Germany plans China-style color code vaccine passport upgrade with multiple tiers of “rights”

By Tom Parker | Reclaim The Net | August 10, 2022
German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach has announced that the nation’s digital contact tracing and vaccine passport app, Corona-Warn-App (CWA), will start assigning different colors to citizens based on whether they received a COVID-19 vaccine within the last three months.
The CWA will assign one color to citizens who add proof that they received a vaccine within the last three months and a different color to citizens who add proof of vaccination that’s more than three months old. Only those with the color showing that they’re “freshly vaccinated” (have received a vaccine within the last three months) will be exempt from Germany’s mask requirement in public indoor spaces.
Other citizens, including those who received multiple vaccines but had their last vaccine more than three months ago, will have to show proof of recent recovery from COVID or a current negative test to get an exemption from this mask requirement.
Germany’s Berliner Zeitung noted that the colors codes in the vaccine passport app would “give different rights in the future” and said the system would put citizens who are already quadruple vaccinated on the same legal footing as those who are unvaccinated.
Berliner Zeitung also reported that this new German vaccine passport system would be similar to China’s color code vaccine passport system. China’s system assigns a green, yellow, or red code to citizens. Those with a green code are allowed to move freely, those with a yellow code may be asked to stay home for seven days, and those with a red code have to quarantine for two weeks.
Despite moving to this color code vaccine passport system, Lauterbach has admitted that the goalposts could shift at any time and that if too many freshly vaccinated people make use of the mask exception, Germany will change the rules and close the exception.
Lauterbach, who is quadruple vaccinated, announced this new color code vaccine passport system four days after he contracted COVID. The new vaccine passport system is being introduced as part of Germany’s “Infection Protection Act.”
Health agencies defended the rollout of vaccine passports and other COVID surveillance measures by claiming that they would prevent the spread of the coronavirus. However, in recent weeks, government health experts have admitted that COVID vaccines don’t prevent infection.
Despite this admission, Germany and other nations are continuing to push far-reaching, restrictive vaccine passport systems. Some countries are also combining vaccine passports with digital ID or rolling out more invasive COVID surveillance devices such as wristbands and ankle bracelets.
Biden’s Bounty on Your Life: Hospitals’ Incentive Payments for COVID-19
THE SEVEN US GOVERNMENT PAYOFFS TO KILL YOU IN HOSPITALS BY DR. PETERSON PIERRE
By Elizabeth Lee Vliet, M.D. and Ali Shultz, J.D. | November 17, 2021
Upon admission to a once-trusted hospital, American patients with COVID-19 become virtual prisoners, subjected to a rigid treatment protocol with roots in Ezekiel Emanuel’s “Complete Lives System” for rationing medical care in those over age 50. They have a shockingly high mortality rate. How and why is this happening, and what can be done about it?
As exposed in audio recordings, hospital executives in Arizona admitted meeting several times a week to lower standards of care, with coordinated restrictions on visitation rights. Most COVID-19 patients’ families are deliberately kept in the dark about what is really being done to their loved ones.
The combination that enables this tragic and avoidable loss of hundreds of thousands of lives includes (1) The CARES Act, which provides hospitals with bonus incentive payments for all things related to COVID-19 (testing, diagnosing, admitting to hospital, use of remdesivir and ventilators, reporting COVID-19 deaths, and vaccinations) and (2) waivers of customary and long-standing patient rights by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).
In 2020, the Texas Hospital Association submitted requests for waivers to CMS. According to Texas attorney Jerri Ward, “CMS has granted ‘waivers’ of federal law regarding patient rights. Specifically, CMS purports to allow hospitals to violate the rights of patients or their surrogates with regard to medical record access, to have patient visitation, and to be free from seclusion.” She notes that “rights do not come from the hospital or CMS and cannot be waived, as that is the antithesis of a ‘right.’ The purported waivers are meant to isolate and gain total control over the patient and to deny patient and patient’s decision-maker the ability to exercise informed consent.”
Creating a “National Pandemic Emergency” provided justification for such sweeping actions that override individual physician medical decision-making and patients’ rights. The CARES Act provides incentives for hospitals to use treatments dictated solely by the federal government under the auspices of the NIH. These “bounties” must be paid back if not “earned” by making the COVID-19 diagnosis and following the COVID-19 protocol.
The hospital payments include:
- A “free” required PCR test in the Emergency Room or upon admission for every patient, with government-paid fee to hospital.
- Added bonus payment for each positive COVID-19 diagnosis.
- Another bonus for a COVID-19 admission to the hospital.
- A 20 percent “boost” bonus payment from Medicare on the entire hospital bill for use of remdesivir instead of medicines such as Ivermectin.
- Another and larger bonus payment to the hospital if a COVID-19 patient is mechanically ventilated.
- More money to the hospital if cause of death is listed as COVID-19, even if patient did not die directly of COVID-19.
- A COVID-19 diagnosis also provides extra payments to coroners.
CMS implemented “value-based” payment programs that track data such as how many workers at a healthcare facility receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Now we see why many hospitals implemented COVID-19 vaccine mandates. They are paid more.
Outside hospitals, physician MIPS quality metrics link doctors’ income to performance-based pay for treating patients with COVID-19 EUA drugs. Failure to report information to CMS can cost the physician 4% of reimbursement.
Because of obfuscation with medical coding and legal jargon, we cannot be certain of the actual amount each hospital receives per COVID-19 patient. But Attorney Thomas Renz and CMS whistleblowers have calculated a total payment of at least $100,000 per patient.
What does this mean for your health and safety as a patient in the hospital?
There are deaths from the government-directed COVID treatments. For remdesivir, studies show that 71–75 percent of patients suffer an adverse effect, and the drug often had to be stopped after five to ten days because of these effects, such as kidney and liver damage, and death. Remdesivir trials during the 2018 West African Ebola outbreak had to be discontinued because death rate exceeded 50%. Yet, in 2020, Anthony Fauci directed that remdesivir was to be the drug hospitals use to treat COVID-19, even when the COVID clinical trials of remdesivir showed similar adverse effects.
In ventilated patients, the death toll is staggering. A National Library of Medicine January 2021 report of 69 studies involving more than 57,000 patients concluded that fatality rates were 45 percent in COVID-19 patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, increasing to 84 percent in older patients. Renz announced at a Truth for Health Foundation Press Conference that CMS data showed that in Texas hospitals, 84.9% percent of all patients died after more than 96 hours on a ventilator.
Then there are deaths from restrictions on effective treatments for hospitalized patients. Renz and a team of data analysts have estimated that more than 800,000 deaths in America’s hospitals, in COVID-19 and other patients, have been caused by approaches restricting fluids, nutrition, antibiotics, effective antivirals, anti-inflammatories, and therapeutic doses of anti-coagulants.
We now see government-dictated medical care at its worst in our history since the federal government mandated these ineffective and dangerous treatments for COVID-19, and then created financial incentives for hospitals and doctors to use only those “approved” (and paid for) approaches.
Our formerly trusted medical community of hospitals and hospital-employed medical staff have effectively become “bounty hunters” for your life. Patients need to now take unprecedented steps to avoid going into the hospital for COVID-19.
Patients need to take active steps to plan before getting sick to use early home-based treatment of COVID-19 that can help you save your life.
Denmark bans vaccine for youth under 18
By Mike Campbell | The Counter Signal | August 9, 2022
Denmark has announced that people under the age of 18 are no longer allowed to get the COVID vaccine.
Those wanting their first shot were cut off after July 1, and no one in the age group — aside from those who are considered “high risk” and have a doctor’s note — will be allowed to get a second shot after September 1.
“Children and adolescents only very rarely become seriously ill from COVID-19 with the omicron variant. Therefore, from July 1, 2022, it will no longer be possible for children and adolescents under the age of 18 to get the 1st [shot], and from September 1, 2022, it will no longer be possible to get the 2nd [shot],” reads a government statement. [translated from Danish]
While many are likely relieved because it means that vaccine mandates won’t be coming back to school, few have followed Denmark’s lead, and if the science is universal, it’s a wonder why they haven’t.
For example, despite this decision from Denmark, babies are now eligible to receive three rounds of Moderna’s Covid vaccine in Canada, even though COVID poses no greater threat to babies than the flu does, and Health Canada admits they lack long-term safety data.
Moreover, various health authorities have recently highlighted the risks of adverse effects that exist from the COVID vaccines.
Germany’s ministry of health recently tweeted there’s a 1 in 5000 chance people receive a “serious adverse effect” from the vaccines.
This came just days after Ontario’s CMHO refused to say healthy people “should” get boosted with what he referred to as a “therapeutic” due to the risk of myocarditis being 1 in 5000.
While it seems that more and more authorities are warning of the risks of vaccines — which, according to Denmark, are greater than the risk of COVID for the young and healthy — few countries are willing to say outright that the risks outweigh the benefits.
Missouri and Louisiana Attorneys General Sue the Biden Administration Over Free Speech
BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE – AUGUST 8, 2022
Brownstone Institute has repeatedly reported on the unholy alliance between the administrative state and Big Tech with the censorious results of free speech suppression. We’ve published a full articles of inquiry as a template for further investigation into these unprecedented actions.
The cooperation between these people during the pandemic response became intense and pervasive. This model is being deployed in other areas too, with a symbiotic relationship between power centers that ends in suppressing dissent. This is contrary to the First Amendment.
The state attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana have filed suit against the Biden administration. Among the plaintiffs are Brownstone Senior Scholars Martin Kulldorff, Jay Bhattacharya, and Aaron Kheriaty who have experienced this censorship first hand. The case is joined by the New Civil Liberties Alliance and filed in the US District Court for the Western District of Louisiana Monroe Division.
The text of the lawsuit is embedded below. Here is an excerpt.
The aggressive censorship that Defendants have procured constitutes government action for at least five reasons: (1) absent federal intervention, common-law and statutory doctrines, as well as voluntary conduct and natural free-market forces, would have restrained the emergence of censorship and suppression of speech of disfavored speakers, content, and viewpoint on social media; and yet (2) through Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) and other actions, the federal government subsidized, fostered, encouraged, and empowered the creation of a small number of massive social-media companies with disproportionate ability to censor and suppress speech on the basis of speaker, content, and viewpoint; (3) such inducements as Section 230 and other legal benefits (such as the absence of antitrust enforcement) constitute an immensely valuable benefit to social-media platforms and incentive to do the bidding of federal officials; (4) federal officials—including, most notably, certain Defendants herein—have repeatedly and aggressively threatened to remove these legal benefits and impose other adverse consequences on social-media platforms if they do not aggressively censor and suppress disfavored speakers, content, and viewpoints on their platforms; and (5) Defendants herein, colluding and coordinating with each other, have also directly coordinated and colluded with social-media platforms to identify disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content and thus have procured the actual censorship and suppression of the freedom of speech. These factors are both individually and collectively sufficient to establish government action in the censorship and suppression of social-media speech, especially given the inherent power imbalance: not only do the government actors here have the power to penalize noncompliant companies, but they have threatened to exercise that authority.
After firing unvaccinated workers, Hershey’s says it can’t make enough candy for Halloween – blames Putin
By Ethan Huff – Collapse News – 08/07/2022
If there is even still a recognizable America later this fall, you can expect to see a whole lot less candy in your child’s Halloween bag.
According to reports, The Hershey Company is facing “capacity constraints” that will greatly reduce the output of candy in the coming months, resulting in demand exceeding supply. And get this: Hershey’s is blaming Russian President Vladimir Putin for its self-induced problems.
Earlier in the year, you may recall, Hershey’s fired all of its unvaccinated employees, which created a worker shortage. Now, company CEO Michele Buck wants to blame Putin, “supply chain issues,” and everything else other than herself for Hershey’s going down the tubes.
Buck made these and other false accusations against others for her company’s fate during a recent quarterly earnings call with investors. In a nutshell, Hershey’s will not have the capacity to maintain output in anticipation of its busiest holiday because it previously engaged in medical fascism against its un-jabbed employees.
“We had a strategy of prioritizing everyday, on-shelf availability,” Buck stated during the call, explaining that the company uses the same equipment to produce both everyday and specialty holiday items. (Related: Remember when Hershey’s was caught engaging in illegal price fixing?)
“It was a tough decision to balance that with the seasons, but we thought that was really important. And so that was a choice that we needed to make. We had [an] opportunity to deliver more Halloween [candy], but we weren’t able to supply that.”
How is it Russia’s fault that Hershey’s fired all of its unvaccinated employees?
Consumer engagement with Hershey’s, all things considered, is expected to remain high, according to Buck. The problem is that the company no longer has the capacity to deliver, thanks to the unvaccinated employees it “separated from the company.”
From now on, Buck indicated, Hershey’s “will not be able to fully meet consumer demand due to capacity restraints” – a deflective way of admitting that she and others in the executive leadership team at Hershey’s screwed up big time.
Buck expects “high single-digit growth” for Hershey’s during Halloween and Christmas, which she says she feels “really good about.” Perhaps there will even be more capacity during that time, she hinted.
Is Hershey’s planning to hire more workers to meet demand? Or perhaps a better way of wording that question is: Will Hershey’s be able to find anyone who isn’t already sick and dying from Fauci Flu shots who is willing to work for the company going into the holiday season?
Buck seems to think this might happen, all while she shifts the blame onto Putin and the “Russian invasion” for her company’s decline.
“I think generally we continue to see struggles across the supply chain,” Buck stated.
“We’re now starting to see bigger concerns relative to scarcity of ingredients needing to leverage different suppliers at higher cost and price points in order to secure production.”
A whopping 10 percent of annual sales at Hershey’s occur during the Halloween season. If the company is unable to meet demand – which seems likely – then it will face a major revenue hit, which is certainly of interest to shareholders.
“This is the same company that about 15 years ago almost shut down because it couldn’t figure out how to put in a new enterprise system (SAP),” wrote a commenter at The Epoch Times.
“I’m sure that Nestlé and Mars will figure out how to take advantage of this company’s incompetence.”
Another wrote that because Hershey’s fired its unvaccinated employees in a demonstration of medical tyranny, consumers should do the same by firing Hershey’s and not buying any more of its products.
Ghoulishly clever psyop pits our own defense mechanisms against us
By Meryl Nass, MD | August 6, 2022
1. Multiple papers now suggest that COVID mRNA vaccines impair not just immunity to COVID, but immunity and immune surveillance overall.
The implication is that the vaxxed are more susceptible to a variety of infections, and perhaps also to cancer. Immune surveillance is what identifies cancer cells and kills them before they can proliferate.
So, you are vaccinated. The implications of this information are too frightening to be allowed into consciousness. You don’t need the external censors to suppress this knowledge; you do it automatically with your built-in defense mechanisms.
2. Data from multiple countries now shows that all cause mortality (deaths from everything) are higher in the vaccinated.
This is just as scary, if not more so, than an increased risk of serious infections and cancer. You deny and/or suppress this information, because it simply cannot be allowed to be true.
3. You vaccinated your child. This may have impaired their fertility, increased the cancer risk, etc. etc. etc.
Of all pieces of information that absolutely cannot be allowed to enter your consciousness, let alone be openly discussed in polite company, this one tops all. So you will simply refuse to allow mention of it. Friends whose conversations veer off in this direction must be obliterated. Requiring that all family members and friends be vaccinated protects you from facing those for whom this discussion does not trigger the existential and uncontrollable pain it does for the vaccinated.
And Voila — you have a controlled and cowed population who have become their own thought police.
Google Censors Basic 2-Question Survey on COVID
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | August 4, 2022
Google denied permission to use its Google Surveys platform to publish a brief survey about people’s experiences with COVID-19 and myocarditis, according to Steve Kirsch, executive director of Vaccine Safety Research Foundation.
Kirsch on Wednesday reported the rejection, telling readers of his Substack post:
“Clearly, they don’t want anyone to know the truth. The only truth they want you to know is what the government tells you.”
Kirsch said his team put together a two-question survey, and Google rejected both questions. Here’s what Kirsch and his team tried to ask:
1. Has anyone in your household (including yourself):
a. Had COVID
b. Is now unable to work because of a COVID infection
c. Died from COVID
2. Has anyone in your household (including yourself):
a. Had the COVID vaccine
b. Had a diagnosis of myocarditis after getting the COVID vaccine
c. Died from the COVID vaccine
“Apparently, Google won’t let you ask any questions related to … COVID or the vaccines. Wow. Just wow,” Kirsch said.
Kirsch, a tech entrepreneur, philanthropist and founder of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, included a screenshot of Google Surveys’ explanation for why it wouldn’t allow their survey.
According to Google Surveys, the team’s survey questions were problematic because:
“Surveys that request information related to certain medical topics or vividly describing a certain medical topic issue are a non-starter.
“In this scenario we must reserve the right to allow or not allow surveys with these topics at our sole discretion.”
Google Surveys also said the questions must be removed because questions involving “offensive, obscene, gruesome, hocking or distasteful content” are unallowed on their platform.
Questions about COVID and myocarditis deemed ‘offensive’
Google does allow its own survey data about COVID-19 on its Google Health platform.
Google Health — whose stated mission of “helping everyone, everywhere be healthier through products and services that connect and bring meaning to health information” — touts a “COVID-19 Open Data Repository.”
According to Google Health’s website, their data repository is “one of the most comprehensive collections of up-to-date COVID-19-related information to help public health professionals, researchers, policymakers and others in analyzing, understanding, and managing the virus.”
Google says the data come “from authoritative sources, gathered automatically as well as from volunteers and contributors, and is updated daily or more frequently.”
According to the website:
“We aggregate data from hundreds of data sources to ensure global representation.
-
-
- Authoritative sources (governmental, health, universities)
- General sources (news media, publications)
- Crowdsourcing (volunteers, contributors)”
-
Google Health also states: “We welcome your contributions.”
According to Google, its Google Health initiative helps “researchers and scientists in advancing the science of public health” and provides “researchers with datasets and tools they can use to discover novel insights in support of public health.”
Kirsch suggested Google wouldn’t allow his team to run their survey because it questioned the official COVID-19 government narrative.
Kirsch said:
“We already know from other surveys we’ve run that the vaccines are not safe. Disallowing such surveys is a danger to society.”
“I can’t wait for the day when I hear a Google executive admit, ‘It was a mistake to censor this information and make it difficult for the public to learn the truth about how unsafe these vaccines are.’
“Will that day ever come? Probably not.”
Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is an independent journalist and researcher based in Fairfield, Iowa.
© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
Twitter Censors Pfizer-Injured Israeli COVID Vaccine Director
Boffin suggested that the monkeypox outbreak was connected to mRNA vaccines
Kanekoa’s Newsletter | August 3, 2022
Professor Shmuel Shapira, M.D., MPH, served as the Director General of the Israel Institute for Biological Research (IIBR) between 2013 and 2021, where he led Israel’s effort to develop a coronavirus vaccine.
Prof. Shapira is also the founder and head of the Department of Military Medicine of the Hebrew University Faculty of Medicine and IDF Medical Corps. He is a Senior Research Fellow at the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) at Reichman University in Israel.
Shapira previously served as Deputy Director General of the Hadassah Medical Organization and as the Director of the Hebrew University Hadassah School of Public Health. He is a Full Colonel (Res.) in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and served as the IDF Head of Trauma Branch.
He has published more than 110 peer-reviewed scientific articles and is the editor of Essentials of Terror Medicine, Best Practice for Medical Management of Terror Incidents, and Medical Response to Terror Threats.
Last week, Twitter censored Prof. Shapira—who was “physically injured” after his third Pfizer vaccine—and forced him to remove a post which said: “Monkey pox cases were rare for years. During the last years a single case was documented in Israel. It is well established the mRNA vaccines affect the natural immune system. A monkey pox outbreak following massive covid vaccination: *Is not a coincidence.”

Prof. Shapira, who started his Twitter account in January 2022, has grown increasingly critical of the mRNA vaccines since he first denounced the Israeli Genesis Award for being delivered to Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla.
On January 18, 2022, Shapira said (translated from Hebrew by Google): “The Israeli Genesis Award was given to the CEO of Pfizer, so wretched. Instead of giving it to an Israeli scientist, and all this for a mediocre, short-acting vaccine that yielded Pfizer a profit of billions, a wretched and exiled one. Bourla will be appointed the King of Israel now. Let me remind you that vaccinated Israel is the fourth-leading in the number of corona patients in the world. There is a championship!”
On February 6, 2022, Shapira asked: “What grade would you give to a vaccine that people are vaccinated with three times and get sick twice (as of today)? Not to mention significant side effects[.]”
On April 9, 2022, Shapira said: “The CEO of the company, millions of whose vaccines were used in Israel for vaccination, stated in an interview with NBC that Israel serves as the world’s laboratory. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first case in history where experimental guinea pigs paid an exorbitant rate for their participation.”
On May 13, 2022, Shapira said: “I received 3 vaccinations, I was physically injured in a very significant way as many others were injured[.] And in addition, my trust in the nature of the decisions and in the processes of making them has been severely eroded. No one asked and checked. I will fight with all my might so that truthful answers regarding all decisions and not just regarding the vaccine are given[.]”
On June 7, 2022, Shapira said: “We are talking about vaccine five in two and a half years. When the vaccine is planned for the sequence from January 2020 (the great-grandfather of the great-grandfather of the current variants). A vaccine that does not prevent infection does not prevent morbidity. And it is allegedly attributed to significant side effects to say the least. Why? What is the logic? Which authority approved? And don’t say that it prevents a serious illness, no one has proven it.”
On June 8, 2022, Shapira said: “I will continue and ask why give an outdated fifth vaccine that does not prevent disease and apparently causes many significant common side effects.”
On July 5, 2022, Shapira discussed the “son of a 36-year-old Australian friend” who developed “severe ventricular arrhythmias and went into heart failure” only “days after the second Pfizer vaccine”.
“The compensation is automatic by the Australian government,” he said. “Despite the behavior of their government they admit to the connection and the phrase ‘no connection’ does not appear in the lexicon.”
On July 15, 2022, Shapira shared a chart of New South Wales COVID rates showing an increased risk of COVID infection with every new dose of the mRNA vaccine on which he commented: “According to official data from Australia the more you are injected the more likely you are to get sick as the fourth injection jumps the chance dramatically. According to this study it is supposedly an anti-vaccine at least according to what I have been taught.”
On July 18, 2022, Shapira said: “I am not anti-vaccine, I am anti-stupidity, anti-fake science, and anti-incompetent management.”
On July 28, 2022, Shapira said: “T warned me to remove the T connecting MP to C. Each day I understand better where we live and in which year.”
In other words, Twitter warned him to remove the tweet connecting monkeypox to the COVID vaccine.
On July 31, 2022, Shapira shared a link to the OpenVaers COVID Vaccine Adverse Event Reports which showed a total of 1,357,937 reports including 170,151 hospitalizations and 29,790 deaths, above which he simply commented: “Safe & Efficient”
PolitiFact Malarky on Coronavirus Shots
By Adam Dick | Ron Paul Institute | August 4, 2022
PolitiFact claims to be a fact-checking organization that exposes false information. But, in practice, PolitiFact can turn out to instead be the promoter of false information.
For example, consider this paragraph from a PolitiFact article from last week by Madison Czopek:
Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine, marketed as Comirnaty, in August 2021 became the first COVID-19 vaccine to achieve full approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Millions of people have received the two-dose Pfizer vaccine, which is a safe and effective way to prevent COVID-19.
This short, two-sentence paragraph from the self-proclaimed fact-checking organization is filled with falsehoods.
First, the coronavirus shots from Pfizer-BioNtech are not a “vaccine” under the normal meaning of the term. As Dr. Joseph Mercola explained early in 2021, soon after the rollout of the shots, the shots from both Pfizer-BioNtech and Moderna are better understood as “gene therapy.” Further, Mercola addressed in an article on the matter that even at that early stage supposed fact checkers were trying to suppress the different nature of these new shots.
Maybe it is OK to let this first problem slide. Even many people who challenge the shots’ worthiness often just call them “vaccines.” You might expect more from someplace saying it is doing fact checking, but it is within the normal range of how people talk about the coronavirus shots.
The next two problems, though, are inexcusable.
Second, contrary to what the PolitiFact article suggests, there has been no widespread use of Pfizer’s Comirnaty shot. What millions of people have received is a different shot — Pfizer-BioNtech’s emergency use authorization coronavirus shot. Megan Redshaw explains the situation regarding Comirnaty in a July 11 article at the Children’s Health Defense website:
According to Pfizer’s press release, Comirnaty was previously made available to the 12 to 15 age group in the U.S. under EUA [(Emergency Use Authorization)] and 9 million U.S. adolescents in this age group have completed a primary series.
‘The vaccine, sold under the brand name Comirnaty for adults, has been available under an emergency use authorization since May 2021 for the 12-15 age group,” Reuters reported. “It will now be sold under the same brand name for adolescents as well.’
Yet, Pfizer’s information hotline says it has no specific information on when Comirnaty will be available.
The FDA said Friday the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine ‘has been, and will continue to be, authorized for emergency use in this age group since May 2021.’
The CDC’s website states that Comirnaty is ‘not orderable.’
A branch of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services overseeing the Strategic National Stockpile indicated Comirnaty was not available because Pfizer did not have time to change the labels.
According to FDA documents, Comirnaty is not available in the U.S. and nobody has received a fully approved and licensed COVID-19 vaccine.
Third, the paragraph from the Politifact article repeats the favorite mantra of politician and big money media pushing the coronavirus shots: The shots are “safe and effective.” Regarding the shots supposed safety, I dealt with that matter in a previous article challenging PolitiFact’s pharmaceutical propaganda. You can read here my February 13 article “PolitiFact’s Crummy Fact-checking on Coronavirus Shots Safety.” As far as effectiveness, is PolitiFact joking? Even Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle P. Walensky finally admitted back in August of 2021 what had become common knowledge among observers of the coronavirus shots’ effects: The shots do not prevent transmission of coronavirus. Wake up, PolitiFact. It is a year later and you are still touting the shots as an “effective way to prevent COVID-19.” Oh boy. And across America and the world we have seen the continued failure of the shots to prevent coronavirus-related sickness and death for shot recipients as well. For a sample of the evidence indicating the shots’ are ineffective and even counterproductive in preventing sickness and death read here Daniel Horowitz’s analysis of data from Great Britain in a March 22 The Blaze article.
The coronavirus shots have proven to be a big failure in regard to their hyped health promotion purposes. Nonetheless — facts, schmacts — PolitiFact continues on in its role as the shots’ dogged promoter.


