The narrative is dead, and the only ones still refusing to accept it are the Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Israeli media

On Wednesday (January 11), CNN published a surprising article: "FDA vaccine advisers 'disappointed' and 'angry' that early data about new Covid-19 booster shot wasn't presented for review last year," stated the headline.

A series of experts who all serve as advisors to the FDA and the CDC were interviewed by CNN, and claimed that they were "disappointed" and "angry" that government scientists and the pharmaceutical company Moderna withheld important data on the effectiveness of the company's new bivalent booster, adjusted to the omicron strain, during meetings in June and September when the advisers discussed whether the shot should be authorized and made available to the public.

The advisers claimed that while the briefing document and the slide presentation they were given at these meetings indicated that the updated bivalent booster, which had cost US taxpayers nearly $5 billion, works better than the original one, it became clear to them lately that data suggesting that the updated booster might not be any more effective at preventing Covid-19 infections than the original shots was withheld from them. In fact, it seems that it is even less effective than the original one, as more participants of the study group who received the updated booster became infected compared to those who received the original one.

Among the "disappointed" advisers was Dr. Paul Offit, a leading vaccine researcher and a member of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, a group of external advisers that helps the FDA make vaccine decisions; Dr. Eric Rubin, a member of the FDA vaccine advisory committee; Dr. Arnold Monto, a professor of epidemiology at the University of Michigan School of Public Health and acting chair of the FDA advisers' group; and Dr. Pablo Sanchez, a member of the CDC's panel, who was the only one to vote against approval of the new booster last September. "It's not a group of children. We understand how to interpret these results," said Dr. Rubin.

The experts argued that the concealment had far-reaching consequences, not only because 48.2 million Americans received the new product whose approval they decided without all the available data brought to the table, but also because the advisory committee meetings are streamed live online, and regulatory agencies around the world use the information to help make decisions about vaccines in their countries. In addition, they stressed the importance of transparency, especially in light of the public's growing mistrust in health authorities.

The Times published a similar article, in which Dr. Paul Offit was interviewed, claiming that the data presented to him and his colleagues did not support the approval of the booster.

It was not just the popular media that published this story. The NEJM, the medical journal whose editor-in-chief is, as mentioned above, Dr. Eric Rubin, the journal which in recent years has become the mother base from which the studies that provided the support for the approval processes of the mRNA vaccines were launched, and which did not even allow 250-word letters to the editor to be published if they voiced even the slightest criticism against these studies or the "consensus" they presented, made a U-turn this week, publishing a surprising piece, the author of which was once again Dr. Paul Offit. Offit, who until recently was an enthusiastic supporter of the mRNA Covid vaccines, titled his article "Bivalent Covid-19 Vaccines – A Cautionary Tale".

But the article's bottom line is the most surprising of all, since it is in fact almost identical to the position that many researchers, including the Israeli PECC researchers, voiced many months ago, but was censored and defined as a "conspiracy theory": "In the meantime, I believe we should stop trying to prevent all symptomatic infections in healthy, young people by boosting them with vaccines containing mRNA from strains that might disappear a few months later." 

---

The experts argued that the concealment had far-reaching consequences, not only because 48.2 million Americans received the new product whose approval they decided without all the available data brought to the table, but also because the advisory committee meetings are streamed live online, and regulatory agencies around the world use the information to help make decisions about vaccines in their countries. In addition, they stressed the importance of transparency, especially in light of the public's growing mistrust in health authorities.

---

 But all this was just the prelude to what happened on Friday. It started with the CDC itself announcing that, along with the FDA, it had identified a "Preliminary COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Signal" requiring an investigation into "a safety concern for ischemic stroke in people ages 65 and older who received the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine (the Bivalent booster)." According to the CDC, the warning signs emerged from an investigation of the Vaccine Safety Database (VSD) data.

Despite all the reservations voiced by the CDC's announcement - "Further investigation is required," "Pfizer-BioNTech's global safety database has not indicated a signal for ischemic stroke," etc. - the fact remains that the major US authorities have finally got the message sent that the public has been sending them for a long time now: enough is enough - you can no longer hide information from us and lie. This fact is made clear already in the opening sentence of the CDC statement: "Transparency and vaccine safety are top priorities for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)."

This announcement has already received the full attention of the US MSM, and this time it's not just Fox News. Everyone, from CNN to Reuters - the "fact checkers" organization - quoted it. "U.S. FDA, CDC see early signal of possible Pfizer bivalent COVID shot link to stroke," states the headline on Reuters.

Almost simultaneously, another scandal broke out yesterday, when Dr. Aseem Malhotra, one of the most prominent and respected cardiologists in the UK, broke into the mainstream broadcast media, and in an interview with him on the BBC, stated that a likely contributory factor to excess cardiovascular deaths in the UK is the Covid mRNA vaccine. Dr. Malhotra called for the suspension of these vaccines pending an inquiry.

Public trust has been lost

Although the BBC was "reprimanded" for this interview, and in response interviewed another expert, who represents the "overwhelming scientific consensus on the vaccine," this short interview had a huge impact - the video clip posted by Dr. Malhotra on his Twitter account has been viewed over 800k times in less than four hours, and today the number of views is already around 12 million.

The understanding of researchers and scientists who until recently led the institutional narrative, that the public is no longer with them, began to seep in several months ago. This apparently began in October, with the admission of Pfizer Director during a hearing in the European Parliament, that her company never tested whether its COVID-19 mRNA vaccine can prevent viral transmission before it was released into the market.

Since then, other things have happened. Perhaps the most important of them is the "Twitter files" that were revealed following the purchase of Twitter by Elon Musk, and which exposed the censorship of the censorship - meaning, how Twitter cooperated with the US government, not only to censor huge amounts of doctors, researchers, and journalists who dared to tweet the "forbidden" scientific information, studies, data, and positions, but to censor this censorship as well, through tactics such as shadow banning and smear campaigns. And this happened, of course, not only on Twitter, but in fact on all social platforms, including Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, and Google.

In a study that I published together with Dr. Josh Gwetzko, Dr. Eti Elisha, Prof. Natti Ronel, and Prof. Brian Martin from Australia, we showed how leading researchers and doctors throughout the world, including Israel, some of them with world renown and an impressive scientific and academic record, and who until the Covid crisis were considered popular interviewees, were not only censored by the MSM and social networks, but were suppressed and silenced with a variety of violent tactics.

A large part of these tactics our interviewees described in the study are designed to censor censorship itself. Why? Because, as Prof. Martin has shown in previous studies, in the digital age, attempts to censor information may lead to the "Barbra Streisand effect" - public outrage at the censorship. To try to prevent this, the strategy is to censor the very existence of censorship. That's exactly what Sunday's Twitter Space broadcast, hosted by Neil Oliver, Nick Hudson, Gal Gur, and Efrat Fennigson, showed, on an even larger scale. One by one, dozens of researchers, scientists, doctors, and journalists testified - and if time had allowed it, there would have been hundreds of them - describing how they were censored, suppressed, silenced and persecuted.

But now, the dam has been breached. It happened all at once, suddenly. Just like the sudden deaths of young people and children that keep piling up. These cases, which can no longer be ignored, the excess mortality reported in many countries in 2021, for which no one can provide a logical explanation, the increasing morbidity of the population - lead even those who until now refused to believe, to understand that something too strange is happening here. A Rasmussen Reports national poll published last week found that close to a third of Americans think someone they know has died as a result of the COVID vaccines, nearly half believe that these vaccines could be responsible for many unexplained deaths, and almost half also believe that there are legitimate reasons to be concerned about their safety.

Throughout the world, many are already realizing that public trust has been lost. Even the CDC and FDA. Otherwise, they wouldn't have opened their announcement like that yesterday. In Eric Rubin's words, "we are not little children." We know how to understand and interpret the information. In Israel as well, in closed conversations, the Ministry of Health officials complain among themselves for having lost the public's trust, and that the public no longer trusts official authorities, certainly not the IMoH, but not even the World Health Organization. But for some reason, the IMoH and those cooperating with it refuse to internalize and implement it.

The video clips from the leaked discussion from last June, in which researchers hired by the MoH presented to the Ministry's Epidemiological Department officials findings from a study on the side effects of the vaccine commissioned by the Ministry, and the tape itself, which last Sunday we revealed in full together with the PECC experts on an international broadcast, have already reached millions of views worldwide.

---

now, the dam has been breached. It happened all at once, suddenly. Just like the sudden deaths of young people and children that keep piling up. These cases, which can no longer be ignored, the excess mortality reported in many countries in 2021, for which no one can provide a logical explanation, the increasing morbidity of the population - lead even those who until now refused to believe, to understand that something too strange is happening here. A Rasmussen Reports national poll published last week found that close to a third of Americans think someone they know has died as a result of the COVID vaccines, nearly half believe that these vaccines could be responsible for many unexplained deaths, and almost half also believe that there are legitimate reasons to be concerned about their safety.

---

 Following our broadcast, some Israeli mainstream media outlets, reinforced by two senior experts, Prof. Galia Rahav and Prof. Gili Regev Yochai, both from Sheba Hospital, were recruited to do the Ministry's dirty job and defend the vaccine and the MoH in view of the recording that was revealed. Prof. Rahav was interviewed by channel 13, while Prof. Regev Yochai responded on Twitter and Facebook to an article published in Haaretz that completely distorted the findings.

To our astonishment, instead of rebelling against the MoH, especially in light of the fact that, as can be seen when comparing the video to the MoH's report to the public published on August, the Ministry withheld the serious findings not only from the public, but even from their own expert committee, when they decided on June 30 – 3 weeks after they were warned about these findings and their implications – to approve the vaccine for infants as young as 6 months.

Moreover, Prof. Rahav is a member of this committee, so she should have been outraged to learn that such important information was withheld from her – at least as outraged as the CDC and FDA's advisors were. Instead, the line chosen to relate to this monumental scandal was a vicious attack on those who exposed it – us, and on those who tried to spread the information, framing us all as "anti-vaxxers" and "delusional people". A vicious attack intended to delegitimize the messenger, instead of the perpetrator.

As for the content itself, when the MoH's initial claim, "taken out of context," made against the video clips we published in August, was proven false – the new tactic adopted was to utterly dismiss what is a complete and raw documentation of the discussion, when anyone with ears and eyes in his head can hear and see clearly what the researchers and the MoH's officials were saying in their own voice.

Anyone with ears and eyes listening and watching the tape can clearly hear and see the researchers repeating again and again in this leaked discussion that one of their central findings is that the side effects they analyzed were in many cases long-term - lasting a year or more sometimes, and some of them were ongoing and continued even when the study ended.

Anyone with ears and eyes listening and watching the tape can clearly hear and see the researchers stressing that the long duration of the range of side effects they analyzed also contradicted what Pfizer itself stated to the MoH they had knowledge of.

Anyone with ears and eyes listening and watching the tape can clearly hear and see the researchers stressing, again and again, that they found many cases of rechallenge (recurrence and even intensification of the symptoms after repeated doses) – and that this is a clear signal of a causal link to the vaccine.

Anyone with ears and eyes listening and watching the tape can clearly hear and see the researchers saying that they identified new phenomena (signals) not listed by Pfizer.

Anyone listening and watching the tape can clearly hear and see the head researcher, Prof. Mati Berkowitch, warning the MoH of medical-legal consequences following these findings and how the Ministry is now exposed to lawsuits because they kept telling the public that the symptoms are short-term and transient, and to "go get vaccinated."

Anyone listening and watching the tape can clearly hear and see how the researchers repeatedly request the epidemiology department officials to share their findings with Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis and Prof. Nachman Ash; and to see to it that the materials are published in the research literature and above all - to the general public in a transparent manner.

Anyone listening and watching the tape can clearly hear and see how the researchers repeatedly asked the officials to convey the message to Dr. Alroy-Preis that the study must be continued, in light of the importance and seriousness of their findings, and because they have not finished it yet and still have a lot of work to do, including the analysis of the most severe cases of hospitalization, and 17 categories of side effects they identified – primarily cardiovascular effects.

Anyone listening and watching the tape, and anyone reading the report published by the Ministry in August, will be able to clearly understand that the IMoH, which under a contract with Pfizer turned Israel into the company's global laboratory, lied to the FDA and the entire world when it claimed that Israel operates an advanced side effect reporting system for the public, and that in fact, during the entire 2021, in which most Israeli citizens were vaccinated, had no functional system for reporting side effects.

And anyone reading the Ministry's report can easily understand that this report is hiding the study's actual important findings and conclusions, and distorting them through cheap manipulations.

But instead, the two leading experts from Sheba chose to continue to cooperate with the MoH's lies even in the face of the raw and complete video that clearly shows the opposite.

Both of these experts chose to frame the discussion as illegitimate, and the criticizing side as "anti-vaxxers" and "delusional". Prof. Regev Yoachai even commended the Haaretz journalist who wrote the smearing article, titled "Anti-vaxxers have no interest in public health - or in researching the truth", as "thorough and accurate", even though not even a single sentence in it is correct.

Prof. Rahav claimed that the side effects found in the study are "rare and unusual", and "pass within a day or two", and that no causal connection to the vaccine can be established.

"I call it 'side effects' even though it's not exactly side effects", she asserted.

For example, regarding menstrual disruptions, Rahav claimed: "There were many discussions about this, and it was found that there was some kind of delay in the cycle, but very minimal, of a day or a day and a half, according to the known scientific literature" – completely ignoring, or unaware of, what the research team said during the discussion (It can also be seen in the slide presentation), that they were in most cases long-term, as 90% of them lasted for over a month and 30% were ongoing, and that this finding contradicts what is known from studies until today.

Unfortunately, neither of these two experts saw fit to disclose, neither while they were intensively promoting the vaccine to the public in countless interviews on TV and newspapers along two long years, nor now, when they are trying to smear the whistleblowers, that they have financial and professional conflicts of interest with Pfizer.

For example, Rahav stated in one of her studies on the following conflicts of interest: "Consultant, Investigator and Speaker’s Bureau, Consulting fee, Research grant and Speaker honorarium". In a previous interview in Haaretz, she dismissed the criticism raised against her that she is taking money from Pfizer with ridicule: “Let them have a look at my paycheck – that’s ridiculous." Prof. Regev Yoachai admitted in a closed MoH meeting a few years ago that she received funding from Pfizer, and also disclosed that she received funding from Pfizer in an article published on NEJM in 2021.In a 2019 conference, she also disclosed serving as an "Advisor or Review Panel" for Pfizer.



In addition, according to IMoH reports, the hospital of those two experts, Sheba, received large sums of money in donations from Pfizer. While until 2014 Pfizer's donations stood at an average of 50-100K shekels ($15K-$30K), and in 2015 at 400K shekels ($120K), in 2019 Pfizer's total donations increased to 710K shekels ($200K) - and in 2020 to 1.36 million shekels ($400K). Interestingly, while Pfizer reported on this donation in 2020, Sheba hospital only reported on a donation of 300K shekels ($90K) by Pfizer that year – less than a quarter of what they actually received.

The media, for their part, did not bother to confront them with this fact. Why, out of all the experts in Israel, did they choose to interview those with conflicts of interest with Pfizer? Why not instead contact Prof. Mati Berkowitz himself and his colleagues and ask them to comment on the recording – a move that would be essential if a journalistic work was to be done here?

It should be noted that we invited Haaretz's publisher, Amos Schocken, several times to watch the entire video months ago. He chose to ignore our invitation, and nevertheless, without watching it, published two articles smearing us.

When confronted with these facts, days prior to our broadcast, he answered via Twitter in one word: "Sababa" – which is Hebrew slang for "whatever".

Then, on Friday, he published this third smearing article, and tweeted that "Ido Efrati's (the journalist who wrote the article) text seems to me to be an adequate summary of the claims about the media's ignoring the 'shocking discussion' at the MoH about the vaccines' side-effects, and a conclusion that the discussion was not shocking and that the hysteria to promote its publication was unnecessary".

The narrative is dead. Long live the new narrative - the truth! The world is already waking up to understand this – both senior researchers and doctors are now abandoning the sinking ship, and the mainstream media is starting to catch on. However, in Israel, the Ministry of Health and the media still refuse to accept this and continue to try to revive it and censor the truth. Censorship takes life. It censors its very existence – but the truth has a life of its own.

The full leaked video. Watch for yourself:

https://youtu.be/jwGWc6qOeWI

https://rumble.com/v24i3gq-israeleak-full-tape.html

Recording of our broadcast revealing the tape:

https://youtu.be/8ibKpyKeVEc

https://rumble.com/v24i8hu-israeleak-tape-exposure-event.htm