What We Now Know About COVID Vaccine Shedding

Story at a Glance: •After the COVID-19 vaccines hit the market, stories began emerging of unvaccinated individuals becoming ill after being in proximity to recently vaccinated individuals. This confused many, as the mRNA technology in theory should not be able to “shed.” •After seeing countless patient cases which can only be explained by COVID vaccine shedding, a year ago, I initiated multiple widely seen calls for individuals to share suspected shedding experiences. •From those 1,500 reports, clear and replicable patterns have emerged which collectively prove “shedding” is a real and predictable phenomenon that can be explained by known mechanisms unique to the mRNA technology. •Likewise, after being blocked from publication for over a year, recently, a scientific study corroborating the shedding phenomenon was finally published. •This article will map out everything that is known about shedding (e.g., what are the common symptoms, how does it happen, who does it affect, does it occur through sexual contact, can it cause severe issues like cancer) along with strategies for preventing it. When doctors in this movement speak at events about vaccines, by far the most common question they still receive is, “Is vaccine shedding real?” This is understandable as COVID-19 vaccine shedding (becoming ill from vaccinated individuals) represents the one way the unvaccinated are also at risk from the vaccines and hence still need to be directly concerned about them. Simultaneously, it’s a challenging topic as: •We believe it is critical to not publicly espouse divisive ideas (e.g., “PureBloods” vs. those who were vaccinated) that prevent the public from coming together and helping everyone. The vaccines were marketed on the basis of division (e.g., by encouraging immense discrimination against the unvaccinated), and many unvaccinated individuals thus understandably hold a lot of resentment for how the vaccinated treated them. We do not want to perpetuate anything similar (e.g., discrimination in the other direction). •We don’t want to create any more unnecessary fear—which is an inevitable consequence of opening up a conversation about shedding. •In theory, shedding with the mRNA vaccines should be “impossible,” so claiming otherwise puts one on very shaky ground. Conversely, if shedding is real, we believe it is critical to expose as: •Those being affected by it are in a horrible situation, particularly if everyone is gaslighting them about it and insisting it’s all in their head. •It provides one of the strongest arguments to pull the mRNA vaccines from the market and prohibit the widespread deployment of mRNA technologies in the future. For those reasons, Pierre Kory and I have spent almost three years trying to collect as much evidence as possible to map out this phenomenon with the following data sets: •Dozens of extremely compelling patient histories1,2,3 from Kory and Marsland’s medical practice, including many responding to spike protein treatment. •My own experience with patients and friends affected by shedding. • I read large numbers of reports of shedding in (now deleted) online support groups. •Roughly 1,500 reports from individuals affected by shedding we were able to collect. •Extensive menstrual data compiled by MyCycleStory. •A peer-reviewed study indicating COVID vaccine shedding affects menstruation (which was almost impossible to get published). From that and the hundreds of hours of work that went into it (particularly reviewing and sorting the 1,500 reports), we can state the following with relative certainty: 1. Shedding is very real (e.g., each of those datasets is congruent with the others), and many of the stories of those affected by it are very sad. 2. People’s sensitivity to it dramatically varies. 3. Most of the people who are sensitive to shedding have already figured it out. 4. Mechanistically, shedding is very difficult to explain. However, now that new evidence has emerged, a much stronger case can be made for the mechanisms I initially proposed a year ago. Note: if you have a shedding experience you would like to share (or wish to read through them), please do so here, where they are compiled. Prior to the COVID vaccines, there were numerous red flags indicating they would cause more issues than the average vaccine (e.g., the trials being rushed, severe effects being reported in online support groups for participants which were not seen in the published trial data, mRNA technology having numerous unresolved risks, and the vaccine mass producing the toxic spike protein within your body). Because of this, I suspected the vaccine would have a variety of long-term issues that would take years to be recognized and advised everyone I knew to wait on vaccinating (which few did due to the religious euphoria surrounding it “saving us” from the pandemic). However, once the COVID vaccines hit the market, I was immediately deluged with a wave of injured patients, quickly realized it was much more dangerous than I’d expected, and before long, started having people around the country call me to ask if the vaccine could cause sudden death because it had just happened to a relative. As my colleagues could not see the same injuries I was seeing (even when patients cancelled because, in their siblings words “they died right after the COVID shot”), I decided the only option I had was to document everything I was encountering, in part so that I could have some type of “evidence” to show skeptical parties, and in part because I was relatively sure no medical journal would ever publish anything on this topic. As such, a year later (Feb 2022), when Steve Kirsch gave me a small platform, I decided to publish that log, and it went viral as nothing equivalent existed (leading to this becoming an established newsletter). From that tiny dataset, I quickly saw patterns in how the COVID vaccine injured people, and by March 2021, knew (correctly) what most of the common debilitating side effects of the COVID vaccines were. In contrast, agencies like the FDA and CDC, with infinitely larger datasets were never able to identify those injuries (much in the same way “credible” journals were never able to publish )—highlighting how industry capture has made it impossible to rely upon the authorities we long believed we could trust for health advice. While doing that project, I noticed numerous unvaccinated women had reported to me that they had had profound changes in menstruation immediately after being in close physical proximity to someone who was vaccinated, and before long was relatively certain, given what happened in some of those cases, that a causal correlation was there. This put me into a bit of a bind, as by all the existing scientific knowledge in this field, shedding from mRNA vaccines was impossible. So, if I endorsed this theory, it would be used as a red herring to debunk everything else (e.g., the post-vaccine sudden deaths). I thus reluctantly made the decision to eliminate all the shedding cases from the log I published while going to great lengths to see if I could get more data to substantiate this phenomenon and find a mechanism to explain it. While that was happening, I then noticed that other key axioms of the COVID vaccine (besides shedding) gradually were debunked. These included: •It being the most tested and scrutinized vaccine in history (whereas European regulatory leaks showed many critical safety studies were skipped and numerous trial participants testified that injuries were covered up while COVID cases in vaccinated groups were ignored—yet remarkably, the FDA ignored all of this even when directly informed by trial participants). •That the vaccine could never enter your genome (whereas it actually contained bacterial DNA contaminants plus SV40 transportation sequences to bring it into the genome and had been detected within tissues, particularly cancers). •That the vaccine would end COVID and prevent you from ever getting COV…