So You Just Need One Good Reason Why Not To Get A SARS Vaccine?

So you just need one good reason why not to get an experimental SARS vaccine?

Well then, here it is…


From the article:


On December 1, 2020, the ex-Pfizer head of respiratory research Dr. Michael Yeadon and the lung specialist and former head of the public health department Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg filed an application with the EMA, the European Medicine Agency responsible for EU-wide drug approval, for the immediate suspension of all SARS CoV 2 vaccine studies, in particular the BioNtech/Pfizer study on BNT162b (EudraCT number 2020-002641-42).

Dr. Wodarg and Dr. Yeadon demand that the studies – for the protection of the life and health of the volunteers – should not be continued until a study design is available that is suitable to address the significant safety concerns expressed by an increasing number of renowned scientists against the vaccine and the study design.

On the one hand, the petitioners demand that, due to the known lack of accuracy of the PCR test in a serious study, a so-called Sanger sequencing must be used. This is the only way to make reliable statements on the effectiveness of a vaccine against Covid-19. On the basis of the many different PCR tests of highly varying quality, neither the risk of disease nor a possible vaccine benefit can be determined with the necessary certainty, which is why testing the vaccine on humans is unethical per se.

Furthermore, they demand that it must be excluded, e.g. by means of animal experiments, that risks already known from previous studies, which partly originate from the nature of the corona viruses, can be realized. The concerns are directed in particular to the following points:

  • The formation of so-called “non-neutralizing antibodies” can lead to an exaggerated immune reaction, especially when the test person is confronted with the real, “wild” virus after vaccination. This so-called antibody-dependent amplification, ADE, has long been known from experiments with corona vaccines in cats, for example. In the course of these studies all cats that initially tolerated the vaccination well died after catching the wild virus.
  • The vaccinations are expected to produce antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. However, spike proteins also contain syncytin-homologous proteins, which are essential for the formation of the placenta in mammals such as humans. It must be absolutely ruled out that a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 could trigger an immune reaction against syncytin-1, as otherwise infertility of indefinite duration could result in vaccinated women.
  • The mRNA vaccines from BioNTech/Pfizer contain polyethylene glycol (PEG). 70% of people develop antibodies against this substance – this means that many people can develop allergic, potentially fatal reactions to the vaccination.
  • The much too short duration of the study does not allow a realistic estimation of the late effects. As in the narcolepsy cases after the swine flu vaccination, millions of healthy people would be exposed to an unacceptable risk if an emergency approval were to be granted and the possibility of observing the late effects of the vaccination were to follow. Nevertheless, BioNTech/Pfizer apparently submitted an application for emergency approval on December 1, 2020.

CALL FOR HELP: Dr. Wodarg and Dr. Yeadon ask as many EU citizens as possible to co-sign their petition by sending the e-mail prepared here to the EMA.

End Excerpt.


I’ve been wondering when sterilization would be found as a “side effect.” And while I will certainly feign no surprise, I will simply say that any woman that would get this vaccine before these questions are answered in triplicate is simply not human, not sane, wallowing in some twisted mix of Narcissism and Sociopathy. Sterilization is not an acceptable sacrifice for anything, let alone an unproven, apparently eugenic, experimental inoculation.

And, for both women and men, remember well what we learned from my Lethal Injection documentary – that reproductive organ xenotransplantation (inoculation) as a sterilization vaccine is used to sterilize wild horses and other animals, as well as human men and women, by creating the same type of antibody response against male and female reproductive organs, preventing spermatogenesis in males as well as birth control in females.

Haven’t seen Lethal Injection: The Story Of Vaccination?

Well then, now is a really good time to refresh your memory or see it for the first time. Why? Well, besides what is about to be sold to us in the form of a vaccine, as many of you know my new documentary Lethal Injection Part 2: A Corruption Of Blood is going to be posted very soon, likely by this weekend if I can do so. Much of the history covered in Part 1 will not be repeated, so I would recommend rewatching Part One as a primer for Part 2. And remember, this documentary will be a master class on the entire medical industry, totaling over several parts about 35-40 hours at best estimate. That means this first installment will barely even scratch the surface of the whole story behind this nightmare we are living through today. My promise to you: after watching this series, you will never again question what is the horrific story behind the story of vaccination, and will never again ask your doctor whether vaccination is right for you.


Wow! I posted this in 2011. Imagine what I’ve uncovered since then!

Look for Lethal Injection 2, coming this month, and God-willing this weekend!

Oh, and by the way, when I searched for that same page from the US Geological Survey on horse sterilization, it was gone. In its place? An updated, less informative page on the subject. Here’s a couple highlights of what it says today…



 …The U.S. Geological Survey and the Bureau of Land Management are cooperating on studies investigating the potential of fertility control drugs to reduce foaling rates. 

Molecular tagging is a new application of molecular genetic techniques to traditional mark-recapture methodology designed to address situations where traditional methods fail. In such studies, non-invasively collected samples (such as feces, feathers, or fur) are used as a source of DNA that is then genotyped at multiple loci such that each individual animal can be uniquely identified. Thus, each individual’s DNA represents a unique tag analogous to a band or other mark used in traditional mark-recapture studies.

…This study involves developing a new method for estimating horse population sizes based on non-invasive techniques; using genetic analysis of fecal samples (dung) and mark-recapture population estimation models. This research is in collaboration with Colorado State University and BLM.

FORT scientists are leading collaborative research projects to provide the BLM with better tools for managing expanding wild horse and burro populations. We are assessing the carrying capacity of wild horse habitats, behavioral effects of spaying mares and gelding a proportion of a herd’s stallions, testing the efficacy of an intrauterine device for mares, and evaluating four fertility-control tools for burros. We are also developing aerial survey techniques for burros, testing the use of DNA extracted from dung to count wild horses, and evaluating effects of cattle versus horses on sage- grouse habitat. Collaborators include Colorado State University, BLM, Oklahoma State University, University of Massachusetts, and APHIS.


Less info to be sure, but they are still up to their sterilization vaccine tricks. Again, see the first section of Lethal Injection Part 1 for the full detail on how sterilization vaccines work, which is the same reason this new vaccine will cause similar autoimmune sterilization.

It does however, point to a few studies that we should certainly take note of, which were the studies used to justify the continued use of these sterilization vaccines back in 2011. The first just happens to be the results of this previous sterilization campaign as originally covered by my documentary. Let’s see how their sterilization vaccine (an inoculation of pig ovary proteins [e.g. Porcine Zona Pellucida (PZP)] into the male and female horses faired…


Foaling rates in feral horses treated with the immunocontraceptive porcine zona pellucida

Wildlife Society BulletinBy: J.I. Ransom, J.E. Roelle, B.S. Cade, L. Coates-Markle, and A.J. Kane

Year Published: 2011


Locally abundant feral horses (Equus caballus) can rapidly deplete available resources. Fertility control agents present promising nonlethal tools for reducing their population growth rates. We tested the effect of 2 forms of the immunocontraceptive porcine zona pellucida (PZP) on foaling rates in 3 populations of feral horses in the western United States. A liquid form requiring annual boosters was administered at Little Book Cliffs Wild Horse Range, Mesa County (CO), and Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range, Bighorn County (WY) and Carbon County (MT), and a time-release pellet form designed to produce 2 yr of infertility was administered at McCullough Peaks Herd Management Area, Park County (WY). Average foaling rates (foals born/mare-yr) from direct observation of untreated and treated female horses (mares), 2004-2008, were 60.1% (n = 153 mare-yr) versus 6.6% (n = 91 mare-yr) at Little Book Cliffs, and 62.8% (n = 129 mare-yr) versus 17.7% (n = 79 mare-yr) at Pryor Mountain, respectively. At McCullough Peaks, mean annual foaling rates from 2006 to 2008 were 75.0% (n = 48 mare-yr) for untreated mares and 31.7% (n = 101 mare-yr) for treated mares. Controlling for age of mares and pretreatment differences in fertility, PZP reduced foaling rates in all 3 herds. The pellets used at McCullough Peaks (produced by cold evaporation) were less effective than pellets used in a previous trial and produced by heat extrusion. Immunocontraception with PZP may be a useful tool in reducing fertility rates in some western United States feral horse herds, but population growth reduction will depend on timely access to mares for inoculation and the proportion of mares that can be successfully treated. ?? 2011 The Wildlife Society.


In another study referenced, we find a different kind of “side effect” that perhaps we don’t speak of enough:


Contraception can lead to trophic asynchrony between birth pulse and resources

By: Jason I. Ransom, N. Thompson Hobbs, and Jason Bruemmer


Abiotic inputs such as photoperiod and temperature can regulate reproductive cyclicity in many species. When humans perturb this process by intervening in reproductive cycles, the ecological consequences may be profound. Trophic mismatches between birth pulse and resources in wildlife species may cascade toward decreased survival and threaten the viability of small populations. We followed feral horses (Equus caballus) in three populations for a longitudinal study of the transient immunocontraceptive porcine zona pellucida (PZP), and found that repeated vaccinations extended the duration of infertility far beyond the targeted period. After the targeted years of infertility, the probability of parturition from post-treated females was 25.6% compared to 64.1% for untreated females, when the data were constrained only to females that had demonstrated fertility prior to the study. Estimated time to parturition increased 411.3 days per year of consecutive historical treatment. Births from untreated females in these temperate latitude populations were observed to peak in the middle of May, indicating peak conception occurred around the previous summer solstice. When the post-treated females did conceive and give birth, parturition was an estimated 31.5 days later than births from untreated females, resulting in asynchrony with peak forage availability. The latest neonate born to a post-treated female arrived 7.5 months after the peak in births from untreated females, indicating conception occurred within 24–31 days of the winter solstice. These results demonstrate surprising physiological plasticity for temperate latitude horses, and indicate that while photoperiod and temperature are powerful inputs driving the biological rhythms of conception and birth in horses, these inputs may not limit their ability to conceive under perturbed conditions. The protracted infertility observed in PZP-treated horses may be of benefit for managing overabundant wildlife, but also suggests caution for use in small refugia or rare species.


Are these studies talking about horses, or us? Or both? It’s hard to say. For these PZP vaccines are used in human sterilization as well.

For more information, here’s another study on the subject, for those that have that I don’t believe this conspiracy stuff attitude, here you can instead believe the scientific data:




The basic principle of contraceptive vaccine is to generate either humoral and/or cell mediated immune response against hormones/proteins that are critical for reproduction, which will lead to interference in their biological activity resulting in inhibition of fertility. Basically, contraceptive vaccines can be broadly categorised as those i) inhibit production of gamete (spermatozoa, egg); ii) inhibit gamete functions such as fertilization; and iii) inhibit gamete outcome. GnRH primarily synthesized and secreted by the hypothalamus (though extra-hypothalamic sites for its secretion have been reported) acts on the anterior pituitary and in turn regulate the production of luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH). Both, LH and FSH secreted by pituitary, in turn acts on testes and ovaries leading to production of sperm and oocytes, respectively. Thus neutralization of GnRH, LH and FSH or blocking LH/FSH receptor by generating specific antibodies may lead to inhibition of gamete production. Generation of immune response against spermatozoa- and/or egg-specific proteins will interfere in their respective functions thereby leading to inhibition of fertilization. Post-fertilization, the embryo synthesize and secrete human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), which has also been used as target for development of contraceptive vaccine for women (28). In the context of wildlife population management, contraceptive vaccines based on GnRH and zona pellucida (ZP) have been tried at the field level. Figure 1 illustrates the basic principle and steps at which the GnRH and ZP-based contraceptive vaccines will act thereby leading to inhibition of fertility. In the present review, both GnRH- and ZP-based contraceptive vaccines will be briefly discussed with respect to their contraceptive efficacy and safety. In addition, the current limitations with respect to contraceptive vaccine delivery in free-ranging wildlife and plausible solutions will be discussed.


When will you get it through your head, you live-stock, that your reproductive ability is a disease that needs an autoimmune vaccine against it? What more needs to be said? For now, ironically, you have it from the horses mouths – a former minister of health and a former Pharma head executive.

Or maybe they just retired to go into the conspiracy business…?

Please share this article with every and anyone you know that has or is expecting to have children in their lifetime. There is no turning back from this kind of reproductive harm.


–Clint richard-son (
–Tuesday, December 8th, 2020