Bill Gates is looking for breastfeeding mums in Africa to poison

A trial of a new vaccine has just started to 'protect' against Norovirus. Never heard of it? You're not alone.

Bill Gates, the King of eugenics in today’s world, has helped, via his foundation, to fund a trial being run on African mothers on the use of an oral vaccine against Norovirus. The company running the trial is Vaxart, funded in part by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Vaxart Doses First Subject in Phase 1 Trial of Its Norovirus Vaccine Candidate in Lactating Mothers

Whenever I read of drug or vaccine trials run in developing nations, my spidey senses start tingling REALLY badly! You see, drug companies love to run trials where they don’t have to do too much inconvenient explaining or worry about having to give that. pesky informed choice. If the subject doesn’t speak the same language as the company running the trial - bonus!

Normally, drug trials have to go through an awful lot of hoops and paperwork before they are tested.

In Australia, the way in which clinical trials are supposed to be managed is determined by the government. Supposedly. It is not unknown for these requirements to be avoided, evaded, folded, spindled or mutilated. But here is what the rules state:

Clinical trial and research ethics

A human research ethics committee must agree that a clinical trial is ethical before it can go ahead.

The ethics committee has a range of members that include:

• at least two members of the public

• a person who performs pastoral care in the community

• a lawyer

• researchers

• people with professional caring experience, such as a nurse or allied health professional

In Australia, people must understand all the facts about a clinical trial before they can agree to take part. This is known as informed consent.

One has to wonder if this was done for the experimental COVID jabs. I tend to doubt it because - EMERGENCY! But there are rules, even if they are not always followed.

In developing countries, however, rules are for chumps!

If you’ve ever read or seen John le Carré’s story, The Constant Gardener, you would know how drug companies lie, cheat and abuse those involved in trials. And how their whoopsies are buried, never to be seen again. After all, admitting to all those deaths and injuries might have an adverse effect on sales! Pun intended.

In Vaxart’s release about this new vaccine for Norovirus, they state that:

Vaxart, Inc. (Nasdaq: VXRT) today announced it has dosed the first subject in its Phase 1 clinical trial evaluating Vaxart’s oral pill bivalent norovirus vaccine candidate focused on lactating mothers.

This language seems chilling to me. These aren’t human beings - they are ‘subjects’. And they are being ‘dosed’, not vaccinated.

I would like to put some quotes here from the Nuremberg Code that I believe have very strong bearing on this issue:

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study, that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.

4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury

This next one is my personal favourite:

No experiment should be conducted, where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects. (emphasis added)

Trust me! If the doctors, the researchers, the pharmaceutical company executives etc also had to participate in these trials, there would be far fewer trials.

I can’t help but think of Samuel Hahnemann, the father of Homeopathy, who tested every remedy on himself before using them on his patients. If only doctors today would follow his example. There would either be far fewer doctors or far safer remedies. Either way: win-win!

Is there any benefit to these women or only risk?

We can see that the last tabu of medicine has well and truly been removed. Previously, pregnant and breastfeeding women were not used as test subjects for trials because the risks were thought to be too high. Shades of thalidomide.

In the last 10+ years, however, pregnancy and lactation are no longer considered to be contraindications to drugs or vaccines or even trials for them. The use of this shot in pregnant women is especially egregious since as far as I can determine, they are being targeted first - before the oral vaccine has even been tested in other populations.

And is there even a need? Do adults die from Norovirus infections and if not, what is the gain for these women or their babies?

The truth is that we don’t know since most people displaying the symptoms of what we call Norovirus or Rotavirus (the symptoms are identical) are never tested. Assumptions are made.

From the NCBI in the US, comes this quote:

Norovirus is believed to cause approximately 60% of cases of acute gastroenteritis in the United States, and the CDC attributes 400,000 emergency department visits and 71,000 hospitalizations each year to norovirus infection. (emphasis added)

We really have no idea how many people get infected with Norovirus or Rotavirus so judging how effective a preventative is for either of this conditions is near impossible. But what we do know is that using women during pregnancy or breastfeeding as guinea pigs is dangerous and evil.

So why use this vaccine at all?

The excuse given for using a Norovirus vaccine reminds me so much of what happened after the introduction of Hib vaccines in the early 1990s.

Hib (Haemophilus influenzae) is one of many bacteria thought to be associated with a range of infections, from ear and throat infections to epiglottis and meningitis. But the main reason we were told the vaccine needed to be used was to prevent meningitis which is a deadly infection.

When the rate of meningitis went up instead of down despite good compliance with the shot, the new cases were blamed on two other bacteria - pneumococcal and meningococcal - and vaccines were introduced against both of those because, obviously, the Hib vaccine had worked so well, it had left the field open for other bacteria to fill the vacuum. We were told that this was called ‘serogroup replacement’ and it only happened because the vaccine had been so incredibly effective. Pull the other one!

Norovirus appears to be the same. How convenient!

Has Norovirus replaced Rotavirus just like Hib was replaced by Pneumococcal and Meningococcal?

It seems that the stage has been set, and the script written to say just that!

Globally, in countries that have adopted a rotavirus vaccine program, norovirus has become the leading cause of pediatric gastroenteritis in health care settings.¹ Pediatric deaths in the United States due to norovirus are rare, but they are much more common in the developing world.

What they are saying is that because we used a rotavirus vaccine (and the symptoms of gastroenteritis haven’t gone down or gone away), we now need a new vaccine against another problem which vaccination has, if not caused, then exacerbated.

Both rotovirus and norvirus are almost unheard of in breastfed infants. Using unsanitary water to make up baby formula is one of the leading causes. So perhaps the money being spent (wasted) on these vaccines might be better used to encourage extended breastfeeding and dig wells in developing countries so people can access clean water.

But there ain’t no profit for pHarma in actually promoting good health now, is there?

It would be very interesting to get ahold of the consent forms the women enrolled in this trial have signed. But that might not be possible because:

(a) there may not be any consent forms; and

(b) they may not have even been asked or informed these women about the fact that they were in a trial.

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

Never forget this.