Evidentiary Document sent to Prime Minister Ardern and Ministers 05/12/2022: (1) PDF EvidentiaryDocument_COVID19NationalLevelHarm_01122022 (2) slide deck version EvidentiaryDocument_COVID19NationalLevelHarm_Slidedeck_01012023.
Dear Professor Tony Blakely
In light of your chairmanship of the New Zealand Royal Commission of Inquiry into New Zealand’s Covid-19 response (inquiry), I would like to share an Open Letter, and Evidentiary Document sent to Prime Minister Ardern and Ministers five hours before this inquiry was publicly announced on 05/12/22 (see attached). Dr. Ayesha Verrall (COVID-19 minister) confirmed her officials are reviewing this evidence (see below). This evidentiary document is highly relevant to the scope of this inquiry. I am a former European corporate venture capital-funded CEO/vaccine co-innovator (“Vaccines for Mutating Viruses,” UK), a veterinarian with 36 years of vaccine use experience, and a private researcher.
The evidentiary document provides national-level evidence of negative vaccine effectiveness (neg.VE) and vaccine failure in New Zealand, England, Scotland, and Canada (Study-1: 75 million vaccinated, 108 million population), globally (Study-2: 77 nations, 2.6 billion vaccinated, 3.9 billion people), and toxic vaccine lots (Study-3: Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System lot numbered outcomes, global implications). Statistical biases evident in the Ministry of Health (MOH) and other healthcare agencies provided or calculable unvaccinated COVID-19 case rates essentially eliminated the neg.VE signal from public view. The evidentiary document also details the molecular, scientific, and other evidence for SARS-CoV-2’s gain-of-function origin, its systematic coverup, and the players involved. The evidentiary document is supported by 525 unique data, scientific, and other citations, while the inquiry framing information described below defers to those citations.
Considering the evidence detailed in Parts 1 and 2 of the evidentiary document, an obvious question arises that is highly relevant to this inquiry. Was a genetically modified non-zoonosis originating SARS-CoV-2 coupled with predictably unsafe COVID-19 vaccination a deliberately intended global strategy implemented by WHO member state governments as part of their COVID-19 responses? The NZ government’s COVID-19 response raises significant concerns about the strategic intent behind its COVID-19 response when viewed through the lens of predictable-programmable Antibody-Dependent Enhancement of virus infection (ADE, causing neg.VE) and Antigenic Imprinting (AI, causing vaccine failure) and the statistical biases evident in the MOH’s calculable unvaccinated COVID-19 case rates that eliminated the neg.VE signal.
These predictable and immunologically programmable phenomena (ADE/AI, sections 1.1.6-8) became realizable upon (re)exposure to antigenically distinct SARS-CoV-2 strains after vaccination and once our international and internal borders were reopened or relaxed. The national border closure in 2020 kept New Zealanders immunologically naive. The Auckland border closures in August 2021, the subsequent coerced/mandated vaccination, and the government and its funded media ostracization and vilification of the unvaccinated by misinformation, then the threat of festive season vacation restrictions facilitated the MOH’s Blitzkrieg-speed high vaccination rates. This COVID-19 response occurred when neg.VE was highly evident in the UKHSA data (from Report 36) and Our World in Data (OWID). Yet, the MOH narrative and informed consent guidelines failed to emphatically warn people of these now evident enhanced infection risks.
The double-tap announcements that the government had reduced the booster interval from four to three months (02/02/22) and borders would reopen starting at the end of February 2022 (03/02/22) were ominous. This significant step in the government’s COVID-19 response meant 3,063,823 people aged ≥18yrs became eligible for a booster concomitant with misinformed hyping-up of the Omicron disease risk upon border reopening. In the context of ADE, a third dose boosted the waned 2nd dose antibody levels above the putative ADE threshold. This therapeutic vaccination enabled the government to phase healthcare system demand and postpone the emergence of neg.VE. You could compare our politician-led COVID-19 response (i.e., quarantine-ensured immunological naivety, Blitzkrieg speed vaccination, a 3rd dose just before opening the borders, withholding Ivermectin treatments, end-to-end misinformation) to laboratory scientists setting up a coronavirus challenge study, which minimized the placebo group (i.e., statistical comparator). The neg.VE became evident in NZ after borders reopened (slide 4, figure legend 2), which progressively deteriorated as the year/waves progressed (slide 8). Excess mortality rates rose sharply in March 2022 (Professor Gibson https://repec.its.waikato.ac.nz/wai/econwp/2211.pdf).
Was whole population vaccination an appropriate government COVID-19 response? During the 2020s highest COVID-19 disease morbidity and mortality rate phase of the pandemic, global data highlighted the burden of serious-severe COVID-19 disease was in the elderly with multiple comorbidities. In contrast, mortality rates in the sub-70yr demographics were broadly equivalent to influenza. In 2021-22 the UKHSA Omicron data shows the hospitalization and death prevention benefit in sub-18yr and 18-59yr demographics was negligible to minimal, without factoring in the vaccine-induced harm or the irreversibly programmed ADE/AI potential. Based on the literature evidence, the NZ government conflating Omicron’s high transmissibility with high virulence was vaccination-inducing misinformation. Allowing the development of superior natural herd immunity in low-risk demographics while protecting the elderly and at-risk populations would have avoided this predictable and irreversible ADE/AI and vaccine-induced harm.
Thus, the government’s COVID-19 response of misinforming and fearmongering whole population vaccination at Blitzkrieg speed was unnecessary, inappropriate, and predictably placed the population at high risk of irreversible harm. The government’s response failed to reflect the barrage of evidence about vaccine harm, neg.VE, and vaccine failure it received from court case expert submissions, doctor petitions, the scientific literature, and overseas government data. The government and its highly funded media censored the public from the global neg.VE/vaccine failure and vaccine-associated harm while threatening doctors with medical disbarment if they did not conform to their informed consent guidelines that failed to fully warn of the risks.
I concluded the WHO/MOH/government COVID-19 response created a 21st-century perpetual human culling biosystem, likely with an accelerating fuse. This putative culling biosystem might explain NZ’s Coroner Amendment Bill and its new death classification of “unascertained natural causes” diagnosable by non-coroners. SARS-CoV-2 will putatively continue its vaccine- and HLA system-driven evolution in wave after wave of immunologically uncontested (largely) viral attack thanks to ADE, antigenic imprinting, and SARS-CoV-2’s reversion to virulence. The evolving China white lung experience might reflect ADE/AI and Omicron’s changing tissue tropism, which putatively parallels Feline Infectious Peritonitis – where death is ultimately assured.
Will the committee investigate the government’s decision not to make Ivermectin available for COVID-19 treatment and prophylaxis? Medsafe defers to the WHO and Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners’ recommendations not to use Ivermectin. This potentially biased-political stance comes despite the overseas and systematic review evidence highlighting its safe therapeutic benefit without the lifelong risks of enhancing COVID-19 infection risk or vaccine-associated enhanced disease risk (VAED). A potential sinister motive is evident in this WHO recommendation not to use Ivermectin outside government-controlled clinical studies when viewed through the lens of SARS-CoV-2’s gain-of-function origin. Ivermectin is a specific gain-of-function countermeasure, which binds to the genetically modified spike protein receptor binding domain to inhibit cell entry and SARS-CoV-2’s infectivity and pathogenesis (section 2.6). The WHO recommendation eliminated an important COVID-19 disease control lever for member nations, which ensured their use of predictable ADE/AI programming vaccination.
In promoting vaccination under its COVID-19 response did the NZ government’s claim that Comirnaty was 95% efficacious and safe at Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) have validity? When you review sections 1.3-5 (slides 13, 17, & 18), Comirnaty’s safety and efficacy claims were falsifiable on multiple counts in December 2020 with the FDA’s first Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Thus, it would appear that Medsafe rubber-stamped that flawed FDA gate-opening lead. Furthermore, when discussing Comirnaty’s safety publicly, this government should have emphasized the 3-decade vaccine industry legacy of ADE with three different coronaviruses and their spike protein-based vaccine prototypes and the 6-decade legacy of antigenic imprinting. This body of vaccine science teaches us that MOH/government should have been cautious in claiming Comirnaty was safe based only on a mean of 46 days of pre-EUA monitoring and that the safety narrative should have reflected the emergence of antigenically distinct strains after vaccination (i.e., 2nd and 3rd pandemic waves). The government’s failure to emphatically warn of the ADE/AI risks was both conspicuous and ominous.
The government’s COVID-19 response failed to reflect that Comirnaty was a first-in-class gene therapy vaccine with serious unassessed potential for autoimmunity, genotoxicity, reverse transcription, and genome incorporation, cancer, prion disease, and spike protein shedding (sections 1.3-4). The government’s safety narrative also failed to reflect the lack of biomarker evidence at EUA for predictable pathogenesis mechanisms and the premature unblinding of the pivotal phase 3 study 28 months early (i.e., eliminating the statistical comparator group). As such, it was highly revealing of government intent that the National Immunization Programme website does not detail any post-marketing studies for predictable-programmable ADE, AI, and VAED (i.e., predictable pathology mechanism biomarkers). This lack of post-marketing studies for ADE/AI/VAED indicates that the government did not prioritize the NZ population’s safety in its COVID-19 response.
Under the government’s COVID-19 response was the immunological programming of neg.VE (ADE) and vaccine failure (antigenic imprinting) and the harm-hiding denominator bias intentional? One must look at both the MOH/government’s and WHO’s actions to address this question.
Based on the MOH surveillance data, its harm-hiding denominator bias before 08/08/2022, and other issues detailed above, a catastrophic public health failure or deliberate intention to irreversibly harm the population has occurred in New Zealand (and England, Scotland, Canada, and elsewhere) associated with this government’s COVID-19 response. Were the government or a powerful minority of government and its expert advisors aware of the ADE, AI, and VAED potential for Comirnaty? If not, why not? After all, Comirnaty’s potentiality for neg.VE and vaccine failure were highly evident from the literature and should have been obvious to MOH advisory experts.
Given the MOH’s well-described shortcomings for HSU2020 as a population total (i.e., it underestimated the residual unvaccinated population) and its provision before/during the Omicron brunt (HSU Population page in https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/pages/covid_vaccinations_22_03_2022.xlsx), it would appear the MOH enacted some retrospective derrière covering to justify its use of HSU2020. The MOH requested Stats NZ peer review its methods used to create the HSU population and its suitability as a denominator (referencing HSU2020) even though MOH statisticians would have known it would underestimate the unvaccinated population and increase the unvaccinated COVID-19 case rates (i.e., 1.9x over NZStats2021 and 2.6x over HSU2022). The Stats NZ post first appeared on the web archive on 04/08/2022, four days before the MOH switched to HSU2022. Raising further concerns about the government’s COVID-19 response intent is that once HSU2022 went live on 08/08/22, the neg.VE became visible for both infections and hospitalizations (slide 8). The MOH has still not notified the public about the irreparable vaccine-induced harm while promoting COVID-19 vaccination.
The intentions behind the global COVID-19 response, which New Zealand is a party to, focuses on the WHO and its influence over WHO member state governments. Any review of New Zealand’s COVID-19 response must reflect the WHO-coordinated global response and UN politics. At the global level, it is essential to reflect on SARS-CoV-2’s unequivocal gain-of-function non-zoonosis origin and the WHO’s IHR2005 Article breaches, missteps, and its critical actions that raise important questions about its pandemic conduct (section 2.5-7).
Importantly, those one degree removed from EcoHealth Alliance’s attempted gain-of-function coverup must be investigated (Part 2). This investigation should include the WHO (i.e., seven critical issues), the US Department of Defense (DoD) and its Ukraine BTRP-Biolab partners (the Russia Federation Government calls them bioweapon labs) like the WHO, World Organization for Animal Health, and CDC, and the National Institutes of Health and Hunter Biden and his ex-Metabiota (i.e., DoD funded Ukraine-Cameroon biolab operations, corona-, monkeypox-, influenza-, Ebola- virus zoonosis surveillance). Be reminded there is zero hard evidence for a zoonosis. SARS-like cases were diagnosed at the Wuhan Military World Games in October 2019, and Wuhan was locked down. SARS-CoV-2 cases were also retrospectively confirmed in Italy, Sweden, Brazil, and France in November-December 2019.
These SARS-like cases mean an unproven accidental release blamed on the Wuhan Institute of Virology is confounded. Thus, the WHO misinformed the world on the origin and timeline for the COVID-19 pandemic. What if foreign soldiers accidentally or deliberately brought the virus to the games, which got blamed on the Wuhan Institute of Virology because they had conducted gain-of-function research? Furthermore, the molecular evidence for enhanced infectivity and pathogenicity, residual synthetic biology fingerprints, and evidence of a potential Moderna patent infringement indicate the global public has been misinformed and censored from the truth, which could also implicate a non-China origin.
Worse still, under this backdrop of misinformation and censorship, the WHO member state governments promoted gene therapy vaccines, which delivered genetically modified Wuhan Hu-1 strain spike protein mRNA encoded pathogenicity mechanisms not obvious in SARS-CoV-2’s closest precursor (i.e., a Furin Cleavage Site/RBD-ACE2/furin-, CD147-, LFA-1-, autoimmunity- mediated, prion sequences, and a spike protein nuclear translocation signal). Given the attempts at global censorship by EcoHealth Alliance (i.e., affiliated with or funded by WHO, DoD, NIH, USAID, and Metabiota), the seven critical issues related to WHO conduct, and other instances of questionable WHO leadership (section 2.7) it is hard to trust the WHO’s strategic intent.
Based on the above overview and detailed analysis in the evidentiary document, I believe the world is amidst a globally coordinated genocide knowingly or unwittingly implemented by WHO member state governments. In my view, one could justifiably be suspicious of genocide with WHO member state government COVID-19 responses that embraced most of the points (a)-(h):
- Their use of high cycle threshold PCR that generated policy-enabling high false positive data (2020-21),
- Those whose drug regulator approved falsifiable COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and safety claims with critical shortcomings in the preclinical and clinical safety data packages and their study designs that avoided the detection of harm,
- Those who withheld the gain-of-function countermeasure Ivermectin from treatment and prophylaxis protocols, which ensured their use of harmful vaccination,
- Those who rapidly achieved high vaccination rates while censoring doctors who opposed their informed consent guidelines,
- Those where statistical bias was evident in provided or calculable unvaccinated COVID-19 case rates, which eliminated the neg.VE and vaccine failure from ready public view,
- Those whose pharmacovigilance and coroners largely attributed vaccine-associated/exacerbated injuries and deaths as not attributable to vaccination,
- Those who controlled and censored the media narrative with financial inducements, and
- Those governments who censored social media through backdoor channels.
This email constitutes an Open Letter and, together with the evidentiary document, represents an informal submission of inquiry evidence. Please urgently review the neg.VE and vaccine failure problem and request government address the requests made in my Open Letter to them on 05/12/2022. This open letter to you was shared within New Zealand and posted online.
Dr. Carlton Brown BVSc (Massey University) MBA (London Business School)
Former CEO and co-innovator at Immune Targeting Systems Ltd (UK), “Vaccines for Mutating Viruses.”
Raising awareness for antibody-dependent enhancement of virus infection (ADE), vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED), and antigenic imprinting by COVID-19 vaccination.
Download the Evidentiary Document: https://grandsolarminimum.com/2022/12/01/covid-19-vaccine-harm-evidence/.
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
——- Forwarded Message ——-
From: A Verrall (MIN) <email@example.com>
Date: On Thursday, December 15th, 2022 at 9:59 AM
Subject: RE: (3600-2022)Open Letter & Evidentiary Document for the Prime Minister and all Ministers: COVID-19 negative vaccine effectiveness and harm evidence in New Zealand and overseas (Results, Call to Action)
To: COVID19VaccineSafetyNZ <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Kia ora Dr Brown
On behalf of Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall, Minister for COVID-19 Response, thank you for your email on 5 December 2022. The Minister has noted your letter and has asked her officials for advice on the matters you have raised. You can expect a response from the Minister in due course.
|Private Secretary (COVID-19) | Office of Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall
Minister for COVID-19 Response
Minister of Research, Science and Innovation
|Minister for Seniors
Associate Minister of Health
Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand
From: COVID19VaccineSafetyNZ [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Monday, 5 December 2022 4:36 PM
To: J Ardern (MIN) <firstname.lastname@example.org>; A Little Office (MIN) <email@example.com>; P Henare (MIN) <firstname.lastname@example.org>; A Verrall (MIN) <email@example.com>; A Sio (MIN) <A.Sio@ministers.govt.nz>
Cc: C Sepuloni (MIN) <C.Sepuloni@ministers.govt.nz>; C Hipkins (MIN) <firstname.lastname@example.org>; D OConnor (MIN) <D.OConnor@ministers.govt.nz>; D Parker (MIN) <D.Parker@ministers.govt.nz>; D Clark (MIN) <D.Clark@ministers.govt.nz>; Megan Woods (MIN) <M.Woods@ministers.govt.nz>; G Robertson (MIN) <G.Robertson@ministers.govt.nz>; J Shaw (MIN) <J.Shaw@ministers.govt.nz>; J Tinetti (MIN) <J.Tinetti@ministers.govt.nz>; K Davis (MIN) <email@example.com>; K McAnulty (MIN) <firstname.lastname@example.org>; K Allan (MIN) <email@example.com>; M Davidson (MIN) <M.Davidson@ministers.govt.nz>; M Whaitiri (MIN) <M.Whaitiri@ministers.govt.nz>; M Wood (MIN) <M.Wood@ministers.govt.nz>; N Mahuta (MIN) <firstname.lastname@example.org>; P Twyford (MIN) <P.Twyford@ministers.govt.nz>; P Williams (MIN) <P.Williams@ministers.govt.nz>; P Radhakrishnan (MIN) <P.Radhakrishnan@ministers.govt.nz>; S Nash (MIN) <email@example.com>; W Jackson (MIN) <firstname.lastname@example.org>; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: (3600-2022)Open Letter & Evidentiary Document for the Prime Minister and all Ministers: COVID-19 negative vaccine effectiveness and harm evidence in New Zealand and overseas (Results, Call to Action)
Dear Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister, Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Health, Hon Dr. Ayesha Verrall, Minister of COVID-19 Response, and Hon Peeni Henare and Hon Aupito William Sio, Associate Ministers of Health
In this Open Letter and evidentiary document, I share my research results on overseas government and Ministry of Health (MoH) COVID-19 vaccine surveillance and pharmacovigilance data indicating irreparable vaccine-induced harm. Furthermore, I share important evidence that SARS-CoV-2 originated from gain-of-function research, remind you that no evidence exists for an animal-to-human origin, and highlight that its potential source lay beyond Wuhan, China. A series of requests for investigations are made below linked to this evidence, including the statisticalbiases evident in the Ministry of Health and other healthcare agencies’ calculable unvaccinated COVID-19 case rates. These biases essentially eliminated the negative vaccine effectiveness harm signal from ready public view. This evidentiary document is provided by a former European corporate venture capital-funded CEO/vaccine innovator (“Vaccines for Mutating Viruses”), veterinarian with 36 years of vaccine use experience, and a private researcher. It is supported by 525 unique data, scientific, and other citations.
According to New Zealand, England, Scotland, and Canada healthcare agencies and Global surveillance data (77 nations), these vaccines failed to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection as initially touted. Significant negative vaccine effectiveness and vaccine failure were evident with the emergence of antigenically distinct strains (i.e., Delta, Omicron). The vaccine industry experienced antibody-dependent enhancement of virus infection (ADE) and vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED) with three other different coronaviruses and their spike protein vaccine prototypes in the last 30 years, giving my study results a predictable context. Furthermore, one year of US lot-numbered COVID-19 vaccine-associated deaths and hospitalizations equaled 32x (Comirnaty 15.4x) and 20x (Comirnaty 10.5x) of all US vaccine-associated deaths and hospitalizations, respectively. These adverse outcomes were highly skewed and peaked across vaccine lots and were associated with a minority of lots sent to a larger number of US States. This data highlights that there was an urgent need for investigation by the US and other regulatory and healthcare agencies before expanded population use.
A vast chasm exists between the vaccine safety and efficacy experienced in 2021-2022 and the falsifiable 95% vaccine efficacy and safety proclaimed by governments with Comirnaty’s first Emergency Use Authorization in 2020 (USA). This document reviews critical pharmacotoxicology and clinical safety package deficiencies evident in overseas regulatory reviews. This helps explain why Pfizer then struggled to cope with the sheer volume of Comirnaty adverse event reports in the first 90 days post-launch. This was uncharacteristic of a safe vaccine. Numerous vaccine-associated enhanced disease mechanisms are evident by which vaccine spike proteins can cause disease or exacerbate comorbidities common to severe COVID-19 outcomes.These mechanisms place upregulated furin and angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 receptors (ACE2) and prevalent comorbidities in tissues and organs common to all three center-stage. At the same time, SARS-CoV-2’s spike protein provides its uniquely encoded furin cleavage site for the furin to cleave its S1 and S2 sub-units and activate its ACE2-receptor-mediated infectivity and pathogenicity.
Of grave concern for global public health is a gain-of-function origin to SARS-CoV-2 is indicated by its spike protein incorporating human infectivity and pathogenicity enhancing features unprecedented in nature while synthetic biology left its fingerprints. Furthermore, there is no evidence supporting a Wuhan Huanan market zoonosis because no virus progenitor or animal host was ever identified. There are two reasons for detailing a coronavirus gain-of-function origin to SARS-CoV-2. Firstly, the negative vaccine effectiveness evident in governments’ COVID-19 surveillance data could have been enhanced by a genetically modified SARS-CoV-2. Secondly, the world will be left vulnerable to future pandemics if there was no accidental release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. At least two other potential SARS-CoV-2 origins exist beyond Wuhan, with one of these potentially involving a WHO, Five Eyes, and NATO-spearhead member nation connected with Ukraine.
The US Department of Defense (DoD) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding of EcoHealth Alliance (EHA, $69 million) and its connections one-degree-removed were scrutinized because EHA’s leader led a failed attempt to cover up SARS-CoV-2’s gain-of-function origin. EHA directed research that genetically modified bat SARSr-CoVs that could not infect humans so that they could. EHA’s $14.2 million funding application to the DoD in 2018 showed its intent to insert a codon-optimized furin cleavage site (FCS) into bat SARSr-CoVs. A uniquely encoded Arginine-doublet containing FCS now sits between SARS-CoV-2’s spike protein S1 and S2 sub-units, which has no precedent in known viruses and may have infringed patents. Besides EHA’s long-standing collaborations with two coronavirus gain-of-function research epicenters in the USA and China, it had another with Metabiota. Metabiota’s Series-A lead investor was a Hunter Biden part-owned investment firm. The DoD-funded Metabiota operated in Pentagon Biolabs in Ukraine and US-funded Biolabs in Cameroon and researched corona-, monkeypox-, influenza-, and Ebola viruses. Metabiota has implemented major DoD and Homeland Security contracts across Central Africa while its surveillance role in Sierra Leone’s Ebola outbreak in 2014 created significant controversies.
You are requested to investigate: (1) this New Zealand and overseas evidence for negative vaccine effectiveness, vaccine failure, and toxic vaccine lots, (2) the statistical biases evident in the MoH and other healthcare agencies’ calculable unvaccinated COVID-19 case rates, which essentially eliminated the negative vaccine effectiveness signal, (3) the role of COVID-19 vaccination in exacerbating comorbidities most frequently associated with serious-severe COVID-19 outcomes, (4) SARS-CoV-2’s gain-of-function origin while internationally championing a punitive global ban on gain-of-function R&D, and (5) the conduct of the WHO during COVID-19 linked to seven critical points detailed in section 2.7. Would you please ensure New Zealanders are updated on their recently acquired life-long health risks and that informed consent guidelines associated with COVID-19 vaccination be urgently amended? Would government please prioritize clinical research into COVID-19 antibody-dependent enhancement of virus infection, vaccine-associated enhanced disease, and antigenic imprinting in the New Zealand population? Thank you.
Dr. Carlton Brown BVSc (1986, Massey University), MBA (1997, London Business School).
Former CEO and co-innovator at Immune Targeting Systems Ltd (UK), “Vaccines for Mutating Viruses.”
Raising awareness for antibody-dependent enhancement of virus infection (ADE), vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED), and antigenic imprinting.
Download the Open Letter and Evidentiary Document: https://grandsolarminimum.com/2022/12/01/covid-19-vaccine-harm-evidence/.