Connect with us


Canadians suffering severe complications after radial keratotomy eye surgeries





Before laser eye surgery, radial keratotomy was the first and one of the most common surgical procedures in North America to correct myopia, or nearsightedness. Today, however, this once-celebrated treatment has largely been abandoned, in part because of questions over its safety.

At the height of its popularity in the 1980s and 1990s, an estimated eight million people in Canada and United States underwent the procedure, in which a doctor uses a diamond knife to make incisions directly into the cornea of the eye. While some have — and continue — to do well, others say that radial keratotomy, or RK for short, has left them with painful, life-changing complications.

Ingrid Babjak is one of them.


Babjak, who lives in Oakville, Ont., underwent RK 27 years ago. At first, she says, her eyesight “immediately” improved.

“I remember when he finished making the eight cuts, I was able to see absolutely every dot on that ceiling,” Babjak told CTV News. “I remember being so happy.”

But now, nearly three decades later, Babjak says she experiences constant eye pain and blurred vision that has left her cloistered at home.

“I’ve got vitreous degeneration on both sides; that’s the separation of the white part in your eye,” she said.

“I don’t want to go out because the dryness is so bad, especially in the winter,” she added. “So it’s better just to be by myself — that’s how I feel.”

The long-term complications she’s experienced from RK have also left Babjak fearing for her future.

“I don’t want to be blind and I’m scared of that,” she said. “I don’t want to be a burden to my daughter.”


Bambi Cox of Newmarket, Ont. also claims to have experienced severe complications from RK decades after going under the knife in 1995.

“It just seemed like the next step a lot of people were doing so that you didn’t have to be bothered with the pain of glasses,” she told CTV News.

At first, she says, the results were “great.”

“The next day I was at the Blue Jays game and I was able to see,” she said.

But then, years later, things started to take a turn for the worse.

“It was 20 years after my RK surgery that I noticed that my eyes were blurry and I was having extreme dryness,” Cox recalled. “My vision seemed to be fluctuating… it was very disconcerting.”

Cox says she now suffers from eye pain that she describes as “sharp, like a knife” and halo vision. These days, she survives on frequent eye drops for “debilitating” dryness and needs to wear dark sunglasses whenever she is outside because of extreme light sensitivity. Previously working as an administrative assistant, Cox is also now out of a job because she could no longer stand the agony of staring at screens.

“I’ve lost my livelihood… I could lose my house,” she said. “It’s the biggest mistake of my life and it certainly changed my life and if I allow it to, it gets really… depressing.”


Dr. Edward Boshnick is a Miami-based optometrist who specializes in treating those who have experienced vision loss or discomfort from past eye surgeries. It’s not uncommon, he says, for RK patients to develop complications long after undergoing the procedure.

“After the surgery is done, that cornea can change shape, so it doesn’t have the same rigidity,” he told CTV News. “A lot of these patients, maybe most of them, became very farsighted and very astigmatic because the irregularity of the cornea increased.”

Other RK complications, Boshnick explained, can include “dry eye, ocular pain… glare, halos, multiple vision.”

“Many of these patients with each eye, they may see two or three objects,” he added. “It’s one thing saying, ‘My eyes feel dry,’ but how about every time you blink it’s like sandpaper scraping over your corneas? Or sometimes you can’t even open up your eyes… And light sensitivity is another big issue because the cornea is so irritated they can’t go outdoors without sunglasses or multiple pairs of sunglasses, one over the other.”

Toronto-based optometrist Dr. Shalu Pal says she has seen multiple cases of RK patients left with severely-damaged corneas.

“The problem with it, it was all done freehand,” Pal said of RK. “It was, ‘You have this much astigmatism, you have this much myopia, let’s try two cuts, let’s try four cuts,’ and it wasn’t an exact science.”

Pal is also one of a handful of Canadian optometrists trying to help suffering RK patients with something called scleral lenses, which are large fluid-filled contact lenses that can shield damaged corneas. They are also custom-made from impressions of the eye surface.

“It’s a very comfortable lens and all of the irregular shape that was created from these incisions can now be corrected with this lens design,” she said. “I have seen dramatic improvements in vision and in comfort and in quality of life, which is the huge thing.”


Scleral lenses, however, did not help Babjak or Cox. And while it remains unknown how many others are suffering nightmarish complications like theirs, both women want to raise alarms about the long-term safety of the now largely-abandoned procedure.

“The benefits never outweighed the risk and they should have told us that,” Cox said. “I feel like a guinea pig. I feel like I was led down the garden path of roses.”

“I was a victim of an experiment,” Babjak added. “I feel betrayed because it shouldn’t have been allowed to happen.”

Some patients have set up a website dedicated to educating and helping RK survivors. For more information, you can click here.


Source link

قالب وردپرس


BRAINWASHING THE YOUNG: Cry Babies dolls allow children to “vaccinate” their dolls, causing measles-looking red dots on their face to vanish





Awareness seems to be growing about the dangers and ineffectiveness of vaccines, so much so that a children’s doll product known as “Cry Babies” was designed to brainwash innocent kids into believing that vaccination is the way to “cure” disease.

A commercial spot for Cry Babies shows two little girls playing with a doll named “Kristal” that develops strange red spots on her face. When the girls notice the spots, their response is to immediately inject the doll with a vaccine, which makes the red spots disappear on contact.

“Look, she has spots!” the one girl says to the other.

“Give her the injection!” the other responds.

On the Cry Babies website, the description for the Kristal doll explains that she “is sick” and needs “the right medicine” in order “to help her feel better.”

“If she gets a cough, give her the medicine to help her stop coughing,” the description adds. “If she gets a fever, you will need to dab her forehead with the wet cloth to help cool her down.”

“When red spot will appear on her face, give her the injection to make them disappear!” it is further explained. “Like all Cry Babies, Kristal also cries real tears when you remove her dummy and makes realistic baby sounds. 6 accessories included; a dummy, a stethoscope, an injection, a cloth, cough syrup and a thermometer.”

Normalizing vaccines for every ailment is the ultimate goal

The Kristal doll, along with the rest of the Cry Babies lineup, is reportedly available in the United States at Target, Walmart and Amazon. The company that manufactures them, IMC Toys, is based out of the United Kingdom.

Brainwashing young kids into believing that vaccines are “science-based medicine” is only part of the agenda, by the way. The ultimate goal is to convince the next generation that vaccines are the “cure” for pretty much every ailment and addiction, whether it be plandemic viruses like Covid-19 or alcohol addiction.

Vaccines are the be all, end all “solution” to whatever ails you, in other words. This is the true agenda behind children’s products like Cry Babies, which parents need to be aware of and avoid while doing their Christmas shopping this year.

On Twitter, vaccine truth advocates jested at Kristal, pointing out that the doll probably does not come with real-life side effects such as diarrhea, asthma and seizures.

“The doll gets some autoimmune / allergic rash and they inject some high-dose corticosteroid / immunosuppressants and the rash goes away (for some time at least). Just like real doctors!” wrote one, making a great point about how the Kristal doll is ill-equipped to teach children the intricacies about how injections really work.

Another noted that such propaganda has been a mainstay of American programming for many decades, though in the past it was primarily geared towards an adult audience.

“Since the late 40s / early 50s, TV has spread the disease of excessive consumerism throughout societies worldwide,” this person wrote. “Add to that its use as a highly effective propaganda tool and it didn’t take long for the corporate world to realize the propaganda with products such as this.”

Perhaps the best advice came from one user who encouraged parents to program their children with the truth rather than allow them to be programmed with pro-vaccine propaganda.

“Show your kids the vaccine-injured babies and their parents’ stories,” this individual added, stressing that the next generation of youth need to recognize that vaccines are unsafe and harmful, and are not a risk worth taking under nearly any circumstance.

Continue Reading


Johns Hopkins published, then deleted, study showing COVID-19 had no measurable effect on deaths in the United States





The Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) is not even close to being the threat that Anthony Fauci and others in government continue to claim it is. And Johns Hopkins University agrees – or at least it did agree before the school deleted a study it published showing that the novel virus has had “relatively no effect on deaths in the United States.”

Thanks to the Wayback Machine, we were able to pull up the now-deleted original paper, which delineates that so-called “infection” with COVID-19 is really no big deal.

When it comes to the death rate this year, there has been almost no change compared to previous years, despite the presence of COVID-19. Things are essentially the same as they have always been, the exception being all the panic, mask-wearing, and eager anticipation among some of a soon-coming vaccine.

“The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals,” stated Genevieve Briand, assistant program director of the Applied Economics master’s degree program at Hopkins.

After compiling and analyzing the death rate among all age groups both before and after the pandemic was declared in the United States on March 13, Briand found that the death rate among older people, who are said to be most susceptible, remained the same.

So while it is said that COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly, significantly increasing their risk of death supposedly, data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) disagrees.

More of the latest news about COVID-19 can be found at

No, COVID-19 has not increased the death rate among Americans

Briand further found that COVID-19 has not increased the death rate among younger people, either. In every age category, the death rate has remained roughly the same both before and during the pandemic, suggesting that all the panic and hysteria is completely unfounded.

In every year prior to 2020, the death rate from all causes has remained the same. Even this year when accounting for so-called COVID-19 deaths, the overall death total has not changed.

“This is true every year,” Briand says about the seasonal increases in death that usually occur in the fall and winter months, 2020 being no exception. “Every year in the U.S. when we observe the seasonal ups and downs, we have an increase of deaths due to all causes.”

What has changed this year is that all other causes of death, including heart disease, respiratory illness, influenza, and pneumonia, have mysteriously declined, while COVID-19 deaths have increased.

This proves that deaths from all causes are now being categorized exclusively as deaths from COVID-19. Meanwhile, nobody is dying anymore from heart disease, respiratory illness, influenza or pneumonia.

A data chart included in Briand’s study illustrates this clearly, showing that the total decrease in deaths by other causes almost exactly equals the increase in deaths by COVID-19.

“This suggests, according to Briand, that the COVID-19 death toll is misleading,” the paper explains. “Briand believes that deaths due to heart diseases, respiratory diseases, influenza and pneumonia may instead be recategorized as being due to COVID-19.”

In other words, if a person tests positive for COVID-19 and dies at some point in the future from any cause, that death is tabulated as caused by COVID-19 for political and financial purposes.

“All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths,” Briand reiterated. “Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers. We found no evidence to the contrary.”

Continue Reading


Expert points out “shaky science” behind AstraZeneca’s coronavirus vaccine trial results





An expert has warned that results from AstraZeneca’s coronavirus vaccine trials are based on “shaky science.” Scientist-turned-writer Hilda Bastian pointed out that data on the British drugmaker’s COVID-19 vaccine, developed with the University of Oxford, has been “patched together” and excludes groups with the highest COVID-19 risk. Bastian wrote in a piece for Wired that AstraZeneca’s data came from two separate studies – one in May and another that commenced at the end of June – that were substantially different from each other. She remarked: “The fact that they may have had to combine data from [these] two trials in order to get a strong result raises the first red flag.”

Bastian mentioned that a dosing error contributed to a higher success rate: Experts accidentally gave some volunteers one and a half doses of the vaccine instead of two full doses. She added the trials were never designed to test this method of dosing, and scientists only caught the “mistake” when some participants did not exhibit the usual high rate of adverse effects. Bastian noted in her Wired article that “of the only two regimens … the mistaken first half-dose, followed by a full dose at least a month later came in at 90 percent [efficacy], and the … two standard doses at least a month apart [regimen] achieved only 62 percent efficacy.”

The expert also mentioned that the trials by AstraZeneca and Oxford appear to include only a small amount of people aged 55 and above – despite this particular age group being vulnerable to COVID-19. The June vaccine trial held in Brazil did not originally permit people over 55; on the other hand, a separate trial by Pfizer and BioNTech had 41 percent of volunteers over 55 who participated.

A number of experts have also voiced out concerns against AstraZeneca’s presented data

Former Pfizer Global Research and Development President John LaMattina raised the prospect that AstraZeneca’s vaccine may not receive approval from U.S. authorities. He tweeted Nov. 24 that it was “hard to believe” the Food and Drug Administration will issue an emergency use authorization for a vaccine “whose optimal dose has only been given to 2,300 people,” adding that “more data” was needed.

SVB Leerink investment analyst Geoffrey Porges told the Financial Times that the British pharmaceutical firm’s coronavirus vaccine candidate was likely to be rejected because it had “tried to embellish [the trial’s] results” by highlighting its effectiveness in a “relatively small subset of” participants in the study.

Continue Reading