© Bao Wiu/The Epoch TimesDr. Harvey Risch, professor emeritus of epidemiology
Yale School of Public Health, New York
Yale School of Public Health, New York
Dr. Risch is professor emeritus of epidemiology in the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at the Yale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine. His research has focused extensively on the causes of cancer as well as prevention and early diagnosis.
In an interview for EpochTV's American Thought Leaders, Dr. Risch said patients must now wait months, not weeks, to get an appointment at an oncology clinic in New York.
There is difficulty in observing whether a vaccine can cause cancer, because cancer usually takes time to develop, Dr. Risch said. It can take anywhere from two years to 30 years, depending on the different types of cancer, from leukemia to colon cancer.
"What clinicians have been seeing is very strange things: For example, 25-year-olds with colon cancer, who don't have family histories of the disease — that's basically impossible along the known paradigm for how colon cancer works — and other long-latency cancers that they're seeing in very young people. This is not how cancer normally develops. There has to be some initiating stimulus to why this happens."Fighting Cancer
Dr. Risch said that in his opinion, cancer is something a healthy human body can fight and disable, as the non-normal cancerous cells are gobbled up when detected in a body with a functional immune system. If the immune system is compromised, however, it cannot cope with the task of neutralizing cancerous cells, and cancerous cells are left to multiply and grow, leading to symptoms of cancer.
"That's the mechanism I think is most likely here. We know that the COVID vaccines have done various degrees of damage to the immune system in a fraction of people who have taken them."That damage could translate to getting COVID more often, getting other infectious diseases, or getting cancer.
Another example Dr. Risch gave was breast cancer, which normally, if there is a remanifestation after surgical removal, the remanifestation occurs after two decades. However, vaccinated women are now seen to remanifest breast cancers in much shorter periods of time.
"Those are the initial signals that we've been seeing, and because these cancers have been occurring to people who were too young to get them, basically, compared to the normal way it works, they've been designated as turbo cancers."Be attuned to your body," Dr. Risch recommended, for noticing any new signals the body might give.
"Some of these cancers are so aggressive that between the time that they're first seen and when they come back for treatment after a few weeks, they've grown dramatically compared to what oncologists would have expected for the way cancer normally progresses."
Adverse Events After Vaccination
Dr. Risch also talked about the aspect of official medical agencies not recognizing someone as being vaccinated inside the first two weeks of vaccination. This happens, he said, because the medical agencies say that the effects of the vaccine need two weeks to start manifesting. Adverse effects occurring a few days after vaccinations were officially counted as health conditions manifesting in unvaccinated people, he said.
However, serious adverse events after receiving the vaccine have occurred within the first four days, Dr. Risch said. Three-quarters of adverse effects are being recorded as happening to unvaccinated people.
The decision makers who were in charge during the pandemic "threw out the principles of public health six days into the pandemic and did the opposite of everything that we knew should be done for respiratory viruses."
One example was the denial of effective early treatment and unnecessary vaccinations, which show a "colossal failure of public health through this period," he said.
Dr. Risch said that a lot of people are now less likely to be "propagandized" regarding COVID, and that news reports about a new variant that is going to take over the world in the next month are "propaganda to sell the next batch of vaccines coming out in a few weeks. People are fed up with this and it's going to be a lot more pushback," he said.
Risks to Society
Dr. Risch said that while the individual risk of an adverse reaction to the vaccine is relatively low, once that risk manifests itself at a greater scale, when millions of people have received the vaccine, the result is that hundreds of thousands of people are left with injuries and serious adverse events that are often worse than the virus itself.
Dr. Risch's opinion is that nobody should get vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine, as the new variants are mild and not life threatening. He has heard of a few hospitalizations that lasted for some days, but as most people had COVID in the past, they have some immunity to these new variants as well.
"There is no reason for people to be vaccinated now, to any degree," he said.
He said COVID has become an illness similar to the flu in its degree of severity, and that propaganda to scare people is being pushed by the government on behalf of pharmaceutical companies to sell more vaccines.
"We live in social contact with each other and therefore spread low-level infections. This is part of human life that we take for granted and we try to treat it the best we can.That's how we should be managing this."
Reader Comments
Natural selection is a process of evolution... let's not fall into the arrogance of thinking that by knowing facts and information behind the vaccines, that somehow makes us more evolved candidates... if we become cruel and consider ourselves superior over that fact, then we are no different from the same psychopathic elites.
Skin cancer or melanoma rocketed when sunscreen was released, I want to say 1976 but could be wrong.
Inuits never have dementia because their diet is 99% some form of meat/blubber and they have little to no vegetables.
When I see the recommendation from any big company or government I immediately take note.
Skin cancer or melanoma rocketed when sunscreen was released, I want to say 1976 but could be wrong.
Inuits never have dementia because their diet is 99% some form of meat/blubber and they have little to no vegetables.
When I see the recommendation from any big company or government I immediately take note.“
I have also noticed the same trends ….which I nicknamed ‘fears of the years’ eg. Climate change will give us all skin cancer, LATHER UP….
The main sunscreen scenario the authors evaluated was a 5% increase in sunscreen users per year over a 10-year period, and they found an approximately 10% reduction in melanomas in the U.S.A.
[Link]
A new study reveals that two indigenous groups in the Bolivian Amazon have among the lowest rates of dementia in the world.
And they eat vegetables, fruits and monkey brains.
They used this to model what would happen if people used more sunscreen. In professional circles we call this garbage in garbage out .
This happened a lot with the lockdown apologists. They just up and assumed how many would die, with a totally wrong fatality rate and calculated against a totally fabricated protection factor of lockdows, which they produced from thin air. Of course the result of their models showed 'lockdowns saved millions'.
Just look at the overall picture, something like this [Link] and you see that the rate of melanoma tripled from 1975 until now. How is that possible while sunscreen use keeps going up and sunscreens with higher and higher protective factors are being sold?
As an aside, the main focus is always on melanoma even though nonmelanoma are far more widespread - probably because of the higher associated mortality and because nonmelanoma can often just be cut out, minimally invasive. Nonmelanoma rates also went up over the years. So maybe sunscreen causes nonmelanoma skin cancer? We're not gonna find out while researchers just assume that sunscreen protects from it.
Basically, shut up @MCsnacks, you blue-pilled troll.
Basically I can make you look stupid on my worst day.
At the same time propaganda towards the danger of being in the sun and for using sunscreen increased. Being tan becoming more attractive also increased the use of solariums, which we know cause skin cancer.
What does peoples perception on 'global warming' have to do with people getting more sunlight?
Because it would be totally unethical to give people a cream that was not protecting them and ask them to go outside in the middle of the summer jackass.
And in a follow-up study published in 2011, they found that daily sunscreen use in these same participants had almost halved the rate of melanoma.
You know what's worse than that? Making it impossible to find out if medication is helpful or hurtful through assuming it is helpful and saying it's unethical to try and find out the opposite.
THIS IS ANTI-SCIENCE AND ANTI-ETHICS.
Rate of new cases - observed
1975 - 8.78
2019 - 27.61
9 times three is 27
This trial was knowingly exposing people to a cancer causing agent that had a 95% kill rate. That is unethical.
Mandated price controls are impractical (what is a fair price?) and potentially fatal to the rapidly growing biotechnology industry.Thats why it's not unethicical to keep life saving medication from people.
THIS IS HOW SCIENCE AND ETHICS WORK.
THAT'S WHY IT IS UNETHICAL.
Ethics as they are called in medicine today are completely unethical. What is this random comment supposed to mean in this context? Apart from being off-topic, you seem to agree with me, that we should do trials where we withhold (potentially) life-saving medication from people?
I'm sticking with the "Baby" formulations that are straight zinc oxide. It's a freakin' mess but shouldn't poison anyone..... They work too.
All trials have a lack of well-defined exposures which is why they are guided by the what's best for society mantra. Doing what's on the best interest for society means that ethics can't be a priority. And as long as biologically plausibility is used then that's the best you can get.
When it comes to the survival of the human race then ethics are not a requirement. Facts don't care about your feelings.
Old-school is, as usual, best.
Gotta hand it to them, they know how gullible the public is and are expert at taking advantage of that.
So if you drop dead 44 days after your initial stab, you're a filthy unvaxxed animal!
However, if you understand that "covid" in 2020 was a psyop using the flu as a cover; no excess deaths in 2020, the flu disappeared, the symptoms of "covid" and "flu" are nearly identical Then the "spike protein" could be any toxic protein that the bioweapons labs have learned to engineer through mRNA.
The other element Ardis has brought to awareness is that nicotine protects people from the "spike protein".
Here is a long interview with Ardis. [Link]
Squares, bores, aliens...
SOTT Focus:Aliens Don't Like to Eat People That Smoke!
From recent news reports, it has come to our attention that smoking is a vice that "leaders" around the world are determined to stamp out. But why? The official story is that our ever benevolent...Probably because of an unconscious physiological aversion to testosterone.
I'm telling you man, a lot of this stuff is playing out on a bio-chemical warfare basis and most of the players are almost completely unaware of it....[Link]
Although some are at some level: Avatar director James Cameron says testosterone is a 'toxin' men must terminate from their system...[Link]
.
"...The latest testimony comes courtesy of Dr. Makis, who explained that young people in their 20s, 30s, and 40s are developing aggressive turbo cancers:
The youngest case that I've reported was a twelve-year-old boy who had one Moderna vaccine. Four months later, he developed stage 4 brain cancer. And then six months later, he died.
Dr. Makis went on to add not just how unprecedented this parabolic rise in cancers is, but, also, just how rapidly the cellular mutations are occurring as a direct function of the slow kill bioweapon injections:
I've diagnosed probably 20,000 cancer patients in my career. I've never seen cancers behaving like this..."
.
"...Despite the non-response of our government and public health authorities, a glimmer of hope just came in from across the pond:
British MP Andrew Bridgen is literally the only British politician publicly awake and calling out numerous Covid frauds around the vaccines and suppression of early treatments (he has told me in conversation that 1-2 dozen more MP’s are either privately concerned and asking questions or they say to him that they are “with him” (but won’t do so publicly). The rest of the MP’s apparently still fully believe and promote the prevailing narrative/propaganda of “safe and effective.”
I just received word from a mutual colleague that Andrew has successfully scheduled a hearing in the British Parliament in October which will focus on the persistent and increased excess mortality being reported in England since the vaccination campaign rollout (their vaccine induced excess mortality is even more striking)... "