Shane’s Jaundiced view of Modern(a) Vaccines

April, 25, 2022 | 34 Comments


  1. “He was negative for COVID-19.”

    False negative rates are very high. Had Sean had covid prior to when he was tested? Almost certainly and probably asymptomatic.

    It’s quite possible that both covid and vaccine-induced spike proteins contributed to liver dysfunction.

    • False positive rates are far far higher than false negative. Whatever about a prior Covid infection the proximity of the effects to the injection – without hours suggests caused by the vaccine in the sense that but for the vaccine he would not have had a problem at that point in time.

      The question is more interesting the other way around. If someone had the vaccine with no problem and then gets Covid and has cholecystitis – what then. In one sense the Covid infection has caused the problem in just the same way as the vaccination appears to have done in Shane’s case. But if we start asking whether he needed to have the vaccine – which it can be argued he didn’t, then the issues become more complex. There is some evidence for triple vaccination enhancing the risk of catching Covid – the causal chain then is more complex.

      What we need in terms of a getting a better handle on things are good figures for Cholecystic problems in 2020 with Covid and no vaccination and the figures for 2021. If anyone working in a hospital coding department can help with this, your input would be good to get.


      • Perhaps damage from the vaccine was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Vasculatory damage can accumulate, right?

        There was a Hopkins’ study back in ’20 that reported a nadir of 20% false negative rates on D3 post symptom onset. 67% on D2 post infection. A more recent study averaged false negatives at 12%, which may be due to less lag between sample collection and testing.

        Myocarditis/Cardiomyopathy topic

        You might be interested in this. There was a murine cocksackievirus study that found that vigorous exercise during viral-induced myocarditis often resulted in cardiomyopathy,

        with implications especially for young men active in sports

        • Clearly other things can set up a situation where a straw breaks the camel’s back but its the straw that does the breaking. Don’t add the straw and no broken back. After the back breaks we can go back and recognize contributions but the key thing is agree a back has been broken and it happened after the straw was added. If you don’t do that then you can invoke invisible Martians or dangerous sounding spike proteins that might or might not be floating around, all of which may cause problems in some cases but the question is what happened in this case.

          If we accept the vaccine is causing myocarditis, we can advise sportsmen not to engage in significant physical activity for week or a month afterwards. But this only makes sense when vaccine induced myocarditis (or Covid induced myocarditis) is recognised and ideally on X-ray show to be present in this case leading to specific advice for this person – that others can take into account if they want to be hyper-cautious but which may not be necessary for them.

          I can’t see any gain in mentioning Covid infections in Shane’s case. It doesn’t offer any useful leads at present.


          • “I can’t see any gain in mentioning Covid infections in Shane’s case.”

            If we are to have a conversation with vaxx cult doctors, then there must be some understanding of their position.

            For them, covid is the herd of horses and covid vaccines are the herd of zebras. So we have to get them talking about degree of impact so that they come to see that the issue isn’t horses v zebras, but the degree of contribution of each to damage to health. We have _clear_, uncontroversial data about myocarditis showing that vaccines add to myocarditis on top of covid. This is something we can build from.

            As regards public health, I think that we need some prophylactic messaging about vitamin D. Doctors on the early treatment side need to look a lot harder at vitamin D. Too many use insufficient dosing in the case of ILIs. If an ILI progresses, prognosis takes a dive. Low vitamin D levels may have contributed to Shane’s reaction. Possibly magnesium deficiency or deficiency in some other nutrient necessary for immune competence.

            We who are aware of the contribution of nutrition to immune competence need to raise the issue. There are dozens of studies showing strong correlations between high mortality and severe vitamin D deficiency.

            We know that vitamin D levels take a dive both starting after a vaccination and during the acute phase of an infection. Risk becomes magnified when both happen consecutively. If the person was insufficient to begin with (say 25OHD of 20 ng/ml in winter north of 37 degrees latitude and the person is a person of color who works in an office and has a BMI of 30), then the 25OHD level could drop into the severe deficiency category with inability to reduce inflammation caused by infection even after the virus is cleared. And so cytokine storm and ARDS happens and sepsis and systemic organ failure.

            Shane perhaps ought to see a physician trained in integrative medicine who would look at his immune nutrient levels (vitamin D, magnesium, zinc, selenium, etc.). And, of course, if Shane has some sort of irritable bowel condition, his general nutrition might be low, which would impact his uptake of immune nutrients..

            So there must be increased interest in educating doctors somehow about immune nutrients. Me, I’m now looking for my primary care physician to be someone trained in integrative medicine.

          • These posts are about Harms. How do we decide whether the vaccine in this case has caused a particular Harm. The posts are not about whether Covid is real – it is – or whether vaccines work – we have no access to the trial data and the articles are ghost-written.

            They are about why doctors seem incapable of establishing harms and in particular with vaccines seem so scared to even begin to think about trying to establish harms. There need be no mention of Spike proteins or reverse transcription or Vitamin D or anything physiological when it comes to establishing harms. Its looking at and listening to a person and trying to work out what on the balance of probabilities is the best explanation for what has happened and is happening.

            Woman with osteoporosis driving her car is crashed into by another car and ends up with broken femur. We can say osteoporosis may have contributed to a fracture that was otherwise unexpected and maybe if she had more Vitamin D it might have helped but the Crash caused this fracture. The problem is that if the other driver’s number plate has VAX in it – seems like the police and medics and the media seem unable to make the obvious connection


          • “Woman with osteoporosis driving her car is crashed into by another car and ends up with broken femur. We can say osteoporosis may have contributed to a fracture that was otherwise unexpected and maybe if she had more Vitamin D it might have helped but the Crash caused this fracture.”

            Let me substitute a different analogy. Woman with vitamin D deficiency missed by her primary care is driving a car. A car with COVID plates swerves towards another car with VAX plates, which crashes into the woman’s car and she fractures her hip. Three defendants–primary care, covid, and vax.

            I get it that we are trying to find the proximate harm, but both covid and the vax seem to sometimes cause a very damaging immune response to the spike protein.

            Burkhardt has a way to distinguish damage from vax from damage from covid. Just stain for the N-protein in an histological sample. Roche sells a kit to detect the N-protein antibody and the kit can probably be used with modification. Burkhardt maybe can tell you how to do it. He seems very approachable if you can get his phone number.

            I don’t think that I’d rely on Roche’s kit “as is” to determine exposure to covid, tho.

          • This forum has nothing to do with Covid. If there is a pandemic we need to address its the pandemic of overtreatment – with drugs that are often ineffective or minimally effective.

            The reason this happens is no one thinks the drugs can harm anymore and people harmed get blown away when they try to make a link. If there are no bumps in the way water will flow down the most minimal of gradients. So minimally effective vaccines and drugs get used and mandated.

            The need in the case of people like Shane and in terms of the pandemic in general is establish that harms are happening. Talk of Ivermectin or Vitamin D is ducking the issue. It just sets up alternates to vaccines but if everything causes almost no harms we end up taking everything – or being forced to.

            The ivermectin and vitamin D advocates have not fronted up on harms


          • David,

            “This forum has nothing to do with Covid.”

            The damaging spike protein induced by vaccines is part of both covid and vaccines, so covid is a confounder.

            ” If there are no bumps in the way water will flow down the most minimal of gradients. So minimally effective vaccines and drugs get used and mandated.”

            Physics isn’t what drives pharma’s profits–unless it’s the physics of lobbying.

            “Talk of Ivermectin or Vitamin D is ducking the issue. It just sets up alternates to vaccines”

            So why did pharma marketing contractors malign alternates? Because the alternates threatened pharma’s profit. Should we really ignore motivation?

            “The ivermectin and vitamin D advocates have not fronted up on harms”

            What are the harms of short duration dosing with clinical levels of ivermectin? I’d be interested in reading case studies of IVM intoxication when treating covid, but haven’t been able to find any. I’m generally opposed to long term prophylactic use of IVM and HCQ.

            And as regards vitamin D toxicity, can I take out a lawsuit for harms against my skin and my liver? I have read _a lot_ about vitamin D, including about various analogs and toxicity and have seen no harms with moderate dosing (=60k units before even mild toxicity was seen. Is there something newer?

          • You’re missing the point. In the case of SSRIs and suicidality or dependence, if therapists or antipsychiatrists claim we should be using less drugs, without pointing to harms, their credibility is shot because they are advocating another therapy or approach from which they make money – so they would say don’t use drugs.

            Therapists etc are too scared to talk about harms – and especially to pin their colours to a mast of this patient has had that harm from this med. They escape by saying establishing the harms of medicines is not their thing – and manage to ignore the harms they must see in the patients right in front of them and commonly contribute to a gaslighting of patients.

            Sounds to me like you are doing the same

            The next fascinating issue after why can people not see harms and not speak up about what is likely causing the harms is how do companies and the academic literature make these harms vanish – which is not too different to how do ivermectin or CBT advocates manage to hype benefits and hide harms.


          • “Sounds to me like you are doing the same”

            Kind of. I am playing Devil’s Advocate and trying to understand how vaccine-harm-skeptics might understand things.

            It seems to me that the way to approach skeptics is to point out that, while covid is a potential confounder, the problem is actually the spike protein and the immune response, which come both from covid and from covid vaccines.

            Avoiding being exposed to covid in the long term is impossible, but vaccines are potentially avoidable.

            Time-proximity between vaccination and harm is a smoking gun. Covid is a potential confounder, but that is really irrelevant to whether someone might be harmed by a covid vaccine.

            So, again, focusing on the spike protein and the immune response looks to be essential to establishing harm from covid vaccines. We saw that approach work successfully in covid autopsies by Burkhardt, where Burkhardt demonstrated conclusively that death was from spike proteins produced from a covid vaccine and that approach should work in other cases as well. And there have been numerous studies of the various ways that the spike protein can be toxic.

            Covid vaccines are basically toxin factories.

            It also looks like covid vaccines may incrementally potentiate covid, which is another avenue of harm from covid vaccines.

            Have we figured anything out yet?

          • Spike proteins are semi-irrelevant. There are lots of other things the vaccines may be doing to produce effects – good and bad.

            The question is why can people not recognize harms without having to default into biobabble?


          • “Spike proteins are semi-irrelevant.”

            Have you ever done carpentry, old school? Remember “clinching the nail?”

            Time-proximate harms from vaccines are the nail. Spike protein toxicity clinches the nail. The case becomes more solid when a mechanism is found to explain the harms.

            If you’re trying to persuade doctors to abandon vaccines, it helps to have a mechanism to explain the harms. Having multiple consilient lines of evidence increases persuasive power. Toxicology, vaccinology, and various clinical specialties (pulmonology, vascular surgery, neurology, cardiology, nephrology, hematology, and hepatology) provide evidence of vaccine harms.

          • Nope
            the question is why are they so disinclined to believe in a harm without a mechanism
            but will believe in a benefit without any idea of how its produced?

            Harms are like garlic or a crucifix to a vampire
            you might also be holding a stake or a spike but he isn’t going to be bothered by that


  2. “unique manifestations.”

    Covid’s latest unpleasant surprise: Sore gallbladder

    “SARS-CoV-2 infection can mimic acalculous acute cholecystitis, an inflammatory disease of the gallbladder; viral RNA detection indicates direct vesicular involvement, while the exact pathogenesis remains to be elucidated.”

    Unintended Consequences of mRNA Shots

    An Insanely Reckless Process

    In a May 2021 interview with me, Seneff said:

    “To have developed this incredibly new technology so quickly, and to skip so many steps in the process of evaluating [its safety], it’s an insanely reckless thing that they’ve done. My instinct was that this is bad, and I needed to know [the truth].

    So, I really dug into the research literature by the people who’ve developed these vaccines, and then more extensive research literature around those topics. And I don’t see how these vaccines can possibly be doing anything good …”

    As explained by Dr. Peter McCullough,15 this means that after your first shot, your body will produce spike protein for at least 15 months. But, when you get shot No. 2 a few weeks later, that shot will cause spike protein production to go on for 15 months or longer.
    With shot No. 3 six months after that, you produce spike protein for yet another 15 months.

    With regular boosters, you may never rid your body of the spike protein. All the while, it’s wreaking havoc with your biology. McCullough likens it to “a permanent install of an inflammatory protein in the human body,” and inflammation is at the heart of most if not all chronic diseases. There’s simply no possible way for these gene transfer shots to improve public health. They’re going to decimate it.

    • Annie’s comment here brings out something useful There can be lots of scare stories about Spike proteins and reverse transcription but this is not where cause and effect lies.

      Cause and Effect lies with someone like Shane having the most severe liver area pain of his life or Cody having the blackout in his plane or Suzanna, a triathlete ending up so fatigued and dizzy that riding a bike is impossible. That is where we establish cause and effect between a drug or vaccine and an injury. If after we establish this, we are able to explain how it happens – perhaps Spike proteins or reverse transcribing – this is the icing on the cake but its not the key moment. We still can’t explain how SSRI or thalidomide or isotretinoin birth defects happen but no-one should doubt that they do.

      We need people like Peter McCullough and others to say – this vaccine or drug or whatever causes myocarditis or suicide or cholecystitis or eye problems and this will then get lab folk working on whether its caused by Spikes or ACE-2 dysfunction or other mechanisms we don’t yet know about.


  3. As far as is possible to tell, Shane certainly had NOT had Covid before he was tested. Due to my inability to wear a mask ( asthmatic with lower than normal blood/oxygen levels) we had all been more or less house bound throughout the two years of lockdowns and beyond.
    Shane’s interaction with the outside world was confined to driving to our house for the weekend and back to his home for the weekdays. All of his usual meetings out of home had been cancelled. I was the only one who went and did the shopping for all of us – the supermarket had 2x weekly slots for us ‘oldies’ and non-maskers. We have been incredibly lucky – all four of us have managed to keep clear of the infection……so far. Now that everything is open once again, I am more anxious than throughout the two years.

    As far as Shane’s cholecystitis is concerned, I still feel that the hospital staff were quite puzzled about his case. A bed was booked for him on a surgical ward on the third day but, once more tests were done, he was declared fit for discharge. In fact, he was delivered to the ward after those last tests but was redirected back to the assessment unit. His Discharge Notes show him as leaving “Ward 5” where he’d never been! I reckon that someone was saying “Hang on a minute, I don’t think we should rush to remove this gallbladder; this case is not following the normal pattern”.

    From reading the accounts of many others, we are just so glad that Shane has come through this with his gallbladder intact and nothing other than fatigue to worry about.

    • Thanks Mary H.
      I reckon that someone was saying ” Hang on a minute, I don’t think we should rush in to remove this gall bladder; this case is not following the normal pattern”.
      Perhaps they followed the same invaluable aphorism that I learned as a young specialist physician: ‘MICLO’. This aphorism is to remind us that when there is diagnostic doubt, the safest medical management might be:
      ‘Masterly Inactivity and Cat Like Observation”.

      So much in medicine fails to follow the ‘normal pattern’, not least in the individual response to drugs, and now there are sincere concerns re mRNA vaccine ADRs.

      If only the not-needed psychiatrists (who caused such terrible injury to our loved one, had adopted this ‘MICLO’ philosophy instead of detention, enforced, multiple toxic drugs, and life-long disability) – had thought, ‘This isn’t following the normal pattern’. This is most likely AKATHISIA. Let’s observe carefully and apply: ‘masterly, therapeutic inactivity’. What suffering would have been prevented and what mastery of medical management could have been demonstrated?
      Above all perhaps, the intense pain and hopelessness induced by apparent G.P. rejection, denial of ADRs, and denial of compassionate care for lifelong iatrogenic injuries would not have been perceived/experienced. More real/perceived rejection and denial must be anticipated in future consultations.

      How can we appeal to those who train our future GPs to teach them about the reality of ADRs not following ‘the normal pattern’? Should there be modules of learning about fraud in ghost-written clinical trials and in pharmaceutical marketing? Would a six month training-grade appointment in ‘Critical, Clinical Pharmacology’ produce a more understanding and a better trained family doctor than that produced by the usual six months junior post in Psychiatry? Something is incomplete in our training, and it is not conducive to achieving and maintaining the essential, therapeutic patient – doctor relationship.
      There are clearly exceptions and such individuals are an invaluable asset to medical practice.


        Tim gave direct link to akathisia on Rxisk to this “Independent” Inquiry with emphasis on

        “How common is akathisia?

        up to 80% or more people on higher doses of an antipsychotic”

        Where does high dose antipsychotic happen – psych ‘hospital’

        Ofcourse nothing will happen. It’s my view all psychiatrists know what is going on – the patients tell them with terror in their eyes.

        • The key question with harms is why do we not believe the person who has something wrong and is reporting it


          • Power imbalance therefore they can just ignore, money – 100k a year for writing scripts for AD’s and AP’s after a quick chat and assertive threat if you argue, they know a complaint will just be swatted away so they can lie and get away with it. Take away the infrastructure that is holding all this in place and it falls down.

            There was one psychiatrist who admitted to me – it was the drugs that caused all my problems. She no longer works at the hell hole that almost killed me, but the psychiatrist who lied about subjecting me to polypharmacy – proven by the trusts own documents to me – is still there even though I sent all the information to the CQC, NMC and PHSO. A lawyer from the NMC sent me an email saying it wasn’t an issue and not to contact them again.

  4. Adam, 22, university student, talks to Dr. John Campbell of his experience after having the Pfizer vaccine – everywhere Adam went seemed to have been a ‘heart-stopping’ shocker of psychiatric diagnosis and general malaise by NHS and Private Providers…

    Really a must-listen as Adam seems no further forward, whilst Dr. Campbell is pretty clear where his thoughts lie…

      • Tim – I think it actually goes a step beyond “believing” the patient. It seems to me that they are not “listening” in the first place. You cannot believe without first being introduced to something – in this case, a patient who wants to tell you how things are for them, for which “listening” is a requirement. Why do they not listen? Are they afraid of what they might hear? Do they already know what their reply is going to be anyway – an AD prescription? They “bother to take a history” so that they have something to record for that patient I guess. Back to the lack of listening/believing – could it be that the only way that they feel they can cope with patient angst plus pressure from time constraints etc. is to actually PRETEND to listen, PRETEND to take an interest, PRETEND to care and PRETEND that they’ve done a good day’s work? Where is the job satisfaction in that?
        If they stopped and REALLY listened, took an interest in the whole story that the patient has to share, cared about the outcome FOR THE PATIENT of that appointed time spent with him/her – I could guarantee them the satisfied feeling of ” a job well done”!

        It was interesting to note Shane’s comments when discharged from the hospital after the stay mentioned in the post above. It was the first stay for him for a physical need – for urgent, decent pain relief in the first place then closely followed by “let’s find out what’s going on here”. He’s had too many occasions to mention in need of mental support. His comments were along the lines of – they treat you like a human being you know, the nurses will do everything they can to make you comfortable; they explain every step of what they do with you (drips etc.) and tests they carry out and share with you what they have found or suspect to be the problem. When asked about MH care at the Unit, now that he knows physical care in the main hospital – his reaction was that you just feel that nobody cares, nobody explains anything, they just load you with drugs and let you be in there.
        I guess it’s only by experiencing the care for physical problems that he has fully appreciated how dire MH care is, here in North Wales and elsewhere. Such a sad state of affairs.

        • ‘Safe and Effective’ medical practice cannot be achieved and maintained without time to listen and hence, without an opportunity to understand what the patient is trying to communicate. Should there be time to listen, there might be a greater ability to believe.
          When it comes to Averse Drug Reactions and Akathisia misdiagnosis, the patient and the prescriber is (most likely) ‘trapped in the machinery of deceit’ as a result of malfeasance and deception in ghost-written, data manipulated clinical trials.
          Trials that Continuing Medical Education (CME) affords every opportunity to mislead prescribers into believing they are practicing ‘Evidence Based Medicine’.

          ‘Deceit’ – Definition: The act of making a person believe something that is not true.

          Isn’t this the raison d’être for clinical trials?

          ‘It is a terrible thing to be in possession of a truth that nobody wants to hear’.

          If there is no time to listen to the history, it is almost mission impossible to try and tell a prescriber about ADRs, AKATHISIA, PSYCHIATRIC MISDIAGNOSIS and CASCADE IATROGENESIS.
          These are truths that very few clinicians want to hear, although several years ago, an outstanding G.P. did listen, and later told me that he had changed his prescribing practice.

          Thank you for pointing out the importance of Time-to-Listen as a foundation for Believing-a-Patient Mary.

          I do hope that many AD prescribers are travelling on the London Underground Victoria Line, where, thanks to MISSD, there are advertisements for akathisia awareness. Very valuable CME indeed!

  5. Re:- April 27th. comment by The Covid Pilot about Shane’s diet, nutrients etc.
    Shane described his diet as “unhealthy” when assessed by Josef. I would describe his diet, at that point as “containing far too much sugar” more than anything else. He has fairly regular blood tests due to the MH drugs that he’s been on and nothing has ever been found wanting in those. I accept that, rather like drug trials, they’re possibly not looking at nutrient levels etc. when those blood tests are taken. Shane is unable to tolerate supplements so has to rely on a decent diet for all that his body needs. Since the cholecystitis, he has completely changed his diet and has lost weight as a result. Not yet quite where he would like it to be but well on the way.
    Having been with Shane from the day he had the booster up to the point of being taken in the ambulance a few days later, seeing the pain creep through that part of his upper body with increasing severity, I cannot let go of the equation, that, for him, booster vaccine = extensive, severe pain and fever. Cholecystitis? I’m not qualified to say – that was left to the “experts”.
    In amazing contrast, I had phlebitis after my second Covid vaccine which I had not linked to the vaccine in any way although previously I’d never had any such problems. When it was time for the booster, I contacted the GP surgery unsure as to whether I should have it or not. Before they would advise me either way, they messaged a Consultant at the local hospital who, with every word except “NO”, hinted heavily that I should not go for it. I didn’t go for it as I felt that they must have some doubts to give me that reply.
    That left me with the feeling that they were linking the phlebitis with the second Covid jab. The very same hospital, though, say, categorically, that Shane’s cholecystitis was in no way connected to his booster jab.
    I would have thought that his case was a far more probable one than mine. There again, who am I who dares think that I might know a little bit about what I perceive with my own eyes! They may think that they can stop us speaking out but they can’t stop us thinking…..yet!

    • Phlebitis…the spike protein is toxic to the vascular system, so phlebitis is a common side effect of vaccines. Most people probably wouldn’t notice it if it were mild and their immune systems were healthy.

      • See above for biobabble comment. The issue is does Mary have phlebitis and if so is it likely to be linked to the vaccine she has just had – is there an alternate equally likely or more likely trigger/cause. If not then on the balance of probabilities the vaccine caused it by whatever mechanism and she should be exempt from having to get a further dose.


      • I am asthmatic. My GP records will show that I am asthmatic. My repeat prescriptions are for an asthma preparation. I take no other medication. My asthma record will show that my blood/oxygen level is always, to quote -” a little low”. My asthma is linked to a reaction to hayfever/ some fruit and many ‘Enumbers’ in processed foods. Apart from this, I am healthy – for my age, so healthy that pharmacists have asked for my “list of medications” and look in disbelief when they find how little of anything I take.
        Given all of that, should they have suspected that I may be susceptible to phlebitis as a result of the vaccine? I very much doubt it. On the other hand, they could have suggested that care may be needed – informed me that “phlebitis is a common side effect of vaccines” especially if they felt that my immune system was “not healthy”. Should they have taken these steps?
        I don’t hold anyone responsible for my case but I do feel that many, with previous blood clotting problems, went for their jabs without any knowledge of this connection. Had I not gone to doctor Google, who said that “anyone who has ever had a blood clot should contact their doctor before accepting the vaccine” then I, too, would very likely have gone along for the booster jab. I am very grateful that our GP surgery looked into the matter rather than just saying to go for it regardless.
        To my mind, for our health to be safe in the hands of our doctors then we, too, need to accept our role of ‘taking care’ and ‘asking for advice’ rather than simply jumping up and finding fault at the first sign of a problem. It is a two-way system and for it to work we need knowledge that is the truth, not knowledge which suits the system regardless of its effect on the population. The truth is always out there – it’s not always out in the public arena though, as we well know.

Leave a Reply