for comment.

The National Health Commission, Sinopharm, and Sinovac did not immediately respond to email queries from The Epoch Times.

https://m.theepochtimes.com/children-in-china-contract-leukemia-after-taking-chinese-vaccines_4332657.html

Useful stats:

https://ourworldindata.org/cancer

#These experimental gene therapies must be stopped immediately pending further investigations#

1. Was there a huge nuclear accident in 2016? That might explain the prior revisions upwards?

* * *

Defining Away Vaccine Safety Signals 5: The DMED "Glitch" Revealed?

The Vaccine Wars Part XXVI

Mathew Crawford

…Hypothesis: The "Glitch" Was an Artifact of Data Fraud

"It is the common peoples' duty to police the police." -Steven Magee

“The May 2021 MSMR was published with summary data for years 2020, 2018, and 2016 at a time when some data for the year 2021 was already known. I think that somebody saw signals of damage by the experimental COVID-19 quasi-vaccines and panicked. It is likely that data for all years 2016-2020 was then upwardly revised to look more inline with expectations for 2021, though changes in 2017 and 2019 will not be apparent until the May 2022 MSMR is published (we get to see in a few weeks).”

https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/defining-away-vaccine-safety-signals-82f?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjozMDk0NDE5NCwicG9zdF9pZCI6NTA4NDQ3MDksIl8iOiJlaDQ3WSIsImlhdCI6MTY0ODAzMzEwMiwiZXhwIjoxNjQ4MDM2NzAyLCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMjk1Nzc2Iiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.d8j-N2FuPJuXTBtEnd1ACvToSVvpMk8DducGqcVc2iE&s=r

2. Trying to make present look good by repainting the past. More confirmatory graphs from Mathew.

To see the needle move on neoplasms within months - if at all - is to me of no surprise but reveals highly potent carcinogenic action. 6th sigma sort of occurrence. Not even nuclear fallout does it to this degree this fast. The nucleotides are too short lived to do that usually.

Defining Away Vaccine Safety Signals 6: DMED Revision, Medium Resolution

The Vaccine Wars Part XXVIII

Mathew Crawford

https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/defining-away-vaccine-safety-signals-e22?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjozMDk0NDE5NCwicG9zdF9pZCI6NTEwMTEzMzcsIl8iOiJlaDQ3WSIsImlhdCI6MTY0ODIxMzQwNCwiZXhwIjoxNjQ4MjE3MDA0LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMjk1Nzc2Iiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.1_MGgNr9WhDVI2xAqk3eM6QPxZLTi7vcm2CGyC8DJaY&s=r