A 357% increase in voter turn out and all voting for Massie rival funded by the Epstein gang?
That is statistically so unlikely as to be evidence of massive fraud.
In the interests of democracy, Massie collect all the evidence of voter fraud also from eye witnesses and should ask a court for a new vote.
https://www.alexjoneslive.com/2026/05/21/kentucky-citizens-smell-a-rat-nobody-knows-who-this-guy-is-everyone-we-know-voted-for-massie/
WHO PREPARING TO GIVE A DANGEROUS MERCK ERVEBO EBOLA JAB TO PEOPLE IN 2 MONTHS
CAN BE MANDATED BY COUNTRIES FOR HEALTH CARE WORKERS AND OTHERS DEEMED AT RISK
BUT SCIENCE AND DATA SAY IT MAY HAVE ZERO EFFICACY AND GIVE PEOPLE EBOLA!
SENT COPY TO MERCK CEO AND MITSOTAKIS WARNING THEM THEY ARE EXPOSING THEMSELVES TO CRIMINAL LAWSUITS
.png)
Following my email to you, which is forwarded below, noting the record of WHO in spreading Ebola by faulty biosecurity protocols, I note that youand WHO have just declared the third Ebola outbreaks to be Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEICs) and are planning to give a dangerous Merck vaccine to health care workers and the public making false claims with mass vaccination possibly starting in two months or so when the vaccine will be “ready”, according to a WHO representative.
https://www.rttnews.com/3654021/ebola-vaccine-2-months-away-says-who.aspx
These are very serious allegations but I will demonstrate that they are true citing just a small number of the documents, studies and facts showing Merck s ebola vaccine may have zero, no, efficacy and actually give people Ebola, but you are not telling people about this, violating rights to informed consent.
The so called Bundibugyo ebolavirus Outbreak (2026) was declared a PHEIC on May 16, 2026, marking the fastest PHEIC designation in the history of WHO.
https://news.cgtn.com/news/2026-05-19/news-1Nh7CY0qNaw/p.html
The European Commission has granted full marketing authorization for ERVEBO to be used as an active immunization to protect against the Zaire ebolavirus and possibly now against the Bundibugyo strain.
The authorization means that it can ERVEBO can be mandated under national rules despite a lack of data showing the vaccine is safe and effective.
In 2017, The National Academies of Sciences, questioned the reported 100% efficacy, noting the vaccine could have zero efficacy as I discuss below.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Health and Medicine Division concluded that the efficacy “could in reality be quite low or even zero, as the confidence limits around the unbiased estimate include zero. “
The report is called "INTEGRATING CLINICAL RESEARCH INTO EPIDEMIC RESPONSE THE EBOLA EXPERIENCE" by Gerald Keusch, Keith McAdam, Patricia A. Cuff, Michelle Mancher, and Emily R. Busta, Editors
Committee on Clinical Trials During the 2014—2015 Ebola Outbreak
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Integrating Clinical Research into Epidemic Response: The Ebola Experience. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24739.
Outbreak; Busta ER, Mancher M, Cuff PA, et al., editors.
Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2017 Jun 26.
https://www.nationalacademies.org/read/24739/chapter/1
To clarify, WHO and partners are planning to give people a vaccine which might do nothing or actually makes things worse. The statistical range which likely contains the true effect size in the real world includes zero.
Because zero is a plausible outcome, the treatment might actually have zero efficacy.
Yet, WHO, Merck and partners are not telling the public that the vaccine they are proposing to use and even allow countries to mandate may have zero effect and make things worse
You are violating rights to informed consent and allowing for WHO and Merck and governments to be sued.
The vaccine trials of Merck s Ervebo (rVSV-ZEBOV) had such an unusual trial design involving a cluster-randomized "ring vaccination" design rather than a traditional placebo-controlled trial that it resulted in statistically meanngless results and in massive gapbs in data which have persisted so that neither efficacy not safety has been proven, as discussed below.
Key data gaps and design limitations include:
1. Trial Design LimitationsLack of Placebo Control:
The landmark Ebola Ça Suffit! trial in Guinea used a delayed ring vaccination strategy instead of a placebo control. This lack of standard randomization and blinding can introduce assessment and diagnostic biases, complicating statistical certainty about exactly how well the vaccine works outside of close-contact environments.Wide Confidence Intervals: Because the trial design targeted clusters (contacts and contacts-of-contacts) rather than evaluating universal mass vaccination, the resulting data featured wide confidence intervals, leading some researchers to debate the exact efficacy percentage of the vaccine.
Immune Distraction and Cross-Protection Gaps: Ervebo is specifically designed to protect against the Zaire ebolavirus. Data is limited regarding its effectiveness against other Ebola strains (e.g., Sudan or Bundibugyo).
2. Post-Vaccination Data GapsDuration of Protection: The exact length of immunity conferred by a single dose of Ervebo remains unknown.
Special Populations: Early trial designs heavily focused on healthy adult populations. Data gaps exist regarding the vaccine’s safety and immunogenicity in children, pregnant women, and severely immunocompromised individuals
People contracting Ebola from the vaccine Breakthrough Cases: Real-world rollout data and post-licensure surveillance have identified breakthrough Ebola cases which is defined as people getting Ebola ten days after the vaccine.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1473309923008198
"Moreover, the Institut National pour la Recherche Biomedicale in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and WHO have both reported breakthrough Ebola virus disease cases in previously vaccinated people, rendering the vaccine's effectiveness less than 100%. These organisations estimate that the vaccine effectiveness for individuals whose symptom onset occurs 10 days or more after vaccination is 97·5% (95% CI 92·4–99·1).15 During the tenth Ebola virus disease epidemic in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (from August, 2018 to June, 2020), there were some individuals admitted to an Ebola health facility who reported receiving rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP 10 days or more before symptom onset of confirmed Ebola virus disease."
Reactogenicity and Arthritis: Early-stage and phase 1 trials highlighted significant reactogenicity, with a notable percentage of vaccine recipients experiencing viral oligoarthritis (joint pain and swelling). In some individuals, joint symptoms were reported to recur or persist for extended periods, highlighting a gap in the understanding of the vaccine's long-term side effects.These limitations have required health organizations to conduct ongoing, post-licensure effectiveness and safety trials (such as the PREVAC study) to supplement the original trial data.
Despite these gaps and uncertainties, Ervebo has received full authorizatio
Ervebo is the first FDA and EMA-approved vaccine to protect against the Zaire ebolavirus.
Its primary regulatory milestones include initial authorizations in late 2019 and subsequent indication expansions to include children.
1. Initial Authorizations (2019)European Union: Granted a conditional marketing authorization by the European Commission in November 2019, following an accelerated recommendation by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) via the PRIME scheme.
United States: Fully approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in December 2019.2. WHO Prequalification (2019)The World Health Organization (WHO) prequalified the vaccine within 48 hours of its EU authorization, accelerating access, rollout, and deployment in high-risk, vulnerable countries.
3. Expanded Approvals (2023–2024)Children and Adolescents: In July and September 2023, the FDA and the European Commission expanded the approved indication for Ervebo.
It is now approved for active immunization in individuals 1 year of age and older.
Switzerland: Swissmedic updated the authorization in September 2024, extending its use to protect individuals from 1 year of age and older.
4. Strategic StockpilingTo manage sporadic and unpredictable outbreaks, major regulatory and public health bodies (including the WHO, UNICEF, and Gavi) support a ring-vaccination strategy. This is backed by a global stockpile of Ervebo doses reserved for high-risk, frontline, and healthcare workers during active Zaire ebolavirus events.
Before I discuss this in more detail, I would like to ask WHO if it has any evidence that the Ebola outbreak in the DR Congo is a bioweapon gven the fact the 1976 outbreak was also due to a bioweapon as discussed below.
WHO S ROLE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF BIOWEAPONS
WHO provided standard seed strains of the live bird flu virus (specifically the A/Vietnam/1203/2004 strain) to Baxter s research facilities in Austria.
https://www.ots.at/presseaussendung/OTS_20070920_OTS0068/baxter-staerkt-seinen-forschungsstandort-in-orth-an-der-donau
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa073121?__cf_chl_tk=loI39REv._dSk2Mt3xbn1tACuOo7M6lmES9wNzSPqrs-1779005451-1.0.1.1-0XSG8E3EUej4OGMt5l.N.hQShI4d4u5jTgqnAyTCj0s
Baxter received this viral strain to develop a "mock-up" prepandemic bird flu vaccine. The bird flu virus was mixed with a batch of seasonal human H3N2 flu virus in what must have been a deliberate act when we consider the many strict BSL 3 protocols which have to be pro actively breached, ignored and subverted to take place and which should be recorded in the lab logs.
Baxter sent contaminated "experimental virus material" to a subcontractor in the Czech Republic, who only discovered the contamination after ferrets unexpectedly died from the samples, triggering an alarm which resulted in staff who came in contact with the material being monitored.
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/avian-influenza-bird-flu/news-scan-avian-flu-tainted-baxter-samples-hhs-secretary-nomination-h5n1
I filed charges with the Vienna prosecutor on this incident and prosecutors did investigate on the basis of my charges allegedly Baxter and WHO were working hand in hand to trigger a pandemic to trigger lucrative contracts for bird flu jabs.
Around the same time as this incident of WHO supplying Baxter with a lethal virus to mix in with the seasonal flu in Austria and spread around the world, that is,, around 2007–2008—Vietnam, Indonesia and several other Asisan nations (restricted sharing bird flu (H5N1) samples with the World Health Organization.
This decision stemmed from a fear that WHO was using the samples in partnership with private actors to weaponize them and cause outbreaks. Vietnam suffered severe economic and public health crises from H5N1 outbreaks (leading to the culling of millions of birds).
To clarify. The very same Vietnam strain of the bird flu, which the Vietnamese government allegedly was being weaponized by WHO, turned up in the conamination of 72 kilos of seasonal flu in Baxter s BSL 3 facilities in Austria to nearly trigger a bird flu outbreak.
Indonesian Health Minister Siti Fadilah Supari published a book in 2008 alleging that the global health system was exploitative and suggesting that the U.S. and WHO might have been using the viral samples to develop biological weapons.
https://asil.org/insights/volume-11-issue-4/
Asian countries provided vital viral samples to the WHO's global network, which were then routinely passed on to private pharmaceutical companies in wealthy nations. These companies developed patented vaccines from the samples but sold them bact at exorbitant prices.
Vietnam and others argued that they held sovereign rights over the biological resources originating in their territories. They viewed the free transfer of these samples as a form of "biopiracy"..
This international stand off ultimately forced the WHO to overhaul how it handles global pathogen sharing and intellectual property. By 2011, member states adopted the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Framework, which established a globally binding system ensuring that countries sharing dangerous viral samples receive guaranteed access to vaccines, treatments, and other benefits during a health crisis.
The WHO’s Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) agreement—a core annex of the landmark WHO Pandemic Agreement—seems also to have suffered setbacks over fears that WHO exploits the "Pathogen Sharing" aspect requiring member states and scientists to quickly share dangerous pathogen samples and their genetic data with the WHO for gain of function research.
The data bases for virus samples which seem to keep turning up in pandemics have sparked fears WHO, Gates and pharmaceutical companies are colluding to find the most lethal viruses, release them, start pandemics to then profit from the pandemics by supplying the matching vaccines
NOVARTIS BIRD FLU TRIALS IN POLAND
In 2007, Novartis conducted a secret bird flu clinical trial in Poland testing an experimental bird fly H5N1 avian flu vaccine, and killing more than a dozen peope, which led to a civil lawsuit.
Novartis hired a clinical research company in Poland to test an experimental H5N1 (bird flu) vaccine.
https://www.thelocal.ch/20170714/swiss-pharma-firm-novartis-sued-over-bird-flu-clinical-trials-on-homeless-people
The trial recruited impoverished individuals and homeless people in the city of Grudziadz who were not told the true nature of the vaccine.
Participants, including a man named Grzegorz S., filed a civil lawsuit against Novartis, claiming they were never told they were testing a bird flu drug.
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/h5n1-vaccine-allegations_novartis-sued-by-bird-flu-guinea-pig/43329732
Instead, subjects alleged they were misled into believing it was a completely normal, conventional seasonal flu vaccine.
The Trial & Conviction: In criminal proceedings related to the case, healthcare professionals were convicted by a Polish judge for conducting clinical trials without obtaining proper, informed consent from the subjects and for defrauding Novartis.
Civil Lawsuit: Following the criminal convictions, the participant launched a civil suit in Basel, Switzerland, seeking compensation and a share of the vaccine profits from Novartis.While the criminal case regarding the unauthorized trial procedures has concluded, it established the foundation for the victim's civil suit against the pharmaceutical company.
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/h5n1-vaccine-allegations_novartis-sued-by-bird-flu-guinea-pig/43329732
The civil lawsuit is an important legal precedent for WHO Ervebo Ebola vacine as I will discuss
Participants were allegedly paid a nominal fee to take what the organizers claimed was a routine flu shot, but what plaintiffs argued was an experimental bird flu vaccine without proper consent.
The criminal aspect of the case concluded earlier in 2017 when Polish courts convicted the local healthcare professionals and organizers who ran the trial. Novartis was not put under investigation during the criminal proceedings and stated that the company was a victim of the fraud committed by the trial operators.
EBOLA AS A BIOWEAPON
THE FINDINGS FROM THE 1976 OUTBREAK
Given this evidence, I would like to ask you what you at WHO are doing to investigate the current Ebola outbreak as an intentional outbreak caused by a bioweapon?
The first officially published World Health Organization (WHO) report on Ebola detailed two simultaneous outbreaks in 1976: one in Nzara and Maridi (Sudan) and a second in Yambuku (Zaire, now the Democratic Republic of the Congo).
The seminal report for the Yambuku outbreak was compiled by the International Commission and published in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization in 1978.
https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/f8655edd-586f-48e8-bfc9-88332025c09b/content
According to this 1978 World Health Organization report the index case and almost everyone in the first group who got Ebola haemorrhagic fever in Zaire, 1976 (IRIS) had received injections at the Yambuku Mission Hospital before their illness
At least 85 of the 288 traceable cases at Yambuku Mission Hospital were infected via unsterilized injections, while 49 cases involved both injections and close contact. The report indicates that the vast majority of the remaining patients contracted the virus through person-to-person contact, with contaminated needles serving as a primary transmission driver.
In Zaire, the outbreak began with a 44-year-old male schoolteacher who visited the Yambuku Mission Hospital for presumed malaria and who had ireceived an injection.
He was treated with an injection of chloroquine for presumptive malaria at the Yambuku Mission Hospital before developing severe symptoms.
The WHO investigators found that unsterilized, reused syringes and needles at the hospital were the primary vehicle for spreading the disease.
The vast majority of the subsequent cases contracted the virus either directly from receiving unsterilized injections at the hospital or as close personal contacts of those who did.
Uninjected individuals only became infected if they had direct close contact with a known, symptomatic case (typically caring for or living with a sick family member).The World Health Organization and researchers concluded that the widespread transmission of the virus was primarily driven by hospital procedures—specifically the daily reuse of just five syringes across dozens of patients without proper sterilization.
There was no sign of a natural origin for Ebola.
The 1978 WHO studies noted that investigators could not immediately identify the natural animal reservoir. They tested various local insects and animals (including a limited number of bats) during the outbreak, all of which were negative at the time.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5050466/
The fact Ebola emerged abruptly in 1976 in a hospital given by injections and with no sign of animals,insects or bats having or transmitting it with an exceptionally high mortality rate was fuelled speculation of a bioweapon deployed covertly.
Epidemiological data shows that certain groups—particularly pregnant women attending local clinics—had much higher infection and mortality rates compared to others suggesting a pattern and a method to deliberately and systematically injected into specific target group to harm them.
It is noteworthy that the Ebola virus was discovered by a team of researchers that included Belgian scientists in 1976, following an outbreak in what was then Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo)and before that, a Belgian colony known as the Belgian Congo.
A team of young researchers, notably including Belgian scientist Dr. Peter Piot and Dr. Guido van der Groen, analyzed the blood and isolated the virus, identifying it as a previously unknown, deadly pathogen under an electron microscope.
Belgium conducted medical experiments in the Belgian Congo.
Key aspects of these historical practices include
Infectious Disease Trials: During the 1940s, Belgian colonial doctors subjected healthy Congolese individuals to experimental infections—including intentionally exposing them to the parasite that causes river blindness (Onchocerca volvulus)—to test treatments.
Sleeping Sickness Treatments: Colonial authorities used draconian "medical" programs to combat sleeping sickness. Patients were forcibly incarcerated in camps and treated with atoxyl (an arsenic-based drug). While it successfully treated the disease, the toxic medication caused blindness in 2% to 30% of recipients.
Colonial Medicine and HIV: Because European scientists and chimpanzees were used for viral research in the region during the colonial era, theories circulated that early HIV/AIDS originated from colonial medical experiments.
Medical authorities set up itinerant "sleeping sickness missions" that utilized semi-military medical grids. Mobile teams canvassed villages and forced unwilling or unconsenting local populations to submit to mandatory screenings and serial injections.
NO STUDY OF BATS CAN FIND ANY SIGN THEY ARE THE NATURAL RESERVOIR OF EBOLA
Subsequent studies in the DRC have shown no sign that Ebola is natural. It is not found in bats as has been claimed.
Several studies in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), such as the extensive field research published in MDPI's Pathogens and the PLOS Pathogens report, highlight that scientists consistently detect antibodies to Ebola in bats but fail to detect active viral RNA or live virus within them.
These studies have failed to find any sign hat bats are the direct source of human outbreaks, and no study has ever isolated an active, full EVD-causing Ebola virus from a bat host.
Investigating the Circulation of Ebola Viruses in Bats (2021): Published in the MDPI journal Pathogens, this study tested nearly 1,000 bats over two years during ongoing Ebola outbreaks in the DRC. While antibodies were detected in fruit bats, zero viral RNA was found in the 676 bats swabbe.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8147758/
Assessing Ebola Virus Circulation in Tshuapa Province (2025): Published in PLOS Pathogens, researchers screened over 1,000 animals. Once again, no active Ebola virus RNA was detected in the wildlife.
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/10/5/557
EBOLA AS A BIOWEAPON
THE FINDINGS FROM THE 1976 OUTBREAK
Given this evidence, I would like to ask you what you at WHO are doing to investigate the current Ebola outbreak as an intentional outbreak caused by a bioweapon?
The first officially published World Health Organization (WHO) report on Ebola detailed two simultaneous outbreaks in 1976: one in Nzara and Maridi (Sudan) and a second in Yambuku (Zaire, now the Democratic Republic of the Congo).
The seminal report for the Yambuku outbreak was compiled by the International Commission and published in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization in 1978.
https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/f8655edd-586f-48e8-bfc9-88332025c09b/content
According to this 1978 World Health Organization report the index case and almost everyone in the first group who got Ebola haemorrhagic fever in Zaire, 1976 (IRIS) had received injections at the Yambuku Mission Hospital before their illness
At least 85 of the 288 traceable cases at Yambuku Mission Hospital were infected via unsterilized injections, while 49 cases involved both injections and close contact. The report indicates that the vast majority of the remaining patients contracted the virus through person-to-person contact, with contaminated needles serving as a primary transmission driver.
In Zaire, the outbreak began with a 44-year-old male schoolteacher who visited the Yambuku Mission Hospital for presumed malaria and who had ireceived an injection.
He was treated with an injection of chloroquine for presumptive malaria at the Yambuku Mission Hospital before developing severe symptoms.
The WHO investigators found that unsterilized, reused syringes and needles at the hospital were the primary vehicle for spreading the disease.
The vast majority of the subsequent cases contracted the virus either directly from receiving unsterilized injections at the hospital or as close personal contacts of those who did.
Uninjected individuals only became infected if they had direct close contact with a known, symptomatic case (typically caring for or living with a sick family member).The World Health Organization and researchers concluded that the widespread transmission of the virus was primarily driven by hospital procedures—specifically the daily reuse of just five syringes across dozens of patients without proper sterilization.
There was no sign of a natural origin for Ebola.
The 1978 WHO studies noted that investigators could not immediately identify the natural animal reservoir. They tested various local insects and animals (including a limited number of bats) during the outbreak, all of which were negative at the time.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5050466/
The fact Ebola emerged abruptly in 1976 in a hospital given by injections and with no sign of animals,insects or bats having or transmitting it with an exceptionally high mortality rate was fuelled speculation of a bioweapon deployed covertly.
Epidemiological data shows that certain groups—particularly pregnant women attending local clinics—had much higher infection and mortality rates compared to others suggesting a pattern and a method to deliberately and systematically injected into specific target group to harm them.
It is noteworthy that the Ebola virus was discovered by a team of researchers that included Belgian scientists in 1976, following an outbreak in what was then Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo)and before that, a Belgian colony known as the Belgian Congo.
A team of young researchers, notably including Belgian scientist Dr. Peter Piot and Dr. Guido van der Groen, analyzed the blood and isolated the virus, identifying it as a previously unknown, deadly pathogen under an electron microscope.
Belgium conducted medical experiments in the Belgian Congo.
Key aspects of these historical practices include
Infectious Disease Trials: During the 1940s, Belgian colonial doctors subjected healthy Congolese individuals to experimental infections—including intentionally exposing them to the parasite that causes river blindness (Onchocerca volvulus)—to test treatments.
Sleeping Sickness Treatments: Colonial authorities used draconian "medical" programs to combat sleeping sickness. Patients were forcibly incarcerated in camps and treated with atoxyl (an arsenic-based drug). While it successfully treated the disease, the toxic medication caused blindness in 2% to 30% of recipients.
Colonial Medicine and HIV: Because European scientists and chimpanzees were used for viral research in the region during the colonial era, theories circulated that early HIV/AIDS originated from colonial medical experiments.
Medical authorities set up itinerant "sleeping sickness missions" that utilized semi-military medical grids. Mobile teams canvassed villages and forced unwilling or unconsenting local populations to submit to mandatory screenings and serial injections.
THE EBOLA MERCK VACCINE
As mentioned above, the European Union primarily relies on the Ervebo vaccine to protect against Ebola virus disease but it has not told the public the truth about the missing data.
Ebola remains a severe viral infection transmitted by bodily fluids, with a reproduction rate of about 1.5 to 2 (much less contagious than flu).
The incubation period ranges from 2 to 21 days.
Merck’s Ervebo Vaccine (rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP) was licensed under emergency use provisions in the USA (FDA approval Nov 2019) and Europe, meaning it was approved without standard clinical trials.
The clinical trials lacked control groups and had methodological flaws, undermining confidence in efficacy claims.
Jon Cohen wrote in Sciencemag that the "unusual trial designed" yielded no data proving the vaccine is safe or effective and, therefore, gave no basis for licensing it.
"The unusual trial design yielded data that were not deemed strong enough to lead regulatory bodies to license the vaccine," he wrote.
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/12/special-report-ebolas-thin-harvest
THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE ON THE EBOLA TRIAL DATA
Echoing the WHO press release, Donald McNeil of The New York Times wrote: “In a scientific triumph that will change the way the world fights a terrifying killer, an experimental Ebola vaccine tested on humans in the waning days of the West African epidemic has been shown to provide 100 percent protection against the lethal disease” (McNeil, 2016).
But in 2017, The National Academies of Sciences, questioned the reported 100% efficacy, noting the vaccine could have zero efficacy.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Health and Medicine Division concluded that the efficacy “could in reality be quite low or even zero, as the confidence limits around the unbiased estimate include zero. “
The National Academies report notes that small sample sizes in early 2014–2016 Ebola trials created wide confidence intervals, meaning the intervention's true efficacy could be zero.
In fact, phrase "zero confidence" in the report refers to the statistical impossibility of drawing definitive conclusions from trials that lacked a control group or sufficient infection cases.
In the report "Integrating Clinical Research into Epidemic Response" (published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine), the evaluation of the Ebola vaccine and therapeutic trials in West Africa highlighted four major systemic criticisms
The report is called "INTEGRATING CLINICAL RESEARCH INTO EPIDEMIC RESPONSE THE EBOLA EXPERIENCE" by Gerald Keusch, Keith McAdam, Patricia A. Cuff, Michelle Mancher, and Emily R. Busta, Editors
Committee on Clinical Trials During the 2014—2015 Ebola Outbreak
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Integrating Clinical Research into Epidemic Response: The Ebola Experience. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24739.
Outbreak; Busta ER, Mancher M, Cuff PA, et al., editors.
Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2017 Jun 26.
https://www.nationalacademies.org/read/24739/chapter/1
The report notes that although serological data showed antibody responses, interpreting them was challenging due to unknown immune correlates of protection. It highlights shortcomings in long-term follow-up regarding antibody durability and safety. Specific criticisms focus on limited 84-day tracking, delayed definitive immunogenicity data, and challenges in collecting consistent, long-term biological samples during the outbreak.
The report states that non-standardized assays hampered comparison of immune responses across vaccine studies, preventing the identification of clear immune correlates. These inconsistencies in measuring antibody levels and efficacy complicated regulatory evaluation for approval.
The NAS committee identified several critical factors that undermined scientific confidence in the results.
Statistical Power and Declining Cases: By the time many trials were implemented, the Ebola outbreak was naturally ebbing. The low number of new infections made it statistically impossible to prove whether a vaccine was effective or if people simply weren't being exposed to the virus.
Trials took too long to plan, get approved, and actually begin. Often, the research was only successfully deployed late in the epidemic when case numbers and the immediate perceived threat had already receded.
The ring vaccination design is highly sensitive to the per-protocol analysis window. If the background incidence wanes before the vaccine takes effect, or if the time to develop immunity overlaps with infection events, statistical power can be significantly diminished.Baseline Spatiotemporal Bias: Unpredictable disease spread, shifting population densities, and changing overall incidence rates can undermine baseline balance across trial arms. This requires sophisticated modeling or permutation tests to prevent inflated false-positive or false-negative rates.
Methodological Disagreements: The report highlights significant "disagreements, competition, and infighting" among international organizations regarding trial designs. There was intense debate over the ethics of using randomized controlled trials (RCTs) versus "ring vaccination" designs, leading to inconsistent data collection.
Lack of Placebo Comparisons: Critics noted that without a placebo group, it was difficult to determine if the 100% efficacy reported in some trials (like the "Ebola ça Suffit" trial in Guinea) was a "statistical fluke" or truly representative of the vaccine's power.
Many trials were neither randomized nor adequately controlled, which prevented researchers from concluding definitively whether the vaccines were truly safe and effective.
MERCK S OWN EXECUTIVE SAID HE DID NOT KNOW IF THE VACCINE HELPED STOP EBOLA OR CAUSE IT IN OCTOBER 2018
Merck executive Jakub Simon, MD, MS, told the American Society of Tropical Medicine's (ASTMH) at its annual meeting in October 2018 that “World Health Organization (WHO) officials have told him they think the vaccine is effective. But the reality is that no one can yet be sure to what extent the vaccination campaign, versus other public health efforts, helped end the Equateur outbreak, or how much it might be helping in North Kivu and Ituri given the roller-coaster numbers.”
To repeat in Octoberr 2018, two years after the publication of the Lancet study, a Merck executive admitted that no one was sure that the vvacine was effective even though Merck had clinical data on 12 trials.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/meetingcoverage/astmh/76018
Furthermore, Merck's Jakub Simon, Merck's Jakub Simon, showed that “new cases dropped significantly after vaccination began in early August, they never approached zero, and 2 months later they rocketed back to the level seen before vaccinations began. (They have since dropped again.)”
“The roller-coaster numbers” and sky high numbers after the vaccine could most likely be because the vaccine was giving people Ebola.
THE PALM STUDY REINFORCES REPORTS THAT THE VACCINE CAUSES EBOLA
The PALM study asked participants whether they had taken the Merck vaccine.
155 patients of the 620 participants in the trial on four other drugs reported that they had received the Merck vaccine. That means, a staggering 25% of all the people who had Ebola and who joined the trial reported having the Merck vaccine. Most of them reported having the vaccine shortly before the onset of the symptoms of Ebola, strong suggesting a causal link.
80 people or 38.7% reported that they had received the vaccine at least 10 days before the onset of clinical symptoms. 60 reported that they had received the vaccine ten days or more before the onset of clinical symptoms.
THE LANCET STUDIES ON THE MERCK VACCINE
An interim Lancet 2015 study showed 27 vaccine recipients contracted Ebola, with 15 deaths attributed to the vaccine as an adverse event.
Results published in The Lancet in 2015 stated that 27 people contracted Ebola as a result of the vaccine and 15 of these people died.
http://www.thelancet.com/pb/assets/raw/Lancet/pdfs/S0140673615611175.pdf
Efficacy and effectiveness of an rVSV-vectored vaccine expressing Ebola surface glycoprotein: interim results from the Guinea ring vaccination cluster-randomised trial
Ana Maria Henao-Restrepo
Paule Kieny, Assistant Director General, Health Systems and Innovation, 20 Av Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland kienym@who.int
"As of July 20, 2015, a total of 43 serious adverse events had been documented among eligible and consenting trial participants, including
27 confirmed cases of Ebola virus disease (see appendix).” Page 6 to 7.
“Apart from Ebola virus disease, the three most commonserious adverse events were suspected, unconfirmed Ebola virus disease (three cases), episodes of febrile illness (three cases), and road traffic accidents (three cases). 16 deaths occurred: 15 from Ebola virus disease and one from cardiac
arrest.”
Confusion has arisen as to the meaning of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) because of a 2010/2011 regulatory shift that changed how and when specific SAEs are reported on an expedited basis.
Prior to 2011 and the FDA’s Final Rule on Expedited Safety Reporting, trial sponsors were legally required to send individual, expedited reports to the FDA for any unexpected, serious adverse experience that was possibly caused by the drug.
In 2012, the FDA revised its Investigational New Drug (IND) Safety Reporting regulations. The new rule clarified that expedited 15-day reporting should only apply to "suspected adverse reactions" (an adverse event for which there is a reasonable possibility that the drug caused it).
To clarify. It was left to the discretion of pharmaceutical companies or those conducting the trial to decide whether an adverse event was caused by the drug or vaccine or not in a clear conflict of interest.
Under the 2011 guidelines, if an unanticipated SAE occurs in the control arm, it is still an adverse event. However, it generally does not trigger an expedited, individual safety report to the FDA, because it is mathematically highly unlikely that the experimental drug caused an adverse event in a patient taking a placebo or standard-of-care medication.
Crucially, there was no control group in the Ebola vaccine trials, blurring the link between the ebola cases and the vaccines
Cases that developed within 0 to 9 days after vaccination were excluded from the primary efficacy calculation because the immune system had not yet had enough time to mount a protective response.
But the period of incubation of Ebola is 2 to 21 days.
The incubation period can be between 2 and 21 days, according to WHO.
https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/ebola/frequently-asked-questions
That means, people could have contracted Ebola from the vaccine in day 2,3,4,5,6,7,8 and 9 after the vaccination and due to the vaccination. People with weak immune systems due to malnourishment could be especially vulnerable to contracting the Ebola disease rapidly after vaccination. To exclude the cases of people developing Ebola less than ten days after the vaccination is arbitrary, unwarranted and skews the results which could show a pattern of people developing Ebola after the vaccination and so due to the vaccination.
THE STEP TRIAL FOR MERCK S HIV VACCINE STOPPED IN 2007 BECAUSE THE VACCINE WAS FOUND TO CAUSE HIV
That the Merck vaccine could give people Ebola is credible given the fact that a Merck HIV vaccine, which used the same cold virus as Merck’s Ebola vaccine, was halted because it was found to give people HIV. Men who had previously caught colds caused by the same chimpanzee “cold” virus used to make the HIV vaccine were two to four times as likely to become infected with HIV if they got the HIV vaccine.
The Ebola vaccine is made using the same cold virus, specifically a chimp adenovirus type . The cold virus is used as a carrier, or vector, to deliver material from the Zaire Ebola into the body.
The Step trial of the NIAID and Merck HIV vaccine was halted in phase IIb of clinical trials precisely because it was found to infect people with HIV . But the Ebola vaccine has not undergo traditional clinical trials as discussed in Section 2.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(16)32621-6/fulltext
The same concerns were raised over covid vaccines that utilized adenovirus vectors—specifically the Adenovirus Serotype 5 (Ad5) vector.
Their concerns centered on three main factors from the halted HIV trial.
Increased HIV Susceptibility: In the STEP trial, researchers surprisingly found that participants who received the Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine actually had a slightly higher risk of contracting HIV compared to those who received the placebo.
The Vector Connection: Several early COVID-19 vaccines (such as the Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, AstraZeneca/Vaxzevria, CanSino, and Sputnik V vaccines) were built on adenovirus vector platforms, causing critics to fear a repeat of the STEP trial's negative outcomes.
Prior Immunity: The heightened risk of HIV in the STEP trial was most pronounced in men who had pre-existing antibodies to the Ad5 vector.
Critics used this to argue that similar vectors could negatively interact with people who already had common, naturally occurring cold viruses (like Ad5).
The covid vaccines did not all use the same Ad5 vector that Merck used. For example, the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine used a chimpanzee adenovirus, and the Johnson & Johnson vaccine used Adenovirus Serotype 26 (Ad26), both of which were chosen to bypass the pre-existing immunity issues seen with Ad5.
The Merck vaccine was explicitly designed to fight HIV and included genetic material from the HIV virus.
It has been claimed that covid vaccines did not contain HIV fragments
But a January 2020 preprint paper that claimed to find "uncanny" similarities between the covid and HIV viruses.
This theory was later fueled by a failed Australian vaccine candidate that used a small piece of HIV protein as a structural stabilizer
Researchers from the Indian Institute of Technology published a preprint on bioRxiv titled "Uncanny similarity of unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag".
They claimed four sequences in the covid protein were identical to HIV-1 proteins.
Under pressure,the paper was withdrawn claiming the similarities were likely coincidental. But we now know for a fact that covid came from a lab and its lab origins were covered up.
In late 2020, a vaccine developed by the University of Queensland (UQ) was halted because trial participants began testing false positive for HIV.
The "Molecular Clamp": The vaccine used a tiny, 81-amino-acid fragment of an HIV protein to "clamp" the COVID-19 spike protein into its correct shape. While the fragment was harmless and could not cause HIV, it triggered the production of antibodies that standard HIV tests mistakenly identified as a real infection.
Following this, fears spread claiming that COVID-19 vaccines contain HIV or cause "VAIDS" (vaccine-acquired immunodeficiency syndrome).
Claims that covid vaccines cause VAIDS (Vaccine Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome) and destroy the human immune system. and immunodeficiency.
A viral video clip of David LV Bauer, a virologist at the Francis Crick Institute, suggests that the vaccine "destroys" the immune system by reducing neutralizing antibodies.
The Francis Crick Institute study found that levels of antibodies generated by the vaccine were six times lower against the delta variant than against the original strain of the coronavirus. This strongly suggests the vaccine destroys a type of white blood cell called the T cell and weakens the immune system.
A study from the Cleveland Clinic (often referred to as the "Cleveland Ohio study")shows that each successive dose of the vaccine makes a person more likely to catch covid, suggesting a weakened immune system.
Because the Cleveland Clinic study did observe an association between a higher number of previous vaccine doses and a higher risk of infection, this can only be interpreted under science rules to say the vaccine caused the infection or an immunodeficiency.
MORE MANIPULATION OF MERCK EBOLA TRIAL DATA?
Results published for the same study in The Lancet in December 2016 were different.
Efficacy and effectiveness of an rVSV-vectored vaccine in preventing Ebola virus disease: final results from the Guinea ring vaccination, open-label, cluster-randomised trial (Ebola Ça Suffit!)
• Dr Ana Maria Henao-Restrepo, M
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(16)32621-6/fulltext?_ga=2.42103269.1751527880.1531267200-635596102.1531267200
No satisfactory explanation is given why the results in this paper are so different from the July 2015 Lancet paper.
It is the same trial, with the same clinical trialnumber, for the same same country, with the same lead author, the same corresponding author, albeit with a slightly different title than the study published in July 2015.
Their statistical confidence and precision differed significantly due to changing sample sizes and evolving epidemiological environments but the expanded data pool
But the key problem iin both ring vaccination trials regarding confusion due to the mixing of direct vaccine effects with indirect (herd immunity) effects remained the same.
Because the trial randomly assigns entire clusters (rings) of people rather than individuals, the statistical analysis struggles to isolate whether a person remained healthy because they got the vaccine (direct protection) or because the people around them were vaccinated, stopping the virus from reaching them (indirect protection).
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5700805/ing
Ring vaccination creates overlapping rings of immunity that dramatically slow local transmission. The statistical outcome—the "total vaccine effect"—becomes a muddy hybrid of direct biological protection and dynamic herd protection. Disentangling the two mathematically is highly complex and requires advanced transmission dynamic modeling.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264410X16302018
Ring trials from a purely statistical perspective are complex, inefficient, and highly prone to confounding compared to standard individual-level RCTs.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4516343/
To sum up Merck’s Ervebo has significant unresolved safety and efficacy issues.
The design and conduct of vaccine trials were severely flawed, undermining confidence in positive claims.
It was first given an emergency license to circumvent traditional rigorous testing, raising ethical and health concerns.
Clinical trials were methodologically flawed, lacking control groups and robust immunological data.
The Merck vaccine may cause Ebola infection in some recipients, with documented cases and deaths post-vaccination.
And yet, this vaccine has been given full authoritzation and can be rolled out any hour.
There are proven, safer public health measures and treatments exist and should be prioritized over experimental vaccines.
WHO S RECORD OF SPREADING EBOLA IN HOSPITALS USING FLAWED PROTOCOLS
As mentioned in my email to Dr Tedros on 9th May 2026, there are extremely effective, low cost biosecurity units available which protect health care workers from infection and ensure that people suspected of incubating Ebola as well as those with symptoms can be treated with the minimum risk.
Research published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases found that during the early phase of the Ebola crisis in 2014 in Guinea, hospital transmissions constituted up to 35% of all documented infection chains. However, once strict isolation and barrier precautions were implemented, hospital-based transmission dropped drastically.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(14)71075-8/fulltext
A systematic review published in The Journal of Infectious Diseases confirms that healthcare workers in Ebola outbreak regions face exponentially higher infection risks compared to the general population due to direct contact with infected bodily fluids before definitive diagnoses are made.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8755545/
Studies show that flawed or sub-optimal World Health Organization (WHO) case definitions hindered early Ebola detection, resulting in the misclassification and spread of the virus.
WHO relied too heavily on general symptoms (like fever and fatigue), meaning that health systems did not distinguish Ebola from common tropical diseases like malaria and typhoid fever.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9355392/
A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis published in The Lancet by researchers from MSF, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), and other institutions analyzed definitions used during the West African epidemic and found that the WHO case definitions looking mainly for fever and not other key indicators of Ebola led to the frequent misclassification of healthy or malaria-infected individuals as Ebola patients.
Placing these uninfected people in isolation with true Ebola patients inadvertently exposed them to the virus and led to nosocomial infections.
Evaluations by CDC epidemiologists on the use of WHO case definitions in Guinea found the broad suspected case relying primarily on fever symptoms without known risk factors limited the ability to rapidly and correctly allocate patients in resource-limited areas.
Because the WHO’s triage criteria were so broad and caught many non-Ebola cases, local populations began to distrust Ebola Treatment Units (ETUs)
There were riots in Kenema in July 2014 because healthy people were being dragged into WHO s Ebola units and forced to stay in the same room as people incubating Ebola with no isolatng making health people sick from Ebola.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-07-25/sierra-leone-police-use-tear-gas-to-curb-ebola-related-riot
THE EFFECTIVE LOW COST BIOCONTAINMENT UNIT, THE CUBE
AN EFFECTIVE WAY OF STOPPING EBOLA WHEN THE RIGHT PROTOCOLS ARE USED
Thanks to the invention of the biosecure CUBE, WHO can provide complete isolation and protection to health care workers for all people who are at high risk of exposure to Ebola patients blood and urine at low cost and so end the Ebola outbreak quickly.
At just 18,000 dollars a unit, WHO can afford to buy one thousand of them for just 18,000, 000.
18 million dollars, a fraction of the 100 billion plus spent on defective covid vaccines.
The Biosecure Emergency Care Unit biosecure CUBE (developed by ALIMA) costs approximately $18,000 per unit.
https://alima.ngo/en/about-us/what-we-do/research-innovation/innovations/cube/
Contact details here
https://alima.ngo/en/take-action/become-a-partner/foundations-companies/
Developed by the Alliance for International Medical Action (ALIMA), this portable, re-usable containment chamber revolutionized Ebola treatment by drastically reducing costs and saving on protective equipment.
A CUBE can be deployed and ready in about 90 minutes.
It offers up to 75% cost savings compared to traditional, rigid Ebola treatment structures, which can cost upwards of $1 million to construct.
By treating patients from outside the unit using built-in glove sleeves, healthcare workers do not need to wear full Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) suits for every interaction, saving approximately $50 per wear.
Because the CUBE provides laboratory-level biosecurity using transparent walls and built-in plastic gloves, doctors and nurses do not need to constantly don and doff cumbersome PPE.
They are at far less risk of being exposed to Ebola.
Patients can remain isolated while receiving closer medical attention and family monitoring, which boosts community trust and recovery rates.
The CUBE weighs less than 300 kg
It can be packed and can be transported to remote or conflict-affected areas using small vehicles.
It features transparent walls that allow family members to see and safely talk with patients throughout the course of treatment.
It allows medical workers to perform reanimation and technical medical actions without the risk of direct fluid or skin contact with highly infectious diseases.
Vital for these units to be effective is that WHO clarifies its case definitions of Ebola to include epidemiological risk factors and contact with people who had Ebola and their blood and urine.
Apart from these new isolation units which can stop the spread of Ebola in its tracks provided WHO uses the correct case definitions and treats patients properly (and does not try to infect and kill them causing riots as in Kenema), there are cures.
EBOLA AS A BIOWEAPON
THE FINDINGS FROM THE 1976 OUTBREAK
Given this evidence, I would like to ask you what you at WHO are doing to investigate the current Ebola outbreak as an intentional outbreak caused by a bioweapon?
The first officially published World Health Organization (WHO) report on Ebola detailed two simultaneous outbreaks in 1976: one in Nzara and Maridi (Sudan) and a second in Yambuku (Zaire, now the Democratic Republic of the Congo).
The seminal report for the Yambuku outbreak was compiled by the International Commission and published in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization in 1978.
https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/f8655edd-586f-48e8-bfc9-88332025c09b/content
According to this 1978 World Health Organization report the index case and almost everyone in the first group who got Ebola haemorrhagic fever in Zaire, 1976 (IRIS) had received injections at the Yambuku Mission Hospital before their illness
At least 85 of the 288 traceable cases at Yambuku Mission Hospital were infected via unsterilized injections, while 49 cases involved both injections and close contact. The report indicates that the vast majority of the remaining patients contracted the virus through person-to-person contact, with contaminated needles serving as a primary transmission driver.
In Zaire, the outbreak began with a 44-year-old male schoolteacher who visited the Yambuku Mission Hospital for presumed malaria and who had ireceived an injection.
He was treated with an injection of chloroquine for presumptive malaria at the Yambuku Mission Hospital before developing severe symptoms.
The WHO investigators found that unsterilized, reused syringes and needles at the hospital were the primary vehicle for spreading the disease.
The vast majority of the subsequent cases contracted the virus either directly from receiving unsterilized injections at the hospital or as close personal contacts of those who did.
Uninjected individuals only became infected if they had direct close contact with a known, symptomatic case (typically caring for or living with a sick family member).The World Health Organization and researchers concluded that the widespread transmission of the virus was primarily driven by hospital procedures—specifically the daily reuse of just five syringes across dozens of patients without proper sterilization.
There was no sign of a natural origin for Ebola.
The 1978 WHO studies noted that investigators could not immediately identify the natural animal reservoir. They tested various local insects and animals (including a limited number of bats) during the outbreak, all of which were negative at the time.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5050466/
The fact Ebola emerged abruptly in 1976 in a hospital given by injections and with no sign of animals,insects or bats having or transmitting it with an exceptionally high mortality rate was fuelled speculation of a bioweapon deployed covertly.
Epidemiological data shows that certain groups—particularly pregnant women attending local clinics—had much higher infection and mortality rates compared to others suggesting a pattern and a method to deliberately and systematically injected into specific target group to harm them.
It is noteworthy that the Ebola virus was discovered by a team of researchers that included Belgian scientists in 1976, following an outbreak in what was then Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo)and before that, a Belgian colony known as the Belgian Congo.
A team of young researchers, notably including Belgian scientist Dr. Peter Piot and Dr. Guido van der Groen, analyzed the blood and isolated the virus, identifying it as a previously unknown, deadly pathogen under an electron microscope.
Belgium conducted medical experiments in the Belgian Congo.
Key aspects of these historical practices include
Infectious Disease Trials: During the 1940s, Belgian colonial doctors subjected healthy Congolese individuals to experimental infections—including intentionally exposing them to the parasite that causes river blindness (Onchocerca volvulus)—to test treatments.
Sleeping Sickness Treatments: Colonial authorities used draconian "medical" programs to combat sleeping sickness. Patients were forcibly incarcerated in camps and treated with atoxyl (an arsenic-based drug). While it successfully treated the disease, the toxic medication caused blindness in 2% to 30% of recipients.
Colonial Medicine and HIV: Because European scientists and chimpanzees were used for viral research in the region during the colonial era, theories circulated that early HIV/AIDS originated from colonial medical experiments.
Medical authorities set up itinerant "sleeping sickness missions" that utilized semi-military medical grids. Mobile teams canvassed villages and forced unwilling or unconsenting local populations to submit to mandatory screenings and serial injections.
NO STUDY OF BATS CAN FIND ANY SIGN THEY ARE THE NATURAL RESERVOIR OF EBOLA
Subsequent studies in the DRC have shown no sign that Ebola is natural. It is not found in bats as has been claimed.
Several studies in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), such as the extensive field research published in MDPI's Pathogens and the PLOS Pathogens report, highlight that scientists consistently detect antibodies to Ebola in bats but fail to detect active viral RNA or live virus within them.
These studies have failed to find any sign hat bats are the direct source of human outbreaks, and no study has ever isolated an active, full EVD-causing Ebola virus from a bat host.
Investigating the Circulation of Ebola Viruses in Bats (2021): Published in the MDPI journal Pathogens, this study tested nearly 1,000 bats over two years during ongoing Ebola outbreaks in the DRC. While antibodies were detected in fruit bats, zero viral RNA was found in the 676 bats swabbe.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8147758/
Assessing Ebola Virus Circulation in Tshuapa Province (2025): Published in PLOS Pathogens, researchers screened over 1,000 animals. Once again, no active Ebola virus RNA was detected in the wildlife.
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/10/5/557
EBOLA CURES
SURVIVORS BLOOD
Studies of Ebola survivors have consistently confirmed that the human immune system develops a robust, lasting defence against the virus.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9759787/
Blood analyses from these cohorts show persistent, long-term levels of virus-specific IgG antibodies alongside highly functional memory T cells capable of neutralizing the virus for years.
The key components of this enduring immune response include:Ebola-Specific IgG Antibodies: Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies targeted against the virus's surface glycoproteins are highly prevalent in survivors.
While there can be a rapid decline in antibody levels immediately following acute recovery, studies show these levels frequently stabilize or surge again. Neutralizing capability has been verified in survivor blood samples years after their initial infection.
Robust Memory T cells: Survivors maintain polyfunctional CD4+ and CD8+ memory T cells. When re-exposed to viral antigens, these cells rapidly release defensive cytokines (such as interferon gamma) and show markers indicating they are primed to destroy infected cells.
Duration of Immunity: Immune evaluations—including cohorts from the massive West African outbreaks—have found that protective immune memories persist for a decade or more.
Natural acquired immunity provides survivors with protection from reinfection for at least a few years, and potentially much longer.
Sub-clinical Exposure: Longitudinal testing has also revealed that some close contacts of Ebola patients develop T-cell responses and antibodies without ever presenting symptoms, demonstrating the breadth of the immune system's adaptability.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7553754/
The engineered monoclonal antibody drugs (like mAb114 and REGN-EB3) was developed directly by isolating and cloning the antibodies from a survivor of the 1995 Kikwit outbreak. These FDA-approved targeted treatments have demonstrated survival rates of up to \(90\%\) when administered early.
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/health/ebola-survivor-blood-shows-promise-in-treatment/527455
EBOLA CURES
LAMIVUDINE
A doctor in rural Liberia who resorted to treating his Ebola patients with a HIV drug claims the mortality rate at his clinic has dropped to just seven per cent.
Dr Gobee Logan told CNN he began treating patients at a clinic in Tubmanburg with the drug lamivudine.
He said he has treated 15 Ebola victims – and 13 have survived, producing a mortality rate of seven per cent, far lower than the 50, 60 or even higher mortality rates of Ebola elsewhwre.
https://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/27/health/ebola-hiv-drug/
Dr. Gorbee Logan proposed that lamivudine (an FDA-approved HIV/hepatitis B medication) could fight Ebola based on the hypothesis that both viruses replicate inside the human body using similar mechanisms.
He theorized that as a nucleoside analog, lamivudine might disrupt the replication process of the Ebola virus, preventing it from multiplying.
Facing overwhelming patient numbers in his rural Liberian clinic, he began testing the drug alongside supportive care and initially reported highly promising survival rates among his patients.
WHO has declared an Ebola outbreak in the DR Congo a public health emergency “of international concern” after 88 suspected virus deaths from 336 likely cases, according to the Africa Centre for Disease Control.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/drc-ebola-outbreak-may-have-been-spreading-undetected/
Before, I go on to discuss all the evidene that Merck s Ebola vaccine is very dangerous, indeed, and should have been given a license, I would like to draw your attention to the evidence that Ebola is a bioweapon.
I would not like to be Mitsotakis and the dozens of Greek prosecutors, police and clergy who seriously thought they were going to escape justice for their massive violations of due process in D 15 218 and malicious prosecution in E 17 378 and E 379....
Even in Greece tolerance of corrupt prosecutors who trade cash for favours is running out.
A prosecutor who had a clear duty to investigate a crime and reopen a probe failed to do to allow Mitsotakis to escape justice for his spy and wire tapping scandal
https://www.ekathimerini.com/politics/1304192/top-prosecutor-expected-to-refuse-to-appear-in-parliament/
The Constitution does not allow illgal acts by Prime Ministers and prosecutors.
A lot of Greek lawmakers and prosecutors and police died or got sick for the covid jabs.
Gates,Bourla, Kushner and Trump underestimate the public mood.
Looks like Adm Christine is doing the right kind of things to stop ebola spreading in the USA for Gates, Trump and WHO to justify lockdowns and mass jab compaigns.
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/05/18/cdc-travel-restrictions-ebola-outbreak-00926421
We are learning more from some of the Iran Lego videos than from any news media.
One on Trump s visit to China suggests Xi repeatedly declined Trump s phone calls.
And why should Xi talk to a moron and a thug who is just the front man for a bunch of kleptocartic CEOs led by Larry Fink, who mostly only have their inflated trillions to thank their adherence to the Epstein bankster mafia and not any real talent and whose sole purpose in seeking business with China is to loot the country just as they looted the USA?
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/escobar-xis-constructive-strategic-stability
Another scene suggests Trump and his Epstein team tried to bribe Xi
Who will be surprised if Trump did try to offer Xi an under the table deal given the fact bribery and corruption is the method of the Epstein gang? That is how they expand their networks also in Venezuela and Greece.
Trump bribed the Venezuelan ministers to hand over Maduro for US oil money. That s why the air defence missiles did not fire, why the US special ops knew where to find Maduro.
It is a method that only works when people are degenerate like the Greek clergy, lawyers and government officials in D 15 218 and the malicious prosecution.
It does not work with people of intelligence and principle.
Xi who now enjoys the furits of making China 20 times more prosperous than it was 30 years ago, does not need any more money for himself. As the leader of CCP he has access to every luxury.
Xi enjoys the fruits of having studied D15218 and E 17 499 and figured out that Trump and Kushner, Soros and Gates have IQs of about 10 and are easy to defeat.
The moron is easy to overcome.
The wise Xi wants a good quality of life and that includes good relatons with the people around him, a feeling of self respect and satisfication of a job well done, of seeing the power base of the Epstein gang destroyed, defanged and unable to attack China except by nukes for which China is very ready.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_2TjDJBmYI&list=RDE_2TjDJBmYI&start_radio=1
Meanwhile, Trump must reap the bitter fuit of a life of crime, facing prison, even death row, loathed and detested by his own voters for his betrayal, lies and corruption and looks very depressed, anxious and fearful as death and hell loom.
As for his legacy, the Trump family may end up the most hated family in modern US history.
TRUMP CLAIMS HE HAS DECIDED TO HOLD OFF AN ATTACK ON IRAN WHEN HE HAS NO OPTIONS AS US DOLLAR FACES COLLAPSE, QATAR, SAUDI ARABIA AND UAE SELL TREASURIES TO FUND THEIR GOVERNMENT DUE TO THE CLOSURE OF HOMRUZ
https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/oil-slides-iran-says-us-agreed-lift-oil-sanctions-during-negotiation-period
GULF STATES FACE A TOTAL WIPE OUT
THEIR ECONOMIES ARE COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON OIL REVENUE
US MILITARY HAS FAILED TO PROTECT THEIR ENERGY AND DESALINATION PLANT INFRASTRUCTURE
TRUMP FACES A MID TERM MELTDOWN
THE REALLY TERRIBLE STUFF FOR THE US, UK AND EUROPEAN ECONOMIES ARE JUST STARTING
GREEKS HAVE TO PAY AMONG THE HIGHEST ENERGY PRICES FOR US LNG BECAUSE MITSOTAKIS GAVE THE US COMPANIES SUCH A GOOD DEAL LIKELY FOR A KICKBACK
BUT WHEN THE GREEK ECONOMY IS DESTROYED AND THE CHINESE BUY UP EVERYTHING, WHAT WILL MITSOTAKIS DO?
HE WILL WALK THE PLANK ALONG WITH THE US OIL AND LNG EXECS WHO ARE PRICE GORCING AND DRIVING ECONOMIES TO RUIN
Has the penny finally dropped with JD Vance and the band of merry morons in the White House that the American voters is going to be asking for accountability for the mafia regime installed by Trump whose sole purpose has been corruption,self enrichment and buyring the Epstein files paired with massive authoritarianism?
With just six months to the midterms, JD Vance is focussing on the Americn voters pain.
But the inflation has just started. The energy shock has just started, the dollar collapse has just started.
Fast forward six months and there could be mobs outside Trump s ball room.
When the Americans find the shops are half empty, everything costs three times as much, they can get no credit, inflation is soaring, interest rates, they have no medicare, social services just a fool surrounded by clowns in the Whie House with vast numbers of corrupt trades, crypto and oherwise, they are going repeat 1776.
But if the Hormuz stays closed, the starving crowds may do more with their weapons than target the ball room, Trumps golden statue and the corrupt and evil Epstein Billionaires offices and residences.
This diaaster is all Trump s making. From day one in office, he did a 180 degree un turn to protect all the Epstein billionaires,the covid jabbers, attack his own voters, loot the tax payers.
While Xi grows the Chinese economy and gets a bigger share of a bigger pie, Trump has shrunk the US economy and still tried to take half the pie for himself and his cronies.
Everyone can see it. The trariffs were obviously also just there to use to get bribes for the Trump family personally for better tariff deals. A Swiss business man got a lower trariff for Switzerland by dropping gold bars on Trump s desk and prosecutors in Switzerland opened an investigation into him for bribery.
All the bribes he took is th e only reason why Trump is clinging to the tariffs because they are a disaster for the US economy.
The voters voted for Trump to carry out a programme. They voted for peace,for no war with Iran. Trump broke that promise. He broke a vital election promise and for no real reason other to create opportunities to make his rich pals richer through insider trading, defence contracts when America no longer has the money for this scale of corruption.
The voters voted for him to improve the economy, not hard to do with good will. Xi Jinping and the CCP have managed 5 to 6 % growth raates a year at low inflation.
Trump has broken that promise to to focus on making his rich moronic pals richer at the votters expense. What is taking place under Trump is just a gigantic transfer of wealth from the producers, the ordinary Americans, to the Epstien billionaires also via the aritificially high oil prices, high through a crisis created byTrump.
Every cent extra the oil companyies make from these artificiallly high oil prices comes form Trumps voters and ordinary Americans and their businesses and creates the momentum for an economic recession.
The end result, now looming, is the total collapse and end of the USA
Then Trump, JD, Bil Gates, Lindsey Graham, Jared, Jamie,Miriam, Barak Ravid and the entire pack of predatory wolves will have no where to go in 2026.
And neither will Tucker Carlson and Buckley Carlson who put this mafia in office to use the links to make money, get jobs, contracts while pretending to be independent pro Americans to fool the voters.
There will have to walk the plank.
The same goes for the US oil and LNG exes who are ruthlessly overcharing.
From media
Mike Nellis, a Democratic strategist and host of the Substack show “Endless Urgency,” said the motivating factor is “that the American voter is pissed about the economy.”
Trump was elected on the promise to wrangle Biden-era inflation and bring down high prices, and “that hasn’t happened,” Nellis told CNBC. “So the American people are pretty pissed.”
“The economy is a marquee campaign issue,” and Trump “recently had the lowest numbers on the economy he’s had in either term,” Quinnipiac University polling analyst Tim Malloy said in a phone interview.
“Put that on top of gas prices, you’re looking at big red flags,” he said.
A New York Times/Siena College poll published Monday found Trump’s overall approval scraping 37%, a new second-term low, as nearly two-thirds of voters said they disapproved of his handling of the economy.
https://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/18/trump-hegseth-economy-2026-election-midterms-iran-china.html
The energy disaster is unfolding and there is no sign that Trump prefers reality to fantasy.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/05/18/uk-gilts-bonds-borrowing-inflation-starmer-burnham-ftse-1000/
Meanwhile, Trump must now be officially diagnosed as mad.
Did he not say the war was won on the first day?
Now we are on day 80 or so and the CIA has leaked that Iran has most of its weapons and can outlast the USA by months, the US has depelted its weapons, Warren Buffett is warning of a dollar collapse, China has just crushed Trump and yet Trump, Lindsey Graham and a circle around Barak Ravid are acting like the USA has been victorious.
On the domestic front, Trump has the lowest ever poll numbers, MTG has warned there will be a revolution if he tries to send troops to Iran, he is set for a wipe out at the midterms and impeachment.
Yet, he does not seem to understand the signifiance of these major developments preferring to focus on minute details. Iran never had a significant navy so why bothering telling us about the navy, for example?
Iran has a rail link withChina to transport oil, so why blockade the Strait?
Madness. Madness
