Breaking News

Dr Geoff Mitchell: “The Covid-19 Vaccines are Neither Safe nor Effective”

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Are we close to a coronavirus vaccine? All you need to know
The report also explores alternative treatments for Covid-19 including Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin.

In a report on the effectiveness of the Covid-19 vaccines which was released yesterday, Dr Geoff Mitchell MD, JD, concluded that the jabs are “neither safe nor effective,” and that “the best data tells us that the Covid-19 vaccines are failing.”

The report, which is titled “Profound and persistent disparity in COVID-19 mortality rates between USA / Western Europe and sub-Saharan Africa: A crossover effect of antimalarial drugs?”, explores the effectiveness of the Covid-19 vaccines compared to alternative treatments.

According to that data, Dr Mitchell said: “Countries with active vaccination programs have more COVID deaths than those who do not.” Moreover, “Countries with a higher percentage of their population vaccinated have more COVID deaths,” and “COVID deaths have increased with vaccination after vaccination programs were implemented.

“The culmination of sixteen months of Africa study is that HCQ and IVM are both about 70% effective in reducing death,” he noted, “but Artemisinin and atovaquone-proguanil are (inadvertently) 95% effective in reducing COVID death.  Artemisinin is reportedly intentionally used in four countries to treat COVID.  The most well-known of artemisinin-treating country is Madagascar which has a 954 COVID deaths, a rate of 35 dpm.  This is 2% of the U.S. rate.”

Within his report, Dr Mitchell wrote: “Among the 104 countries which offer no demonstrable COVID vaccination programs, on 08/16/21, their COVID fatality rates averaged an unexpectedly lower 690 deaths per million.

“However, “Among the 82 countries which offer vaccination programs, on 08/16/21, their COVID fatality rates averaged 828 deaths per million which is counterintuitively higher than the COVID fatality rate for unvaccinated countries.

“In the 82 countries which offer vaccination programs, not only was the average COVID fatality rate greater than in unvaccinated countries, but the number of deaths increased as the number or percentage of residents vaccinated increased.”

Furthermore, within the report, Dr Mitchell explored the use of alternative treatments for Covid-19, studying the use of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and Ivermectin.

He noted that HCQ has been slammed by the media and as a result has been criticised and prohibited in the United States, despite being “successfully used to treat COVID around the world.”

In his report, Mitchell wrote about the success of HCQ, noting that “In a metanalysis of 1.8 billion patients, the c19study group reported that ‘the treatment group has a 69.9% lower death rate.'”

Despite the fact that HCQ has been used for over 220 years and is an effective treatment for ailments including malaria, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the US government have opted to promote the vaccine agenda whilst censoring any information on alternative treatments.

However, reports such as this will only be regarded as “medical disinformation” as it contradicts the current mainstream narrative that vaccines work and do not cause harm.

Share this page to Telegram
5 2 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
8 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sorcha
Sorcha
2 years ago

One fake strain is debunked, another fake strain is created.
All those killer poison fake vaccines reaching their kill by dates, who can the monsters palm them off onto now? Columbia. Pedo ring Bill’s fetish for genocide continues. Come on America, take that evil hated pedo ring rats head off.

A new Covid strain, named Mu, has been designated a variant of interest by the World Health Organisation (WHO).
Mu, or B.1.621, was first identified in Colombia earlier this year and cases have been recorded in South America and Europe.

Last edited 2 years ago by Sorcha
Paul Howell
Paul Howell
Reply to  Sorcha
2 years ago

I am making a good salary from home $1200-$2500/week , which is amazing, under a year back I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone, Here is what I do…. http://fulwork.ml/

Last edited 2 years ago by Paul Howell
Maria
Maria
Reply to  Paul Howell
2 years ago

I am making $92/hour telecommuting. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $21 thousand a month by working on the web, that was truly shocking for me, she prescribed me to attempt it. simply give it a shot on the 
accompanying site…………>> http://www.CashApp1.Com

Last edited 2 years ago by Maria
Maria
Maria
Reply to  Maria
2 years ago

I am making $92/hour telecommuting. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $21 thousand a month by working on the web, that was truly shocking for me, she prescribed me to attempt it. simply give it a shot on the 
accompanying site…………>> http://www.CashApp1.Com

Last edited 2 years ago by Maria
Paul Howell
Paul Howell
2 years ago

I am making a good salary from home $1200-$2500/week , which is amazing, under a year back I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone, Here is what I do…. http://www.works61.com

Last edited 2 years ago by Paul Howell
Anonymous
Anonymous
2 years ago

Thousands of drs and scientists with seriously respectable credentials can’t all be wrong Especially when their opinions are suppressed That’s the signal.

Petra Papst
Petra Papst
Reply to  Anonymous
2 years ago

I make more then $12,000 a month online. It’s enough to comfortably replace my old jobs income, especially considering I only work about 11 to 12 hours a week from home. I was amazed how easy it was after I tried it…GOOD LUCK..
HERE ➤➤ https://www.CashApp3.com

Last edited 2 years ago by Petra Papst
arthur brogard
arthur brogard
2 years ago

I came here via the australian ‘covid medical network’ and I’m a bit worried that they don’t make any avenue available to communicate with them.
And some of their links are a bit rough – like to the Washington Post which won’t let you read an article if you’ve ‘exceeded the limit’ and therefore the link is useles.
And nothing surrounding or accompanying that link to point to the relevent data or study or whatever – so i’ts a link to an opinion piece (which itself doesn’t have a link to data or source) only – and one which doesn’t want you there unless you buy a subscription.
Pretty poor.
I don’t knock if for what it is: general reporting, but I think it should be compartmentalised off and labelled as such.
So now I find myself dubious about the merit of the ‘covid medical network’.
. No contact.
. Unreliable links.
. No accessible references.
And I’ll throw in another:
There’s obvious lifestyle things could be done to prepare oneself for a covid ‘attack’ – vit D, sunshine, etc. without running into trouble by advocating Ivermection. But there is no advocation of anything on the front page
If you are really fair dink wouldn’t you put such a thing front and centre for the sake, at least, of all the frail elderly/sick who’re making their chances worse by being anxious (second highest risk factor as you’d know)? And you could ameliorate their anxiety somewhat if you offered something positive like that.