Scientists have examined the Pfizer ‘vaccine’, and what they found was HORRIFIC…It’s Poison!
Source: Stew Peters Show
Scientists have examined the Pfizer ‘vaccine’, and what they found was HORRIFIC…It’s Poison!
Source: Stew Peters Show
The fake news media seems to shy away from any negative press about the Covid vaccine in America.
Over in Europe, however, the truth is making its way into the headlines.
Some shocking figures made the news about how many vaccinated people have died from Covid.
In a stunning admission last week in Public Health England’s technical briefing, it was revealed that most people dying in the UK from Covid had been vaccinated.Trending: WATCH: Report About Ivermectin’s Covid Treatment Success Banned From Fox News
“43% of the Covid deaths in UK are vaccinated. Often only 1 vaccination. But also double vaccinated. In the elderly, the risk of death is so high that even 95% protection leads to many deaths. That means: in winter, …. a booster vaccination will probably be necessary” https://t.co/9G5wqSVtQc
— charles ex (@charles_consult) June 28, 2021
Bad news for vaccinated who are 50+.
Of the 117 recorded deaths in UK from Delta variant of Covid, 50 of them had been vaxed with two doses, and were all 50+.https://t.co/272rUysDT7
— Susan Chun (@schunnyc) June 28, 2021
And over 50% of UK covid deaths in the past week have been people who were double vaccinated. This is not to say the vaccination isn’t extremely effective and the best protection available, but even those who are fully vaccinated should still be cautious.
— Michael E Lewis (@MichaelELewis_) June 28, 2021
Read it yourself.
According to latest UK figures for the delta variant, the death rate for unvaccinated is 0.08% whereas those with 2 doses is 0.69%, I.e. 8.45 times more likely to die catching Covid and fully vaccinated. See page 14 for details. https://t.co/2jsCX7ZDUh
— Data Scientist (@AIOverlord777) June 28, 2021
It appears one-third of people in the UK who have died from the Delta variant had received BOTH “vaccines.”
Leftist Guardian has more on the story:
A MailOnline headline on 13 June read: “Study shows 29% of the 42 people who have died after catching the new strain had BOTH vaccinations.” In Public Health England’s technical briefing on 25 June, that figure had risen to 43% (50 of 117), with the majority (60%) having received at least one dose.
It could sound worrying that the majority of people dying in England with the now-dominant Delta (B.1.617.2) variant have been vaccinated. Does this mean the vaccines are ineffective? Far from it, it’s what we would expect from an effective but imperfect vaccine, a risk profile that varies hugely by age and the way the vaccines have been rolled out.
Unintended deaths are an unfortunate side effect from forcing an untested experimental drug on people. Follow on Telegram @WeLoveTrumpNoah
Curiously, why does the Guardian think the Covid deaths aren’t a bad sign?
— Curious Rabitt (@CuriousRabitt) June 28, 2021
If the Covid vaccine was actually safe, deaths wouldn’t occur.
Metro UK reported similar findings that 12 people who died with the Indian Covid variant in the UK were fully vaccinated:
Almost one third of people in the UK who have so far died from the Indian variant had received both their vaccinations.
Just weeks before England aimed to scrap coronavirus regulations for good, the variant – now officially named ‘Delta’ – has caused cases to soar, sparking fears of another wave of the disease.
But infection numbers are not necessarily what will delay ‘Freedom Day’ on June 21, as scientists will analyse the number of people being hospitalised and dying from the virus.
A new report from Public Health England (PHE) shows out of the 42 British people known to have died with the Delta variant, 12 of them (29%) were fully vaccinated with two doses.
In notes seen by the Sunday Telegraph, PHE epidemiologist Meaghan Kall recorded this ‘percentage of severe outcomes among people [with vaccine] breakthrough infections’ on Friday.
She observed: ‘Who are they and why is that happening? Work ongoing to understand the profile of fully vaxxed people with severe outcomes.’
But it is likely the vaccinated people who died were elderly or sick with pre-existing conditions, and their immunity had dwindled since getting their jabs.
The push to get the Covid jab supersedes rational thinking, it seems.
Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, the US is reporting similar findings amongst the vaccinated dying from Covid.
CNBC recently reported that 4,115 people have been hospitalized or died with Covid-19 despite being fully vaccinated:
More than 4,100 people have been hospitalized or died with Covid-19 in the U.S. even though they’ve been fully vaccinated, according to new data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
So far, at least 750 fully vaccinated people have died after contracting Covid, but the CDC noted that 142 of those fatalities were asymptomatic or unrelated to Covid-19, according to data as of Monday that was released Friday.
The CDC received 3,907 reports of people who have been hospitalized with breakthrough Covid infections, despite being fully vaccinated. Of those, more than 1,000 of those patients were asymptomatic or their hospitalizations weren’t related to Covid-19, the CDC said.
“To be expected,” Dr. Paul Offit, a top advisor to the Food and Drug Administration on children’s vaccines told CNBC. “The vaccines aren’t 100% effective, even against severe disease. Very small percentage of the 600,000 deaths.”
Breakthrough cases are Covid-19 infections that bypass vaccine protection. They are very rare and many are asymptomatic. The vaccines are highly effective but don’t block every infection. Pfizer and Moderna’s phase three clinical studies found that their two-dose regimens were 95% and 94% effective at blocking Covid-19, respectively, while Johnson & Johnson’s one-shot vaccine was found to be 66% effective in its studies. All three, however, have been found to be extremely effective in preventing people from getting severely sick from Covid.
The CDC doesn’t count every breakthrough case. It stopped counting all breakthrough cases May 1 and now only tallies those that lead to hospitalization or death, a move the agency was criticized for by health experts.
Most Americans have received at least one shot of the two currently authorized mRNA vaccines. The U.S. has administered 178.3 million shots and fully vaccinated 46% of its population.
“You are just as likely to be killed by a meteorite as die from Covid after a vaccine,” Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, an infectious disease expert at the University of California San Francisco, told CNBC. “In the big scheme of things, the vaccines are tremendously powerful.”
Efficacy rates decrease slightly for variants like alpha and delta, with studies indicating 88% efficacy against the delta strain after two doses of the Pfizer vaccine. It was unclear if any of the reported breakthrough cases were caused by variants.
In Israel and the United Kingdom, concerns about the delta variant are rising after growing reports of breakthrough infections.
Even with 80% of adults vaccinated, Chezy Levy, director-general of Israel’s Health Ministry, said the delta variant is responsible for 70% of new infections in the country. Levy also said that one-third of those new infections were in vaccinated individuals.
In the U.K., Public Health England released a report that found 26 out of 73 deaths caused by the delta variant occurred in fully vaccinated people from June 8 to June 14. Most of the deaths occurred in unvaccinated individuals.
“Determination of whether hospitalizations and deaths are more represented in immunocompromised patients and the type of vaccine received will be important for future guidance,” Chin-Hong said.
On June 7, the CDC received reports of 3,459 breakthrough cases that led to hospitalization or death. On June 18, that number was updated to 3,729, an increase of 270 cases. Today, the number stands at 4,115.
An overwhelming majority, 76%, of the hospitalizations and deaths from breakthrough cases occurred in people over the age of 65.
″We do not have the years and years of data we have for vaccines against other airborne pathogens — and therefore it is really essential that the CDC provides up to date reporting on breakthrough cases,” David Edwards, aerosol scientist and Harvard University professor, told CNBC.
The CDC says its numbers are “likely an undercount” of all Covid infections in vaccinated people because the data relies on passive and voluntary reporting.
Interestingly, the CDC says the number of breakthrough Covid cases that lead to death is likely an undercount!
How many more people have to die before they shut down the human experiments?
If a few Covid deaths can lockdown the country, surely a few Covid vaccine deaths should shut down the program.
If ONE DEATH out of 10,000 COVID cases shut down the country,
shouldn’t ONE DEATH out of 10,000 vaccines shut down the program?
— HighImpactFlix (@HighImpactFlix) June 23, 2021
Source: We Love Trump
By Nathaniel Weixel It is inevitable that some people who have been fully vaccinated against COVID-19 will still get a “breakthrough” infection, Anthony Fauci said Monday, because no vaccine is 100 percent effective.
A breakthrough infection is when a person contracts an illness despite being vaccinated against it. Fauci noted that there will be hundreds, and maybe thousands of instances of completely vaccinated people getting infected with COVID-19.
The key is to compare the small number of infections to the tens, and eventually hundreds of millions of people who’ve been vaccinated, Fauci said.
“We see this with all vaccines, in clinical trials, in the real world,” Fauci said during a White House briefing. “No vaccine is 100 percent efficacious, or effective, which means that you will always see breakthrough infections, regardless of the efficacy of your vaccine.”
Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, noted the best example of breakthrough infections happens with the flu vaccine. The flu virus mutates rapidly and even during a good year, the shot is only 40 percent to 60 percent effective.
However, even if a vaccine fails to protect against infection, it often protects against serious disease.
“If you get vaccinated, no doubt, you’re less likely to get the flu. But even if you do get the flu and get sick, vaccination can reduce the severity and duration of illness, and could help get you out of trouble,” Fauci said.
During the briefing, Fauci also addressed an Israeli preprint study that made headlines over the weekend, which seemingly found the B.1.351 variant may somewhat evade the protection from the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine.
“With all due respect to my Israeli friends, I think that that preprint, as it were, was about as confusing as you possibly could be,” Fauci said. “The only thing that isn’t confusing is two doses are really good” if you want to be fully protected.
Fauci said the study made it sound like people who receive two doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine were more likely to get infected with the B.1.351 variant than people who were not vaccinated at all.
Fauci said the vaccine’s protection means that in the unlikely event an infection does break through, it will likely be the “more difficult variant,” but “that doesn’t mean you have a greater chance of getting it.”
Source: The Hill
Homology between human and viral proteins is an established factor in viral- or vaccine-induced autoimmunity.
Failure of SARS and MERS vaccines in animal trials involved pathogenesis consistent with an immunological priming that could involve autoimmunity in lung tissues due to previous exposure to the SARS and MERS spike protein.
Exposure pathogenesis to SARS-CoV-2 in COVID-19 likely will lead to similar outcomes. Immunogenic peptides in viruses or bacteria that match human proteins are good candidates for pathogenic priming peptides (similar to the more diffuse idea of “immune enhancement”). Here I provide an assessment of potential for human pathogenesis via autoimmunity via exposure, via infection or injection. SAR-CoV-2 spike proteins, and all other SARS-CoV-2 proteins, immunogenic epitopes in each SARS-CoV-2 protein were compared to human proteins in search of high local homologous matching.
Only one immunogenic epitope in a SARS-CoV-2 had no homology to human proteins. If all of the parts of the epitopes that are homologous to human proteins are excluded from consideration due to risk of pathogenic priming, the remaining immunogenic parts of the epitopes may be still immunogenic and remain as potentially viable candidates for vaccine development.
Mapping of the genes encoding human protein matches to pathways point to targets that could explain the observed presentation of symptoms in COVID-19 disease. It also strongly points to a large number of opportunities for expected disturbances in the immune system itself, targeting elements of MHC Class I and Class II antigen presentation, PD-1 signaling, cross-presentation of soluble exogenous antigens and the ER-Phagosome pathway. Translational consequences of these findings are explored.
Source: NCBI NLM NIH
We sought to determine whether immune reactivity occurs between anti-SARS-CoV-2 protein antibodies and human tissue antigens, and whether molecular mimicry between COVID-19 viral proteins and human tissues could be the cause.
We applied both human monoclonal anti-SARS-Cov-2 antibodies (spike protein, nucleoprotein) and rabbit polyclonal anti-SARS-Cov-2 antibodies (envelope protein, membrane protein) to 55 different tissue antigens. We found that SARS-CoV-2 antibodies had reactions with 28 out of 55 tissue antigens, representing a diversity of tissue groups that included barrier proteins, gastrointestinal, thyroid and neural tissues, and more.
We also did selective epitope mapping using BLAST and showed similarities and homology between spike, nucleoprotein, and many other SARS-CoV-2 proteins with the human tissue antigens mitochondria M2, F-actin and TPO. This extensive immune cross-reactivity between SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and different antigen groups may play a role in the multi-system disease process of COVID-19, influence the severity of the disease, precipitate the onset of autoimmunity in susceptible subgroups, and potentially exacerbate autoimmunity in subjects that have pre-existing autoimmune diseases.
Very recently, human monoclonal antibodies were approved for use on patients with COVID-19. The human monoclonal antibodies used in this study are almost identical with these approved antibodies. Thus, our results can establish the potential risk for autoimmunity and multi-system disorders with COVID-19 that may come from cross-reactivity between our own human tissues and this dreaded virus, and thus ensure that the badly-needed vaccines and treatments being developed for it are truly safe to use against this disease.
Source: FRONTIERS IN ORG
Many pregnant persons in the United States are receiving messenger RNA (mRNA) coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) vaccines, but data are limited on their safety in pregnancy.
From December 14, 2020, to February 28, 2021, we used data from the “v-safe after vaccination health checker” surveillance system, the v-safe pregnancy registry, and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to characterize the initial safety of mRNA Covid-19 vaccines in pregnant persons.
A total of 35,691 v-safe participants 16 to 54 years of age identified as pregnant. Injection-site pain was reported more frequently among pregnant persons than among nonpregnant women, whereas headache, myalgia, chills, and fever were reported less frequently. Among 3958 participants enrolled in the v-safe pregnancy registry, 827 had a completed pregnancy, of which 115 (13.9%) resulted in a pregnancy loss and 712 (86.1%) resulted in a live birth (mostly among participants with vaccination in the third trimester). Adverse neonatal outcomes included preterm birth (in 9.4%) and small size for gestational age (in 3.2%); no neonatal deaths were reported. Although not directly comparable, calculated proportions of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in persons vaccinated against Covid-19 who had a completed pregnancy were similar to incidences reported in studies involving pregnant women that were conducted before the Covid-19 pandemic. Among 221 pregnancy-related adverse events reported to the VAERS, the most frequently reported event was spontaneous abortion (46 cases).
Preliminary findings did not show obvious safety signals among pregnant persons who received mRNA Covid-19 vaccines. However, more longitudinal follow-up, including follow-up of large numbers of women vaccinated earlier in pregnancy, is necessary to inform maternal, pregnancy, and infant outcomes.
Source: NEJM ORG
Ever since reports have surfaced in recent days that people who have chosen NOT to receive the experimental COVID-19 shots but have been exposed to those who have received them, and have suffered what appear to be infections coming from these fully “vaccinated” people, affecting mainly women who have reported menstruation difficulties, heavy bleeding, miscarriages, and reduction of breast milk, I have been watching my newsfeed to see if any of the dissenting doctors and scientists we feature regularly here at Health Impact News would address these issues.
Fortunately, a team of 5 doctors in the U.S., all of whom we have featured in the past here at Health Impact News and are highly qualified to address this topic, just held a round-table discussion a couple of days ago to address these issues.
The issues they discuss affect ALL of us in the U.S. (and around the world) right now, and it is imperative that you take 79 minutes of your time to watch this video.
Not only do these highly qualified doctors discuss why they think this is happening, they also give practical advice at the end about what we can be doing right now to protect ourselves and stop this attack on the human race by the Globalists seeking to reduce the world’s population.
Every single one of these doctors believe that these shots are NOT vaccines, but bioweapons designed to kill human beings.
Whatever else you are doing when you come across this video, it is highly unlikely that anything else you do the rest of your day will be more important than watching this video so you can be informed of the evil effects of these injections that are being censored in the corporate media and Big Tech social media.
Research and analysis
Statement from the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling, Operational sub-group (SPI-M-O). Paper from the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling, Operational sub-group (SPI-M-O) summarising further modelling on easing restrictions for England (Roadmap Step 2). It was considered at SAGE 85 on 31 March 2021.
This paper should be read alongside the accompanying modelling papers from SAGE 85:
This updates earlier SPI-M-O statements on modelling on easing restrictions, that was tabled at SAGE 81 on 18 February 2021.
The paper is the assessment of the evidence at the time of writing. As new evidence or data emerges, SAGE updates its advice accordingly. Published 5 April 2021
By Jeanne Smits
According to the CTIAP, all of the vaccines were put on the market and actively used on human beings before ‘proof of quality for the active substance and the finished product’ was produced.
April 22, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A regional independent drug assessment center, the CTIAP (Centre territorial d’Information indépendante et d’Avis pharmaceutiques), which is linked to the Cholet public hospital in the west of France, recently published a report showing that the vaccines used against COVID were not only submitted to insufficient clinical testing, but that the quality of the active substances, their “excipients, some of which are new,” and the manufacturing processes are problematic. “These new excipients should be considered as new active substances,” the Cholet hospital team stated, in a study that according to them raises issues that have not been commented to date.
The team led by Dr. Catherine Frade, a pharmacist, worked on public data released by the EMA with relation to the Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) shots, and its first caveat was that all these products only have temporary marketing authorizations. They are all subject to further studies that reach as far as 2024 and even beyond, and these will be almost impossible to be completed because of the way the vaccines are now being distributed, said the CTIAP report.
These studies even include the stability and comparability of the vaccine batches put on the market and the quality and safety of excipients — substances formulated alongside the active ingredient of a medication to facilitate or enhance their absorption.
According to the CTIAP, all of the vaccines were put on the market and actively used on human beings before “proof of quality for the active substance and the finished product” was produced: all the manufacturing labs obtained future deadlines to submit their studies in this regard.
The authors of the report consider that the “variabilities, which impact the very core of the product, could even invalidate any clinical trials conducted” in the coming months and years.
They go so far as to state: “Prudence would even dictate that, in all countries where these vaccines against COVID-19 have been marketed, all the batches thus ‘released’ should be withdrawn immediately; and that these MAs that have been granted should be suspended, or even canceled, as a matter of urgency until further notice.”
Can we imagine launching a car manufacturing line and putting vehicles on the road, despite the uncertainties noted in the official documents published? These uncertainties are related to the quality of the parts making up the engine and the various other parts, including those related to safety, the manufacturing process, the reproducibility of the batches that are being marketed, etc.
In the field of medicines (including vaccines), the pharmaceutical act of “release” of the finished product (an authorized product intended for sale) constitutes the final stage of control that precedes the release of these products to the population. This key step of “release” is under the pharmaceutical responsibility of the manufacturers.
Following its previous analyses, the CTIAP of the Cholet Hospital Center has once again revealed to the public, and probably in an unprecedented and exclusive way, new vital information concerning the following four vaccines against COVID-19: the one from the BioNTech/Pfizer laboratory; the one from the Moderna laboratory; the one from the Astra Zeneca laboratory; the one from the Janssen laboratory.
This work was made possible thanks to the valuable contribution of Dr. Catherine Frade, pharmacist and former director of international regulatory affairs in the pharmaceutical industry. She graciously provided us with a documented, written alert. In this document, she sheds light on data extracted, on March 22, 2021, from the MA (marketing authorization) itself; an MA qualified as “conditional.” She has extracted “source data that is difficult to identify by someone who does not work in the field.” This data is therefore public and verifiable. First of all, it should be noted that the author of this document no longer works in the pharmaceutical industry; she states: “First of all, I would like to make it clear that I have no conflict of interest with the pharmaceutical industry.” It is therefore with her agreement that CTIAP intends to make available to the public, health professionals, decision-makers … an analysis of some of these data that all should read carefully.
This reflection first presents what a “conditional” MA is (I). Then, it recalls that the studies for these vaccines are not complete, as they run from “2021 to at least 2024” (II). Then, it reveals, in an unprecedented and exclusive way, that the official documents, published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), underline the insufficiency of the evidence concerning also the “quality” of the “active substance” and of the “excipients,” of the “manufacturing process,” of the “reproducibility of the batches” that are being commercialized, etc. (III). Finally, this analysis proposes a conclusion.
An MA is to a drug what a car registration document is to a car. MA is granted when a drug has proven its quality, efficacy, and safety; with a positive benefit/risk ratio: that is, it presents more benefits than risks. Obtaining this MA is the essential condition for a pharmaceutical laboratory to sell any drug, including vaccines.
Here, in the case of these vaccines against COVID-19, the four MAs issued are so-called “conditional” MAs. They are temporary. They are valid for no more than one year, because they were obtained on the basis of “incomplete data.” To obtain a standard 5-year MA, the laboratories concerned must provide dossiers completed with “studies in progress and studies planned for the coming years.” Throughout “this development,” close and coordinated monitoring between the manufacturing laboratories and the health authorities is organized through regular discussions. The “conditional” MA is “re-evaluated each year” according to the contribution and critical analysis of additional data provided and collected during a full year.
This “conditional” MA is a European MA. It was obtained through the centralized accelerated procedure. It allows simultaneous marketing in the following 30 countries (European Union and European Free Trade Association): Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden.
The studies concerning these four vaccines are therefore still in progress.
All of the studies submitted during the MA application are summarized in the EPAR (European Public Assessment Report). This report is published on the European Medicines Agency (EMA) website. The planned studies, not yet completed, are also included.
This schedule, which “extends from 2021 to at least 2024,” depending on which COVID-19 vaccine is involved, is defined in the “annexes” of the conditional marketing authorization and in the published EPARs.
As an example, the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine received this European conditional MA on December 21, 2020. And the deadline for filing “confirmation” of efficacy, safety, and tolerability of this vaccine is “December 2023.”
The Moderna vaccine was granted marketing authorization on January 6, 2021. The deadline for filing “confirmation” of efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the vaccine is “December 2022” at the earliest.
AstraZeneca’s vaccine was granted marketing authorization on January 29, 2021. The deadline for filing “confirmation” of efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the vaccine is “March 2024.”
The Janssen vaccine was granted conditional European marketing authorization on March 11, 2021. The deadline for submitting “confirmation” of the vaccine’s efficacy, safety and tolerance is “December 2023.”
However, to date — and this is undoubtedly where the unprecedented and exclusive revelation of this study lies — another deadline has been set for these four vaccines. This deadline no longer concerns only the ongoing clinical trials, but also the “proof of quality for the active substance and the finished product” itself: that is, the intrinsic quality (the heart) of the product sold and administered to millions of people.
The deadline for submitting additional evidence on the “quality” of the “active substance” and the “finished product” (i.e., the vaccine that is authorized and sold) is set for:
Indeed, for these 4 vaccines, paragraph E, “Specific obligation regarding post-authorization measures for the conditional marketing authorization,” taken from Annex II of the MA, clearly states the following:
For the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine (pages 18-19)
By “March 2021,” the laboratory must provide “additional validation data” to “confirm the reproducibility of the finished product manufacturing process.”
By “July 2021,” the laboratory must provide missing information to:
For the Moderna vaccine (page 15)
The laboratory should provide the missing information to:
For the Astra Zeneca vaccine (pages 14-15)
The laboratory must submit the missing information in order to:
For the Janssen vaccine (page 18)
The laboratory should submit the missing information to:
These facts allow us to offer a conclusion.
For these reasons, which are not exhaustive, it has proved useful to look for and read the content of the paragraph E: “Specific obligation relating to post-authorization measures concerning the conditional marketing authorization,” extracted from Annex II of the MA, corresponding to each of these 4 vaccines against COVID-19.
The inadequacy of the evaluation does not only concern the clinical trials (studies conducted in humans (women and men)), but also the quality of the active substance, the excipients, some of which are new, the manufacturing process, and the batches released and administered to humans in several countries around the world.
Moreover, these new excipients must be considered as new active ingredients, and thus be the subject of a complete evaluation file similar to that required for a new active ingredient.
Changing the commercial name of one of these vaccines, as was recently announced for the AstraZeneca vaccine in particular, can only be considered as a cosmetic arrangement of the product’s image for marketing purposes (winning new public confidence, boosting sales). It would not answer the questions raised concerning the quality, efficacy and safety of the product. This is one of the usual techniques used to put make-up on (dissimulate) certain undesirable characteristics of the product concerned. It is a technique that has been used to present other drugs in the best possible light.
As already mentioned, in the field of medicines (including vaccines), the “release” of the finished product (intended for sale) is the final stage of control (of quality and therefore of safety) before making these products available to the population.
This key stage of “release” of batches is the pharmaceutical responsibility of the manufacturers. However, the responsibility of the users (institutions and health professionals in particular) may also be involved.
In our opinion, these clinical studies should never have begun before the intrinsic quality of the finished product and its manufacturing process had been fully mastered; before the formulas of these vaccines had been stabilized.
These variabilities, which impact the very core of the product, could even invalidate any clinical trials conducted.
Even in the case of a health emergency, it is therefore difficult for us to understand the basis for the MA (marketing authorization) that has been granted to these COVID-19 vaccines.
In addition to the uncertainties related to COVID-19, there are also the approximations related to the use, and the intrinsic quality, of these vaccines. Now two problems will have to be managed instead of one.
The maneuver seems subtle. The useful information is available in the official documents published in the framework of the MA; but this data is not made visible by the official discourse. It seems the latter has only tried to present these products as being effective and safe, without reservations; even though the formulas and manufacturing processes of these vaccines do not even seem to have been fully stabilized yet.
These new revelations, which are undoubtedly unprecedented and exclusive, further cast doubt on the validity of consent (a fundamental freedom) that is supposed to be free and informed, and which is said to have been given by the people who are now already vaccinated.
Every person has the right to clear, fair and appropriate information. This information is also perennial: if new data is revealed, those already vaccinated must be informed a posteriori (after the administration of this or that vaccine).
The “obligation” to vaccinate cannot therefore be sustained, even in a disguised form, notably through a “vaccine passport.”
This new analysis further confirms our previous reflections such as the one entitled “Could the Covid-19 vaccine (Tozinameran; COMIRNATY°) be qualified as ‘defective’ by a judge?” or those expressed in the two open letters that have already been sent to the Minister of Solidarity and Health and to the seven Orders of health professionals.
Vulnerability does not only arise from the age and state of health of individuals. Not being able to access independent information on medicines (including vaccines) is the first form of poverty and inequality.
Moreover, concerning the uncertainties on the effectiveness of these vaccines, the Council of State noted, on March 3, 2021, in particular the admission of the Ministry of Solidarity and Health itself, and the contradictions of the French “administration.” In this decision, and against the opinion of this Ministry, the Council of State had produced a decision that seemed to tend towards the recognition of this effectiveness. But, a few days later, in a new decision (n° 450413) issued on March 11, 2021, the Council of State changed its position and admitted “the uncertainty that remains regarding the real effectiveness of the vaccine in terms of the spread of the virus.” It should also be recalled that, on February 18, 2021, the Minister of Solidarity and Health also recognized, and that publicly, that no European country has been able to provide proof that these vaccines can prevent “severe” forms of COVID-19 (see press conference, starting at 34min 44s).
In its latest “Update on the surveillance of COVID-19 vaccines — Period from 12/03/2021 to 18/03/2021” published on March 26, 2021, and updated on March 29, 2021, the French National Agency for the Safety of Medicines (ANSM) reports, in particular, the number of deaths that have occurred in France after the administration of these vaccines. Deaths that are notified (reported) in pharmacovigilance (regardless of the certainty of the “causal link” between these vaccines and these deaths): “311 deaths” after administration of the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine; “4 deaths” after administration of the Moderna vaccine; “20 deaths” after administration of the Astra Zeneca vaccine; (no data is available at this time regarding the latest vaccine (Janssen) to be licensed). In general, for all drugs, there is a high level of under-reporting in pharmacovigilance despite the mandatory nature of these reports.
Consequently, prudence would even dictate that, in all countries where these vaccines against COVID-19 have been marketed, all the batches thus “released” should be withdrawn immediately; and that these MAs that have been granted should be suspended, or even cancelled, as a matter of urgency until further notice. In any case, this is the sense of the recommendations that we could suggest to the ad hoc authorities, and in particular to the French authorities. And, at the very least, this information must be made known to everyone in a clear, fair, and appropriate manner.
All the more so since, in the case of serious adverse effects, including deaths, and in order to establish the said “causal link” with certainty, the victims and their families are often powerless when faced with the requirement of “probatio diabolica” [a legal requirement to achieve an impossible proof].
Source: Life Site
All about COVID-19 mass vaccination program, experimental vaccine, science warns, corona scandal, pandemic/Plandemic, the global reset, Nuremberg Tribunals II, Articles and videos…
History tells us that the 1918 Spanish Flu killed between 50 – 100 million people. At the time, medical and pharmaceutical sources described it as THE MOST horrific disease process since the Black Plague of 1347, which killed an estimated 25-30 million people.
In the book, Vaccination Condemned, by Eleanor McBean, PhD, N.D., the author describes, in detail, personal and family experiences during the 1918 “Spanish Flu” pandemic.
McBean’s coverage of the 1918 “Spanish Flu”, as a reporter and an unvaccinated survivor, requires that the historical basis of the event needs to be revisited, not as a “conspiracy theory” but with evidence that will “set your hair on fire”.
A few years ago, I came across another book by Eleanor McBean: “Vaccination…The Silent Killer”. McBean provides evidence that not only were the historical events of the 1918 “Spanish Flu” compromised, but also those of the Polio and Swine Flu epidemics.
Spain was neutral during WW1 and did NOT censor its press, unlike the combatting countries. As a result, Spain was the first to report the 1918 Flu epidemic and the world “scapegoated” Spain as the source. Thus, the “Spanish Flu” is born.
In preparation for WW1, a massive military vaccination experiment involving numerous prior developed vaccines took place in Fort Riley, Kansas- where the first “Spanish Flu” case was reported.
The fledgling pharmaceutical industry, sponsored by the ‘Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research’, had something they never had before – a large supply of human test subjects. Supplied by the U.S. military’s first draft, the test pool of subjects ballooned to over 6 million men.
CLICK HERE for more details.
Autopsies after the war proved that the 1918 flu was NOT a “FLU” at all. It was caused by random dosages of an experimental ‘bacterial meningitis vaccine’, which to this day, mimics flu-like symptoms. The massive, multiple assaults with additional vaccines on the unprepared immune systems of soldiers and civilians created a “killing field”. Those that were not vaccinated were not affected.
“Seven men dropped dead in a doctor’s office after being vaccinated. Letters were sent to their families that they had been killed in action.”
Minnesota Wellness Directory
WW1 U.S. soldiers were given 14 – 25 untested, experimental vaccines within days of each other, which triggered intensified cases of ALL the diseases at once. The doctors called it a new disease and proceeded to suppress the symptoms with additional drugs or vaccines.
In the examples given in my previous blog “COVID 19: Another Chapter in the History of Deception and Secrecy”, history is replete with intentional lies told to the public to either “save face” or to deceive for nefarious purposes. The 1918 “Spanish Flu” was no exception.
British scientist and Professor Neil Ferguson of The Imperial College, London (the same Imperial College of London funded by the Bill Gates Foundation) was responsible for developing the mathematical pandemic computer models for the COVID-19 pandemic.
The world followed Ferguson’s advice, yet all his models have been proven to be grossly over stated and misleading.
For example, Ferguson modeled that Sweden would experience 100,000 deaths by June, 2020. To date, Sweden peaked at 2,854 deaths total.
The media, Facebook, Google, YouTube, and other “privately” owned communications outlets have become the self-proclaimed “guardians” (censors) of information.
On April 26, 2020, Twitter suspended the account of a publicly traded biotech company for sharing information about a non-medicinal UV light therapy for COVID-19. YouTube also removed a video demonstrating how the technology works.
“(YouTube) will ban videos that contradict W.H.O. guidance on the pandemic or share fake or unproven Coronavirus remedies.”Susan Wojcicki
CEO – YouTube
NewsGuard recently classified Mercola.com as fake news for reporting that the COVID virus potentially leaked from the biosafety level 4 laboratory in Wuhan City, China.
“Fact Checking” is often provided by paid writers from the pharmaceutical companies and not from verified, independent sources.
“The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.”Arnold Relman
Former Editor of the New England Journal of Medicine
Vaccine promoters claim that vaccines wiped out most infectious diseases. History tells us a different story. The beginning of the 20th century introduced improved sanitation (sewers), water treatment plants, and vastly improved nutrition.
The sample graphs above show that infectious diseases like Measles, Whooping Cough, Diphtheria, Typhoid Fever and Polio, were all at their lowest levels and dropping, BEFORE the vaccines were introduced.
The 1918 “Spanish Flu” held sinister secrets for 100 years. Based on my previous blog: “COVID 19: Another Chapter in the History of Deception and Secrecy”, will we learn that the world-changing protocols from COVID-19 may also contain hidden secrets?
Source: Dr. Sal Martingano, FICPA