Letter addressed to Peter Fonseca, Member of Parliament for Mississauga East-Cooksville
Your assistant has informed me of your interest in arranging a meeting to discuss my concerns about the COVID-19 vaccines. You have seen Professor Campra’s report that conclusively documents the presence of graphene oxide in vials of the vaccines. You have also received my bibliography documenting the toxicity of graphene compounds to humans. Remember that the manufacturers have not declared the presence of graphene in their list of ingredients.
More questions and concerns regarding the vaccines are being raised all over the world. Today, I am drawing your attention to two new studies that, together with the graphene-oxide issue, should lead to an immediate moratorium of COVID-19 vaccines.
The journal Circulation of the American Heart Association has published a study by Doctor Steven Gundry on 8 November 2021, entitled “Mrna COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: a Warning.”
Allow me to briefly summarize the study and explain why I think that it, on its own, is sufficient to stop the vaccine program immediately. (A better discussion is available here.)
The PULS (Protein Unstable Lesion Signature) test measures proteins that indicate that the body has suffered arterial injury. Typically, those injuries will contribute to cardiac lesions that will eventually rupture. In other words, the patient will suffer a cardiac event.
PULS is used by cardiologists to identify at-risk patients. Gundry and his team have used the test for years to predict the probability of ACS (Acute Coronary Syndrome) among their patients. ACS is caused by any sudden reduction of blood flow to the heart. The PULS score measures the deviation from a normal baseline measurement of a number of protein biomarkers.
The study included 566 patients who had been under continuous care for eight years. Their PULS markers were therefore on record throughout that period. A big change occurred in these markers, predictive of cardiac events, after the mass vaccination campaign began in December 2020. Since vaccination rates were high in California, where Gundry’s practice is located, the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines were identified as a possible factor in the deterioration of his patients’ health.
Gundry and his staff ran tests on each of the 566 patients, split evenly between male and female, from twenty-eight to ninety-seven years of age. Each patient had a new PULS test from two to ten weeks after their second COVID-19 shot. On average, the PULS scores increased from an eleven-percent risk of ACS over the subsequent five years to twenty-five percent. The probability of a cardiac event more than doubled as a result of the vaccination. And those changes in PULS scores persisted up to the time of the writing of the study, two and a half months after the second mRNA vaccine.
Doctor Grundy concludes that both the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines increased inflammation of the endothelium and T-cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and could correlate to increased ACS.
Another study that is equally disturbing was carried out by Doctor De Benito throughout the summer of 2021. His report will be made public, along with the results of others independently researching the same issue, next week.
De Benito began by asking why there was such insistence on vaccinating everybody for a disease that was not a threat. What was the real purpose behind the vaccine?
Throughout the summer of 2021, De Benito carried out his consultations with patients, at twenty minute intervals, in a building that was otherwise empty. Due to covid measures, his patients were advised to come alone at the appointed time. So, there were no electronic devices within range of his office. Before the start of each appointment, De Benito connected the Bluetooth application on his cell phone to make sure that it was not registering that any devices were available to contact in the vicinity. He was able to predict the approach of his patients through his Bluetooth app that registered the appearance of one or more devices available to connect with. If his app did detect a device, it showed a MAC (Media Access Control) address. A MAC is a unique identifier that manufacturers assign to an item that can be networked. At the end of each consultation, De Benito asked the patient for his COVID vaccination status.
Those who replied in the affirmative did not hesitate or register any qualms about the question. However, those who claimed to have not been vaccinated were often wary or even disturbed by the question, suggesting that the patient had already experienced unwanted social pressure. De Benito documented the answers. None of the 137 patients refused to answer. He then asked them to turn off any cell phone or electronic devices they might be carrying. As they turned off their devices, one by one, the signals registered through Bluetooth would disappear. Once all of the devices had been turned off, De Benito documented the following results.
Of the 137 patients, 112 said they had been vaccinated and twenty-five said that they had not. None of the unvaccinated patients registered any device available for Bluetooth connection. Of the 112 patients who claimed to have been vaccinated, ninety-six continued to register a MAC address after all their devices had been turned off. He noted the remaining Bluetooth code in the medical history. De Benito assumed that the patient himself was emitting the code. Indeed, when the patient left the building, the code disappeared from De Benito’s Bluetooth app. So, 100 percent of the unvaccinated patients registered no MAC code. Eighty-six percent of the patients who claimed to have been vaccinated did register a MAC code.
De Benito has offered several conclusions. The isolated environment meant that there was little chance of interference in the Bluetooth application. It is possible that his cell phone did not detect all Bluetooth devices. If nothing else, the detectable MAC address on his app allowed De Benito to know that vaccinated people were coming to his office before they arrived. De Benito consulted with computer technicians, roboticists, biologists, and experts in computer science and nanorobotics. The consensus was that the code could have been generated as a result of the injected material interacting with genetic material (DNA or HLAs) of the patient.
The final question that De Benito needed to address was the fourteen percent of the vaccinated patients who did not register a MAC address. Why? He has several hypotheses. First, perhaps some received a placebo and not the active agents of the vaccine. Second, some vials could have been denatured. Third, perhaps the product did not have the intended effect on all patients. And, fourth, perhaps fourteen percent of his patients lied about their vaccine status in order to avoid problems or head off any attempts of vaccine promotion.
What does it mean? It’s beyond De Benito’s medical knowledge. But it requires further study and an explanation.
These studies raise serious issues about the COVID-19 vaccine program. It should be stopped immediately. A thorough enquiry into the composition and effects of the vaccines should be initiated. As a Liberal Member of Parliament, will you be raising these issues with the government?
Paul Jackson, PhD