Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Ex-Pfizer Employee Warns Vaccine Increases COVID By Over 300%

By Lance D Johnson | Humans Are Free | October 1, 2021 

The fraudulence of covid-19 vaccines is on full display, and the evidence is sitting right out in the open. The full FDA approval for Pfizer’s COMIRNATY vaccine contained clinical proof that the inoculation increases COVID infection by over 300 percent!

Varitage.com

A former Pfizer employee named Karen Kingston is blowing the whistle on her former employer. Kingston is currently a pharmaceutical marketing expert and biotech analyst. When she scrutinized the full FDA approval for COMIRNATY, she found blatant fraud in Pfizer’s clinical studies.

FDA Approves Pfizer’s Covid-19 Vaccine, Even Though It Increases Infection By 300 Percent

Kingston brought forth a Briefing Document from the FDA’s advisory committee meeting that took place on September 17, 2021. The title of the document is, “Application for licensure of a booster dose for COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA).” The document includes clinical studies conducted by Pfizer. These studies track the durability of immunity offered by the COMIRNATY vaccine and compare it to immunity observed in unvaccinated people.

“If you get the Pfizer vax, you’re more likely to get COVID” said Kingston, “So, when they weren’t injected, their infection rate was 1.3% and when they got injected, it was 4.34%. It went up by over 300%.” How could the FDA have glossed over this evidence and approved blatant fraud?

Since the vaccine was officially approved, the federal government started applying pressure on businesses across the US, threatening them with extortion and fines if they do not impose vaccine mandates on their employees.

The covid-19 vaccines have been injected almost 225 million times into the arms of Americans, causing severe injury and death along the way. Real world observations also support clinical data showing that the vaccines increase one’s susceptibility to covid-19.

In fact, the vaccines increase viral load in the nostrils of the vaccinated. An August 26 article by Dr. Peter McCullough shows that the covid vaccines allow the vaccinated to carry 251 times the viral load of covid-19 in their nostrils, turning them into the asymptomatic super spreaders they once feared.

Pfizer Studies Show That Being Unvaccinated Offers Greater Protection

Medical freedom rights attorney, Thomas Renz, went public with the Pfizer fraud. The Pfizer study involved over 36,000 people. Those who were injected earlier in the study were more likely to come down with covid infections later on, showing a clear trend of waning immunity. Those put in “high priority” groups, who were vaccinated earlier on, have a 36 percent greater chance of infection, compared to the group that vaccinated later on.

The group that vaccinated later on went unvaccinated for 5.1 months longer than the group that got vaccinated early on. This placebo group did not have high rates of infection while they were unvaccinated, even though they went longer without any “protection.”

Because of this, Kingston stated that the vaccinated group “have an even higher chance of being infected with COVID-19 than the 36 percent difference indicated by this portion of the study.”

The study even admitted in its conclusion: “An additional analysis appears to indicate that incidence of COVID-19 generally increased in each group of study participants with increasing time post-Dose 2.” Kingston clarified that infection rates “increase over time” when people get two doses of Pfizer mRNA.

Most shocking was the data on the placebo group. In the first four months, the placebo group had “no vaccine protection” and recorded an infection rate of 12.6 cases per 1,000 person-years. The infection rate for the unvaccinated was a meager 1.3 percent.

After their placebo period, the group got “fully vaccinated.” In just a few months, this group became more infectious and showed 43.4 cases per 1,000 person-years. Their infection rate went UP by over 300 percent to a 4.34% infection rate. Mrs. Kingston called this “super alarming.”

“They had less infection when they had no protection. So, that’s a problem,” she said.

References:

LifesiteNews.comFDA.govPapers.SSRN.com

October 12, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | 6 Comments

Pfizer Scientist: ‘Your Antibodies are Probably Better than the Vaccination’

Project Veritas | October 4, 2021
  • Nick Karl, Pfizer Scientist: “When somebody is naturally immune — like they got COVID — they probably have more antibodies against the virus…When you actually get the virus, you’re going to start producing antibodies against multiple pieces of the virus… So, your antibodies are probably better at that point than the [COVID] vaccination.”
  • Chris Croce, Pfizer Senior Associate Scientist: “You’re protected for longer” if you have natural COVID antibodies compared to the COVID vaccine.
  • Croce: “I work for an evil corporation… Our organization is run on COVID money.”
  • Rahul Khandke, Pfizer Scientist: “If you have [COVID] antibodies built up, you should be able to prove that you have those built up.”

[NEW YORK – Project Veritas released the fourth video in its COVID vaccine investigative series today which exposed three Pfizer officials saying that antibodies lead to equal, if not better, protection against the virus compared to the vaccine.

Nick Karl, a scientist who is directly involved in the production of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine, said that natural immunity is more effective than the very vaccine he works on, and Pfizer produces.

“When somebody is naturally immune — like they got COVID — they probably have more antibodies against the virus… When you actually get the virus, you’re going to start producing antibodies against multiple pieces of the virus… So, your antibodies are probably better at that point than the [COVID] vaccination,” Karl said. Notwithstanding, Karl still believes that vaccine mandates are positive for society.

“The city [of New York] needs like vax cards and everything. It’s just about making it so inconvenient for unvaccinated people to the point where they’re just like, ‘F*ck it. I’ll get it.’ You know?”

A second Pfizer official, Senior Associate Scientist, Chris Croce, corroborated Karl’s assertion about COVID immunity derivative of antibodies:

Veritas Journalist: “So, I am well-protected [with antibodies]?”
Chris Croce, Pfizer Senior Associate Scientist: “Yeah.”

Veritas Journalist: “Like as much as the vaccine?”

Croce: “Probably more.”

Veritas Journalist: “How so? Like, how much more?”

Croce: “You’re protected most likely for longer since there was a natural response.”

Croce expressed dismay with his company’s direction and moral compass:

Veritas Journalist: “So, what happened to the monoclonal antibody treatments?”

Croce: “[It got] pushed to the side.”

Veritas Journalist: “Why?”

Croce: “Money. It’s disgusting.”

Croce: “I still feel like I work for an evil corporation because it comes down to profits in the end. I mean, I’m there to help people, not to make millions and millions of dollars. So, I mean, that’s the moral dilemma.”

Veritas Journalist: “Isn’t it billions and billions?”

Croce: “I’m trying to be nice.”

Veritas Journalist: “No, I hear you. I hear you. I do. I mean, I’ll still give you a hard time about it.”

Croce: “Basically, our organization is run on COVID money now.”

The third Pfizer scientist, Rahul Khandke, admitted his company demands that its employees keep information from the public.

“We’re bred and taught to be like, ‘vaccine is safer than actually getting COVID.’ Honestly, we had to do so many seminars on this. You have no idea. Like, we have to sit there for hours and hours and listen to like — be like, ‘you cannot talk about this in public,’” Khandke said.

Khandke also signaled that proof of antibodies is on par with proof of vaccination.

“If you have [COVID] antibodies built up, you should be able to prove that you have those built up,” he said.

Project Veritas will be releasing more Pfizer tapes in the very near future. To receive updates straight into your email inbox, click here.

October 5, 2021 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

Pfizer Says COVID Vaccine ‘Safe’ for Kids — But Pfizer Has Lied About Kids and Drugs Before

In 1996, Pfizer’s drug, Trovan, was still in the clinical stage of development when the drugmaker tested it, without parents’ consent, on about 200 children.

By Chelli Stanley | The Defender | September 30, 2021

Pfizer last week told the public and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) its new experimental COVID vaccine is safe for young children.

It’s a familiar story, similar to one the vaccine maker told in the past about another drug it tested on children — a story that had a terrible outcome.

Both stories began with this simple claim: “These drugs are safe for your children.”

In 1996, Pfizer, the transnational multi-billion-dollar pharmaceutical company, was working to bring a new drug — Trovan — to market. The drug was still in the clinical stage of development, when Pfizer made a decision that reportedly cost the lives of many children, and triggered an international firestorm.

Pfizer took its unlicensed Trovan to Kano, Nigeria, during a meningitis outbreak — though Trovan had never been tested in children or against meningitis.

According to Pfizer whistleblower, Dr. Juan Walterspiel, Pfizer sent unskilled doctors to Kano, who were unlicensed to practice medicine in Nigeria, and who had limited experience treating meningitis in children.

Walterspiel also reported the staff were so unskilled they could not place IV lines, and quickly resorted to orally administering the drug to children.

In the short two weeks Pfizer was in Kano, staff worked with 200 children, and gave 99 of the children unlicensed Trovan, despite the children’s desperate state. Pfizer did this even though Doctors Without Borders was operating in the same Kano hospital, treating children for free, with medicine proven to work well against bacterial meningitis.

Doctors Without Borders realized what Pfizer was doing and in a statement said they “were shocked Pfizer continued the so-called scientific work in the middle of hell.” They “communicated their concerns to both Pfizer and the local authorities.”

Pfizer gave the other 101 children ceftriaxone, which is proven effective for meningitis.  However, many children were “low-dosed,” with only one-third of the recommended amount. Because Pfizer didn’t have enough skilled medical personnel to administer ceftriaxone by IV, staff injected it directly into the children’s butts or thighs.

But “the shots were severely painful, leading to ‘great fear and sometimes dangerous struggles with children.’” So Pfizer lowered the dose significantly to ease the severe pain caused by the shots.

Pfizer said available data indicated the dose remained more than sufficient, but the drug’s manufacturer, Hoffmann-La Roche, said the reductions could have sapped the drug’s strength.

“A high dose is essential,” Mark Kunkel, Hoffmann-La Roche’s medical director, told the Washington Post. “Clinical failures … and perhaps deaths of children could have resulted from the low dosing.”

According to a lawsuit against Pfizer, “five of the children who received Trovan and six of the children who were ‘low-dosed’ with ceftriaxone died, and others treated by Pfizer suffered very serious injuries, including paralysis, deafness and blindness.”

Of the 200 children treated by Pfizer, 181 were gravely injured, and 11 died.

The Washington Post investigated Pfizer’s ethics, stating, “Some medical experts questioned why the company did not switch to the proven pills when it was clear the young patients were approaching death.”

“It could be considered murder,” said Evariste Lodi, the leading Doctors Without Borders physician in Kano, after reading a report that Pfizer kept a child solely on Trovan until the child died.

In a statement about the child’s death, a Pfizer spokeswoman said “researchers had no reason to suspect the experimental medicine was not working.” Pfizer also said Trovan was “at least as effective as the gold standard treatment,” despite it having never been used in children, or for meningitis.

Pfizer designed the clinical trial in Kano “in six weeks, though the risks and complications of such a trial would typically require a year to adequately assess,” The Atlantic reported.

The parents in Kano have maintained they were not notified of an experiment, and that Pfizer did not have their consent to use their children in a drug trial in the middle of a health crisis. They organized to sue the drugmaker, while caring for children injured during the experiment.

Pfizer maintains the Nigerian parents gave full consent for their critically ill children to be used in an experiment, though even Pfizer admits no parent ever signed a consent form.

The lawsuits dragged on for years, as Pfizer refused to admit to any wrongdoing. “We are fed up with this case,” said a father who lost his daughter. “Our children are dead and some are maimed.”

Pfizer said “the trial was conducted appropriately, ethically and with the best interests of patients in mind; and it helped save lives.”

However, even the approval letter Pfizer submitted to the FDA about the Kano trial was exposed by a Nigerian doctor, who “said that his office backdated an approval letter and this may have been written a year after the study had taken place.”

The community of Kano has been profoundly affected — “the experiment shaped public perception of Western drugs in the region. Parents told their children about it. Teachers lectured about Pfizer in classrooms. Pundits spoke of Western physicians seeking human guinea pigs.”

Pfizer acknowledged the severe nature of the meningitis outbreak to a Nigerian investigative committee, then said, “Pfizer’s intervention was therefore strictly a humanitarian gesture aimed at saving lives. It was totally devoid of any commercial undertones.” The company called it “the humanitarian trial.”

“If I had the power, I would take away their medical licenses,” said Lodi.

Pfizer’s Trovan history gets worse

In the initial development of Trovan, Walterspiel reported that Pfizer tried another study and:

“ … the study failed and several patients developed severe post-operative infections and one woman had her uterus removed. Pfizer dispatched risk managers and asked affected patients and relatives to fill out checks for whatever amount they felt right against their signature to keep the payments confidential.”

Pfizer made no such offer in Kano. The families of Kano had to sue Pfizer repeatedly, and received no compensation until nearly 15 years after the incident occurred.

Pfizer did not let these mere setbacks of death, maiming and international scandals deter the company. Within a few short years, the drugmaker brought Trovan to market in both the United States and Europe.

Expecting to reap financial windfalls, Pfizer aggressively marketed Trovan — until it discovered the public in both the EU and U.S. was reeling from liver damage, liver failure and death as a result of taking Trovan.

Reports of adverse reactions grew until Europe took Trovan off the market completely, and the FDA severely restricted the public’s access in the U.S.

New York Times article detailed how Trovan’s serious side effects became known only after it was given to the public. “The case showed how a new drug, marketed by an expert like Pfizer, could be swiftly prescribed to thousands of patients before all the side effects were known. Pfizer said its tests of Trovan had not revealed any serious problems.”

In 2000, William C. Steere Jr., then chairman of Pfizer, acknowledged some side effects only become known after a drug is approved, saying, ”You put the drug in the general population, and then everyone is taking it. We just hold our breath and wait to see if there is something unique with the drug.”

‘If I had an enemy, I would not let him take their drugs’

Pfizer was repeatedly sued in Nigeria and the U.S. for its actions in Kano. In 2009, Pfizer agreed to pay $75 million, despite initially being sued for $8.5 billion.

The company got involved in several more scandals that exploded when Wikileaks published several U.S. Embassy cables detailing Pfizer’s communications.

A Pfizer lawyer described in the cables that “Pfizer has worked closely with former Nigerian Head of State Yakubu Gowon. Gowan spoke with Kano State Governor Mallam Ibrahim Shekarau, who directed the Kano AG to reduce the settlement demand from $150 million to $75 million.”

In another cable, a top Pfizer representative in Nigeria said:

“Pfizer had hired investigators to uncover corruption links to Federal Attorney General Michael Aondoakaa to expose him and put pressure on him to drop the federal cases. Pfizer’s investigators were passing this information to local media. A series of damaging articles detailing Aondoakaa’s ‘alleged’ corruption ties were published in February and March.”

A cable showed a Pfizer representative commenting that “Doctors Without Borders administered Trovan to other children during the 1996 meningitis epidemic, and the Nigerian government has taken no action.”

The accusation prompted Doctors Without Borders to publish a strongly worded press release stating that they did not give anyone Trovan, and were in fact the first to speak out about Pfizer’s unethical actions.

Finally, the cables showed that “Pfizer was not happy settling the case, but had come to the conclusion that the $75 million figure was reasonable because the suits had been ongoing for many years, costing Pfizer more than $15 million a year in legal and investigative fees.”

The original lawsuit also sought prison terms for Pfizer officials.

Scandals continued even after the case was settled, when Pfizer demanded that anyone collecting the money give a sample of their DNA. Several people refused, distrusting what Pfizer may do with their DNA. They were not allowed to get compensation as a result.

Pfizer said it “always acted in the best interest of the children involved, using the best medical knowledge available.”

Najib Ibrahim of Kano said of Pfizer, “If I had an enemy, I would not let him take their drugs.”  Abdul Murtala said, “Pfizer reminds me of recklessness with human lives.”

The pattern continues, with 12-year-old injured during Pfizer COVID trial

Maddie de Garay was 12 when she voluntarily participated in Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine trial for 12- to 15-year-olds in Ohio. After she took the second dose on January 20, 2021, her life changed.

Her mother, Stephanie de Garay, spoke at press conference in June, held by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), during which she described the maiming of her child and Pfizer’s disregard towards Maddie and the family — despite Maddie being part of the trial in order to determine whether Pfizer’s covid vaccine is safe for children.

Stephanie said:

“All we want is for Maddie to be seen, heard, and believed, because she hasn’t been.  And we want her to get the care that she desperately needs so that she can go back to normal. She was totally fine before this. They’re not helping her.”

Stephanie said within 24 hours of the second dose, Maddie “developed severe abdominal and chest pain. She had painful electrical shocks down her neck and spine that forced her to walk hunched over. She had extreme pain in her fingers and toes.”

Maddie went to the ER immediately, as instructed by Pfizer’s vaccine trial administrator. After doctors ran few tests, she was sent home with a diagnosis: “Adverse effect of vaccine initial encounter.”

In the first five months after getting her second dose, Maddie would return to the ER eight more times.

According to Stephanie:

“Over the next 2.5 months, her abdominal, muscle and nerve pain became unbearable.  She developed additional symptoms that included gastroparesis, nausea and vomiting, erratic blood pressure and heart rate, memory loss, brain fog, headaches, dizziness, fainting, and then seizures.

“She developed verbal and motor tics, she had loss of feeling from the waist down and muscle weakness, drastic changes in her vision, urinary retention and loss of bladder control, severely irregular and heavy menstrual cycles, and eventually she had to have an NG tube put in to get nutrition. All of these symptoms are still here today. Some days are worse than others.”

Maddie’s doctors began to suggest she had “functional neurological disorder due to anxiety” and even tried to admit her to a mental hospital. Her family fought it.

It took five months for Maddie to get an MRI of her brain and appropriate blood tests, which she got when her family went elsewhere for medical advice after talking to others who were adversely affected by the COVID vaccines.

Stephanie said:

“What I want to ask is: Maddie volunteered for the Pfizer trial. Why aren’t they researching her to figure out why this happened so other people don’t have to go through this? Instead, they’re just saying it’s ‘mental.’”

The de Garay family has joined with emerging grassroots advocacy groups whose members’ lives suddenly changed after they got a COVID vaccine. They are asking the CDC and FDA to recognize their injuries, the medical community to believe and help them, the media to share their stories, for the public to know about these injuries as part of informed consent, and for their injuries to be studied so that solutions can be found.

Since being injured by new vaccines still in phase 3 trials, they have been subjected to stonewalling, cover-ups, bullying, refusal to collect the data and blanket denials.

Pfizer has not commented publicly on Maddie’s case.

At the September FDA advisory meeting on Pfizer COVID boosters in the U.S., Steve Kirsch, executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, said Pfizer did not record Maddie’s extensive injuries in its clinical trial results. Kirsch also noted Pfizer marked the entirety of Maddie’s injuries as “abdominal pain.”

Kirsch reported Pfizer’s fraud to FDA acting Commissioner Dr. Janet Woodcock, but no investigation has been launched into Pfizer for allegedly erasing Maddie’s extensive injuries from its trial data for children.

© 2021 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.

September 30, 2021 Posted by | Deception | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Pediatricians Remove Info on Mask Risks, Dangers for Kids

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | September 20, 2021

Throughout 2020 and 2021, ever since the declared COVID-19 pandemic, government officials consistently have been inconsistent in their assessments and recommendations for public health. In August 2021, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) joined the ranks when they endorsed the CDC’s recommendation for masking.1

Since they did not want to be seen holding inconsistent positions, they removed years of information from their website that explained the importance of facial cues to early brain and child development. The removal of the content culminated August 12, 2021, with the fourth in a series of tweets, in which they said:2

“Babies and young children study faces, so you may worry that having masked caregivers would harm children’s language development. There are no studies to support this concern. Young children will use other clues like gestures and tone of voice.”

At the end of the tweet, they provided a link to an article on HealthyChildren.org3 that suggested “… when one sense is taken away, the others may be heightened.” The series of tweets was aimed at masking in general, stating:4

  • Masks work to reduce the spread of COVID-19 among children
  • Masks are a vital part of keeping kids safe at school this fall
  • Masks do not compromise children’s breathing
  • Being around adults wearing masks doesn’t delay babies’ speech or language development

Experts argue over the efficacy and necessity of masking a population that has minimal risk from the virus. You need look no further than the CDC’s website,5 which shows that children ages birth to 17 had a death rate of 0.08% in 2021 and 0.05% in 2020. Yet, it was the final statement — that masking doesn’t affect children’s development — that unleashed a reaction on Twitter from parents, speech therapists and physicians who heartedly disagreed.

American Academy of Pediatrics Caught in a Quandary

To support the unsubstantiated long-term use of masks, the AAP turned their back on years of research and their own information on the importance of facial cues with infants to protect and promote brain growth and development.

To make this work, the organization has taken down significant sections from their website about early childhood development. Reuters6 asked why the content was removed the weekend after the tweets were published. They were told the content was in the process of being migrated to a different platform.

A spokesperson told Reuters, “The AAP can confirm that our web content migration has nothing to do with AAP’s mask guidance.”7 They assured Reuters the content would be republished, but were unsure about the timeline; they expect it to be complete by the end of the year.

In other words, this well-funded and organized group is coincidentally “migrating” one key section of web content that curiously contradicts their new mask guidance, and planned this so it would take months to complete.

According to Reuters,8 any links to this content that come up in the search engine are now redirected to the AAP’s homepage. However, not all the content has been deleted since other organizations use the AAP documents to educate their clients.

For example, the “Building ‘Piece’ of Mind” pdf that was pulled as a resource on the AAP website9 is available on the Ohio Bold Beginning! site and branded with the Ohio chapter of the AAP.10 You can also download the full document from an Internet archive.11

The now “migrated” document encourages parents to pay attention to their emotional responses to their children, since “Feelings are a language that your infant understands early in life.”12 Yet, without facial cues, it’s challenging for adults, much less children, to read and understand emotional reactions. In the migrated document, the AAP says:

“As your baby grows, social smiles lead to conversations. For example: When you smile, your infant will smile back … This ‘dance’ between you and your baby is fun for both of you. It is a great way to encourage your baby’s new skills as they appear. For this important dance to work, calmly and consistently meet your baby’s needs … and smile!”

But how is that supposed to work if your baby is staring at you and other adults who have two-thirds of their faces covered with masks? How do babies know you’re smiling if your entire face is covered up? In response to the AAP, Dr. James Todaro, who runs the website MedicineUncensored, tweeted:13

“AAP in 2018: ‘How Do Infants Learn? Infants love to look at you and hear your voice. In fact, faces, with all their expressions, usually are more interesting than toys. Spend time talking, singing, and laughing. Play games of touching, stroking, and peek-a-boo.’

AAP in 2021: ‘Babies and young children study faces, so you may worry that having masked caregivers would harm children’s language development. There are no studies to support this concern. Young children will use other clues like gestures and tone of voice.’”

Did Pfizer’s Funding of the AAP Influence Their Mask Policy?

Shortly after the AAP took down their facial cue documents and posted their new masking recommendations for children, a retired chief of police questioned the AAP’s motives — and in a telling opinion piece for Law Enforcement Today,14 he revealed that Pfizer is one of the AAP’s largest funders.

Twitter users15 noticed it too, with several asking what would Pfizer’s funding have to do with the AAP’s mask recommendations. Finally, one person figured it out, saying, “perhaps the plan is to get parents so fed up with their children having to wear them they break down and get them the vax.”

In fact, the AAP itself linked vaccination to mandatory mask-wearing quite clearly when they talked with NBC news,16 which reported: “The AAP said universal masking is necessary because much of the student population is not vaccinated, and it’s hard for schools to determine who is as new variants emerge that might spread more easily among children.”

When you consider that another COVID vaccine maker, Johnson & Johnson, is also a funder for the AAP — and that Dr. Anthony Fauci made the news September 9, 2021,17 saying that vaccines for children as young as 6 months may be ready as soon as November 2021 — the idea that the AAP would consider setting the stage for parents to come begging for a vaccine doesn’t sound so off the wall.

Not Just Children Are Affected

An AAP staffer was quoted in Live From Studio 6B,18 saying, “AAP recommends masks in schools and public settings to protect children. These documents are more about interactions between infants and their parents or primary caregiver, much of which will be in a home setting where masks are usually not needed.”

However, masking facial cues affects infants and young children in day care situations and when they are out of their home. This impacts “social referencing,” which the AAP finds important to child development and refers to the ability to read the face of a stranger.19

Research20 shows mothers have unique central nervous system responses when they first see the face of their newborn. This demonstrates the significance of facial cues in building mother-infant bonding. Yet, as comments on a Twitter thread point out, infants and children are not the only ones suffering from a lack of facial cues. Twitter user MDaly is a mother and teacher, who commented:21

“I teach English to students who are not native English speakers. Wearing a mask absolutely affected their language development last year. I had to ask students to repeatedly speak up and repeat themselves which negatively affects their self-esteem as well.”

A letter to the editor in The BMJ 22 expounds on the challenges faced by adults who are hearing impaired with mandatory masking. Health care has always been challenging for those with hearing impairment, especially in emergency departments where the noise level is high. Alexandra Dumitru is hearing impaired and commented:23

“Zero common sense. It’s tragic what our health institutions have become. First the CDC, now this — even adults benefit from seeing a full face. As someone hearing impaired masks have been a nightmare for me. Kids copy adults; they need to see mouths move.”

Data Are Sparse for a Very Good Reason

The AAP stated that there were no studies to support the concern that baby’s and young children’s development would be impeded by the constant use of masks in the adults who care for them. Yet, as one person on Twitter said, “If you don’t study something, you can say there are no studies.”24

However, the data are sparse and there are no studies analyzing the effect of masking on young children because before 2020 it would never have passed an ethical review board. Imagine gathering a cohort of 40 infants. Nearly from the time of birth 20 parents would wear masks anytime they had interactions with their children. The other 20 would serve as a control group, being raised in a way formerly advised by the AAP.

After five years of what could only be called abusive behavior, psychiatrists and behavior psychologists would test these children to find their brain development, language development and ability to recognize facial cues are stunted. And yet, the AAP would like us to believe that won’t happen — without testing infant development in an environment known to be detrimental, we cannot extrapolate the information and understand it would be detrimental.

In 1990, the world discovered a carefully guarded secret of the Romanian Communist Party’s leader, Nicolae Ceauşescu.25 After his execution the new government brought in Western psychologists and child specialists to help deal with the 170,000 children who were abandoned in orphanages where they received no interaction with adults.

Charles A. Nelson III, a professor of pediatrics and neuroscience at Harvard Medical School and Boston Children’s Hospital, recounts his introduction to the environment these children lived in. He recalled:26

“I walked into an institution in Bucharest one afternoon, and there was a small child standing there sobbing. He was heartbroken and had wet his pants. I asked, ‘What’s going on with that child?’ A worker said, ‘Well, his mother abandoned him this morning and he’s been like that all day.’ That was it. No one comforted the little boy or picked him up. That was my introduction.”

The children in the orphanages of Romania not only didn’t have “face time” with their caregivers, but also didn’t have any comfort or interaction. It’s not hard to imagine how an infant, who relies on cues from other people to learn and grow, could be stunted by having little exposure to facial expressions.

The Still Face Experiment

The horrific environment these children and young adults lived in was the largest human experiment in which children did not receive interaction from other humans. Until, that is, 2020 and 2021, when many infants and children are being raised in an environment where they are unable to read facial cues. In this short video, you’ll see what happens during the “still face” experiment when the infant does not get a response from the mother.

The still face experiment demonstrated how infants are vulnerable to the emotional or nonemotional reactions of people. In the COVID-19 pandemic, infants and children are lacking visual facial cues, but the expectation is they continue to receive emotional interaction at the same level they did before the mask mandates.

Research has demonstrated that when parents struggle to be emotionally present with their children, the children grow up having more trouble with trust and regulating their own emotions.27 However, there has been no data before 2020 to determine if masking facial cues would cause children to grow up with the same issues.

Are Facial Cues Recognizable Through Masks?

Research produced after 2020 has demonstrated that children and adults struggle to recognize emotion in people who are masked. How this will affect overall child development and whether the children can “catch up” if mask mandates are ever removed, is yet to be determined.

For example, in one study28 published by the University of Wisconsin-Madison in December 2020, researchers engaged children ages 7 to 13 and showed them photos of people exhibiting six different emotions. Without the masks, the children identified the emotions correctly 66% of the time.29

However, when masks were in place, this dropped to between 18% and 28% for sadness, fear and anger. A second study30 in children ages 3 to 5 years demonstrated that the younger children had even more difficulty.

The data were in line with past literature that confirmed that a face mask affected understanding emotions. They found the toddlers’ performance was more influenced by a mask than older children and adults.31

Similar studies have also been performed with adults. One study32 published in September 2020 with 41 healthy adults aged 18 to 87 years presented the participants with photos of six different expressions.

When the photos were not wearing masks, the overall performance for identifying emotions was 89.5%. This dropped significantly when masks were in place. A second study33 published in Scientific Reports in 2021, analyzed the effects of masking to measure emotion recognition and trust attribution in 122 adult men and women.

The researchers found that standard masks interfered with both measures and made it more difficult to identify an individual they had already encountered when the mask was removed.

Data produced since 2020 have shown that masks do an excellent job of masking a person’s ability to read emotions, but likely do not have the same efficacy in slowing the spread of a virus. The question we therefore must ask is, what will be the long-term effect on the emotional and mental health of society as the generation of children raised without full exposure to facial cues become doctors, lawyers, businesspeople and politicians?

Sources and References

September 20, 2021 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | Leave a comment

You cannot be forced to get the Covid vaccine. Here is the way out.

By Meryl Nass, MD | August 26, 2021

Let me show you how FDA, Pfizer and BioNTech colluded to fool everyone about the EUA status of the vaccine Americans will be offered. But close reading of their document gives you an escape route.

The “Fact Sheet for Recipients, “dated August 23, 2021, is approved by FDA and is on FDA’s website, and is signed by BioNTech and Pfizer.

Direct quotes from this easy to read 8 page document are below, and I suggest you print the document out, as it will help you avoid a vaccine mandate. Pay close attention. I added numbers to the most interesting excerpts.

After stating that you might receive the licensed vaccine or a vaccine under EUA in item 2, item 6 indicates that both the licensed vaccine AND the EUA vaccine are both under EUA. (This may be the way chosen to shield the licensed vaccine from liability.) Item 5 says that while under EUA, it is your choice whether or not to receive the vaccine.

Show this document to your college, your hospital, your boss. They cannot force you to receive either of these vaccines!

—————–

1.  The FDA-approved COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) and the FDA-authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) have the same formulation and can be used interchangeably to provide the COVID-19 vaccination series.[1]

2. You are being offered either COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) or the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine to prevent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2.

3. The licensed vaccine has the same formulation as the EUA-authorized vaccine and the products can be used interchangeably to provide the vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns. The products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness.

4. WHAT IF I DECIDE NOT TO GET COMIRNATY (COVID-19 VACCINE, mRNA) OR THE PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE?

5. Under the EUA, it is your choice to receive or not receive the vaccine. Should you decide not to receive it, it will not change your standard medical care.

6. This EUA for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine and COMIRNATY will end when the Secretary of HHS determines that the circumstances justifying the EUA no longer exist or when there is a change in the approval status of the product such that an EUA is no longer needed.

Manufactured by Pfizer Inc., New York, NY 10017

Manufactured for BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH An der Goldgrube 12 55131 Mainz, Germany LAB-1451-7.2 Revised: 23 August 2021

August 27, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception | , , , , , | 2 Comments

Israel and Covid: Is the drug deadlier than the disease?

By Neville Hodgkinson – The Conservative Woman – July 30, 2021

ISRAEL’S nine million people, and Gibraltar’s 34,000, are among the most Covid-19 vaccinated in the world, almost entirely using the Pfizer mRNA injection. But after a fall in cases, both communities are now once again seeing a rapid rise in infections.

Sacrifices made in life and liberty are beginning to look less worthwhile – a fact that French legislators seem to have overlooked this week in requiring Covid vaccine passports for a wide range of normal life activities.

Governments and media commentators internationally praised Israelis and Gibraltarians as they did their best to support scientists and politicians trying to minimise damage wrought by SARS-COV-2, the genetically engineered virus (see here and here and here) first identified in Wuhan, China.

Less attention was given to the fact that Gibraltar suffered the highest Covid mortality rate in the world, proportional to its small population, during the first three weeks of a vaccine rollout that began on January 10 this year.

Despite the opportunity for a focused inquiry that could have shed light on the vaccine’s safety, regulators failed to look into claims that the jab itself, in the frail and elderly people who received it first, contributed to this tragic loss of life, the worst in Gibraltarians in over 100 years.

More than 78,000 doses were administered, reaching close to 100 per cent of the population, as well as some visiting tourists and workers.

Residents went along with promises that the jab would prevent a renewal of the lockdowns they suffered last year, which were hugely socially and economically damaging.

But today Gibraltar is experiencing a surge in breakthrough infections. More than 700 people are in self-isolation, and there are over 260 active Covid cases, although only seven of those are receiving treatment in hospital.

Globally, regulators have downplayed deaths and injuries associated with the Covid vaccines, insisting that the protection they offer against the disease offers the best way out of the crisis.

In Israel this week, however, the health ministry reported that 2,260 new infections were diagnosed on Tuesday alone, a high not seen since mid-March.

Across Israel there are now 14,365 confirmed cases, described as ‘skyrocketing’ by the Israeli newspaper Arutz Sheva. Of those, 258 are in hospital, 153 in a serious condition, and 35 are critically ill.

It has not been revealed how many of these cases had received the vaccine. More than five million Israelis have had both doses, but ‘vaccine hesitancy’ has grown, as news of the apparent dangers has spread, and the rate of full vaccination has slowed to a crawl.

A study by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, reported this week by The Times of Israel, indicated however a fall in the Pfizer vaccine’s effectiveness over time, with those vaccinated in January having just 16 per cent protection against infection now. Since elderly people, who respond less to the vaccine, were among the first to receive the jab, that failure is unlikely to be as great across the population as a whole.

Nevertheless, the phenomenon of so-called breakthrough infections is causing mounting concern in the scientific community.

The Israeli government has recognised the harm caused by lockdowns and to try to curb the resurgence in infections is focusing instead on mask-wearing, social quarantining, and reinstatement of a vaccine passport for events of more than 100 people in closed venues.

It has also announced a continuing programme of vaccinations, and health ministry officials met on Wednesday to decide whether a third, booster dose should be provided to all elderly people. Israel set a world precedent by administering a third shot two weeks ago to those with severely compromised immune systems.

If the world goes down the route of regular Covid jabs, as with the (largely ineffective) flu vaccine, it will be great news for Pfizer shareholders, but not for those who suffer the resulting injuries and deaths from the vaccine.

Nearly 6,500 deaths have been attributed to Covid in Israel, but one study claimed there were ‘orders of magnitude’ increases in death rates during a massive vaccination campaign beginning in mid-December.

In the two months to mid-February, 2,337 deaths occurred, leading the study authors to conclude that ‘vaccinations have caused more deaths than the coronavirus would have caused during the same period.’

The Israeli People’s Committee, a team of doctors, lawyers, and scientists of various disciplines concerned at the impact of both the vaccine drive and civil rights restrictions on ‘our people’s welfare and the destiny of our country’, has announced an inquiry into what it called ‘suspected governmental and institutional criminality’ during the crisis.

It says the state has ‘systematically shut down all monitoring and tracking systems’ designed to identify vaccine adverse events, despite the experimental nature of the product.

The result has been ‘an unprecedented flood of thousands of serious adverse event reports after the vaccine on social media, which seems to be the only forum that still allows people to share their experiences’.

The gap between this reality and information published by the Israeli ministry of health and the media, is ‘inconceivably large’, the committee says, raising concerns of ‘a dangerous deception not only of Israeli citizens, but of citizens of the entire world, who view Israel as the research laboratory of Pfizer’s corona vaccine.

‘Such a deception, whether negligent or premeditated, could create additional cycles of harm to humans around the globe.

‘We wish to say to the Israeli government and governments throughout the world: A lack of transparency kills people. Deception and concealment lead to disability and loss of life. Remove all confidentiality, create transparent and controlled reporting mechanisms; only then can lives be saved and further damage avoided from the very tool that is supposed to preserve health.

‘Is this a case where the drug is more deadly than the disease? Or is it equally, or less, deadly? We can only come to a true conclusion if comprehensive data is revealed in real time and if the press, which is supposed to be free and a watchdog of democracy, will remain on guard and raise the alarm when necessary. And it is indeed very necessary.’

Meanwhile, Pfizer has applied to US regulators for full approval of its jab, arguing that the company’s data ‘confirm the favourable efficacy and safety profile of our vaccine’.

July 30, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

And We Should Trust ‘The Science’ of the Pharma Industry?

By F. William Engdahl – New Eastern Outlook – 29.07.2021

The forever-head of the US NIAID, Tony Fauci, has repeatedly demanded that the public “trust the science” as he shifts his own science opinion from one positon to another. What is never mentioned in mainstream media in the West or almost anywhere in the world is the scientific record of the major global vaccine making pharmaceutical giants. In short, it is abysmal and alarming in the extreme. That alone should prohibit governments from pushing radical untested experimental injections on their populations without extensive long-term animal and other testing to assure their safety.

This past April as the US vaccination program was in high gear, the Biden chief covid adviser, 80-year-old Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) since 1984, announced that the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had decided to order a “pause” on giving the Johnson & Johnson (Janssen) vaccine in order to examine reports of blood clots. It turned out that there were six reported blood clot cases of some seven million who then had had the J&J covid jab. Fauci in his press remarks declared, “one of the things that’s, I think, such a good thing about our system here, is that we’re ruled by the science, not by any other consideration.” There is good reason to question Fauci.

That was supposed to reassure people that the authorities were being ultra-careful with the experimental covid medications which, after all, never have been mass-tested on humans before and have only gotten “emergency use authorization,” provisional FDA approval. The FDA quickly lifted the pause as J&J agreed to print that its vaccine could cause blood clots.

Yet at the same time, rival vaccine makers, Pfizer and Moderna, both using a hyper-experimental genetic treatment known as mRNA, were not being paused by “the science” despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of alarming vaccine-related severe reactions, including official data of several thousand deaths from both, had been recorded by CDC data base, VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System).

According to the CDC such “adverse” events, post-vaccine, include anaphylaxis, thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, myocarditis, pericarditis, and death. For the week of July 16 the CDC VAERS reported an alarming 9,125 reported deaths since late December from the COVID-19 vaccinations. Never in history have such high death totals been associated with any vaccine, yet the media is deafeningly silent about this.

Their dismal science record

The wording of Fauci is precise and deliberately manipulative. It suggests that there exists some fixed thing we can call “The Science,” like some Vatican religious dogma, whereas the real scientific method is one of continuous questioning, overturning past hypotheses with newly proven ones, adjusting. Yet when it comes to “Science,” the handful of giant vaccine makers, sometimes known as Big Pharma, a cartel not unlike Big Oil, have a record of fraud, deliberate doctoring of their own tests, as well as widespread bribing of doctors and medical officials to promote their various drugs despite “Science” results that contradict their assertions of safety. A look at the major global pharmaceutical giants is instructive.

J&J

We begin with the Johnson & Johnson Company of New Jersey. On July 21, 2021 J&J and three other smaller drug makers agreed to pay a staggering $26 billion damages to a group of US states for their role in causing America’s opioid epidemic. Of that J&J will pay $5 billion. The CDC estimates that use of the highly-addictive opioids as painkillers caused at least 500,000 deaths between 1999 and 2019. Johnson & Johnson is accused of pushing the deadly painkillers for excessive use and downplaying their addiction risks. They knew better.

The same J&J is in a huge legal battle for knowingly using a carcinogen in its famous baby powder. A 2018 Reuters investigation found J&J knew for decades that asbestos, a known carcinogen, lurked in its baby powder and other cosmetic talc products. The company is reportedly considering legally splitting its baby powder division into a small separate company that would then declare bankruptcy to avoid large payoutsThe J&J covid vaccine, unlike that from Pfizer and Moderna, does not use mRNA genetic alteration.

The two global covid vaccine makers which have by far the largest market to date are the two being personally promoted by Fauci. These are from Pfizer in alliance with the tiny German BioNTech company under the name Comirnaty, and from the US biotech Moderna.

Pfizer

Pfizer, one of the world’s largest vaccine makers by sales, was founded in 1849 in the USA. It also has one of the most criminal records of fraud, corruption, falsification and proven damage. A 2010 Canadian study noted, “Pfizer has been a “habitual offender,” persistently engaging in illegal and corrupt marketing practices, bribing physicians and suppressing adverse trial results.” That’s serious. Note that Pfizer has yet to make fully public details of its covid vaccine studies for external examination.

The list of Pfizer crimes has gotten longer since 2010. It is currently engaged in lawsuits related to charges its Zantac heartburn medication is contaminated with a cancer-causing substance. As well, Pfizer received the biggest drug-related fine in US history in 2009 as part of a $2.3 Billion plea deal for mis-promoting medicines Bextra and Celebrex and paying kickbacks to compliant doctors. Pfizer pleaded guilty to the felony of marketing four drugs including Bextra “with the intent to defraud or mislead.” They were forced to withdraw their arthritis painkiller Bextra in the USA and EU for causing heart attacks, strokes, and serious skin disease.

Clearly in a move to boost revenue, Pfizer illegally paid doctors kickbacks for “off-label” use of more than one of its drug which resulted in patients being injured or killed. Among them were Bextra (valdecoxib); Geodon (ziprasidone HCl), an atypical antipsychotic; Zyvox (linezolid), an antibiotic; Lyrica (pregabalin), a seizure medication; its famous Viagra (sildenafil), an erectile dysfunction drug; and Lipitor (atorvastatin), a cholesterol drug.

In another court trial, Pfizer subsidiaries were forced to pay $142 million and release company documents that showed it was illegally marketing gabapentin for off-label use. “Data revealed in a string of U.S. lawsuits indicates the drug was promoted by the drug company as a treatment for pain, migraines and bipolar disorder – even though it wasn’t effective in treating these conditions and was actually toxic in certain cases, according to the Therapeutics Initiative, an independent drug research group at the University of British Columbia. The trials forced the company to release all of its studies on the drug, including the ones it kept hidden.”

In 2004 Pfizer subsidiary Warner-Lambert was forced to pay $430 to settle criminal charges and civil liability arising from its fraudulent marketing practices with respect to Neurontin, its brand for the drug gabapentin. Originally developed for the treatment of epilepsy, Neurontin was illegally promoted off-label for the treatment of neurological pain, and in particular for migraine and bipolar disorder – even though it wasn’t effective in treating these conditions and was actually toxic in some cases. Neurontin for unapproved uses made up some 90% of the $2.7 billion in sales in 2003.

A New York Times report disclosed in 2010 that Pfizer “… paid about $20 million to 4,500 doctors and other medical professionals in the United States for consulting and speaking on its behalf in the last six months of 2009.” It paid another $15.3 million to 250 academic medical centers and other research groups for clinical trials. In the US legal practice it is seldom that corporate executives actually doing the criminal deeds are prosecuted. The result is that court fines can be treated as “business costs” in this cynical milieu. In eight years of repeated malfeasance through 2009, Pfizer accumulated just under $3 billion in fines and civil penalties, about a third of one year’s net revenues.

In 2020 as its covid vaccine was in development, Pfizer paid $13,150,000 in lobbying Congress and officials in Washington among others. Also notable is the fact that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation own shares of both Pfizer and their partner in the leading mRNA vaccine, BioNTech of Germany.

Moderna

The third covid vaccine producer today with FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is Moderna of Cambridge, Massachusetts. It has yet to be sued for illegal practices unlike J&J or Pfizer. But that fact is likely only because before its EUA for its mRNA experimental vaccine, in its ten years existence since 2010 it had failed to get FDA approval to market a single medicine, despite repeated failed attempts. However Moderna has a red neon sign that reads “conflict of interest” that should give pause.

Moderna and Fauci’s NIAID have collaborated on development of vaccines using Moderna’s mRNA platform and NIAID of Fauci on coronaviruses including MERS, since at least November, 2015. On January 13, 2020, before the first case of a supposed Wuhan, China “novel coronavirus” was even detected in the United States, Fauci’s NIAID and Moderna signed an updated cooperation agreement which described them as co-owners of a mRNA based coronavirus and that they had finalized a sequence for mRNA-1273, the vaccine now being given to millions for supposedly averting the novel coronavirus. That means that Fauci’s NIAID and perhaps Fauci personally (it’s allowed in the US) stood to reap huge financial benefits from emergency approval of the Moderna jab, yet Fauci has never admitted to the conflict publicly when he was Trump corona adviser, nor as Biden’s.

Ten days later on January 23, 2020 Moderna announced it was granted funding by CEPI, a vaccine fund created by Bill Gates’ foundation along with Davos WEF among others, to develop an mRNA vaccine for the Wuhan virus.

Moderna was created by a venture capitalist, Noubar Afeyan along with Harvard professor Timothy A. Springer, and others. In 2011 Afeyan recruited French businessman and former Eli Lilly executive Stephane Bancel as CEO of the new Moderna. Despite having no medical or science degree nor any experience running a drug development operation, Bancel lists himself as co-patent holder for a hundred patents of Moderna tied to the different vaccines. Beginning in 2013 the tiny Moderna was receiving grants from the Pentagon to develop its mRNA technology. As of 2020 just prior to its receiving emergency use authorization from the US Government FDA, fully 89% of Moderna revenues were from US Government grants. This is hardly an experienced company yet it holds the fate of millions in its hands. As Fauci says, “Trust the Science.”

In February 2016, an editorial in Nature magazine criticized Moderna for not publishing any peer-reviewed papers on its technology, unlike most other emerging and established biotech companies. The company remains ultra-secretive. That same year, 2016 Moderna got $20 million from the Gates Foundation for vaccine development using mRNA.

Up to its receiving EUA approval for its covid mRNA product in December 2020 Moderna had only made losses since its founding. Then curiously, following a March 2020 personal meeting with then-President Trump where Bancel told the president Moderna could have a vaccine ready in a matter of months Moderna luck changed.

On May 15, Trump announced creation of Operation Warp Seed to rollout a COVID-19 vaccine by December. The head of the Presidential group was a 30-year R&D veteran of the large UK drug firm GSK, Moncef Slaoui. In 2017 Slaoui had resigned from GSK and joined the board of none other than Moderna. Under Slaoui’s Warp Speed, some $22 billion of US taxpayer money was thrown at different vaccine makers. Moderna was a prime recipient, a brazen conflict of interest but nobody seemed to care. Slaoui funneled some $2 billion in government funds to his old company, Moderna, to develop the mRNA covid vaccine. Only under public criticism did Slaoui sell his stock in Moderna, making millions in profit from Moderna’s role as a covid vaccine leading candidate. Shortly after resigning at the end of the Trump presidency, Slaoui was fired by his old firm GSK from a company subsidiary following charges of sexual harassment of a female employee.

In February 2020 Trump Secretary of Health and Human Services, Alex Azar, invoked the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP) to exempt Moderna, Pfizer, J&J and any future covid makers from any and all liability arising from damage or death caused by their vaccines for the Wuhan coronavirus. The legal protection lasts until 2024. If the vaccines are so good and safe, why is such a measure needed? Azar was former head of the US drug giant Eli Lilly. There are some serious questions that must be raised openly regarding the vaccine makers who are now pushing experimental highly controversial gene-edited formulations in human experiments.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University.

July 30, 2021 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | 2 Comments

The FDA cover-up that led to the approval of the Pfizer vaccine

By Jon Rappoport | No More Fake News | May 25, 2021

As I’ve been documenting for the past year, the COVID experts have been contradicting themselves six ways from Sunday. As charlatans, they’re abject failures. They can’t keep their own story straight.

Thanks to an alert reader, I’ve come across a new blockbuster.

BY THEIR OWN STANDARDS, the FDA should never have allowed the Pfizer COVID vaccine to be shot into a single arm. The Agency’s Emergency Use Authorization was a crime—according to their own data.

Here we go.

The document, posted on the FDA website, is titled, “Vaccines and Related Biological Products; Advisory Committee Meeting; FDA Briefing Document Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine.” [1]

It is dated December 10, 2020. The date tells us that all the information in the document is taken from the Pfizer clinical trial, based on which the FDA authorized the vaccine for public use.

A key quote is buried on page 42: “Among 3410 total cases of suspected but unconfirmed COVID-19 in the overall study population, 1594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1816 in the placebo group [who received a saltwater shot].”

Those shocking numbers have never seen the light of day in news media.

The comparative numbers reveal that the vaccine was not effective at preventing COVID-19. It was certainly not 50% more effective than no vaccine at all—the standard for FDA Emergency Use Authorization.

To make all this clear, I need to back up and explain the theory of the vaccine clinical trial.

The researchers assumed the SARS-CoV-2 virus was spreading everywhere in the world, and during the clinical trial, it would descend on some volunteers.

The billion-dollar question was: how many people receiving the vaccine would become infected, vs. how many people in the placebo group?

If it turned out that FAR FEWER people getting the vaccine became infected with SARS-CoV-2, the vaccine would be hailed as a success. It protected people against the virus.

But as you can see from the numbers above, that wasn’t the case at all.

So now we come to the vital weasel-phrase in the FDA document I just quoted: “suspected but unconfirmed COVID-19 [cases].”

“Well, you see, we can’t say these were ACTUAL COVID-19 cases. Maybe they were, maybe they weren’t. They’re in limbo. We want to keep them in limbo. Otherwise, our clinical trial is dead in the water, and we’ll never get approval for the vaccine.”

What does “suspected cases” mean? It can only mean these people all displayed symptoms consistent with the definition of COVID-19, but they’re unconfirmed cases because…their PCR tests were negative, not positive.

However, if their tests were negative, why would they be called “suspected cases” instead of “NOT CASES”?

Something is wrong here. The FDA is hedging its bets, muddying the waters, obscuring facts.

By FDA/CDC rules, a case of COVID-19 means: a person has tested positive, period.

That’s the way cases are counted.

These several thousand volunteers in the Pfizer clinical trial were either COVID-19 cases or they weren’t. Which is it?

The official response to that question is obvious: the FDA decided to throw the data from all those suspected cases in the garbage and ignore them. Poof. Gone.

Why do I say that?

Because if the FDA had paid serious attention to the several thousand “suspected cases,” they never would have authorized the vaccine for public use. They would have stopped the clinical trial and undertaken a very deep and extensive investigation.

Which they didn’t.

This is called a crime.

“But…but it’s not that simple. This is a complex situation. It’s a gray area.”

“No. It isn’t. If you were running a clinical trial of a new drug, and a few thousand people in the trial, who were given the drug, nevertheless came down with the disease symptoms the drug was supposed to cure, wouldn’t you cancel the trial and go back to the drawing board?”

“You mean if we were being honest? That’s a joke, right? We’re not honest. Don’t you get it?”

Yes. I get it. You’re criminals. Killers.

But wait. There’s more. The FDA document also states: “Suspected COVID-19 cases that occurred within 7 days after any vaccination were 409 in the vaccine group vs. 287 in the placebo group.”

That’s explosive. Right after vaccination, 409 people who received the shots became “suspected COVID cases.” This alone should have been enough to stop the clinical trial altogether. But it wasn’t.

In fact, the FDA document tries to excuse those 409 cases with a slippery comment: “It is possible that the imbalance in suspected COVID-19 cases occurring in the 7 days post vaccination represents vaccine reactogenicity with symptoms that overlap with those of COVID-19.”

Translation: You see, a number of clinical symptoms of COVID-19 and adverse effects from the vaccine are the same. Therefore, we have no idea whether the vaccinated people developed COVID or were just reacting to the vaccine. So we’re going to ignore this whole mess and pretend it’s of no importance.

Back in April of 2020, I predicted the vaccine manufacturers would use this strategy to explain away COVID cases occurring in the vaccine groups of their clinical trials.

It’s called cooking the data. It’s a way of writing off and ignoring COVID symptoms in the vaccine group—and instead saying, “The vaccine is safe and effective.”

And the FDA document, as I stated above, just puts an impenetrable cloud over all the volunteers in the Pfizer clinical trial by inventing a category called “suspected but unconfirmed COVID-19 cases,” and throwing those crucial data away, never to be spoken of again.

I’m speaking about them now. Any sensible person, looking at them, would conclude that the vaccine should never have been authorized.

Unless fraud, deception, profits, and destruction of human life via the vaccine were and are the true goals.

Finally: When you have “suspected cases,” and their ultimate status depends on doing a test, you do the test. You do it as many times as you need to, until it registers positive or negative. Then each “suspected case” becomes an actual case or no case at all.

Perhaps these “suspected cases” in the clinical trial were tested, and many of them came up positive, revealing they were actual COVID cases—but the researchers lied and covered up the fact that they were tested.

Or if you really don’t want to know whether “suspected cases” are actual cases, you don’t test them. You leave them in a convenient limbo and park them, never to be seen again.

Either way, the situation is patently absurd. By official standards, the PCR test decides whether a person is a case or not a case. Just do the test. Saying “we don’t know” is nothing more than a con and a hustle.

I’d love to hear the researchers try to talk their way out of this one. Here is how the conversation might go:

“So you’re saying these several thousand suspected COVID cases couldn’t be adjudicated one way or another?”

“That’s right. Their PCR tests were ‘indeterminate’.”

“That says something devastating about the test itself.”

“Well, sometimes you just can’t tell whether it’s positive or negative.”

“I see. And this ‘indeterminate’ result occurred in SEVERAL THOUSAND suspected cases.”

“I guess so, yes.”

“You know, you could have done something else with these suspected cases. A different test. You could have taken tissue samples and looked for the virus itself in a more direct way.”

“No. That wouldn’t work.”

“Why not?”

“Because…the actual virus…”

“Because no one has been able to come up with a specimen of the actual SARS-CoV-2 virus.”

“Right.”

“So tell me—what does that indicate? I’ll tell you what it indicates. You can’t prove the SARS-CoV-2 virus exists.

“I have to go. I’m late for a meeting.”

“You’re late for more than just a meeting. Is it true a person becomes a virologist by cutting out a coupon from the back of a comic book and mailing it to a PO Box in Maryland?’

“Absolutely not. That’s outrageous.”

“What then?”

“The PO Box is in Virginia.”


SOURCES:

[1] https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download

Jon Rappoport is the author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALEDEXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX.

May 25, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | 1 Comment

Pfizer Ducks Criminal Prosecution Using Shell Companies

Principia Scientific | May 6, 2021

You first heard of ‘too big to fail’ banks in 2008 when the global economic collapse destroyed lives and businesses and few, if any fraudster bankers went to jail.

Don’t be surprised to learn that ‘too big to fail‘ also applies to those Big Pharma entities in cahoots with corrupt politicians. This short video explains how Pfizer, conspiring with bent regulators, uses shell companies to get away with their vaccine crimes.

www.bitchute.com

May 6, 2021 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , | 2 Comments

`We Don’t Debate with Anti-Vaxxers – Whether They’re Right or Wrong’ – Says BBC

Dr Vernon Coleman MB ChB DSc FRSA |  February 12, 2021

At the beginning of what I started off calling the coronavirus hoax, but which I now prefer to refer to as the covid fraud, I expected to see some fairly active debate about the importance of what seemed to me to be a rather over-marketed disease.

The forecasts upon which governments were basing their decisions were clearly over-dramatic and the main forecaster, Neil Ferguson of Imperial College, has a terrible track record – having already been seriously wrong about a great many things.

In 2001, the Imperial team did the modelling on foot and mouth disease which led to a cull of six million sheep, pigs and cattle. The cost to the UK was around £10 billion. The Imperial’s work on this has been described as `severely flawed’. In 2002, Ferguson predicted that up to 50,000 people would die from mad cow disease. He said that could rise to 150,000 if sheep were involved. In the UK the death total was 177.

In 2005, Ferguson said that up to 200 million people could be killed by bird flu. The total number of deaths was 282 worldwide so he was out by 199 million 999 thousand seven hundred and eighteen. If Ferguson designed a mug he’d put the handle on the inside.

In 2009, Ferguson and his chums at Imperial advised the Government again, and they then warned that swine flu would kill 65,000 people in the UK. In the end swine flu killed 457 people in the UK.

Finally, Ferguson is said to have admitted that his model of the covid-19 is based on undocumented 13-year-old computer code that was intended for use with an influenza epidemic.

And it has been reported that early modelling which helped guide the British Government’s approach in 2020, used Wikipedia – which is edited by all sorts of saddos, wierdos and freaks as well as by people with very particular political agendas to pursue. Read what co- founder Larry Sanger has to say about Wikipedia.

So those of us with some experience in these matters decided that the Government had got it wrong again.

And then on March 19th 2020, the public health bodies in the UK, and the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens, decided to downgrade the coronavirus to flu level. The proof of this is on my website.

Naively, I thought that would be that.

Sadly, I was wrong.

Around the world governments have continued to lie, to deceive and to create fear and the media has aided and abetted the lies. All debate has been suppressed and the many doctors and other practitioners who have spoken up and tried to share the truth have been abused and demonised and had their careers ruthlessly destroyed.

The result is that the millions who doubt the Government’s propaganda and who question the safety and efficacy of the jabs have been disenfranchised by the media.

No media organisation has, in my view, been more egregiously dishonest than the BBC which has exhibited staggering ignorance mixed with prejudice and has forgotten that its job is to report the news not to bend it.

I am tired of them ignoring the science, avoiding debate and demonising those of us speaking the truth. I am convinced they believe that by demonising us they can silence us and more easily sustain the fraud and perpetuate the hoax.

They also seem to believe that they are immune to the consequences of this fraud. Do they think they and their relatives will escape the dangers of these lethal jabs?

The tragedy is that the BBC, funded with public money, deliberately suppresses valuable information that could help its viewers and listeners.

Speaking last autumn a BBC presenter called, Emma Barnett, said `we actually don’t, as a matter of editorial policy, we don’t debate with anti-vaxxers, whether they’re right or wrong. We actually don’t do that.’

There’s the proof of the BBC’s one-sided, corrupt approach to the biggest fraud in history. Right or wrong the BBC suppresses the truth.

Why does the unjustifiably arrogant BBC think it knows better than the science? Who told them that vaccines are so good that there is no need to debate their value, their safety or their effectiveness? Is it a stretch to fear that there’s drug company influence lurking somewhere.

And it’s no stretch to conclude that the BBC won’t allow me live on air to counter its misinformation because I can prove that vaccines kill and injure and often don’t work at all, and that would upset Bill Gates and the Government.

The BBC won’t let me discuss covid-19 because I can prove that masks kill and don’t work, that social distancing and lockdowns do far more harm than good, that the Government policy is arguably responsible for more deaths than covid-19 and that the experimental jabs being so heavily promoted are already killing and maiming thousands of people who have been denied informed consent.

Could it be that the bean counters at the BBC are frightened that the truth might upset the BBC’s cosy relationship with arch pro-vaxxers the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation? Gates, remember, has boasted that putting money into vaccines was the best investment he’s ever made.

Why do the BBC staff allow this to happen? Whatever happened to editorial integrity and independence?

I’m not what the BBC would call an anti-vaxxer, I am simply interested in facts and scientific truths, but I can prove that some of the companies making vaccines have over the years been found guilty of fraud and I can prove that billions of dollars have been paid out in compensation to people injured by vaccines.

The BBC isn’t interested in any of those uncomfortable truths. When faced with scores of scientific papers proving that face masks are dangerous, they dig out a scientist who will follow the party line – and then claim that a few quotes trump the inconvenient scientific truths.

Decent broadcasters and journalists would walk away from an organisation which has such oppressive policies – out of tune with an obligation to the public – but they stay for the big salaries and the power and the modest and ethereal fame.

The BBC seems to me to be a propaganda department for, among others, the powerful, rich and fraudulent vaccine industry. They don’t seem to care how many people die as long as they get their fat salaries, fat pensions and a chance to get their picture in the papers occasionally.

Lord Reith would weep.

Many BBC presenters probably don’t know who the hell he was. But he’d weep. He is identified with the BBC’s aims to educate, inform and entertain.

In my view if you deliberately suppress scientific truths that would be inconvenient to one of your financial partners then you deserve all the opprobrium that is available.

Could the BBC and its vast army of reporters and presenters be legally responsible when people who have been denied the truth, fall ill?

I believe so.

The BBC has a legal responsibility to provide both sides of a scientific discussion with a voice but it has deliberately chosen to provide only one point of view.

The BBC is a self-confessed biased organisation and I don’t think it is a stretch to describe it as corrupt. It is, after all, helping Gates get ever richer by silencing, libelling, trashing and attempting to humiliate those trying to reveal the science behind this scam.

The BBC refuses to allow presenters to discuss the downside of vaccination. It is deliberately and knowingly refusing to allow any debate on an issue which affects the health, and possibly the life, of everyone.

Let us not forget, too, that the BBC has financial links with the world’s arch pro-vaxxers – the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation which has interests in a number of vaccine makers – including Pfizer.

In the US the National Vaccine Information Center has so far reported 501 deaths and 10,748 other injuries following the covid-19 jab.

That was before the end of January so I expect its higher now. And don’t forget that in America, as in the UK and elsewhere, they admit that they only receive details of a tiny proportion of the problems after vaccination.

Sadly, the figures from the UK are also horrifying. Officially, more than a third of those having the jab have a reaction. But it’s the serious adverse events that worry me.

UK Government figures show that the Pfizer jab in the UK is already responsible for 107 deaths and 49,472 people injured. In the first few weeks.

If you want to see the horrifying details of the UK government figures they are on my website. Press the health button and the figures are there, near the top in an article entitled `How many are the vaccines killing?’. (Note: Since this video was recorded, there has been an update on the UK Pfizer deaths and injuries. There are now 143 deaths)

This isn’t a vaccination programme. It’s genocide, supported, defended and protected by the BBC. Still, some people are happy. The UK Government is delighted. It will save £600 million in pension payments because of all the old people who’ve been murdered in the last twelve months. And the Financial Times reports that covid-19 deaths, and presumably the jab deaths, will cut £60 billion from corporate pension costs. I have no doubt that the BBC is aware of these figures. After all the Government has appointed, as the new chairman of the BBC, an ex-Goldman Sachs banker – a money man. Goldman Sachs, in my opinion, one of the most corrupt companies in the world has rightly been described as a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity. I’m guessing that the BBC might have welcomed Goebbels as their new chairman if he’d been alive.

Instead the BBC got an ex-Goldman Sachs banker who was appointed by the conservative party and who has allegedly given more than £400,000 to the conservative party. He’s being paid a huge salary and will doubtless get a peerage or a knighthood in due course.

Don’t the coincidences just keep mounting up. You couldn’t make this up. You couldn’t satirise it.

The BBC’s financial partner, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, has financial links to The Guardian, and since BBC job ads often appear in The Guardian, advertising provides a constant source of new, hubristic pseudo journalists. And, of course, the Gates have a huge shareholding in the Pfizer vaccine. Oh what a simple web these conspirators have woven. Whenever the BBC is involved the stench of corruption seems to me to be nauseating.

Bill and Melinda will no doubt be delighted to hear that Pfizer expects to generate $15 billion, or a quarter of its total revenue, from sales of its experimental covid-19 jab. Moreover Pfizer say they expect there to be a long lasting need for covid-19 vaccines to combat new variants and boost waning immune responses.

As far as I know the BBC has failed to tell the public that both the Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Authority and Public Health England have received huge sums of money from Gates.

Is there not one person at the BBC with the integrity, the wisdom, the decency, the self- respect to be ashamed that the corporation has allied itself to one of the most reviled men in modern history, and that in doing so they have betrayed themselves, their families and their viewers, listeners and readers?

Corruption, remember, is fraudulent conduct by those in power – often involving money.

If you lay down all the lies the Government has told in the last twelve months they would go round the world twice and end up on the steps outside Broadcasting House. If you give money to the BBC you are buying the bullets to kill your family. There appears to be no end to the lack of integrity at the BBC. Without talent, without honour and without self-respect – that’s the BBC in 2021.

I haven’t seen the BBC warning that the second dose of the jab may well cause worse problems than the first dose. I doubt if you have either.

Nor have I seen them warn that people who are receiving the jab are going to be in real trouble when they next come into contact with a coronavirus. There will be a problem called a cytokine storm or pathogenic priming, their immune systems will overreact and that’s likely to be when there are lots of deaths. Details can be found on my website and in the International Journal of Clinical Practice for October 2020. If there is someone at the BBC who can read they might like to take a look.

The BBC deliberately and cold-bloodedly suppresses the truth about vaccines (because the pro-vaxxers aren’t going to tell you about the dangers) and has financial links with people promoting vaccines.

Is that corruption?

The BBC derides the truth-tellers as conspiracy theorists.

But the BBC itself is now part of a huge conspiracy and a conspiracy which is practice – not theory. Hundreds of BBC staff are involved in a self-aggrandising, self-enriching betrayal of duty. Every truly independent scientist knows that the covid jabs are experimental and hugely dangerous.

Lord Haw Haw and Tokyo Rose would be welcomed into the bosom of the BBC.

The sooner we get rid of this wretched, treacherous organisation the safer and healthier we will all be.

We can easily judge if the BBC has a shred of honesty left. Here is a simple challenge, a chance for the BBC to redeem itself and show that it is prepared to allow debate of the most important health issue in modern times.

I am prepared to debate the fraud, and the vaccination programme, with any combination of Dr Whitty and Dr Vallance and Mr Hancock live on BBC television. I will try to avoid mentioning that Dr Vallance has shares in his former employer vaccine manufacturer and that Dr Whitty has loose financial links with Bill Gates. I will point out that informed doctors know that the death totals for covid-19 have been grossly exaggerated. Indeed, I’m convinced that in the long run the lockdowns will kill far more people than covid-19.

I also suspect that the vaccines may eventually kill as many as covid-19 – though the vaccine deaths will be wrongly blamed on covid-19. And the side effects will be blamed on mutant strains of the virus or the so-called long covid.

One stipulation: the programme must be live.

I doubt if am alone in not trusting the BBC to edit a programme fairly and without bias. I’ll hire a couple of guys to bring a few thousand scientific papers with me as evidence.

Unlike the BBC which too often relies on a quote from an isolated government approved scientist, I prefer to use scientific papers from reputable journals.

Why should they debate with me? Well, I’m medically qualified and I’ve been writing about medicine and drug companies and vaccines for over 50 years. In 1975 my book, The Medicine Men exposed the way the drug industry had bought control of the medical establishment. Ironically, the BBC made a film about that book.

Today, my books sell around the world and have been bestsellers for years. This is no time for false modesty – I have for many years been the world’s leading medical author. My campaigning has in the past changed government policy.

If the BBC prefers someone else for the live debate then that’s absolutely fine with me. I have, in the past, presented scores of programmes for the BBC but I have now absolutely no personal interest in ever going into a BBC studio again.

If the BBC is to salvage anything from its shattered reputation it has to arrange a debate – otherwise everyone will know that what they have long suspected is true: the BBC is a propaganda machine which is paid for by the British public but which has sold its allegiance to the Government and, quite possibly, to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and their massive commercial interest in vaccines. The BBC gleefully defends the medically and scientifically indefensible – preferring, it seems to me, to deceive rather than inform.

They know as well as I do that the debate I have proposed would produce huge ratings. It’s the debate people want to see.

But I doubt if the BBC, or indeed Whitty, Vallance or Hancock, will accept my challenge. It is no idle boast when I say that they are rightly afraid that I will destroy all their arguments and expose the fraud. I have facts and scientific truths on my side.

If they had confidence they would jump at the chance to debate with me but they know they’ll lose and so they’ll ignore the challenge.

However, if they don’t accept the challenge everyone in Britain will know the truth: the BBC and the Government are frightened that their paper thin deceits will not stand up to scrutiny.

What reason, other than cowardice, could there possibly be for rejecting the debate?

Finally, I leave you with these thoughts.

First, through ignorance or a lack of integrity the BBC has suppressed the truth, and silenced and sneered at the truth-tellers. The only things it seems to do well these days is, it seems to me, to lie and cheat.

Second, the Government’s programme has undeniably resulted in huge numbers of deaths from the lockdowns and from the jabs. There will be thousands more deaths from these indefensible policies.

I believe the BBC staff who are guilty of suppressing the truth are responsible for many of these deaths.

Third, of course, the BBC has close links to vaccine company investors.

Remember, John Reith, the BBC’s first director general originally demanded that the BBC inform and educate – as well as entertain.

Current BBC staff have failed miserably to inform and educate or to represent the huge part of the country which has serious doubts about government policies. The BBC has become a crude propaganda machine, with a vast army of squalid and overpaid pseudo journalists spewing out a never ending stream of lies, deceptions and half-truths and sneering at passionate, caring health practitioners who have spoken out, not for money or prestige, but because they believe it is their duty to share the truth even when doing so costs them dearly – leaving their reputations dishonestly trashed by hundreds of scummy, crooked pseudo-journalists.

It has been well-known for years that the BBC is unreliable and dishonest. The BBC’s biased support of the EU and opposition to Brexit was outrageous. But the BBC’s role as a ruthless propaganda tool, fear creator and disinformation medium has become embarrassingly apparent in recent months. When the BBC opens its mouth it’s the voice of Bill Gates which we hear.

We should work together to demand that the BBC licence fee is stopped. Meanwhile, we should all look for legal ways to stop paying it.

As I have shown in precise detail in previous videos there is no doubt whatsoever that the BBC is our mortal enemy.

Don’t watch any of their programmes. Don’t listen to any of their lies. Shun anyone who works there. The BBC has chosen to side with the enemy of the people, to suppress the truth and to distort the news. Ignore their wretched website. If you care about the truth, and about the lives of those around you, then you must fight to see the BBC abolished. The BBC today seems to me to be all about money and power – and oppressing and deceiving the licence fee payers. The BBC, seems to me to specialise in disinformation.

Meanwhile, ask the BBC why they won’t organise the debate I’ve suggested. And avoid paying the BBC licence fee – legally, of course. Share this video with everyone you know wherever in the world they may live. Warn them about the BBC – in my view it is the world’s most scurrilous, most dishonourable media organisation.

Vernon Coleman’s bestselling medical books include `Coleman’s Laws’, `Bodypower’ and `How to stop your doctor killing you’. These are all available on Amazon as paperbacks and eBooks.

Copyright Vernon Coleman February 12th 2021

February 14, 2021 Posted by | Corruption, Fake News, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , , | Leave a comment

AstraZeneca Recruiting 5 Year-Old Kids For Covid Vaccine Trial

By Richie Allen | February 14, 2021

AstraZeneca is planning a childhood immunisation programme that it says, could protect people from Covid-19 for most of their lives. Yesterday the company announced it was recruiting kids as young as five for the trials. Children participating in the trial will get their first jab by the end of this month. Pfizer is planning a similar trial on a global scale.

AstraZeneca believes that by giving children a “series of jabs” in early life, they’d be giving them a lifetime of immunity from Covid. Professor Sarah Gilbert, an Oxford scientist who worked on the AstraZeneca vaccine said:

“If they get infected it will just be a mild disease, it won’t be very serious, it will just be a sniffle. We’re all really waiting to see how things play out. We could be looking at giving young children immunity, and then boosting it towards the end of life.”

Children are basically immune from coronavirus. Most of them will never get it and those who do will have mild symptoms only. Kids DO NOT need a coronavirus vaccine. What’s going on? A Five-year old should not be compelled to participate in a vaccine trial. The child cannot give informed consent. Any parent who puts their child forward for the trial is guilty of neglect and I’d go further than that. It’s child abuse.

They’re already giving as many as 16 vaccines to children in this country, most of them totally unnecessary. Now they want to vaccinate them just in case they get Covid as an adult? It’s insane. Is there any opposition to this anywhere? The answer is no. The papers and the broadcasters just repeat this crap. None of them has the balls to challenge it. I despair.

Richie Allen is the host of The Richie Allen Radio show, Europe’s most listened to independent radio show and is a passionate supporter of free speech. He lives in Salford with the future Mrs Allen and their two dogs.

February 14, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | 1 Comment

Dozens of people develop rare blood disorder after taking coronavirus vaccines – reports

RT | February 10, 2021

At least 36 recipients of Pfizer’s and Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccines in the US have developed a rare immune disorder that attacks the blood, according to reports. One patient is dead, and doctors can’t rule out blaming the vaccine.

Dr. Gregory Michael – a 56-year-old obstetrician-gynecologist who ran his own practice at Miami Beach’s Mount Sinai Medical Center for more than a decade – died in January of a brain hemorrhage. He had received a dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine two weeks earlier, and immediately developed immune thrombocytopenia, a rare and sometimes fatal blood disorder.

Michael is one of at least 36 people to have developed the condition after receiving either Pfizer’s or Moderna’s coronavirus vaccines, according to a New York Times report published on Monday. The cases were self-reported to the government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) before the end of January, meaning more people could have developed the condition since then.

Immune thrombocytopenia is a rare condition affecting an estimated 50,000 people in the US. The condition is caused by the body’s own immune system attacking the platelets that are the component of the blood responsible for clotting. With their blood unable to clot, patients often develop internal or external bruising, which may look like a rash. In several cases like Michael’s, the condition has caused massive hemorrhages or strokes.

One patient contacted by the Times suffered heavy vaginal bleeding two weeks after receiving Moderna’s vaccine and required platelet transfusions and steroid treatment to survive. Another woman was hospitalized with bruising and bleeding blisters in her mouth just a day after receiving the same shot. Her condition deteriorated to the point where doctors concerned that a slight knock would trigger fatal bleeding were afraid to move her from the hospital bed.

The cases can’t all conclusively be linked with the vaccines, but Dr. James Bussel, a hematologist and expert on the condition, told the Times that an association “is possible.”

“Having it happen after a vaccine is well-known and has been seen with many other vaccines,” he said. “Why it happens, we don’t know.”

Unlike traditional vaccines, which use an inactive form of the pathogen they protect against, both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s offerings are mRNA vaccines. Technologically new and therefore untested on a mass basis, these vaccines work by introducing into the body’s cells a strand of RNA with instructions that tell the person’s DNA how to begin making antibodies.

Researchers at Cambridge University state that side effects could include “autoimmune reactions,” but Harvard scientists say that mRNA vaccines produce “a stronger type of immunity” than their traditional counterparts.

Immune thrombocytopenia can also develop as a result of certain medications and cancers, from influenza, and seemingly from Covid-19 itself. As early as last spring, long before any vaccines were near completion, doctors in the US, Europe, India and China noticed the condition in Covid patients and suspected a link.

Officials with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said that they are investigating the VAERS reports, while both Pfizer and Moderna told the Times that they are monitoring the safety of their vaccines.

Doctors contacted by the Times still insist that vaccination is safe, and that the risk of developing serious illness from the coronavirus is still higher than the risk of side effects from the vaccine.

February 10, 2021 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | 1 Comment