Connect with us

How I Discovered Unconditional Love & How It Changed My Life

Avatar

Published

on

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

It’s been a year since we parted ways. This relationship has been significant in my life. It was the first time I moved out of my mom’s place to move in with a partner. Throughout those 3 years I not only experienced a loving and fun relationship, but I also made a best friend. He was the first person who saw me for me and loved me for me, despite our differences. Our relationship quickly felt like a safe haven for me, I felt protected. I felt loved even when I couldn’t love myself. And I loved him just as much. I grew comfortable enough that I began to settle for the idea of comfort and consistency more than the idea of change and movement. I didn’t realize how strongly I secluded myself from the world and from myself because of this “comfort zone”… until our relationship fell apart.

advertisement - learn more

It took a few weeks for me register that we would no longer be together, that I would have to move out of the space we shared, leave Toronto and go back to my mom’s place in Montreal, all while having no single clue where I was headed. I was swimming in the “scary” unknown. Those three years spent together became “life as I knew it.” They became my reference point, my world. I have built friendships there. I had a partner I could always count on. I lived this new life in Toronto and I didn’t plan to have it any other way anytime soon. But now, all of it was gone, just like that.

--> Become A CE Member: The only thing that keeps our journalism going is YOU. CE members get access to exclusive benefits and support our shared mission.. Click here to learn more!

I was always one to preach about how everything happens for a reason, but this time, the mere concept in my head didn’t cut it. I was devastated. I freaked out.

  • Loss: I felt like I lost my best friend and the man I loved.
  • Rejection: I felt rejected by the man I thought loved me for me. “I guess me wasn’t enough after all.”
  • Feeling left out: My friends and him would continue hanging out as usual, yet I could no longer be a part of it. I moved far away and was no longer “in the picture.”
  • Feeling unloved and unimportant: I equated this whole experience with being less loved. “He broke up with me because he no longer loves me. I am no longer important to him.”
  • Feeling Alone: Because I felt unable to relate with most people in this world, losing the one partnership I felt like I could relate with brought me face-to-face with an extreme feeling of loneliness.

For months, I was still trying to mentally pick up all of the pieces and stick them back together. I would call him in tears and pity myself wondering why no one ever called me. “Weren’t we the closest friends just a month ago? What happened?” I would say. I could not bare how rejected I felt. I felt like a victim. My love was intimately tied in to a feeling of bitterness and blame towards him for how he managed to dig up all of my darkness. And he left me alone with it.

For a while, I tried to control my pain by controlling my relationships. At times, I tried to squeeze out any bit of love and acknowledgment I could get from virtual or phone conversations with him and sometime others… But every bit I could get came with an aftertaste of my own inability to be at peace and in love with myself, with my own inability to just love unconditionally.

And this… this is why we needed to break up.

I needed to grow up. I needed to first and foremost accept the current condition of my emotional state (rejection issues, fear of loss, aloneness, powerlessness) without solely reacting to and blaming the circumstances. Without trying to patch it up with something or someone. I couldn’t patch it up anyways, and this was a true blessing disguised as deprivation. Besides, I carried this baggage long before I entered any relationship in life. Relationships simply brought them to my awareness. This baggage was mine to carry, and mine to let go of.

advertisement - learn more

“If you cannot be at ease with yourself when alone, you will seek a relationship to cover up your unease.  You can be sure that the unease will then reappear in some other form within the relationship, and you will probably hold your partner responsible for it.” – Eckhart Tolle

This was no longer a matter of REcovering from a breakup, but about UNcovering myself from all of the limiting beliefs and thoughts that have made my world more narrow, my relationships more narrow, and my perspective more narrow.

  • When I expect my relationships to be a certain way before I can love and be at peace
  • When I rely on someone else to feel comfortable in my own skin
  • When I refuse to accept the transient nature of experiences and rely on predictability
  • When I live my life in fear of change

And more specifically…

  • When I define love as some label, some “way it should look like,” some opposite of something else…

I forget what love is.

Love. Just. Is. 

ms04As time went by and I became too exhausted to hold on (not that we always have to wait until then lol) I finally gave up on reacting to everything and resisting the flow of my emotions. I had to accept, and so I did. By accepting not only the situation – but everything I felt – the dust gently settled. My emotions calmed. My thoughts quieted. I was able to sink back into the present moment and experience life as it was – not as I thought it should be. I could still hear the echoes of my ego telling me “hey, what are you doing? You need to stay in control here. You need to keep thinking about how you’re going to fix your life. You need to reach out for something or someone as soon as it gets uncomfortable.” 

But by that point, I had gained a certain level of maturity where I understood this would only throw me into the same cycle of endless reactions. Did I need to repeat this, or could I now learn my lesson and just let it be? I didn’t know where “letting things be” would lead me. It sounded directionless, not to mention it didn’t change my situation.  My ego did not like that, but my intuition knew it was what I needed to do.

As I let things be and chose to simply “not go” with the same old mind stories as they would try and taunt me, I soon realized it wasn’t love that hurt. It was the mind stories. It was the mental interpretations, meanings, beliefs and conditions I built around love, not love itself.

It didn’t hurt when I allowed myself to love:

  • It hurt when I told myself love was lost.
  • It hurt when I told myself I wasn’t loved.
  • It hurt when I told myself I couldn’t love.
  • It hurt when I told myself love should look this way or that way.
  • It hurt when I saw myself as separate from love.

By choosing to no longer feed those stories, I realized that Love isn’t really something we do or reach out for, it is something we are. And it is from this space that we are able to love truly.

“How we relate, or rather how well we love, depends on how empty we are of ideas, concepts, expectations.” – Kim Eng

Love & Attachment

Attachment, which we often confuse with love, is the subconscious act of “investing” your own inner-discomfort and emotional baggage in something or someone else to protect yourself from facing and feeling it. This is why we become possessive and dependent. This is why we tend to reduce the other to a “thing” we get addicted to. This is why we can go from loving to hating as soon as our partner pushes our buttons and triggers something uncomfortable within us. Attachment has to do with personal fears more than it has to do with loving someone.

Unconditional love, however, begins with the understanding that all of your relationships – even the challenging ones – have something to teach you. If they push your buttons, they are making you aware of your buttons. This may sound like a “bad” thing at first, but just a little step back can give enough perspective to realize that a button pusher is simply reminding you that you have the option to either stay with your issues and protect yourself from ever having to deal with them… or acknowledge them, see what they’re all about and perhaps work on letting them go. It becomes difficult to not love unconditionally when you lose the tendency to blame others for your own reactions. 😉

“There’s two ways to live your life:
1. You do everything you can to avoid the button pushers.
or 2. You get rid of your buttons and at last enjoy everything.”

Yes, it takes a lot of self-observation to get there… but all it takes to begin the journey is the will to turn your attention inwards when your sensitivities are brought to your awareness. That way, you no longer get caught up pointing fingers out there while dismissing the cue to work on releasing whatever is weighing you down.

Unconditional love is the kind of love that emerges naturally once you stop believing all the junk in your head telling you “you are not enough, you need this and that before you can feel peaceful, you need others to be a certain way before you can let them be etc.” As you let go of such thoughts – not by judging or fighting them but by simply releasing your grip on them – you naturally enter a state of peace and wholeness within yourself. You then get to feel for yourself that true love is not about what others can give you because you feel lack, it’s about the love you can share freely because you’re already complete.

“Love is about complete freedom. The freedom to be 100% oneself and give that same freedom to others.” – Franco DeNicola

Love has no opposites, no conditions, no rules, no separations. Such things exist only in our minds as concepts and ideas trying to shape something so immaterial, immeasurable and vast into a compact, solid shape. It may sound normal due to how we are taught relationships should be like. It may sound normal due to all of the definitions of love thrown around in movies and magazines… but once again: Love isn’t a definition. Love Is.

How This Changed My Life & Relationships

You would think letting go of chasing, controlling, needing and attaching to others would leave you lonely and unable to relate with people. But as I simply began to live in the present moment without struggling to change it, change others or change myself, not only did I begin to enjoy my own company – I actually began to attract more wonderful connections and relationships in my life. In this new state of being, I am now able to enjoy those relationships more fully for what they are because I no longer use them to fulfill a personal agenda.

Aw.

In fact, I am now closer than ever with my ex, who triggered this whole learning experience for me. Ever since I released my expectations, it became so easy to be friends once again. No resentment, no drama, simply an unconditional love and gratitude for everything that we are and have taught one another. I am now able to see more clearly the gem that each of my relationships have to offer: opportunities for growth, for both parties to identify their blockages and embody even more freedom within themselves. It doesn’t mean that I no longer have emotions, fears or feelings of attachment that come up, it only means that I am now able to see them for what they are and no longer identify myself with them. I am now back in the driver’s seat of my life, more able than ever before to experience and embrace all that life has to offer.

P.S. I love you.

How To Change The World

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

General

Dr Byram Bridle Speaks For 100 Colleagues Afraid To Share Science About COVID Vaccine Concerns

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 2 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Dr Byram Bridle and two other physicians spoke at a news conference on Parliament Hill about their experience being censored or harassed as a result of sharing their medical opinions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

  • Reflect On:

    Do we as citizens truly want our scientists and physicians to be silenced and censored?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

Why are scientists and experts in this field scared to share concerning science regarding COVID vaccines? Just ask Byram Bridle, a viral immunologist from the University of Guelph who recently released a detailed, in-depth report regarding safety concerns about the COVID vaccines. The report was released to act as a guide for parents when it comes to deciding whether or not their child should be vaccinated against COVID-19. Bridle published the paper on behalf of one hundred other scientists and doctors who part of the Canadian COVID Care Alliance, but who are afraid to ‘come out’ publicly and share their concerns.

Bridle has stated about the Alliance,

In fact the reason that we (Canadian COVID Care Alliance) exist is sad. We exist because we’re like minded in the sense that we all want to be able to speak openly and freely about the scientist and medicine underpinning COVID-19, and we don’t feel safe to do it  anywhere else other than within our own private group, where we feel safe.

Below is our detailed report on the news conference held on Parliament Hill on June 17th, 2021. It was organized by Canadian MP Derek Sloan who has received hundreds of concerned communications from Canadian citizens about the censorship of scientists. Bridle and two other physicians spoke at the conference.

A recent article published in the British Medical Journal by journalist Laurie Clarke has highlighted the fact that Facebook has already removed at least 16 million pieces of content from its platform and added warnings to approximately 167 million others. YouTube has removed nearly 1 million videos related to, according to them, “dangerous or misleading covid-19 medical information.”

The more important questions to ask are: who is deciding what’s misleading? Who decides what’s false?

Some of the most renowned scientists and expert in this field have been subjected to this “fact-checking,” and they’ve been outspoken about how much of this fact-checking is flat out censorship. You decide.

To note: HealthFeedback.org, a fact checker, has attempted to refute some of Bridle’s claims. You can read more about them here.

 

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

General

Study Finds Many Uninfected Adults Still Have Strong Pre-Existing Antibody Protection Against COVID

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 5 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A study published in March 2021 suggests that the majority of healthy adults in British Columbia, Canada, have immunity from COVID-19 despite the fact that some of them have never been infected with it.

  • Reflect On:

    Why has the power of naturally acquired immunity not been recognized and focused on more deeply? Why is the only focus on vaccination?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

A study published in March 2021 suggested that  the majority of healthy Adults in British Columbia have evidence of pre-existing or naturally acquired immunity to COVID-19.  They found this to be the case even in individuals who haven’t been infected, and could be explained by the fact that coronaviruses that already circle the globe, prior to COVID-19, may provide protection from the novel virus.  They explain,

There are 4 circulating coronaviruses predating COVID-19 that cause up to 30% of seasonal upper respiratory tract infections (8). The spike proteins of β-coronaviruses HKU1 and OC43 exhibit approximately 40% sequence similarity, whereas the α-coronaviruses NL63 and 229E exhibit approximately 30% structural similarity with SARS-CoV-2 (9). The common occurrence of circulating coronaviruses year after year and their structural similarity with SARS-CoV-2 raises the possibility that the former may stimulate cross-reactive responses toward SARS-CoV-2 and that this heterotopic immunity may impact clinical susceptibility to COVID-19 and/or modulate responses to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (10, 11)….In conclusion, this study reveals common preexisting, broadly reactive SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in uninfected adults. These findings warrant larger studies to understand how these antibodies affect the severity of COVID-19, as well as the quality and longevity of responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

We are living in a world where anything “natural” seems to be shunned by a large portion of the medical community, and defined as “pseudoscientific”, when in fact, research suggests the opposite.

Natural immunity is quite robust. Dr. Suneel Dhang, an internal medical physician in the United States explains,

I’m not aware of any vaccine out there which will ever give you more immunity than if you’re naturally recovered from the illness itself…If you’ve naturally recovered from it, my understanding as a doctor level scientist is that those antibodies will always be better than a vaccine, and if you know any differently, please let me know.

A number of studies have now been published demonstrating that infection from COVID will provide a person with long lasting antibodies. Several studies have demonstrated that individuals with prior infection not only have these antibodies, but that they also developed robust levels of B cells and T cells (necessary for fighting off the virus) and these cells may persist in the body for a very long time. How long? It could be decades, or even a lifetime.

Individuals with infection from SARS, for example, still have a robust level of antibodies nearly two decades later. Research has also found that even a mild COVID infection can provide very strong protection that could last a lifetime.

Last fall there were reports that antibodies wane quickly after infection with the virus that causes COVID-19, and mainstream media interpreted that to mean that immunity was not long-lived. But that’s a misrepresentation of the data. It’s normal for antibody levels to go down after acute infection, but they don’t go down to zero; they plateau. Here, we found antibody-producing cells in people 11 months after first symptoms. These cells will live and produce antibodies for the rest of people’s lives. That’s strong evidence for long-lasting immunity. –  Ali Ellebedy, PhD, associate professor of pathology & immunology, of medicine and micro-biology. (source)

This science and research completely opposes what we were hearing early on in the pandemic, that prior infection, and infection from other coronaviruses may only provide protection for a few months or even a couple of years. It turns out that it’s probably a lot longer.

When infected with SARS-CoV-2, most people clear this virus from their body by mounting a robust, long-lasting immune response that targets multiple components of the virus1. These people will be protected from re-infection with the same variant of SARS-CoV-2 and, due to the breadth of a natural immune response, will also likely have some degree of protection against emerging new variants of SARS-CoV-2. Indeed, most people who have naturally acquired immunity should not be at risk of developing severe disease. – Dr. Byram Bridle, Viral Immunologist, University of Guelph. (source)

How does this compare to vaccine induced immunity? We don’t know as there is not enough data to say yet.

Dr. Ozlem Tureci, co-founder and CMO of BioNTech, the company that developed a COVID vaccine with Pfizer told CNBC that people will likely need a third shot of its two-dose COVID-19 vaccine. She also believes people will need one every year. Judging by this belief, vaccine induced immunity will continually wane and those who choose to go the vaccine route may have to continue with inoculations.

The scientific consensus of the number of people infected around the world is well over what testing has claimed. Currently, we’re nearly at 200,000,000 cases, but that number is most likely well over a billion globally. This is why the survival rate for healthy people under the age of 60 is nearly one hundred percent.

These infection numbers are important because it represents a globe closing in on herd immunity. My question is, what effect does the vaccine have on those who have already had an infection? What does this do to natural protection one gets from infection?

Another important question to ask is, why has the topic of naturally acquired immunity been given absolutely zero attention within the mainstream? Why are they pushing the idea that we can’t go back to completely normal until every single person has had a vaccine if that doesn’t match what the science is saying?

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Opinion | Which Is More Dangerous: Mainstream Media or The Spike Protein?

Avatar

Published

on

By

10 minute read
By MattLphotography

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    It's known that SARS-COV2 poses very little risk to healthy children. Mainstream media continues to urge universal & immediate vaccination of this group claiming the vaccine is safe, while ignoring data that points to grave danger of the vaccines.

  • Reflect On:

    When will large mainstream media sources be held accountable for unbalanced reporting? Who will hold them accountable?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

Update June 18, 2021: A summary of the uncertainties involving the spike protein experiments and a link to a HealthFeedback.org critique were added.

Last week CE published this piece that demonstrated the obvious spin The Washington Post used to mislead their readers about the status of the unvaccinated, claiming that their rates of infection, death and hospitalization are significantly higher than vaccinated individuals when in fact they never measured these rates. In this article I will once again focus on the Washington Post and their lack of journalistic integrity. This time their propaganda is more egregious because they are targeting the largest pool of unvaccinated individuals: children.

The Washington Post urges the vaccination of adolescents

On May 10, 2021 the Washington Post published this article titled “FDA authorizes Pfizer Coronavirus vaccine for adolescents 12 to 15 years old”. The article begins with a quote from Kawsar R. Talaat, an assistant professor of international health at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health who says,  “A vaccine gives them an extra layer of protection and allows them to go back to being kids.” 

This is a fascinating statement. Obviously kids were never not kids during the pandemic. Dr. Talaat is essentially saying that in order to be allowed to enjoy their youth kids must be vaccinated. However the restrictions that have been imposed upon their activity were never based on sound data. Asymptomatic spread could never be quantified or even confirmed. Mask mandates have been empirically demonstrated to have no effect on transmissibility or incidence of infection. The only things preventing kids from going back to being kids are the mandates that remain unsupported by any evidentiary arguments–not their vaccination status.

This statement was then further supported in the article:

”Robert W. Frenck Jr., the researcher who led [an] adolescent trial at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, who said the study was designed to test whether it triggered immune responses, not whether it prevented disease. But because of the number of children who became ill in the placebo arm of the trial, it also became evident the vaccine offered robust protection. He finishes by stating ‘That really points out how much covid there is in the adolescent community.’”

Dr. Frenck admits that the study he conducted was not designed to tell whether the vaccine prevented disease but whether children in the study developed antibodies. The point he is trying to make is that there is a lot of disease in the adolescent community. How much? In his study 16 out of approximately 1150 unvaccinated kids got Covid, all of whom recovered. That is an absolute risk of 1.4%. Compare that to the risk of getting the flu in a flu season: 8%. 

The article goes on to claim that the mortality of COVID is greater than the flu in children. The Post correctly states that of the 581,000 deaths from Covid only 300 adolescents have perished from the disease, an admittedly extremely small percentage but tragic nonetheless. However they state that this number is greater than the number of adolescents that die from the flu which justifies universal vaccinations. The article cites this paper from the CDC that they claim confirms this statistic. In it the CDC states that 188 children died from the flu in the 2017-18 season, indeed less than 300. However the paper then states that “CDC estimates the actual number was closer to 600”. We have caught the Post in what can be fairly called a lie that is being used to make their case that the threat of the disease justifies prevention through vaccination.

Vaccination Risks and what we know about the “Spike Protein”

Every medical intervention has a risk/benefit relationship that must be examined closely. The Washington Post never once addresses the potential risk of the vaccine in children. Despite mainstream media’s dogged refusal to pursue any research into potential harm of the Covid vaccines, some very troubling information has recently surfaced if one is willing to look beyond headlines and CDC reports. Unlike the Washington Post, I will also examine the risk aspect of the vaccine with a look at the role of the infamous “spike” protein.

As is well known, the Spike protein on the SARS-COV2 virus is what allows it to enter a human cell and infect it. It is also the target protein of the mRNA “vaccines” that use a novel approach to teach our immune systems to recognize it by stimulating our own cells to produce this protein ourselves, hopefully triggering our immune system to produce antibodies against it.

The vaccine manufacturers and the FDA who grant them authorization to deploy their product have made an enormous assumption: the virus is dangerous, but the spike protein is not. It is becoming clear that this assumption does not hold true. In this short article published on April 30, 2021 (11 days before the WP published their article) Salk News summarizes one of several scientific publications that demonstrate the danger of the spike protein:

“The paper, published on April 30, 2021, in Circulation Research, also shows conclusively that COVID-19 is a vascular disease, demonstrating exactly how the SARS-CoV-2 virus damages and attacks the vascular system on a cellular level. The findings help explain COVID-19’s wide variety of seemingly unconnected complications, and could open the door for new research into more effective therapies.

‘A lot of people think of it as a respiratory disease, but it’s really a vascular disease,” says Assistant Research Professor Uri Manor, who is co-senior author of the study. “That could explain why some people have strokes, and why some people have issues in other parts of the body. The commonality between them is that they all have vascular underpinnings.'”

The takeaway from these statements is that Covid-19 is a vascular disease more than just a respiratory illness. This was suspected very early on in the pandemic when many people were injured by bleeding, clots, strokes and organ failure. The authors were able to establish its mechanism by an elegant experiment. They designed a “pseudovirus”, one that had the SARS-COV2 spike protein on its surface but without any viral RNA in it. The pseudovirus damaged the lungs and pulmonary vasculature in animal models. They then isolated the molecular pathway by which spike proteins alter the metabolism of vascular endothelial cells causing injury. Conclusion: the spike protein itself causes harm in animal models.

Though we cannot definitively assert, from this study alone, that the spike protein is directly responsible for injury in humans, we must avail ourselves of the reality that this may take a very long time to prove definitively. If it is shown that an intervention is dangerous to animals there is no justification in assuming that it will be safe in a human being. That is why we use animal models in medical research to begin with.

“Fact Checkers” are Taking Notice

As expected, such statements are getting a lot of attention in the media. PolitiFact quickly responded with two articles (one here) “debunking” the theory that spike proteins are dangerous to humans. They quote Dr. Walter Orenstein (associate director of Emory University’s Emory Vaccine Center) and Dr. Paul Offit (director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia) who both summarize that they are not aware of any evidence around the danger of spike proteins. Neither, however commented on the study presented in this essay.

PolitiFact also noted that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) called the spike protein “harmless”. Once again, PolitiFact accepted their blanket statement without asking the CDC for their opinion of the evidence cited here. PolitiFact declined to query the CDC for a different explanation of why hospitalized Covid-19 patients commonly expressed systemic disease often with vascular and clotting disorders.

Another fact-checking organization, HealthFeedback.org, took aim at the Circulation Research study. They correctly point out that we cannot confirm whether the spike protein on the “pseudovirus” is identical to the SARS-COV2 virus or the ones encoded for by the mRNA in the vaccines. The concentration of pseudovirus used in their experiment may exceed that of a typical or severe Covid-19 infection and/or the level of circulating spike protein following vaccination as they point out as well. You can read their full critique of the relevant scientific studies and subsequent claims here.

The Danger of an mRNA vaccine that generates spike proteins

If the spike protein is pathogenic, i.e. capable of causing disease, how do we know that when we create antibodies to it we will be completely protected from it? We don’t. How do we know that every person inoculated will mount an antibody response to them? We don’t. This should be sounding alarms in every institution charged with public health. Why? With traditional vaccines there is very little risk, if any, of contracting disease from the vaccine. For example, if a person inoculated with a Hepatitis B vaccine does not mount an immunological response they do not end up getting Hepatitis B.

The situation we may be in is much more concerning. These mRNA vaccines, if they work as intended, are in fact introducing the disease-inducing component of the virus into our bodies. As with most biological processes there will be a wide distribution of responses to the vaccine from people who have little or no side-effects to others who suffer devastating injury. Is that what we are seeing now? Yes it is. 

The vaccines migrate throughout the body after injection

More recently, more disturbing information is coming to light. Bioavailability studies of the vaccine were not made public prior to Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). A Pfizer bioavailability study, obtained through the FOIA from a Japanese regulatory agency by a group of international scientists, demonstrates where the vaccine may go once it has been injected into the muscle tissue of our shoulder. Table 2.6.5.5B in this study indicates that the very same Lipid Nanoparticles (LNPs) used in the Pfizer vaccine begin to redistribute throughout the bodies of mice. Within 15 minutes after inoculation LNPs show up in the brain, liver, gastrointestinal tract, heart, lungs and especially in the ovaries and spleen. We can infer that where the LNPs go so do the mRNA that codes for spike protein. That was the purpose behind doing this study. We can also safely say that Pfizer and the other Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers never intended for their product to migrate so far from the site of inoculation.

This story is still evolving, however these studies and recently released bioavailability reports help to explain the clinical picture of Covid-19 with its broad effects on the body that are not limited to the respiratory system. Furthermore it may substantiate the numerous reports of injury following vaccinations like strokes, blood clots, bleeding, “brain fog”, Bell’s Palsy, etc.

The spike protein is toxic. The vaccine induces our cells to make spike proteins. The vaccine spreads throughout the body after injection. Until another unifying explanation is found we must assume that these vaccines are potentially far more dangerous than anticipated.

A call to halt vaccinations in the UK

In this advisory letter to Dr. June Raine, chief executive of Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (the UK’s FDA), Dr. Tess Lawrie, the director of an evidence based medicine consulting firm, urges the director to halt the vaccination program in that country after an extensive review of the UK’s adverse reaction data was conducted.

The Takeaway

We know, through the CDC’s own data, that Covid-19 vaccines provide almost no benefit to children and adolescents. The danger of vaccination is yet to be fully understood or quantified. In my opinion, the medical community, the FDA and CDC have no reasonable argument to encourage parents to vaccinate their children at this point. The Washington Post has once again demonstrated sloppy research standards, unbalanced reporting and lack of integrity. In this case adolescents, who are among the least vulnerable to the virus, may be harmed from The Post’s inability or unwillingness to uphold basic journalistic principles.

 

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Elevate your inbox and get conscious articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!