Natures Heart Intentions

Brigid Mary Prain

Brigid Mary Prain is devoted to loving the Amazon and expresses that in a myriad of ways…

From documenting the Indigenous Resistance evicting trespassing oil companies, making immersive films about her Amazon animal encounters, producing music from Nature sounds accompanied by beautiful videos, giving presentations at festivals, taking her work into schools, and spreading the word about Nature protection far and wide on social media.

Through her work Brigid seeks to enliven our connection with life itself by challenging our senses and deepening our innate appreciation for existence. 

She is the Wilderness, a Wild Adventuress creating in Love with Nature, an Instrument for the Divine.

It is her deepest calling to be the voice for those who speak but are seldom heard.

She encourages us all to follow our passion, to live our bliss, to care for all life and to know that we are all indeed interconnected. Stand up and be counted!

See her current exciting project here.

Non-mandated Community Safeguards Amidst Fear-based Groupthink

Addressing the issue of safety for communities with the presence of Omicron variant of COVID-19 and Groupthink fears generated over two years of ‘COVID News’ will require reading this with a ‘fresh perspective and open mind’.

[The information in this essay] contravenes the narrative of “safe and effective” gene-based vaccines and the goal of vaccinating most of the population. However, the phrase “following the science” means following the data as it comes to hand and therefore Science is about changing hypotheses, theories and conclusions in line with changing data. (Covid Medical Network Letter to Regulatory bodies)

Based on the assumption that the virus may lead to hospitalisation and severe illness, possibly death in a small subsection of the community, safety for these people must be considered.

Early in 2020, witnessing the rolling out of mass lockdowns, a group of highly qualified Doctors produced The Great Barrington Declaration, which is in alignment with traditional medical practice and pre-COVID pandemic plans.

“The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.”

It was eagerly signed by thousands of medical practitioners (now nearly 1 million), but it was undermined by Fauci (NIAID) and Collins (NIH) who organised ‘a quick and devastating published takedown’. This was revealed when emails between the two men were released after a FOIA request. The released emails were tweeted and can be seen online in several chat and news sites.

See this news report with screen shots of the emails, one above.

You can read The Real Story Behind Collins and Fauci’s Attack on the Great Barrington Declaration – written by Jay Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, two of the scientists who wrote the declaration. I recommend reading this.

It is not too late to instigate ‘focused protection’.

This smear campaign was one of several that worsened the pandemic by silencing scientists and front-line medical practitioners.

Safety for the elderly

The Australian government has recently announced it will be spending more for aged care homes for RAT tests and vaccines. Plus, two new anti-viral oral tablets (Paxlovid and Lageviro) are available for vulnerable people (at risk of progressing to severe disease). Drugs used for asthma and other illnesses are used for different stages of the illness.

“In the COMET-ICE trial, unvaccinated participants with COVID-19 who received a single one-hour intravenous infusion of 500 mg sotrovimab [a monoclonal antibody] were found to have a 79% reduced rate of hospitalisation and death compared to those who received a placebo.  [Questions remain about its efficacy in vaccinated and immunocompromised people.] Sotrovimab is so far among the treatments showing promise against the Omicron variant, with the Australian Government having recently secured an additional 46,000 units, bringing the country’s total to 81,000.” The above RACGP article provides full review of medications being used in Australia.

However, much more could be done, and more economically, with the introduction of the Phased Prevention and Early Treatment Protocol, again proposed early in 2020, but also suffering a similar smear campaign. Although prescription drugs are included there are many over the counter supplements that can be used such as Vitamins D and C, Zinc and Quercetin.

One of many Vitamin D studies that showed reduced progression to serious disease and fatality below.

Phased Immunological response to COVID

Yanuck—Immuno-physiological Approach to COVID-19 Integrative Medicine • Vol. 19, No. S1 • Epub Ahead of Print 9

Prevention and Early treatment protocols – This protocol was first published in the American Journal of Medicine July 2020 (Epub ahead of print) by doctors working o nthe frontline treating patients.

Pathophysiological Basis and Rationale for Early Outpatient Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Infection  (August 2020)

A shorter protocol version was promoted amongst doctors.

Now updated for Omicron

More protocols

Both Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin, both cheap and universally used medications, have been subject to smear campaigns.

The TGA in Australia largely based their approval of the vaccines on the approval from the USA. “Under an EUA, FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions when certain statutory criteria have been met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.”

See how Ivermectin was taken down by Dr Andrew Hill.

Tess Lawrie and her video ‘Letter to Andrew Hill’-  (18 minutes).

For a quick glance see the article and transcript of Zoom conversation in World tribune or a 1 hour interview by Del Bigtree on The Highwire

Nutrition advice – this varies and I have not seen specific studies. Diabetics, people with heart disease and obese people are most at risk of complications from COVID-19. One protocol suggests no or very low carbohydrate i.e. no sugary drinks or cereals, bone broth and water. The aim of the protocol is to keep blood glucose low-normal. A personal ‘nutritional needs’ basis is best.

Mouth gargle and nasal wash with Povidine iodine 1% strength (Betadine is 10% so needs to be diluted with water). There are several studies, and it ranks 5th in effectiveness where Paxlovid at $700 per treatment comes first at reported 96% and Povidine iodine is 88% and costs $1. This should be Public Health advice like washing your hands. The nose and mouth are the landing spots and first places for viral replication.

Vaccine injured protocols are available to assist those already injured by the vaccine. At present people who have suffered post vaccine illness unlike they have ever experienced before are being ignored and told they are anxious. They naturally search for answers and find links to illnesses that match theirs, but they are ignored. Without support for their physical illness, they are left suffering and frequently in financial and emotional distress.

Safety:risk analysis – there is now no medical reason to offer, let alone mandate COVID vaccines.

– assumption – the latest variant is mild  so the safety:risk analysis that was presumably done by the TGA when the first two variants were causing morbidity needs to be redone.

Plus the reporting of an increasing number of adverse events, including hundreds of death, adds more weight to risk especially in the young with no comorbidities.

Two years on, many countries and some states of Australia are removing mandates and other COVID restrictions. How much this is related to public health advice, politics (approval ratings) and/or legal action remains unknown. However, as there is no case for the mandates (the vaccinated can catch and transmit the virus as easily as the unvaccinated) it is likely to be political.

So, looking at WA, it seems there is no political will for a Premier who has publicly said he is going to make life hard for the unvaccinated to reverse his decision even in the face of no threat of lack of ventilators and no emergency. He has the balance of power and can keep rolling over the Emergency Laws giving him Totalitarian rule.

Science looks at new evidence, new trends (data) and information (studies, previously hidden documents) that can change the narrative, however ‘groupthink’, as described by Thomas Kuhn (The Structure of Scientific revolutions) keeps many people, even those in scientific groups, stuck in the old narrative. Once it has been established it is hard to shake off (the Earth is the centre of the universe, smoking is good for you etc). It will be courageous leaders and politicians who dare to ‘call-out’ this abuse of human rights. Even medical practitioners have been threatened by AHPRA with ‘regulatory discipline’ if they use social media and post evidence-based findings that go against the Public Health narrative. It is probably a politically unsafe move to speak up.

Councillors may prefer to take the approach of waiting for the numbers of ‘cases’ to go down and for it to be ‘safe’ (politically and in the eyes of a large proportion of the community) to remove the mandates. In light of the evidence is this ethical? Does the City have a Duty of Care to its people?

Dr Clay Golledge, an infectious disease expert at Hollywood Hospital said in a WAToday news report, February 16th, 2022 “The days of mandates are rapidly running out because we have a high vaccination rate,”.

“Mandates have done their job in terms of dragging the reluctant 10 to 15 per cent of people who are vaccine-hesitant over the line.

But with Omicron everything has changed, it’s not the killer that it was.” They quote other health experts such as Catherine Bennett, WA Police Commissioner, Chris Dawson and Opposition health minister, and Libby Mettam who have claimed the current rules need to change. There is no public health justification for excluding unvaccinated people from venues in Western Australia.

Professor Milne from the University of WA who specialises in pandemics and vaccination research, has studied how Omicron will impact WA once the borders do reopen. His modelling showed a six-week peak after the borders open, with 43 people needing beds in ICU at the peak continuing for two weeks. He feels our hospital system can cope with that. However, Dr Clay Golledge said it is likely to be a lot less as he hadn’t factored in the use of the new antiviral drugs that became available last month. These will be available to vulnerable people.

The recently released “Letter to ATAGI, TGA, Fed Health-8March” is a 52 page report asking for clarification of medical issues and issues of grave concern. I don’t expect you will have the time or inclination to read it, but a quick scan will alert you to the immense dangers and safety issues we are likely to face because of these experimental gene therapy drugs.

I have also provided a link to a presentation that shows what pathologists are seeing on autopsy and live biopsies in people injured (sometimes fatally) by the vaccine. A normal autopsy may show cardiac arrest but unless histology is done, they will not see the lymphocytosis caused by the spike protein, manufactured by the introduced mRNA code. The document provided by Pfizer to the TGA, FOI released Pfizer documents and ongoing studies indicate that the spike protein is being found in cells outside the deltoid muscle. Sites include the heart, brain and ovaries but largest quantities in the liver, spleen and adrenal glands.



I hope you can see this is larger than discrimination against the unvaccinated. Ceasing the mandates and alerting people to the dangers of continuing the injected gene therapy drugs may prevent much suffering and early sudden death in the vaccinated.


Following the rabbit I found a rat: an eco-warrior of the open loving heart’s investigations.

Last year I enthusiastically set up a FaceBook group called “We Design our Future – An Eco-weary Sanctuary and Systems Change Incubator’. It came after I had read extensively about the IPBES project – Natures Future Framework and created a page called “The Value of Nature =Our Future”. Within their scenarios are models of communities that embrace technology to work with and mimick nature (mimicry), condensed human habitats with productive land surrounding the dense housing and urban plots where habitat and food production co-exists. My aim was to get people talking about what would fit our local environment, and be best for not only humanity, but the rest of Nature.

I briefly presented the idea at the AAEE conference held in Mandurah, however I felt that my efforts to ‘change the world’ were more possible through inner presence and connection with Nature in a more spiritual sense. I was also aware of the increasing eco-despair and climate grief. Witnessing destruction of our beautiful endemic jarrah and karri forests I felt the despair first hand. I also experienced active hope and a connectedness with a small group who gathered for a weekend of “The Work that Reconnects” (Joanna Macy). Moving from the mind to the body and the emotions was cathartic.

To connect with the energy and vibration of spirit, which to me is a feeling of love, gratitude and compassion radiating out from my heart, is necessary to be the change. Many schools of thought and immersions guided my journey.

Engaging with the Presencing Institutes U.Lab 1X and 2 X  where I met hundreds of change makers from around the world who were following principles of open mind, open heart and open will (love and acceptance) provided guidance, yet I felt alone in the local setting. I struggled to find people to work in collaboration with whilst seeing teams in other countries using generative discussions to move forward.

I found clarity and peace from focussing on my breath using Soma breathwork, Qi Gong and being in nature. Whilst connecting with the ocean whilst standing on my stand-up-paddle board I practiced Tonglen,  breathing in the hate vibrating around Earth and breathing out love.

As well as an open heart I had, and still have, an open mind. I read and listened to observations of credible people who were being censored on social media platforms like FaceBook (Meta), Twitter and You-Tube. There are many videos showing this bizarre change away from critical thought and testing of scientific hypothesis. It is not my intent to discuss this here, (I hope pro-vax advocates can stick with me) however there is a wide range of information on the Frontline Covid Care web site. Even studies that showed how suffering could be reduced in people contracting Covid, or prevent disease were silenced, doctors sacked, and licenses removed. Since childhood I have had a tendency to stand up for people being wrongly accused. This discrimination led me to  spend hours looking into why this was happening. You could say I followed the rabbit down the hole.

Down the Rabbit Hole

I wondered why people who were, in other situations, wary of government promises and tactics to hide the truth (deforestation of our native forests, mining, fracking for gas etc) repeating what I saw as propaganda about the disease, especially the new experimental drug that they called a vaccine. The definition was changed so that they could call it one. Vaccines now don’t have to give you immunity against the disease, they only need to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases to produce protection. Even USA’s CDC stated they didn’t know whether the new vaccines would keep people from spreading the disease, nor how long the protection would last. Plus, “CDC says, “the mRNA strand never enters the cell’s nucleus or affects the vaccine recipient’s genetic material.” Politicians, influencers, media, and public health workers said it was safe and effective yet they knew virtually nothing about its side effects. The trials were so short and the outcomes not transparent to the public.

One huge red flag was when they were saying it was safe in pregnancy and breast feeding. As a child health nurse, I was taught that no drug is safe until proven so after long trials. My role as Healthy for Life Coordinator in an Aboriginal community focused on counselling women about healthy pregnancy – avoiding drinking alcohol, smoking and poor nutrition whilst pregnant. The Pfizer application for Emergency Approval of their vaccine, Comirnaty, provided studies on rats but there were no studies on women. To mandate that pregnant women had to be ‘vaccinated’ to keep their job, which would also mean maternity leave post birth, was to me a gross act of medical negligence. Coercion negates informed consent.


However, any medical person who questioned this, or tried to get an exemption for people for whom the risk was greater than the disease, was shut down with the threat of seizure of records and loss of license to practice. Meanwhile, the Pfizer documents supplied to the TGA revealed that concentrations of the vax did get to the ovaries of rats, albeit given a higher dose than given to humans, within 48 hours. See Table.

My mind screamed “no, this is wrong”. So, I delved deeper. Once I jumped down the rabbit hole a wonderland, nothing like what Alice experienced opened before me. It was a wonder land of shock and bewilderment.

I watched Senate inquiries and testimonies from highly credentialled medical professionals, virologists, scientists and statisticians. To see a father weep because his son who volunteered to be in the clinical trial had died, and a young girl, Madie, (below) paralysed moved me. Madie’s adverse reaction was recorded as ‘gastric problem’. Gastric paralysis was just the start. The longer Senate Hearing is here.

I could be silent no more.

Yet when I tried to share many articles and videos FB slapped a warning about Covid information – and directed me to the government site. For some of the content FB told me it was against community guidelines and my post would not be shown to others and if I kept sharing, I would be banned. Community groups like Mandurah Q & A banned me for 30 days for posting a link to information about susceptibility to infections post vax. If we apply the Scientific Method, we would investigate not censor. To ‘fight’ Covid the holy grail was vaccination, and any other way was classed misinformation. When did this become acceptable in science?

If I made comments under posts that supported freedom rallies I was classed as colluding with right wing extremists. I acknowledge that many people who are against being mandated to have an experimental drug injected into them have political, religious and environmentally different views than mine. But it does not mean they are leading this attempt to raise awareness that this pandemic is not only about a virus that can be lethal for some.

We need to be aware how much of it is about corporate power, and the view of people who own 99% of the world’s wealth. We need to be aware of their intentions to create the future they want. We need to look deeply, beyond the home page of organisations like the World Economic Forum (the Great Reset) and the World Health Organisation (global health policies). For a light hearted Russell Brand presentation watch his video from a year ago ‘You will own nothing, and you will be happy’. It has quotes from Naomi Klein. Screenshots below.

Also looking at the WEF website and videoed conferences is a great place to start. There are many clips on Klaus Schwab (the highlighted one sounding benevolent but others , like this one on the fourth Industrial Revolution, a bit more revealing. Others are within event recordings) You can get a picture of what his view of what the world should be. It is high tech, AI and surveillance and global control. A satirical presentation, that may not be to your taste, but does show alarming clips of Klaus and his advisors is in his You tube video ‘Awaken with JP‘ .

Are we OK with greater surveillance, digital ID and global vaccine passports all managed from a central global NGO or corporation?

Are we OK with silencing doctors and other medical practitioners because they don’t want to go against the Hippocratic Oath and do no harm?

Are we OK with impeding what could be the next great step in advancement of human consciousness as we understand human neuro-psycho-immunolgy and biology, quantum science applications to health, the biofield and the influence of the terrain on our health?

Have we fully explored the placebo effect, and how we can we heal ourselves?

I see coercion, mandating the taking of drugs, that are patented to produce billions of dollars for the producers and stockholders a violation of the right to continue my journey of consciousness raising. It is an act of disempowerment to say the only way my body can combat a virus is to be injected with genetic code. Does that warrant people labelling me selfish? If we are all connected, inter-beings, then doesn’t my wish for a rise in consciousness affect us all? The advertising (propaganda) to entice people to ‘do the right thing’, ‘get vaccinated to protect the vulnerable’ has no scientific grounding. It has been proven false that the vax can stop transmission.  I don’t need to do it to protect the vulnerable. There are much more valuable things we as a community can do.

I see our current trajectory as the wrong path for humanity. There is a place for technology – maybe 3 D printed hearts instead of heart transplants will be the next surgical advancement but those who chose to meditate and move energy, keep fit and eat healthy food should not be forced into the corporate-industrial-medical system of the Fourth Industrial revolution.

Where did I find the rat?

Over a year ago I was made aware of false accusations against Ivermectin, a proclaimed ‘wonder drug’ that has saved the suffering of many people in Africa (specifically Onchocerciasis or River blindness and Lymphatic filariasis) and countries with high levels of parasites, infected scabies etc including remote Aboriginal Australia where I have prescribed and given the drug to children.

Most of the mild side effects are due to the death of the parasites as depicted in the CARPA Medicine book from which we prescribed.


One woman’s story as to how this was ridiculed as a prevention and early treatment for Covid, and then outlawed, highlights how thousands of people have lost their lives, and are suffering with long covid because of this deliberate misrepresentation of rigorous scientific study. Tess Lawrie, MD PhD, describes her heart ache that came after Dr Andrew Hill, consultant to WHO, published the Meta-analysis, the background of which she and many medical researchers and practitioners had been working on. After a year of trying to be heard Tess has produced a video – ‘Letter to Andrew Hill’.

Quote “On Jan. 6 of 2021, Hill testified enthusiastically before the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidlelines Panel in support of ivermectin’s use. Within a month, however, Hill found himself in what he describes as a “tricky situation.” Under pressure from his funding sponsors, Hill then published an unfavorable study. Ironically, he used the same sources as in the original study. Only the conclusions had changed.

Shortly before he published, Dr. Tess Lawrie, Director of the Evidence-based Medicine Consultancy in Bath, England, and one of the world’s leading medical research analysts, contacted Hill via Zoom and recorded the call (transcript in the World Tribune). Lawrie had learned of his new position and reached out to try to rectify the situation… Four days before publication, Hill’s sponsor Unitaid gave the University of Liverpool, Hill’s employer $40 million. Unitaid, it turns out, was also an author of the conclusions of Hill’s study.” World Tribune.

Surely this should be investigated. Why are regulatory bodies refusing to comment? Is it money, the funding of institutions and research or is it worse? I wonder if there is threat of death for non-compliance or if people have been put in a trance state. Watch Andrew Hill’s body language and consider the consequences if he had changed the concluding paragraph to align with his genuine analysis, not what he wrote and published in his meta-analysis.

For more background as to who Tess Lawrie is and the work she has done previously for WHO please watch this segment of the Highwire. It is like watching a ‘Who done-it’ movie. It is an hour long but the Letter to Andrew Hill is only 18 minutes.

Alternatively, for a quick read, more conflict of interest is explained in the World Tribune article, “Researcher Andrew Hill’s conflict: A $40 million Gates Foundation grant vs a half a million lives”.

In the Zoom call with Tess, and in his conclusion, Andrew Hill says he is waiting for more evidence. In January 2021, he thought it would take 6 weeks. There has been no retraction and no further comment. Why?

Meanwhile many countries have continued to use the medication for prophylactic and treatment of this and other diseases. As Tess Lawrie mentions, a large, randomised trial is fraught with difficulties in an emergency situation. If a new drug, that required a name change to be called a vaccine can be approved with scant clinical trial data, none of which Pfizer wanted to reveal to the public, can be allowed, surely a drug with decades of safety use data could be used.

However large studies have been undertaken. This recently released study is the world’s largest study of Ivermectin for Covid-19. Conducted in a southern city in Brazil that has 100% digitalised medical records of it citizens, it looked at Ivermectin as a preventive measure only. It was not randomised but self-selected for use of Ivermectin which resulted in more people with comorbidities requesting to be in the Ivermectin arm.  For those who want to delve really deeply, the platform Cureus allows people (preferably medical/research competent) to comment freely. In the comments you can read of how politics affected the dropout rate of participants, different ways of measuring mortality rate, consider what constitutes conflicting interest and how our preconceived ideas affect how we read and react to this study. This is what helps the advancement of medicine. It is the Scientific Method.

The Scientific Method

As described here on but similar elsewhere.

“The scientific method is a series of steps followed by scientific investigators to answer specific questions about the natural world. It involves making observations, formulating a hypothesis, and conducting scientific experiments. Scientific inquiry starts with an observation followed by the formulation of a question about what has been observed. The steps of the scientific method are as follows:

  • Observation
  • Question
  • Hypothesis
  • Experiment
  • Results
  • Conclusion”

We have been told to ‘follow the science’ yet the scientific method has not been followed. There are so many incongruences within the  ‘Pubic Health Information’ which we have been instructed to follow. Some guidelines have been enforced as law under the Emergency Act which was initially for 6 weeks to flatten the curve.

Why do they keep extending it?

Where is the safety-risk analysis for their ‘laws’ on masks and vaccination especially for children who we were told are very rarely seriously affected by the virus and should not wear masks.

The list of incongruences would take hours of research to investigate but focussing on number 3 below, here is one that has been identified from the information provided by Pfizer to the Australian TGA and Japanese regulatory bodies when seeking ‘Emergency Approval’?

  1. mRNA technology is new, but not unknown. It has been studied for decades.
  2. mRNA vaccines do not contain live virus and carry no risk of causing disease in the vaccinated person.
  3. mRNA from the vaccine never enters the nucleus of the cell and does not affect or interact with a person’s DNA.

A paper  “SARS–CoV–2 Spike Impairs DNA Damage Repair and Inhibits V(D)J Recombination In Vitro”published in the journal Viruses in October 2021 showed in vitro possibilities of the spike from the vax drug getting into and damaging the DNA in the nucleus of cells.

Dr Reszek who uses You Tube to explain complicated studies to the public explained it clearly in his video, ‘Spike Protein inside nucleus enhancing DNA damage? -COVID-19 mRNA vaccines update 18.’ On the 24/2/22 he released another video that links Pfizer’s own research with the probability that the lipid nano-particle which carries the mRNA code into the cell can reach the nucleus. “Merogenics on spike and vax getting into the cell

He writes:- “Scientific evidence from Pfizer, presented to the Australian government [pre-approval], confirming the possible entry of the spike protein into the cell nuclei. We analysed the remainder of the document information capturing the cell studies and animal studies prior to vaccines being approved and discuss the limitations the Australian authorities were pointing towards.”

You can locate the .pdf on the TGA site here.

None of this is ‘fake news’ or misinformation. It is the process of science, which includes ethics and transparency which seems to be lacking in ‘the science’ we are being told to follow. It is a familiar pattern – just think of the Tobacco industry, asbestos mining and chemical producers like Monsanto. The science they produced on their deadly products was manipulated and anything adverse was hidden. It took years to uncover.

I hope the cover-ups and acts that others more informed than I are calling fraud and crimes against humanity do not take as long.

Humanity hangs in the balance.

I followed a rabbit and found lots of rats, a huge corporate nest. My concern is that they will not be easily trapped. The authoritarian rule will intensify. The ramifications for losing our right to protest, to free speech, to vote and elect leaders, and ultimately for the trees, the wildlife, and all the elements of the planet, which are reliant on our voice, are frightening.

Photo – Perup Forest post ‘controlled burn’ by the Dept Biodiversity Conservation and attractions. The Department relies on outdated science to justify its over-zealous burning of forest and bush. Is the hectare quota system driven by money for a few?








Informed Consent: ADE, waning antibody titres and negative efficacy

In this blog I set out to provide evidence from a range of sources that relate to, and link signs of waning and negative efficacy of the vaccines and Antibody Dependent Enhanced disease.

Prior to SARS CoV-2, research showed that some vaccines designed to prevent respiratory diseases led to Antibody Dependent Enhancement (known by several names – immune enhancement, disease enhancement, antibody-dependent cell-meditated cytotoxicity (ADCC), pathogenic priming).

Attention was brought to the potential side effect, ADCC, when designing vaccines (specifically respiratory, influenza, pandemic etc) with the publication of studies in 2017 and 2018 of mice models showing increased mortality in mice vaccinated and then exposed to the virus. [1, 2]

However, previous vaccine development (respiratory syncytial virus vaccines – discussed below) had exposed the problem as early as the 1960’s.

In this video Dr. Peter Hotez, Centre for Vaccine Development, Texas, is speaking at a senate hearing (House Science Committee Hearing, March 5th 2020). This indicates the US Senate was informed of the dangers of waning and ADE. (9.54 on segment on Highwire)[9]

“One of the things that we’re not hearing a lot about is the unique potential safety problem of corona-virus vaccines. This was first found in the early 1960s with respiratory syncytial virus vaccines. And it was done here in Washington with the NIH and Children’s National Medical Center that some of those kids who got the vaccine actually did worse. And I believe there were two deaths in the consequence of that study, because what happens with certain types of respiratory virus vaccines you get immunized and then when you get actually exposed to the virus, you get this kind of paradoxical immune enhancement phenomenon. When we started developing corona-virus vaccines and our colleagues, we noticed in laboratory animals that they started to show some of the same immune pathology that resembled what had happened 50 years earlier. Since it we said, oh, my God, this is going to be problematic. These clinical trials, are not going to go quickly because of that immune enhancement. It’s going to take time.”[9]

In September 2020, Nature Journal published ‘Antibody-dependent enhancement and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and therapies.’ (written in May 2020) [3]. This clinically detailed article provides a useful background for understanding current concerns.

The Abstract – “Antibody-based drugs and vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are being expedited through preclinical and clinical development. Data from the study of SARS-CoV and other respiratory viruses suggest that anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could exacerbate COVID-19 through antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). Previous respiratory syncytial virus and dengue virus vaccine studies revealed human clinical safety risks related to ADE, resulting in failed vaccine trials. Here, we describe key ADE mechanisms and discuss mitigation strategies for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and therapies in development. We also outline recently published data to evaluate the risks and opportunities for antibody-based protection against SARS-CoV-2.” [3]

Did we hear about this in the news? No, all we heard is that it is safe and effective.

In December 2020, the USA Food and Drug Administration stated that exisiting data did not indicate a risk of vaccine-enhanced disease, but that risk remains unknown and needs to be evaluated further. [10]

Were doctors, nurses and other persons giving the vaccines explaining this possible side effect whilst gaining ‘informed consent’?

Informed Consent. 

The lack of information given to obtain informed consent, especially the use of coercion, has been a major ethical dilemma for many health professionals. The following study (published December 2020) looks at the risk of ADE and the need for the significant risk to be explained.

“Informed consent disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of risk of COVID-19 vaccines worsening clinical disease”


‘Aims of the study: Patient comprehension is a critical part of meeting medical ethics standards of informed consent in study designs. The aim of the study was to determine if sufficient literature exists to require clinicians to disclose the specific risk that COVID-19 vaccines could worsen disease upon exposure to challenge or circulating virus.

Conclusions drawn from the study and clinical implications: The specific and significant COVID-19 risk of ADE should have been and should be prominently and independently disclosed to research subjects currently in vaccine trials, as well as those being recruited for the trials and future patients after vaccine approval, in order to meet the medical ethics standard of patient comprehension for informed consent.’ [20]

Concern about the risk of ADE occurring with the mRNA vaccines was high amongst virologists, pathologists and medical doctors, including Geert Vanden Bossche, Peter McCollough, Robert Malone and Ryan Cole, (I will quote and provide links to some of their work below but will need to write another paper to include the vastness of this medical experiment) but their voices became hard to hear through censorship by Big Tech and avoidance by main stream media of anything but the narrative that vaccines are safe and effective. Fact checker discredited them. However, as shown by a US court hearing Fact checkers are just journalists with opinions.


Surely the vaccine trials would have checked for ADE.

Unfortunately, the short Pfizer trial did not even follow their own advice, and regulatory bodies did not assess, or require the safety process of excluding immune waning and potential ADE. Pfizer only submitted up to 6 months of trial data to the FDA to get approved, and they didn’t retain the placebo group. The administers of the trial vaccinated most of the control group at or before 6 months of the trial. There are numerous concerns about the trials including manipulation of data, removing the injured from the trial data or minimising their injuries but in relation to this issue the absence of a control group beyond 6 months reduces the ability to analyse longer term effects caused by waning and potential ADE. Concerned medical specialists, scientists, data analysists etc have had to wait for the ‘unofficial global human trial’ to progress to assess what is happening.

Data from many countries (Singapore, Scotland, Israel, Qatar) are now showing low to negative efficacy.

“[In a trial] zero percent means that vaccinated people are at as much risk as people who got the placebo.” [17]

So negative means that the risk is higher in the vaccinated people, in most cases this is double jabbed or based on the time since vaccination. More infections (and/or severe illness & deaths) are occurring post vaccine than in the unvaccinated. At this stage the data reports from Health Departments accompanying the figures and graphs are not acknowledging ADE, but there are serious safety and efficacy issues that need to be discussed, not censored.(Links to each countries data below)

In the absence of a one specific, globally encompassing study, I have provided excerpts and quotes with links to studies but I am unable to include them all.

I acknowledge the Janzen report on the Highwire, medical investigative journalism, for many of the links. As the screenshots are hard to read I advise visiting the website to view their report. I have based some of my text on their transcripts.

Episode 226 “Ahead of the Curve, in June 2021, covers great material including video clips of top specialists explaining the types of immunity affected. For example:

David Bauer is a lead on a study that Janzen and Bigtree discuss. He heads up the RNA Virus Replication Laboratory at the Francis Crick Institute.

“And here’s what he had to say about immunity and vaccination.”

[00:10:44] Dr. David Bauer

“So the key message from our finding is that we found that recipients of the Pfizer vaccine, those who’ve had two doses, have about five to six fold lower amounts of neutralizing antibodies. Now, these are the sort of gold standard private security antibodies of your immune system which block the virus from getting into your cells in the first place. And so we found that that’s less for people with two doses. We’ve also found that for people with only one dose of the Pfizer job, that they are less likely to have high levels of these antibodies in their blood. And perhaps most importantly for all of us going forward, is that we see that the older you are, the lower your levels are likely to be. And the time since you’ve had your second job, as that time goes on, the lower your levels are also likely to be. So that’s telling us that we’re probably going to be needing to prioritize boosters for older and more vulnerable people coming up soon, especially if this new variant spreads.”

In Episode 230, October, 2021, segment “Serious Antibody Drop After Vaccine” Janzen and Bigtree look at news headlines and studies that indicate waning of antibody titres happening post vaccination.

“Antibody levels decrease after two doses of Pfizer vaccine- study” [4] In Israel a study of almost 5,000 participants found the neutralizing antibodies decrease rapidly after three months.
The New England Journal of Medicine published a study out of Qatar looking at the Pfizer vaccine protection against SARS-CoV-2 .[5] It went from January 1st to September 5th 2021.   By early September in Qatar, 80 percent of the people received both doses. They used the nation’s comprehensive digital health database. The first chart, is showing vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection.  At the bottom is zero to 13 days going to seven months or greater. Median effectiveness in the first month is 77.5%. By 5 months it is 22.5%, six months 17.3% and at 7 or greater 23.3%. However, there are some people who had zero effect and just under zero.

What this Figure above shows:

Vaccine Effectiveness against Any SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Estimated BNT162b2 effectiveness against any SARS-CoV-2 infection was negligible for the first 2 weeks after the first dose, increased to 36.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 33.2 to 40.2) in the third week after the first dose, and reached its peak at 77.5% (95% CI, 76.4 to 78.6) in the first month after the second dose (Table 2 and Figure 2A). However, effectiveness declined gradually, starting from the first month after the second dose. The decline accelerated after the fourth month, and effectiveness reached a low level of approximately 20% in months 5 through 7 after the second dose. A sensitivity analysis that adjusted for previous infection and health care worker status confirmed the main analysis results (Table 3). [5] 

Part B shows ‘Estimated BNT162b2 effectiveness against any severe, critical, or fatal disease due to any SARS-CoV-2 infection’ and for the first  6 months after the second dose verifies the narrative that the drug reduces severe disease. However, it drops markedly at the 7th month, median 55.6 and a low of between -ve 40 and -ve 50 (negative efficacy ?ADE)
FDA requirements
To be approved the USA FDA required 50% efficacy with the confidence level no lower than 30%. Pfizer said their estimate was in the high 90’s. [10]
“In the months to come, researchers will keep an eye on this data to see if they become less effective — either because the immunity from the vaccine wanes or because a new variant arises.” [17]
If it drops below 30% will the vaccine be recalled?

No, according to the article;      “In either case, new vaccines will be created, and manufacturers will provide new measures of their efficacy.”

The Evidence

Once I started following references in studies I found numerous studies measuring or discussing the effectiveness, however, this one identified by Janzen, refers to ADE.

Journal of Infection: Infection-enhancing anti-SARS CoV-2 antibodies recognize both original Wuhan Strain and Delta variants of potential risk from mass vaccination? (Published online August 2021)

“Infection enhancing anti SARS CoV-2 antibodies recognize both original Wuhan Strain and Delta variants of potential risk from mass vaccination? … As they entered the NTD (N-terminal domain) is also targeted by neutralizing antibodies., our data suggest that the balance between neutralizing and facilitating antibodies in vaccinated individuals is in favour of neutralization for the original Wuhan/D614G strain ..However, in the case of the Delta variant, neutralizing antibodies have a decreased affinity for the spike protein, whereas facilitating antibodies display a strikingly increased affinity. Thus, ADE may be a concern for people receiving vaccines based on the original Wuhan Strain spike sequence. Under these circumstances, second generation vaccines would spike protein formulations lacking structurally conserved ADE related epitopes should be considered…the possibility of ADE should be further investigated as it may represent a potential risk for mass vaccination during the current Delta variant pandemic”.[13]

More studies showing waning of the various vaccines can be found on the UCI virus watch page. Public Health officials see boosters as the answer.

Real World Data

Data recording varies from country to country and amongst states or counties. What constitutes fully vaccinated varies, and changes with time as boosters are added. This study used COVID-19 data provided by the Our World in Data for cross-country analysis, available as of September 3, 2021.

They investigated the relationship between the percentage of population  fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases across 68 countries and across 2947 counties in the US.

There is no abstract but the .pdf provides useful Tables and graphs. I have provided two excerpts. (I advise visiting the paper). [7]


At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days (Fig. 1). In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people. Notably, Israel with over 60% of their population fully vaccinated had the highest COVID-19 cases per 1 million people in the last 7 days…


The sole reliance on vaccination as a primary strategy to mitigate COVID-19 and its adverse consequences needs to be re-examined, especially considering the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant and the likelihood of future variants. Other pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions may need to be put in place alongside increasing vaccination rates. Such course correction, especially with regards to the policy narrative, becomes paramount with emerging scientific evidence on real world effectiveness of the vaccines…” [7]


The U.K., which posts the most comprehensive granular weekly data every Thursday, shows that COVID cases per capita are more common among the vaccinated than the unvaccinated in most age groups. News headlines state “It’s time to stop calling infections among the vaccinated “breakthrough cases.”


Using data from Public Health England, Don Wolt posted these clear graphs to show the vaccinated (blue colours) and unvaccinated (orange colours), in age groups and different degrees of vaccination with numbers per one hundred thousand.

Title – UK CoV2 Infections Per 100,000 by Vaccination Status (Oct1, 2021) Source PHE COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance Reports: Weeks 36-39

In the green box it says – CoV2 infection rates are similar or higher among fully vaccinated in all age cohorts over 30 years old.

First age group is Under 18, 18-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, 70-79, 80+. From the age group 40 to 49 it shows that the vaccinated peopler having more infections per 100,000 than the unvaccinated.

The blue colour – light to darker is the weeks from vaccination (2 doses) 32-35, wks 33-36, wks 34-37, wks 35-38 and in orange going from light to dark similarly for the unvaccinated.

He ‘pinned’ the post on the 3rd February, 2022 and has followed up with another graph using the next 4 weeks of data and says:

“Infection rate growth (Rept Wk 50 to Rept Wk 5) since Omicron became dominant is now higher in all boosted cohorts. In boosted adult cohorts ≥40, growth increases with age or time since boosting – whereas infection rate growth in the unvaxxed is fairly consistent across cohorts.” [18]

“UK vaxx surveillance data also suggests that the fully vaxxed (which includes the boosted) may be much more susceptible to Omicron infection than their unvaxxed peers.” Feb 3rd 2022.

The Jaxen report alerted me to news from Taiwan.“ Taiwan has a zero COVID policy like Australia, especially Western Australia, and New Zealand. The article quotes several news sources reporting that death from COVID-19 vaccination exceeded death from COVID-19.

“On October 7th, the death toll after vaccination in Taiwan reached eight hundred and fifty two, while the death toll after COVID-19 was diagnosed was eight hundred and forty four. The number of deaths after vaccination exceeded the number of confirmed deaths for the first time.” [8]

Western Australia is in a unique position as community spread has been minimal until the arrival of Omicron. Many people have welcomed our ‘hard border closure’ and the Zero Covid policy. Mandated vaccination for most workers and the introduction of a Vaccine Passport to access many venues and events has resulted in high vaccination. The Government has pushed the booster shot. However concerns remain about the safety, the treatment of the injured and the rights of people to chose their preferred defence against virus infections. Early treatment with pre-exisiting drugs and supplements requires a paper of its own. Injuries can be reported to the TGA, and numbers of reports are visible on their web site, but only myocarditis is broken down. My interaction with personal accounts of attempts to have injuries recorded has indicated a reluctance from health staff to do so.

Only time will tell how the long term effects on the declining immunity of the vaccinated, as reported in other countries, affects a population isolated from the original strain and now being exposed to the variant Omicron and any future variants. We really need a control group and I am sure there are thousands of people who have refused to be injected who would volunteer for this role. There is no scientific reason for stigmatisation, let alone segregation of the unvaccinated.

News in the main stream media is changing quickly with glimpses of questioning the narrative. In WAtoday, Feb 10th, 2022 (the day I initially published this article) an article titled “Experts call for WA’s border to reopen, with concerns immunity of frontline workers will wane” quotes the Shadow Minister for Health expressing concerns of health professionals and researchers from the University of Western Australia who have predicted waning immunity in health staff who were boosted two months ago. Professor George Milne’s Omicron modelling calculations indicate escalating death the longer W.A.’s hard border policy remains. Hollywood Hospital infectious diseases expert Clay Golledge agreed with the modelling but felt deaths would be far less due to the availability of new oral antivirals at the end fo the month. Meanwhile Premier McGowan repeated his reasons for making the decision to delay the border opening with this mantra:- “[the delay was] for the safety of the people of this state. It was about saving lives, saving jobs and saving our economy”. Ms Mettam, shadow minister, concluded

“The UWA infectious disease modelling confirms that the WA hard border has served its purpose and it could now be costing lives”. [21]


My questions

Is there any scientific data indicating that Vaccine Passports are useful, let alone ethical in segregating the population based on a medical procedure that does not stop transmission of the virus, or in the existence of waning immunity, even protect from severe disease?

Who will be responsible if it actually results in more severe disease for the vaccinated?

Who is listening to and helping the vaccinated injured?

Is the science we have been fed by our government and media propaganda and the studies that have not been ‘aired’, including the scientists who have been censored, the real truth? If so, which I believe to be true, where to from here?

References (and extra links not included in article)


  1. Ye ZW, Yuan S, Poon KM, Wen L, Yang D, Sun Z, Li C, Hu M, Shuai H, Zhou J, Zhang MY, Zheng BJ, Chu H, Yuen KY. Antibody-Dependent Cell-Mediated Cytotoxicity Epitopes on the Hemagglutinin Head Region of Pandemic H1N1 Influenza Virus Play Detrimental Roles in H1N1-Infected Mice. Front Immunol. 2017 Mar 21;8:317. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00317. PMID: 28377769; PMCID: PMC5359280.
  2. Wang J, Liu M, Ding N, Li Y, Shao J, Zhu M, Xie Z, Sun K. Vaccine based on antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity epitope on the H1N1 influenza virus increases mortality in vaccinated mice. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2018 Sep 10;503(3):1874-1879. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2018.07.129. Epub 2018 Jul 29. PMID: 30064910.
  3. Lee, W.S., Wheatley, A.K., Kent, S.J. et al.Antibody-dependent enhancement and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and therapies. Nat Microbiol 5, 1185–1191 (2020).
  4. Antibody levels decrease after two doses of Pfizer vaccine – study, The Jerusalem Post October 7 2021.
  5. Waning of BNT162b2 Vaccine Protection against SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Qatar, The New England journal of Medicine.
  6. Horowitz: The Country with the best data shows infection rates higher among vaccinated, Blaze Media October 04, 2021
  7. Subramanian SV, Kumar A. Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States. Eur J Epidemiol. 2021 Dec;36(12):1237-1240. doi: 10.1007/s10654-021-00808-7. Epub 2021 Sep 30. PMID: 34591202; PMCID: PMC8481107.
  8. Taiwan Deaths from COVID-19 Vaccination Exceed Deaths from COVID-19, Medical trend, Global Research, Transcend Media Service.
  9. Video -House Science Committee Hearing March 2020. Dr Hotez. Vaccine Development Co-Director, Texas, Dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine, Baylor College of Medicne.
  10. Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee Meeting Dec 10, 2020, FDA Briefing Document, Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine.
  11. Informed consent disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of risk of COVID-19 vaccines worsening clinical disease, Int J Clin Pract 2021 Mar
  12. UK scientists back Covid boosters as study finds post-jab falls in antibodies, The Guardian
  13. Infection-enhancing anti-SARS CoV-2 antibodies recognize both original Wuhan Strain and Delta variants of potential risk from mass vaccination?Yahi N, Chahinian H, Fantini J. Infection-enhancing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies recognize both the original Wuhan/D614G strain and Delta variants. A potential risk for mass vaccination?. J Infect. 2021;83(5):607-635. doi:10.1016/j.jinf.2021.08.010
  14. Rochelle Walensky, Director, Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, USA. Press conference video followed by different message February 2022
  15. Ryan Cole MD, pathologist, PhD immunology speaking on The Highwire (website -
  16. Geert Vanden Bossche,
  17. What do Vaccine Efficacy Numbers Actually Mean”, The New York Times, March 2021.
  18. Don Wolt on Twitter
  19. Prevalence and Durability of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies Among Unvaccinated US Adults by History of COVID-19.
  20. Cardozo T, Veazey R. Informed consent disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of risk of COVID-19 vaccines worsening clinical disease. Int J Clin Pract. 2021 Mar;75(3):e13795. doi: 10.1111/ijcp.13795. Epub 2020 Dec 4. PMID: 33113270; PMCID: PMC7645850.
  21. Experts call for WA’s border to reopen, with concerns immunity of frontline workers will wane, WAtoday.
  22. Front Line COVID_19 Critical Care Alliance Dr Paul Marik & Dr Pierre Kory – Prevention and Treatment Protocols


Published 10th February 2022. Edits in March – reformatting.