We have a national agenda to vaccinate Singapore. However, we need to question ourselves by what means do we go about achieving this. Do we push it at the cost of dismissing suspected vaccine injuries? Are we not transparent so that public remains unsuspecting but uninformed?

On issues of vaccine, the Singaporean is already disadvantaged towards an informed consent. Few Singaporeans even knew that vaccines can result in injuries. They have never heard of Marcella Gruelle, Hannah Poling, Jesse Gelsinger, where politics concerning vaccination resulted in scandals. They did not know of the VICP where billions have been paid out to vaccine victims. Nor have they read about vaccine injuries in failed campaigns in Japan, Philippines, India, Africa, US and many European countries etc. Singaporeans are ‘blissfully’ unaware. We seem to have zero cases of vaccine injury in our history. There would never be a need for vaccine injury recourse. Vaccines could do no harm – this perspective seems held by not just the commoner but the medical community here.

Therefore, I was thankful when at the announcement of our Covid-19 vaccination campaign, our authorities / experts, i.e. Kenneth Mak, admitted to the possibility of anaphylaxis that could come from the Covid-19 vaccine. They also announced the roll out of the VIFAP! Gratefully, it is the first “recourse” for vaccine victims I have heard of here. Perhaps now our narrative about vaccines can shift towards more scientific perspectives?

Unfortunately, as we move along our vaccination campaign, I began to see that our engagements are characterized by shameful name-calling and manipulative rhetoric. I began to see an invisible strong hand that pushes the official narrative (which is not wrong in itself) but also unfairly crushes dissenters’ perspectives and more.

Let’s start with the Media. According to The Straits Times, it is implied that alternative sources of information about Covid-19 vaccine is comparable to misinformation sprouted by extremists, like that of “yoga-beats-Covid” Baba Ramdev. This “all-or-nothing” rhetoric divides Singaporeans by positioning the vaccinated and the unvaccinated at extreme ends – with nothing-in-between. One is safely informed because he listens only to official experts’ narratives. The other is misinformed because he had researched more into things and therefore fallen prey to conspiracies. As a critical thinking educator, I have never heard such flawed assumption that to research is to become misinformed. Surely there are those who know how to make the distinction between conspiracies and science, and who seek to inform others in a responsible manner.

Yet consider headlines by Today and ChannelNewsAsia like this: “The Big Read: Conspiracy theories, scientific misinterpretations, plain ignorance abound in Covid-19 infodemic.” One can imagine why such a title is crafted. One of its statements read: “Tracing the roots of misinformation to their sources would likely reveal one of several motivations behind its spread: These include political and ideological reasons, commercial profit, mischief, but also cases of genuine misunderstanding“. Don’t overlook the mouthful of accusations. Between childlike compliance and malicious misinformation, there is little in-between.

A Mr Jake Goh is mentioned from the first sentence of “The Big Read” as an anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist. This impression builds up further into that of an extremist, as Mr Jake Goh’s “best friends” had to remove him “from their Facebook friends list.” An “administrator of two Telegram groups that discuss Covid-19 and vaccine injuries”, little was discussed about why Mr Jake chooses to painstakingly reach out to suspected vaccine victims. Instead, the article immediately reminds readers of Mr Jake’s redundancy because his Telegram groups are formed “despite the fact” that the Pfizer vaccine is “authorised” by the government and assessed to be “safe and efficacious” by experts. It is ironical that “The Big Read” on misinformation fails to look into evidences of the injured, but dismisses the compassionate guy who does that, filling up the exact gap left by the media.

If such is the level of (un)thinking our media seeks to educate us about misinformation, what is the level of discernment such agenda-driven articles can build in us? Nothing. Blindly believe everything you are told is not discernment. And to brand those who had read up more as malicious extremists with an intent to misinform? Such engagements by the media strike fear and dishearten those who sincerely seek to engage with good intent. Even more hurt are the victims with burning, unanswered questions. Without providing valid answers, what right does anybody have to pigeon-hole us? Such rhetoric divides, isolates and eventually justifies hate and discrimination.

Disappointingly, such “all-or-nothing” language was also used by some figures of authority. Dr David Lye, Director of NCID, who sits on the Expert Committee on COVID-19 Vaccination, started a Facebook post stating, “Why fake science and anti-vaccine groups are dangerous in a pandemic”. So if you are not in agreement with Dr Lye, you are “fake-science”, “anti-vaccine” and “dangerous.” Nothing-in-between. Dr Lye wrote, “Some of these were from a group of doctors including.. a Dr Oon Chong Jin,” who Dr Lye described as “a private cancer specialist who championed hepatitis B vaccination in Singapore.” But how can anyone who had “championed hepatitis B vaccination” be anti-vaccine?

Dr Onn and Dr Lye may have different positions about the Pfizer vaccine, but their disagreement should not have justified ad hominem attacks. Both are experts in their own rights. However, in critical thinking 101, everyone commenting on this debate can be assumed to be biased until proven otherwise. Dr Oon, who prefers Sinovac, believes that the mRNA vaccine will be increasingly ineffective against Covid-19 variants. Official reports have already highlighted this probability. Dr Lye disagrees with Dr Oon’s belief in Sinovac, saying that there is “little data to confirm” the vaccine’s effectiveness. New reports have since emerged from Indonesia that suggest Dr Lye’s caution about Sinovac is correct.

Both ought to be free to engage by means of reasoning so truth is propelled forward. Dr Lye’s rebuttal should have been the beginning of a robust debate based on logic, science, and statistical data. Instead, the post was uncharacteristically rhetorical.

When Dr Lye asserted that children and teenagers should vaccinate even though they “do not usually have severe COVID”, his premise is basically – because they “can infect adults.” Yet Dr Lye emphasises: “mRNA vaccines are one of the most effective COVID vaccines. They reduce symptomatic COVID by 95%..” If the vaccine is really as effective as described, why worry about unvaccinated kids? Vaccines have not wiped out the possibility of infection anyway, as seen from the outbreak at MINDSville@Napiri, which should have consisted of mostly vaccinated residents and caregivers. Why then is ‘children can infect adults’ a good premise to vaccinate children? Especially when there is a lack of safety data from Pfizer’s own trial: 2,260 teenager participants studied for 2 months, and only half of them actually received the vaccine – this small sample of 1,100 teenagers now justifies the strong roll out to vaccinate 400,000 Singaporean teenagers.

Suspiciously, Dr Lye alluded to “a wealth of data from the US, UK and Israel on their safety”, but conveniently neglects corresponding data on adverse effects from these same countries. E.g., U.S. government site VAERS has already recorded more than 5000 deaths and 25,000 serious injuries. How could Dr Lye square these ground reports of injuries with “the vaccines are safe for children”? In fact, Mr Jake Goh’s Telegram group, the SG Suspected Vaccine Injuries Team, has compiled at least 16 cases of deaths as of 28th May 2021, with several dozens of severe injuries. These cases have mostly been dismissed on the basis that no evidence confirm the injuries to be a result of the vaccine, yet these same doctors could not disprove that the vaccine could have contributed to it. Why haven’t any local experts addressed this elephant in the room in a responsible manner?

Charlene Lin, who suffered a severe adverse effect following vaccination, questions if Dr Lye could explain her injury. She received no response.

With unanswered questions of this nature, it will not be fair for anyone to engage in hateful rhetoric. People are already in paranoia. Vaccinated family members are restricting unvaccinated parents in the same household from getting near to their children. Many are vaccinating out of the fear that they could be discriminated against e.g. from traveling, work, social settings. Now, if you do not vaccinate but wish to worship God as a congregant, you have to be PCR-swabbed – weekly. Some wonder if regular swabs could hurt their nasal cavity. It’s not unfair to wish for less invasive procedures like the breathalyser test. Our government must also consider that without an exit plan in sight, how much longer before increasing curbs result in poor mental health, or oppress the basic freedom to worship? Asking these questions should not make one guilty or hated.

At certain point, Singaporeans must learn to live above our fears. We must also align our beliefs to science that can be verified and exchanged in an open arena, based on reasons, not rhetoric. The real skill to cultivate against misinformation is not childlike compliance, but discernment. With discernment, one could have picked up how in Dr David Lye’s post, he cherry-picked a redundant point on Ivermectin – about a fraud company’s data that has nothing to do with reality – to debunk evidences about Ivermectin’s success. Or that Dr Lye sufficiently cautioned on the need to “watch out for side effects” for vaccines using “old technology” but seemed totally dismissive about possible side effects of mRNA vaccines.

Dr Lye cannot not know about these facts that I mentioned, like the data on Ivermectin or VAERS. Neither could he not know that he had cherry picked a negative point about Ivermectin to debunk all the other evidence for it. By calling this out, I have not shown that I am more qualified than Dr Lye in science (far from it). What I have instead pointed out is the likelihood that Dr Lye is biased towards his narrative and therefore selective in the information he shares and withholds. This selectivity had led to loopholes. Let’s make this picture larger. Can Singapore make a mistake because we decidedly choose to stand by our national vaccination agenda? The answer is yes. We cannot have two priorities at one time. Either we prioritise justice and truth and encourage reasoned scientific exchanges, or we prioritise the vaccination agenda and guard against every dissenting view. Politics therefore, must be considered in the larger picture discussion.

Experts need to build trust not by cherry picking what they want to say or toll politically correct narratives. They build trust by answering real questions, addressing legitimate concerns and demonstrating reliable trustworthiness. It doesn’t help that in recent weeks, conspiracy theories about Fauci misusing his connections for vested interests have been found to be likely true. It seems if there is a narrative to upkeep, truth does get sidelined. So contrary to claims, truth does not just lie with institutions. It also belongs to independent doctors and scientists who discover what works in a crisis, statisticians who observe real world data without conflict of interest, critical thinkers who question with an independent mind, and truth seekers who search for answers. Sadly, sometimes, truth emerges from even the unfortunate injury or death of a vaccine victim.

Geniuses can make mistakes. Experts can contradict. Teachers can be wrong. As long as critical questions remain unanswered, one cannot claim to be exhaustive in all truth to the exclusion of reasoned alternatives that are accompanied by evidence. Throw politics, money, power, security, fear and social pressure into the mix, we should therefore not think we could be spoon fed if we want to be informed. Discernment, not childlike compliance as “The Big Read” suggest, is the real skill we need to cultivate.

In closing, I will leave 3 unanswered questions below that experts must answer, or otherwise, the gaps are so jarring that it is disturbing why our authorities have not sought to close it.

***

  1. Suspected Vaccine Injury Cases

The biggest elephant in the room. Every injury and death following vaccination, other than anaphylaxis, seems to be unfairly dismissed. Why? Heart attack, blood clotting is a recurring pattern. Mr Yak’s case, which I wrote about, and the latest, is Andrew Tan’s. Consider this case too, of which the patient had “full bloodwork” cleared for a knee replacement surgery – but suddenly had a aortic clot following vaccination. The rising number of heart inflammation issues among the young following vaccination points in the same direction.

Consider too Charlene Lin’s, Jo-ann Tan’s cases. Unexplained adverse reactions on perfectly healthy persons. One suddenly lost her ability to walk and the other lost his senses. Isn’t this already evidence – that all of them had sudden injuries following vaccination? In this era of “your science vs my science”, we need to practice even greater discernment on safety issues. In fact, we should let the evidence of injuries guide us into understanding the science of how our body reacts with the vaccines, and not take sides with “our preferred science” to presume no injuries can ever happen. For this assumption will then be truly fake science – and it seems for now the mainstream media and the local experts are as guilty of presumptuousness, and even more, injustice.

In the name of public interest and safety, can our experts examine these cases with more public scrutiny? Can independent stakeholders be called in to assess ethical considerations for VIFAP payout? Can “suspected vaccine injury” cases and figures be made known to the public in the name of transparency?

  1. Ivermectin and it’s “undeniable” evidence

Dr Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA vaccines (and DNA vaccines), who has almost 100 peer-reviewed publications resulting in over 10 patents and about 7000 citations, has claimed the evidence on Ivermectin as “undeniable”.

The man who invented mRNA vaccine technology thinks the data on Ivermectin for COVID is undeniable. And the signal about possible reproductive harm cause by the mRNA “vaccines” is extremely worrisome. This is one of the most important videos you will ever see. Watch it before Youtube censors it.

Dr Kory has also testified to a Senate Committee, who grilled him on the scientific evidences of Ivermectin as a successful treatment drug for Covid-19 as well as for preventive prophylaxis purposes. India, whose Covid-19 infection crisis was all over the news weeks ago, has resolved their crisis by permitting the use of Ivermectin (though politics is back at play). These are just three of many evidences, a number of which are already referenced in this petition which advocates for Ivermectin to be used in Singapore.

Now that vaccination does not seem to be a plausible exit plan from infection from Covid-19 variants, Dr Lye needs to substantiate our reluctance to explore Ivermectin with reason and wisdom. Or they must bear the responsibility for compromising Singaporeans if a plausible solution was already plainly in sight.

  1. The “spike protein” controversy explains possible mechanism towards injuries

Ever since research by Salk Institute showed that the spike protein of Covid-19 virus alone was enough to cause disease, shouldn’t experts be concerned with the next inevitable question: wouldn’t the mRNA vaccine spike proteins act likewise? Vaccine researcher Byram Bridle has already confirmed that the spike protein of mRNA vaccines will get into our bloodstream and accumulated in our organs. Dr Robert Malone corroborates Byram Bridle’s findings and raised cautions against CDC’s advisory that the vaccines are safe for pregnant women (3:50min). He also suggested that spike protein in the bone marrow can lead to possible long term effects of leukemia and lymphoma in “6months, 3 years or 9 years..” (4:40min).

Can our experts confirm if the vaccine’s spike protein is a toxin right now? Could the spike-protein be the reason for our unexplained injuries? Have our local experts studied that under observation of independent stakeholders? If not, why rush pregnant women, girls and teens to be vaccinated? MOH reported “some 2,000 individuals.. experienced “severe adverse reactions” after the first dose”. That’s a pretty high severe adverse reaction rate of 0.1%, if we assume 2 million first doses to have been delivered at that point. Are our benefits still outweighing the risks?

Have our local experts also examined hidden numbers pointed out in Peter Doshi’s review: 3410 cases of ‘suspected but unconfirmed’ Covid-19 cases; 371 individuals who were “excluded from the efficacy analysis”? Will our experts’ over-confidence, collective assurances, shape our narrative into an impregnable impetus that has to deny future vaccine injuries?

***

PS: Dr Lye makes a new post

Just as I finished my article, Dr Lye made another post seeking to debunk Dr Robert Malone’s caution to pregnant women (3:50min). Note that Dr Lye provided only 1 study for that. The other study helped made up the numbers, but it actually didn’t fit the subject matter.

And for that 1 relevant study he provided… click on it for a look. I provided the screenshot below. This is the paper you will see. Check the part I highlighted in the red box.

It says in emphasis: “This article is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed [what does this mean?]. It reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice.

If this “preprint” is what Dr Lye banked on to approve vaccination for our pregnant women, he would have contradicted the scientific caution of the preprint i.e. “research.. should not be used to guide clinical practice.” Is this what he should provide out of his arsenal of studies to reassure Singaporeans? The manner by which he debunks other internationally esteemed experts with his “preferred science” is worrying. Does it prove whatever I had mentioned in my article? I will leave you to discern.

Where does truth lie? Unanswered questions experts cannot dismiss

19 thoughts on “Where does truth lie? Unanswered questions experts cannot dismiss

  • June 21, 2021 at 9:51 am
    Permalink

    I appreciate the depth and clarity of your arguments. Why are our authorities seemingly unable to think out of the box? Why insist on ” my way or the highway” approach? Shouldn’t a more holistic alternative should be given room to air? Why not do a thorough trial with Ivermectin which has already been shown to be generally safe for 40 years? If we really care for our young who generally safe from Covid 19, why rush headlong into vaccinating them in the face of so many concerns expressed by the most reputable of scientists and medics? I pray for humility and wisdom to prevail and the removal of all personal and political agenda in this crisis.

    Reply
  • June 21, 2021 at 12:41 pm
    Permalink

    Wow! You surely must have poured in numerous hours of hard work n research to put up this excellent apologetic piece. How can your effort be shared widely? May God give us heavenly wisdom as we the remnants maneuver thru this huge sea of negativism that seeks to silent us.

    Reply
    • June 26, 2021 at 3:05 pm
      Permalink

      Thanks so much for confirming things a layman like me knows in logic but unable to substantiate…

      Btw is invecmectin being used already by our Medical board

      Reply
  • June 21, 2021 at 2:11 pm
    Permalink

    Thank you, Mr Leo, for taking time to write such an illuminating and thorough commentary on the issue facing many if not all Singaporeans today – the safety of mRNA vaccination.

    There are progressively more reports on vax-associated deaths, mostly of unexpected onset, where “final” comment from authorities like the Coroner, have been that they are not caused by the vaccination. Some of these conclusions have raised more questions than answers.

    There are more and more such associated deaths being reported from different parts of the world..

    The truth behind whether mRNA vaccines have a direct contributory or precipitatory role to play in the unexpected deaths remains to be unravelled. My prayer is that research will go at a trajectory that will lead us to such a discovery and provide some form of closure for many who have been directly affected by vaccine-associated deaths of loved ones , like the Yak family and Andrew Tan.

    Reply
  • June 21, 2021 at 4:08 pm
    Permalink

    Leo, I applaud your voice of courage and clarity. You have really lent words to the nagging discomfort with the prevailing narrative and pressure to get vaccinated.

    Reply
  • June 21, 2021 at 11:25 pm
    Permalink

    Thank you for the good work you are doing via your website. God bless.

    Reply
  • June 22, 2021 at 4:49 am
    Permalink

    Thanks for this article. I find it v informative.

    Reply
  • June 22, 2021 at 10:59 am
    Permalink

    Look for immunohistochemical evidence eg.. antibodies to spike proteins and and spike proteins at site of heart attack or stroke. I do not see any reports that such were Not found in the autopsy yet they concluded that death or disability was Not due to mRNA vaccination. At best they could label Inconclusive…. it’s not possible to be sure its not due to vaccine….so vast majority will be ? Inconclusive and only a small number excluded or causative.

    Reply
  • June 22, 2021 at 10:01 pm
    Permalink

    The 3 hrs interview with Robert Malone was removed & now even the 15mins video had been removed. I have listened to both. It is a concern when the inventor himself raises caution. It is supposed to stay onbthe muscles but evidently had travelled to other parts of the body. Agree on your questioning the need to vaccinate the young. On one hand govt says vaccination is voluntary yet on the other hand ONLY vaccinated people do not need PET for attending church when EVIDENCE (as seen in the recent community outbreak) they get infected & can attend & ‘infect’ those unvaccinated who have proven they are cleared? It is the vaccinated that are infectious for a longer period of time without their knowing…so how can they say vaccination is voluntary when policies rolled out are against unvaccinated? Thanks for your well written TRUTH. God bless you.

    Reply
  • June 23, 2021 at 1:07 am
    Permalink

    Ridiculous. absurd reasoning given by Dr Lye to substantiate his prognosis on vaccination on children and pregnant women.

    Better to err on the caution side as regards vaccination.

    Even without vaccination, chances of getting covid is slim as long as you practise proper masks wearing/social distancing/ hygience protocol and whatever safe measures deem fit.

    Then comes to my point:

    What is the use and effectiveness of vaccination even it does not guarantee a person from not getting covid???

    On that score, readers have to discern for themselves to make their own judgemental call as to whether to get vaccinated or not.

    Reply
  • June 23, 2021 at 2:25 am
    Permalink

    This comes from Pfizer factsheet for vacc providers:
    (Google Pfizer factsheet for prescribing providers hsa eua)
    MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE
    ADMINISTRATION UNDER INTERIM AUTHORIZATION
    In order to mitigate the risks of using this unapproved product under interim
    authorization and to optimize the potential benefit of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19
    Vaccine, the following items are required. Use of unapproved Pfizer-BioNTech
    COVID-19 Vaccine for active immunization to prevent COVID-19 under this interim
    authorization is limited to the following (all requirements must be met):
    1. Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is authorized for use in individuals
    12 years of age and older.
    2. The vaccination provider must communicate to the individual receiving the
    Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or their caregiver, information
    consistent with the “Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers” prior to the
    individual receiving Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine.
    3. The vaccination provider must include vaccination information in the
    state/local jurisdiction’s Immunization Information System (IIS) or other
    designated system.
    4. The vaccination provider is responsible for mandatory reporting of the
    following:
    • vaccine administration errors whether or not associated with an
    adverse event,
    • serious adverse events* (irrespective of attribution to vaccination),
    • cases of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome (MIS) in adults and
    children, and
    • cases of COVID-19 that result in hospitalization or death.
    The reports should include the words “Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine
    Interim Authorization” in the description section of the report.
    5. The vaccination provider is responsible for responding to HSA requests for
    information about vaccine administration errors, adverse events, cases of
    MIS in adults and children, and cases of COVID-19 that result in
    hospitalization or death following administration of Pfizer-BioNTech
    COVID-19 Vaccine to recipients.
    * Serious adverse events are defined as:
    • Death;
    • A life-threatening adverse event;
    • Inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization;
    • A persistent or significant incapacity or substantial disruption of the ability to
    conduct normal life functions;
    • A congenital anomaly/birth defect;
    • An important medical event that based on appropriate medical judgement
    may jeopardize the individual and may require medical or surgica

    Reply
  • June 23, 2021 at 3:28 am
    Permalink

    Where the Indonesian case is concerned please note the stats. 300 plus Heath workers getting Covid out of more than a million Heath workers in Indonesia! And nobody died!

    Reply
  • June 23, 2021 at 12:48 pm
    Permalink

    I would suggest that those who find that the present situation illogical such the push by the health authorities for vaccination with experimental vaccines that have not been proven for their efficacy and safety and proven not to prevent COVID19 infection, the curb on cure options and the news on thousands of deaths and other serious health issues to dig deeper themselves for the truth.

    Everything happens for a reason. Find the true reason for the main media narrative and the health authorities’ position.

    Only the truth can set you and your loved ones free!

    Reply
  • June 27, 2021 at 4:15 pm
    Permalink

    Vaccination has potentially led to a Black Swan event of Cerebral Venous Thrombosis. 3 Case reports conducted in Singapore. This risk albeit extremely rare, needs to be properly served to the public as proper informed consent. The authors also takes a pro- vaccination position with regards to the risk vs benefits of vaccination. More can be found in the paper. Link here. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajh.26272

    Reply
  • June 28, 2021 at 8:02 am
    Permalink

    Thank you Leo for your excellent analysis of the potential health risks caused by mRNA vaccines
    Although we agree the benefits can outweigh the risks in adult cases, why are some Singapore scientists and Expert Committee so sure that the same benefits can be extended to younger age group of 12 to 17 years old.
    As you mention, Pfizer BioNTech has conducted clinical trial of 1,100 teenager cases for 2 months and do you think this small number and short time are safe to justify 400,000 innocent teenagers vaccination in Singapore. Already a 13 year old boy died in Michigan, America after receiving the Pfizer vaccination. (source: CDC). Will the Expert Committee stay accountable for the teenagers’ safety after vaccination for the period of 1 to 10 years.
    Can the Expert Committee also consider other safer preventive options e.g steam or hot air disinfector which can neutralise Covid-19 variants by 5 min daily inhalation. Many million people in China have tried this heat method with great success. Copy the video and the portable hot air devices link to your browser to view: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1i2RDGYGaMAqVmvMV41wgLu5Zg54gJ9kK/view?usp=sharing
    https://youtu.be/chJdAK6g2as
    Natural heat, sunlight and hot drink can kill bacteria and viruses sometime better than drugs and vaccines.

    Reply
  • July 24, 2021 at 2:43 am
    Permalink

    Fact Check-No evidence spike proteins from COVID-19 vaccines are toxic.
    This write-up is mostly based on research done by Bryan Briddle and his alleging that vaccines spikes are dangerous. However a quick google search shows that Mr Bryan Briddle’s “research” has been debunked. As Christians we are called to examine all things and to hold fast to that which is good.

    Spreading vaccine misinformation even in good faith should not be a part of being salt and light to the world.

    Links Debunking Briddle:
    https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaccine-safe-idUSL2N2NX1J6

    https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jun/07/facebook-posts/no-proof-researcher-claim-covid-19-vaccines-spike-/

    https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-377989296609

    https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/7505236002

    Stay safe. Get vaccinated with the vaccines developed by the ingenuity that God has given scientists. And God Bless.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.