Illinois Freedom Alliance

The term bodily autonomy roughly means "self-governing one’s own body.” You have a right to decide what happens to your body and whether or not you want to take a drug, vaccine, or undergo certain types of medical tests, such as blood tests, X-rays, and/or the COVID-19 PCR test.

It is important to be educated and research any type of medical procedure or test that is being administered. For example, the PCR test currently being deployed to detect COVID-19 infection is the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test. This test, however, was not developed for and is not a reliable indicator of the presence of infectious disease.

The Nobel-Prize winning inventor of the test, Kary B. Mullis, is quoted as stating: "PCR tests cannot detect free infectious viruses at all.” (1) They can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves. PCR test technology relies on amplifying results many times over. If they are amplified less than about thirty-five times, no-one will test positive. If they are amplified sixty times, everyone will test positive. So, to be clear - a positive PCR test result is not evidence that a person is either unwell with any infection, or in any way infectious to others.

It is important to recognize that inappropriate use of PCR tests to misdiagnose infectious disease is not a new phenomenon; in 2007, the presence of positive PCR tests led staff at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in the USA to falsely believe they were in the midst of a pertussis epidemic. Nearly 1,000 health care workers at the hospital in Lebanon, N.H., were given a preliminary test and furloughed from work until their results were in; 142 people were told they appeared to have the disease; and thousands were given antibiotics and a vaccine for protection. Hospital beds were taken out of commission, including some in intensive care.

However, nearly a year later, the entire episode was declared a false alarm, since not a single case of whooping cough was confirmed with the definitive test, growing the bacterium, Bordetella pertussis, in the laboratory. Instead, it appears the healthcare workers were probably afflicted with ordinary respiratory diseases like the common cold. According to epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists, this episode occurred because too much faith was placed in a quick and highly sensitive molecular test - the PCR test - that led them astray.

Reflecting on the situation, Dr. Cathy A. Petti, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Utah, said the story had one clear lesson:

"The big message is that every lab is vulnerable to having false positives," Dr. Petti said. "No single test result is absolute and that is even more important with a test result based on PCR." (2)

Given the above, I do not feel it is advisable or necessary for people to receive a PCR test for COVID-19, as the test is not fit for purpose when it comes to diagnosing the presence of active infection.

Links:

https://tottnews.com/2020/11/20/covid-tests-harvesting-dna/

https://snooze2awaken.com/2021/11/24/genetic-harvesting-covid-testing-firm-admits-to-selling-covid-swabs-containing-customer-dna-to-third-parties/

Further, I do not believe this test is adequately safe. The intranasal nature of the PCR test represents a highly invasive experience that is not only potentially extremely distressing, but it also carries with it risks to health. Media reports have detailed cases of the nasal swab penetrating the blood-brain barrier and causing brain fluid to leak (3), and there are also reports of the tests being contaminated due to inadequate quality controls (4).

References Links:

1. https://off-guardian.org/2020/10/05/pcr-inventor-it-doesnt-tell-you-that-you-are-sick/
2. https://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/22/health/22whoop.html
3. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-swab-test-womans-nose-brain-leakeda4562066.html
4. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/coronavirus-lab-testing-kits-contamination-falsepositives-delay-a9472601.html

Why You Can’t Get Pfizer’s ‘Approved’ Comirnaty Vaccine

Alix Mayer, Children’s Health Defense (CHD) board member and president of CHD’s California chapter, explains why Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine isn’t available in the U.S., and why vaccine makers are targeting kids.

This is a summary of Alix Mayer’s PowerPoint:

Link to full story below:

Why You Can’t Get Pfizer’s ‘Approved’ Comirnaty Vaccine • Children's Health Defense (childrenshealthdefense.org)

The Three Holy Grails

There are three holy grails that the vaccine makers rely on:

1.      The Emergency

2.      No Early Treatment

3.      Full Liability Protection

(Taking advantage of our children through the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986)

The Four Standards to Get EUA (Emergency Use Authorization)

1.      Declaration by HHS (Department of Health & Human Services) of an emergency situation leading to serious or life-threatening disease or condition

2.      Evidence of effectiveness for product intended to address emergency, which is 30-50 percent effective. (Yet we are being told that the vaccine is 90 percent effective)

3.      Known and potential benefits of the product outweigh the known and potential risks of the product

4.      No adequate, approved, or available alternative

Consider the four standards to be like the four legs of a stool. If one of the legs are broken, the stool falls. One leg is the Emergency; One leg is Alternatives; One leg is 30-50 percent effective; One leg is that the benefits must outweigh the risk.

Emergency

The State of Emergency must be maintained to keep the EUA products on the market. This is why we are seeing variants and more variants. Also, if the vaccine is fully approved to treat COVID then all other EUA shots would be pulled off the market. This is also why Comirnaty is NOT treated as fully approved.

So, the emergency will likely not stop until the shots get full approval, at that time they can be added to the CDC’s Childhood Vaccine Schedule and will be exempt from liability because of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.

H.R.5546 - 99th Congress (1985-1986): National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

This Act gives vaccine manufacturers blanket immunity against vaccine injuries. 

Remember the Emergency Use Authorization can only remain if all four standards are met. This is why the FDA is censoring and squashing HCQ and Ivermectin because there cannot be an approved, adequate or available treatment alternative. The FDA is in cohorts with the United States Postal Service and is actively confiscating packages containing Ivermectin and destroying them. 

Interchangeable

Instead, Pfizer is saying that their current BioNTech vaccine and Comirnaty are “interchangeable,” so that mandates would be legally supported, but a federal judge has rejected that claim. By continuing the use of the EUA shot (BioNTech) the vaccine is then still under the liability shield afforded to all EUA products.

Comirnaty is licensed to be manufactured and introduced into interstate commerce, but not licensed to be given to anyone.

The Fact Sheet Language: “This EUA for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine and Comirnaty will end when the Secretary of HHS determines that the circumstances justifying the EUA no longer exist or when there is a change in the approval status of the product such as that an EUA is no longer needed.”

So Comirnaty will only get on the market when “fully approved” by the CDC and then it will be added to the children’s schedule. Any shot on the CDC’s recommended schedule for children gets full liability protection, per the 1986 Act.

This is why they are going after our children when they have a 99.9973 percent recovery rate.

Confusing FDA Approval

• The FDA issued an intentionally confusing approval by an unprecedented “approval” to both shots.
• License the Comirnaty shot saying it’s “interchangeable” with Pfizer shot—so mandates would be legally supported
• And retain the vaccine’s liability shield by designating it EUA as well

The Race to Get Liability Protection

Once the COVID shots are fully approved, the manufacturer has full liability. So was Pfizer’s Comirnaty fully approved? No. Is it on the market? No. Is it legally interchangeable with the BioNTech shot? No. Does it make the COVID shot mandates legal? No.

De Facto Mandates

The EUA vaccines are the only ones on the market and currently being used. They are experimental and investigational. These vaccines are not able to be legally mandated and everyone should have a right to refuse without suffering consequences. But instead, these are de facto vaccines: De facto describes practices that exist in reality, even though they are not officially recognized by laws. It is commonly used to refer to what happens in practice, in contrast with de jure, which refers to things that happen according to law. Coercion and duress are de facto mandates, which are illegal. Mass violation of the law does not make mandates legal!

Consequences



In Doe vs. Rumsfeld the Anthrax vaccine was under Emergency Use Authorization and mandated for the military. The word consequences for refusing the vaccine was judged or adjudicated to mean medical consequences ONLY, not punishments like loss of job or distance learning. The military personnel won this case.

Later the DOJ gave an opinion and redefined the word consequences to be punitive or punishment like the loss of job or working in a separate location. This, however, was already decided and defined in Doe vs. Rumsfeld. Furthermore, the DOJ stated that the right to accept or refuse was “purely informational.” So, this is why people are being fired from their job for refusing to take an experimental vaccine that is under EUA, because of the DOJ’s redefining the word consequences to mean punishment and taking away a person’s right to refuse and by saying that a person’s right to refuse was purely informational.

Study Of Ten Million Finds No Evidence Of Asymptomatic COVID Spread

Story Link Below:

Study of Ten Million Finds No Evidence of Asymptomatic COVID Spread | Principia Scientific Intl. (principia-scientific.com)

Hospital Death Camps Exposed

Story Link Below:

Hospital Death Camps Exposed | Columnists | thedesertreview.com