Archives

• 

  Reconceptualizing Vaccinology

  Vol. 4 No. 1 (2025)

  Vaccinology is at the heart of modern theories of immunology, all of which need to be strengthened and updated at their foundations. Associating COVID-19 "vaccines" loosely with antibodies to some component of any one or all of those "vaccines" (or any other vaccine) may be a necessary criterion but it is an insufficient test of the  efficacy of any vaccine for preventing or diminishing some condition or disease. In general, if any pharmaceutical is to be causally related to some particular observed outcome after its administration to a person or group, it must, at a minimum, meet the Bradford Hill criteria. They require, more or less, showing a significant and substantial magnitude of the effect (its power), the consistency of the measured effect across cases and groups (reliability and reproducibility), the systematic elimination of other possible causes (all of them if possible) zeroing in on the claimed cause for the effect observed, the timing of the observable effect must be after its cause (in keeping with mathematical proofs of the logic of true narratives), the effect must vary reliably and measurably with dosage, a plausible theoretical explanation must exist for whatever cause-effect relation is claimed, empirical evidence must agree with that theoretical explanation and refute other proposed explanations, and there should be control evidence showing that in the absence of the cause, the effect does not occur. The IJVTPR invites theoretical and empirical research addressing the Hill criteria applied to any and all aspects of vaccinology theory. Any other work on subject-matter already dealt with in previous issues is also welcome, but preference will be given to articles showing how and why the whole business of vaccinology needs to be reconceptualized. If we have learned nothing else from the global COVID-19 disaster, surely we have learned this much at the very least: the theory of vaccinology requires a fundamental overhaul.

• 

  Injuries, Causes, and Treatments, Part 2

  Vol. 3 No. 2 (2024)

  The discussion begun in the previous issue of the journal is far from over. Here in Part 2 our call for papers is a continuation of the discussion of injuries and causes, but especially seeking empirical clinical research into successful treatment protocols for any and all aspects of COVID-19 illness as well as the increasingly well-documented sequelae of the experimental injections. 

• 

  Injuries, Causes, and Treatments, Part 1

  Vol. 3 No. 1 (2023)

  In this issue we focus attention on injuries reasonably attributable to vaccines. Such "harms" as the Brits call them, are commonly referred to in medical literature as "adverse events" or euphemistically they are called "side effects". The key to being able to figure out how to treat such injuries is first to identify their causes, and then to determine ways to address those causes in order to repair the damage if possible, or, at least, to keep it from getting worse. We seek evidence in this issue of treatment protocols that work. Merely applying a supposed remedy is not enough. There needs to be evidence that proposed remedies work.

• 

  COVID Aftermath

  Vol. 2 No. 2 (2022)

  This issue invites papers for peer-review addressing the known and expected consequences of the ongoing COVID-19 genetic experiments aiming to get nucleated cells in recipients of the EUA “vaccines” to manufacture the COVID spike protein. Scientific research into the mRNA code of the spike protein itself and studies of protocols for alleviating the so-called “side effects” of the experimental ingredients being injected into billions of people during of the ongoing world-wide experiments are also welcomed.

• 

  Epidemic NCDs

  Vol. 2 No. 1 (2021)

  This issue begins to explore the language, policies, practices, and science examining the range of known interactions between some of the toxicants in vaccines and other factors known or reasonably believed to be involved in the increasing number and scope of epidemic non-communicable chronic diseases/disorders (NCDs).

• 

  COVID-19

  Vol. 1 No. 2 (2021)

  This second issue in the first volume of the IJVTPR addresses COVID-19 from its historical, economic, engineering, governmental, scientific, and treatment perspectives. The article by Dr. Lee on Gardasil9 replaces the one that appeared in the prior issue (with correction of two errata and some added notes), and the article appearing here from the Children's Health Defense Team first appeared with permission in The Defender December 14, 2020.

• 

  Inaugural Issue

  Vol. 1 No. 1 (2020)

  The Inaugural Issue of IJVTPR opens with global vaccine controversies accented by the on-going pandemic of COVID-19. Shaw  shows how the valued peer review process has been hijacked by the "conflicted commercialization of medicine" to remove studies from academic publications that do not conform to vested interests. Oller et al. follow up on the 2013-2015 WHO tetanus campaign used to distribute anti-fertility vaccine to the millions of African women seeking only to protect themselves and their babies from tetanus. David Lewis shows how biolsolids containing highly concentrated toxicants and pathogens from vaccines in human waste, are almost certainly contributing to the rising global prevalence of certain disorders and diseases. Sin Hang Lee examines cetain alignment issues in gene editing for Gardasil9 to produce virus-linked proteins that stimulate immunity against the 9 selected HPVs.

  Our next issue of IJVTPR will focus on gene-editing research by vaccine developers that is cryptically called “dual use” or “gain of function” research manipulating potential pandemic pathogens (PPPs). In such PPP work, vaccine developers create gene-edited viruses from flu virions, SARS, MERS, corona viruses, etc., deliberately making them more infectious. For instance, they may create or import a "spike protein" to by-pass existing defenses in lab animals or humans. The ostensible goal of developing vaccines to protect against PPPs, is offset by actors seeking bioweapons, and by ways PPP research can and does sometimes go wrong. In the next issue, we will show why "dual use" PPP research may well have been the proximate cause of the still on-going global COVID-19 pandemic.