The M+G+R Foundation

The Covid-19 "vaccines" - A big experiment with the world population

Year 2020: They presented it as if the objective was assured

Year 2021: They have failed in the long term immunization objective

Originally published in December 2020
Updated in December 2021

IMPORTANT NOTE Added on December 2nd, 2021

The so-called Covid "vaccine" is no longer an experiment, as the result is already known and is: FAILURE

Since the masters of the experiment have proven, and publicly announced, that the so-called "vaccine" does not give solid immunity after six months of being injected (17), it can be said, backed by that official recognition, that the experiment has failed.

Since an experiment is, by definition, “a methodical process to prove or disprove the suspicion of truth about something unknown”, and that “unknown” – the goal of providing long-term immunity – has been disproved, it is no longer an experiment.

In order to be proven as a success with all the necessary guarantees, it would have been necessary, of course, many years of careful - and truly unbiased - verification. But, to prove that those biological devices do not work as promised, it has been enough just a few time, and the masters of the experiment themselves have announced the poor outcome: the immunity from the injections vanishes within months.

It could still be considered an experiment only if one sees it as an attempt to further investigate some secondary aspects – not the main stated and failed purpose of the product: to give long-term immunity (18). If one persist in believing that the main real purpose (19) is health, then, at least, the product should be downgraded to the status of “just another candidate to medical treatment” down from “oh, so great remedy, that will bring down the epidemic forever”. But, if it is just ”another candidate to treatment”, why to force it on the entire world population?

What we warned through the document below was that the experimental "vaccines" were being sold as a fully tested and fully finished product. We keep this document as a historic testimony of “we told you so”.

NOTE Added on July 2nd, 2021

Four new notes have been added in different places (in red) in the document on July 2, 2021.

Although this document provides, essentially, data from December 2020, we believe that the argument is still valid because it demonstrates that, at a time when vaccines were already being promoted worldwide and at the highest level as "the great solution", the primary goal of the vaccines - stopping disease transmission - was not clinically demonstrated, nor were the necessary details about vaccine-acquired immunity.

As for some recent studies suggesting or supposedly demonstrating that this or that "vaccine" reduces the transmission of the disease, what they confirm is that the vaccines were launched without that point being proved.


Exposing the contradictions behind the vaccination campaign should serve as a reminder that, since the official logic does not fit, it is being confirmed that the purpose of vaccination has to be other than simply to end the epidemic.


As the campaign for universal vaccination continues to develop - which we know has a final purpose different than saving us from the epidemic (1) - we believe it is important to be informed about certain technical issues regarding the vaccines. Well-informed and documented responses (2) to such questions can serve to "vaccinate" us against the epidemic of confusion that is continually being cast by the mainstream media.


Following, we answer some questions that we think may be of interest to our readers. In the footnotes you will find the corresponding references that support the answers provided.

Will the Covid-19 vaccines prevent transmission to others?

Amazingly (in December 2020, when three manufacturers had concluded their clinical trials which they considered sufficient for the public authorization of their vaccines), they do not know. Vaccine studies on Covid-19 have not been designed to assess whether or not a vaccinated person can transmit the disease to others. They are designed to determine whether it leads to the absence of disease in a vaccinated subject for a few months after vaccination. It is not clear whether vaccines can suppress viruses at low enough levels to prevent transmission to others. This is not a conclusion from anti-vaxxers, it is what vaccine experts and manufacturers say. (3)

This is totally the opposite of what we have always been taught about vaccines. From the school, we are told that "unlike most medicines, vaccines don't treat disease, but they can prevent it from spreading and making people sick" (4). But now, for the Covid-19 emergency vaccines, this is just an unknown. These "vaccines" are not tested to do what people expect that a vaccine should do, that is, to prevent the infection to others. Are health authorities informing properly on this to each one of the citizens that they are going to vaccinate?

Note 1 added on July 2, 2021

Now that some studies are suggesting or allegedly showing that this or that "vaccine" reduces the transmission of the disease, the point we wanted to illustrate has not changed: with the authorization of the "vaccines" and their intensive promotion by governments, the world has been deceived into believing that it was "proven" - supposedly as a result of the trials by which they were approved as "emergency vaccines" - that the Covid-19 "vaccines" prevented the transmission of the disease, when in fact the manufacturers themselves confirmed that the vaccines were not tested for that.

How long immunity will last?

In short, they do not know how long immunity acquired from vaccine will last (5).

It is important to distinguish between personal guesses from experts, on the one hand, and facts confirmed by studies, on the other hand. Because the disease has been known for less than one year, with studies lacking the necessary duration, there is still some uncertainty about the duration of immunity acquired by someone who has had the disease naturally and a very large uncertainty for those who have been vaccinated. So far (in December 2020), the assertion from some that immunity from the vaccine lasts longer than natural immunity is a matter of personal opinion rather than a fact certified by clinical trials.

However, according to a recent scientific study (from November 2020), natural immunity to the coronavirus may last at least eight months in most cases (6). Said study has been "approved" by The New York Times, a standard-bearer of the pro-vaccine platform, so nobody can't disqualify it as an "anti-vaxxer" study. The point here is: If natural immunity is so long lasting, what is the purpose of the vaccines? The vaccine experts do not know if vaccines will give protection even for a year!

Note 2 added on July 2, 2021

Reporting on results from medical researchers, about natural infections:  (11)

People who recover from mild cases of COVID-19 develop antibodies that may protect them from the Wuhan coronavirus, say researchers at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis (WUSTL). In their report, which was published in Nature, the team noted that these immune cells can persist for a lifetime as they continue to produce antibodies.

This suggests that
mild cases of COVID-19 may leave patients with lasting antibody protection, reducing the likelihood of reinfection.

“There were reports that antibodies wane quickly after infection with the virus that causes COVID-19, and mainstream media interpreted that to mean that immunity was not long-lived,” explained Ali Ellebedy, an immunologist at WUSTL and the senior author of the study.

“But that’s a misinterpretation of the data. It’s normal for antibody levels to go down after acute infection, but they don’t go down to zero; they plateau. Here,
we found antibody-producing cells in people 11 months after first symptoms. These cells will live and produce antibodies for the rest of people’s lives. That’s strong evidence for long-lasting immunity.”

Is the mass vaccination an experiment? Are they experimenting with the population?

The answer is clearly yes, at least to the extent that:

(a) Side effects have not been proven in the long term. (7)

(b) The duration of vaccine protection (immunity) is uncertain. (5)

(c) They do not know if the vaccines prevent transmission to others. (4)

(d) The universal marking of people through a personal identifier has not yet been tested on a global scale. (8)

Presumably, the mass vaccination would serve to determine those extremes. In these terms, it can be described as an experiment.

Note 3 added on July 2, 2021

The Pfizer "fact sheet for healthcare providers administering the vaccine, US, Revised on June 25, 2021 (12), says [with our highlighting]:

* The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is an unapproved vaccine that may prevent COVID-19.

* The FDA has authorized the emergency use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine to prevent COVID-19 in individuals 12 years of age and older under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA).

* There is no U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19.

* [...] These may not be all the possible side effects of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. Serious and unexpected side effects may occur. Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is still being studied in clinical trials.

In these circumstances, "unapproved" clearly means "in another experimental phase", regardless of their official avoidance of the use of the word "experimental". And the same goes for vaccines from other manufacturers (none have been "approved" by the FDA). Despite this, as of July 2, 2021, Pfizer-BioNTech "vaccine" is being used in 106 countries (13), with at least 150 million doses administered in USA only (14).

An "approved" vaccine in FDA terminology means that it has met certain efficacy and safety requirements for public use. "Emergency use" is a subterfuge to, in fact, not only authorize and approve them (in the common, unofficial sense of the words "authorize" and "approve") but, even more, to promote their use to the maximum despite the fact that they are in an experimental state, evading liability before millions of people under the pretext that, technically, they are not "approved".

According to the FDA (15), "If FDA grants an approval, it means the agency has determined that the benefits of the product outweigh the known risks for the intended use." Under that official definition, do you see the implication that a product has been reviewed but not "approved"?

If I have had the disease, I should have natural immunity. Will I thus be able to avoid being vaccinated?

If you have had the disease, the logical path for health authorities would be to declare you exempt from vaccination and to recommend you not to vaccinate (9). But they are not doing that way.

They lack enough statistical data to compare natural immunity with immunity from vaccine. Therefore, if some speakers like Fauci recommend the vaccination to those who had had the disease, they should inform to those affected that, since the recommendation is based on a guess, they are experimenting with the vaccinated.

Now, at the plane of vaccinations mandated by law or imposed under social coercion: Based on what we are seeing unfolding, it seems that having had the disease will not be an option to be exempt from the vaccination. What we are seeing is:

(a) In the national vaccinations plans in different countries, a very consistent and suspicious absence of provisions on what to do with those who have already had the disease.

(b) In the mouth of public speakers like Fauci, recommendations that "it is better to be vaccinated even if you have had the disease", with the striking circumstance that such recommendations are based on personal guesses and not on statistical data from clinical trials. (10)

This means that they are moving in the direction of imposing vaccines for all even if you can officially prove that you have had the disease.

Note 4 added on July 2, 2021

According to Dr. Marty Makary, a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine:  (16)

Makary lamented the lack of guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for those who were infected but have recovered from the disease. He also decried the demonization of people with natural immunity for refusing to get vaccinated, which Makary said is a reasonable decision, because “natural immunity works.”

Makary disputed claims that natural immunity is inferior to that acquired through vaccination, saying that both are “probably life-long” and that no boosters will be needed. “There is more data on natural immunity than there is on vaccinated immunity, because natural immunity has been around longer,” Makary claimed. “We are not seeing reinfections, and when they do happen, they’re rare. Their symptoms are mild or are asymptomatic”

Makary claimed that the U.S. has already achieved the 85%-benchmark, or herd immunity. However, “the most slow, reactionary, political CDC in American history” has been ignoring the fact that nearly half of the unvaccinated people are naturally immune, according to Makary. “Please, ignore the CDC guidance,” he added. “Live a normal life, unless you are unvaccinated and did not have the infection, in which case you need to be careful.”


At the time of this writing (December 2020), the apparent purpose of the vaccines - to end the epidemic - is not guaranteed by the vaccine experts and manufacturers. The duration of protection from the vaccines is still unknown (5). Also, the ability of the vaccines to prevent transmission of the disease from a vaccinated person to others is still unknown (4). However, vaccines are being promoted to the maximum.

In this sense, it is a big experiment authorized and approved by the governments of the world, no matter how much they want to twist the meanings of the words "approve" and "experiment" out of common language usage and by means of " authorized" official definitions.

On the other hand, natural immunity could be, after all, better than immunity from the vaccine (6). They have not enough data to discount it, so it is still a real possibility. Some experts can speculate about this and say that this is not so but, at the moment of truth, they are offering just guesses and bets, not numbers. If they don't know the numbers for vaccine immunity (how long it lasts and to which degree it prevents transmission), they can't compare them to the numbers for natural immunity.

As we said in the introduction, the aberrant logic in the vaccination campaign should serve, for those which do not want to live in denial, to keep confirming that the purpose of vaccination has to be other than simply to end the epidemic. (8)

(1) Index of Documents Regarding Covid-19 / Coronavirus
(2) Like this, for example: Open letter from Belgian medical doctors denouncing the contradictions of Covid-19
(3) Vaccine experts do not know whether the Covid-19 vaccines will prevent transmission to others:
(a) The New York Times, 13 Oct 2020: "Vaccine trials are designed to look for an absence of disease, rather than of infection, and it’s unclear whether vaccines can suppress virus levels enough to prevent transmission to others."
(b) Pfizer CEO "Not Certain" vaccine will stop people from spreading COVID-19 (4 Dec 2020): Even though I’ve had the protection, am I still able to transmit it to other people?” NBC’s Lester Holt asked, to which Bourla [Pfizer CEO] responded: “I think this is something that needs to be examined. We are not certain about that right now.”
(c) "Two vaccines, from Pfizer and from Moderna, were highly effective at protecting people in late-stage studies from getting sick with COVID-19, the companies announced in November. But the trials don't tell us whether the vaccines help block the virus from infecting people or stop it from jumping from person to person." ( 27 Nov 2020)
(d) "The studies designed to test the candidate vaccines only examined symptomatic infections, not whether vaccinated people could still be contagious." ( 8 Dec 2020)
(4) People are expecting that a vaccine should prevent the infection to others, as we always have been taught:
(a) "What is a vaccine and how does it work? A vaccine is a substance that stimulates a person's immune system to develop antibodies that produce complete or partial immunity to a specific disease. Vaccines prevent 2-3 million deaths per year. Unlike most medicines, vaccines don’t treat disease, but they can prevent it from spreading and making people sick." (Information to the public from a certified lab focused on COVID-19 testing, 25 Sep 2020)
(b) "Vaccines don’t just protect yourself. Most vaccine-preventable diseases are spread from person to person. If one person in a community gets an infectious disease, he can spread it to others who are not immune. But a person who is immune to a disease because she has been vaccinated can’t get that disease and can’t spread it to others. The more people who are vaccinated, the fewer opportunities a disease has to spread." (Information to the public from CDC [USA Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], 29 Jun 2018)
(5) They do not know how long the vaccine protection will last, and this unknown is a provision officially approved by authorities.
(a) It is not clear whether the COVID-19 vaccines will last that long. “I don’t think we have overwhelming confidence,” Fauci said. “We’re less than a year into the disease, so you can’t say it lasts more than a year — I mean, that would be impossible. That doesn’t make any sense because no one that we know of that we’re following has been infected more than a year.” ... “So the bottom line is we don’t know right now how long it lasts”, Fauci said, speaking of the length of immunity a vaccine will provide. “But it likely would last for a full year’s cycle.” ( 27 Nov 2020)
(b) How long will the vaccine last? FDA will consider "authorizing" this vaccine, but will not issue a full approval because there is no data on how long the vaccine will be protective. Officials decided that in the midst of a pandemic, it was good enough to ensure that the vaccine was safe and at least transiently effective, rather than withholding it for two years to await the typical long-term results required for a full approval.” ( 8 Dec 2020) [Note that the avoiding of the official label "full approval" does not prevent that the vaccines are de facto being fully approved to be delivered to the population.]
(c) "Because these vaccines are brand new, we don’t know how long the immunity they provide will last either. John Zurlo, an infectious diseases doctor at Jefferson Health, said it’s not a huge problem if COVID-19 vaccines last only, say, a year." ( 11 Dec 2020)
(6) Natural immunity to the coronavirus may long at least eight months:
(a) "Eight months after infection, most people who have recovered still have enough immune cells to fend off the virus and prevent illness, the new data show. A slow rate of decline in the short term suggests, happily, that these cells may persist in the body for a very, very long time to come." ( 17 Nov 2020)
(b) The referred study: "We analyzed multiple compartments of circulating immune memory to SARS-CoV-2 in 185 COVID-19 cases, including 41 cases at at least 6 months post-infection. Subjects represented a range of asymptomatic, mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19 cases, and were recruited from multiple sites throughout the United States." (Source 16 Nov 2020; PDF)
(7) Side effects have not been proven in the long term... since the disease has been known for less than one year, with studies lacking the necessary duration.
(8) The imposition, on a global scale, of an immunity test or a vaccine as a requirement for release from permanent quarantine status.
(9) Statistically, the possibility of reinfection is very little and, when it happens, it should be with mild symptoms. That is how natural immunity works. If it were confirmed statistical data supporting that it is different for the Covid-19 coronavirus, people like Fauci would have trumpeted thus to the public.
(a) "Reinfection seems to be vanishingly rare." ... "In most people, the immune system works as expected." ... "More than 38 million people worldwide have been infected with the coronavirus, and as of Monday, fewer than five of those cases have been confirmed by scientists to be reinfections." ... "In most cases, a second bout with the virus produced milder symptoms or none at all." ( 13 Oct 2020)
(b) "A resurgence of symptoms doesn’t prove reinfection." ( 13 Oct 2020) || "The number of genetically proven reinfections is orders of magnitude lower than that of suspected reinfections. The Netherlands alone has 50 such cases, Brazil 95, Sweden 150, Mexico 285, and Qatar at least 243." ( 18 Nov 2020) [According to this source the numbers are different, but still very small against the alleged millions of Covid-19 cases worldwide.]
(c) "Natural immunity from the coronavirus is fortunately quite strong. A vast majority of people infected produce at least some antibodies and immune cells that can fight off the infection. And the evidence so far suggests that this protection will persist for years, preventing serious illness, if not reinfection." ( 5 Dec 2020)
(10) "Take the vaccine even if you’ve already had coronavirus, Fauci says" ... "“I believe they should” take the vaccine, Fauci said, addressing concerns among individuals who have already recovered from infection." ( 27 Nov 2020) -- Which translated means: "So far, we have no data to support my recommendation, but let's do an experiment with you."
(11) Study: Recovering from a coronavirus infection gives you lifelong antibody protection (dated 30-Jun-2021) The confirmation that they are talking about natural infections, not vaccination, is their last line at the original source: "Ellebedy and colleagues now are studying whether vaccination also induces long-lived antibody-producing cells."
(12) Pfizer fact sheet for healthcare providers administering the vaccine (visited 2-July-2021)
(13) The New York Times - Tracking Coronavirus Vaccinations Around the World (visited 2-July-2021)
(14) Our World in Data - Coronavirus (Covid-19) Vaccinations (visited 2-July-2021)
(15) What does it mean 'FDA Approved? - An explanation from the site of the FDA (visited 2-July-2021)
(16) ‘Ignore The CDC’: Johns Hopkins Professor Says Half Of Americans Have ‘Natural Immunity’ (dated 25-May-2021)
(17) The so-called "vaccine" does not give solid immunity after six months of being injected
(18) Even if someone deny with technicalities that it was the stated purpose, this purpose is implicit in the concept of "vaccine", as it has always (until now) been understood. If there is no long-term immunity, then herd immunity – which was the most trumpeted goal – is hardly achievable.
(19) ¿Which could be the real purpose?

Related Documents

Index of Documents Regarding Covid-19 / Coronavirus

Open letter from Belgian medical doctors denouncing the contradictions of Covid-19

The intended calendar for an enforced or "encouraged" vaccination

The Second Wave of the Covid-19 Conspiracy  -  Part 1. The two dominant versions of Globalization

The dramatic failure of the pseudo-vaccines to keep people immunized

In Spanish:  Las "vacunas" de Covid-19 - Un gran experimento con la población mundial

Published on December 14th, 2020 • Expanded on July 2nd, 2021

The Seal of St. Michael the Archangel © Copyright 2020 - 2024 by The M+G+R Foundation. All rights reserved. However, you may freely reproduce and distribute this document as long as: (1) Appropriate credit is given as to its source; (2) No changes are made in the text without prior written consent; and (3) No charge is made for it.

The M+G+R Foundation
Online since 1998
Introduction for First Visit Frequently Asked Questions
Home Page English Español Portugues
Search Page Index of Documents
Disclaimer About Us Contact
Back Up Home Page (Mirror Site)