Disclaimer & Compliance
***All Information shared from Les Berenson MD and LesBerensonMD.com , is Public Domain & For Educational Purposes. Information Can Be Shared Freely With The Understanding That All Statements Have Not Been Evaluated By The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Go Here For A Current List Of The FDA’s Position On Various Therapeutic Interventions. We Are Required To Inform You That Any Information Presented On This Site (Including Within The Videos) Are Not Intended To Advise, Diagnose, Treat, Cure Or Prevent Any Disease Including COVID, as Well as This Information is Not Intended To Constitute Legal Advice. Always Consult With Qualified Licensed Medical Professionals & Legal Experts Before Enacting Any Information Presented Herein.*** Please understand you assume all risks from the use, non use or misuse of this information.
***In A Transparent Effort To Be In Full Compliance With The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Regarding Prevention, Treatment, & Deceptive Practices (15 U.S. Code § 57b & Section 19 of the FTC Act), We Are Required To Notify You That The Information Presented On This Website Is A Collection Of Peer-Reviewed as well as Empirical Evidence, But Has Not Yet Been Evaluated By The FDA For Safety & Efficacy. None Of The Information Provided Is Intended To Replace The Care And Supervision Of Qualified Licensed Medical Professional Or The Legal Advice Of Licensed Attorneys. Additionally In Full Disclosure, We Do Not Endorse Any Products, Companies Or Services.***
Check out there 2 MILLION (so far) adverse reactions recorded on WHO website
VigiAccess™ – WHO Collaborating Centre for International Drug Monitoring
VigiAccess was launched by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2015 to provide public access to information in VigiBase, the WHO global database of reported potential side effects of medicinal products. Side effects – known technically as adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) – are reported by national pharmacovigilance centres or national drug regulatory authorities that are members of the WHO Programme for International Drug Monitoring (PIDM). WHO PIDM was created in 1968 to ensure the safer and more effective use of medicinal products. Read more about the background and purpose of the WHO PIDM here.
To access the data base:
1) Check consent at the bottom (Search database)
2) Enter ” covid-19 vaccine ” in search bar
3) Search the 2 million adverse reactions to the Covid 19 vaccine
WHO Insider Blows Whistle on Gates and GAVI Analysis
by Dr. Joseph Mercola (March 2021) – Fact Checked
(Because of censorship Dr. Mercola’s articles are taken down after 48 hrs so the link is broken)
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, interviews Astrid Stuckelberger, Ph.D., a WHO insider, about what she discovered about Bill Gates and GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance. For the past 20 years, since 2000, she’s been involved with public health at the WHO, and was part of their research ethics committee for four years. In 2009, she got involved with the WHO’s international health regulations.
- The WHO has turned global health security into a dictatorship, where the director general has assumed sole power to make decisions by which member states must abide
- GAVI – The Vaccine Alliance core partners are Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, WHO (World Health Organization), UNICEF, and the World Bank. From GAVO+I website – “Gavi also works with donors, including sovereign governments, private sector foundations and corporate partners; NGOs, advocacy groups, professional and community associations, faith-based organizations and academia; vaccine manufacturers, including those in emerging markets; research and technical health institutes; and implementing country governments.”
- 2000 year that gates stepped down from CEO Microsoft , he started the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and launched Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI), known today as Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. The foundation has given $4.1 billion to Gavi over the past 20 years.
GAVI website – “Two key factors set us apart from other actors in global health:
- The partnership model: as a public-private partnership, we capitalise on the sum of our partners’ comparative advantages;
- The business model: by pooling demand for vaccines from the world’s poorest countries, securing long-term funding and shaping vaccine markets, we are accelerating access to life-saving vaccines in the countries that need them the most.”
- LONG-TERM FUNDING – All countries pay a share of the cost of their Gavi-supported vaccines. As a country’s income grows, its co-financing payments gradually increase to cover the full cost of vaccines.
- GAVI is a nongovernmental organization that is allowed to operate without paying any taxes, while also having total immunity for anything they do wrong. They can do whatever they want,” Stuckelberger says, without repercussions. The police, for example, are barred from conducting an investigation and collecting evidence if GAVI were to be implicated in a criminal investigation.
- Documents cited by Stuckelberger show the WHO has assumed what amounts to dictatorial power over the whole world. The director general has the sole power to make decisions — including decisions about which tests or pandemic medications to use — that all member states must then obey.
- They’ve effectively turned global health security into a dictatorship
- When you look back over the past year, it seems Gates has often been the first to announce what the world needs to do to address the pandemic, and then the WHO comes out with an identical message, which is then parroted by world leaders, more or less verbatim.
- A complete review and overhaul of the United Nations, which established the WHO, is also required as the U.N. has done nothing to prevent or rein in undemocratic and illegal activity.
- According to a long-term World Health Organization insider, Bill Gates’ vaccine alliance, GAVI, is directing the WHO
- GAVI is headquartered in Switzerland. In 2009, GAVI was recognized as an international institution and granted total blanket immunity, including immunity against criminal sanctions (since 2009). It is also exempt from paying taxes
- In 2017, Gates asked to be part of the WHO’s executive board — like a member state — because of his funding. While the “one-man nation-state of Gates” was not officially voted in, it appears he may have been granted unofficial power of influence
1. WHO’s role in setting the stage for a global health dictatorship
- By changing the definition of “pandemic.” Before 2009 – “when a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity, resulting in several, simultaneous epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.” The key portion of that definition is “enormous numbers of deaths and illness.” This definition was changed in the month leading up to the 2009 swine flu pandemic. The change was a simple but substantial one: They merely removed the severity and high mortality criteria, leaving the definition of a pandemic as “a worldwide epidemic of a disease.” Wayback Machine, WHO Pandemic Preparedness September 2, 2009 (PDF)
- The change was a simple but substantial one: They merely removed the severity and high mortality criteria, leaving the definition of a pandemic as “a worldwide epidemic of a disease.”9 This switch in definition is why COVID-19 was and still is promoted as a pandemic even though it, at no point, has caused any excess mortality.11,12
12 Johns Hopkins Newsletter November 26, 2020 (Archived)
11 Technical Report June 2020 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.24350.77125
- In short, by removing the criteria of severe illness causing high morbidity, leaving geographically widespread infection as the only criteria for a pandemic, the WHO and technocratic leaders of the world were able to bamboozle the global population into giving up our lives and livelihoods.
2. WHO Rewrites Science by Changing Definition of Herd Immunity
Herd immunity occurs when enough people acquire immunity to an infectious disease such that it can no longer spread widely in the community. Prior to the introduction of vaccines, all herd immunity was achieved via exposure to and recovery from an infectious disease. Eventually, as vaccination became widespread, the concept of herd immunity evolved to include not only the naturally acquired immunity that comes from prior illness, but also the temporary vaccine-acquired immunity that can occur after vaccination.
As late as June 2020, the WHO’s definition of herd immunity, posted on one of their COVID-19 Q&A pages, was in line with the widely-accepted concept that has been the standard for infectious diseases for decades. Here’s what it originally said:18
“Herd immunity is the indirect protection from an infectious disease that happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection.”
The updated definition of herd immunity, which appeared in October 2020, read as follows:19
“‘Herd immunity’, also known as ‘population immunity’, is a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached. Herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from a virus, not by exposing them to it. Vaccines train our immune systems to create proteins that fight disease, known as ‘antibodies’, just as would happen when we are exposed to a disease but — crucially — vaccines work without making us sick. Vaccinated people are protected from getting the disease in question and passing it on, breaking any chains of transmission. With herd immunity, the vast majority of a population are vaccinated, lowering the overall amount of virus able to spread in the whole population.”
After public — and no doubt embarrassing — backlash, the WHO revised its definition again December 31, 2020, to again include the mention of natural infection, while still emphasizing vaccine-acquired immunity. It now reads:20 “’Herd immunity’, also known as ‘population immunity,’ is the indirect protection from an infectious disease that happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection. WHO supports achieving ‘herd immunity’ through vaccination, not by allowing a disease to spread through any segment of the population, as this would result in unnecessary cases and deaths. Herd immunity against COVID-19 should be achieved by protecting people through vaccination, not by exposing them to the pathogen that causes the disease.”
3. WHO’s Recommendation of PCR Test ‘Intentionally Criminal’
Stuckelberger also shocks the Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee by pointing out that twice — December 7, 2020,21,22 and January 13, 202123 — the WHO issued medical alerts for PCR testing, warning that use of high cycle thresholds (CT) will produce high rates of false positives, that the CT value should be reported to the health care provider and that test results be considered in combination with clinical observations, health history and other epidemiological information.
Yet since the beginning of the pandemic, it has pushed PCR testing as the best way to detect and diagnose infection. This, she says, makes it intentionally criminal. Since the start of the pandemic, the WHO has recommended using a CT of 45,27,28,29 which guarantees an enormous number of false positives, and therefore “cases.” This alone is how they kept the pandemic fearmongering going. The scientific consensus has long been that anything over 35 CTs renders the PCR test useless,30,31,32
as the accuracy will be a measly 3% — 97% are false positives.
From Kari Mullis (inventor of PCR test – PCR test is quantitative and tells us what’s there. Results can be misrepresented. It allows you take a miniscule amount of anything, make it measurable and say it’s there like its important. If you look incorrectly at the PCR test by over “amplifying”, one can find almost anything – even 1 molecule.