Vaccine Crimes

[mountain_jim]

https://twitter.com/DavidBCollum/sta...c6wZncmHo60jmQ

https://twitter.com/DavidBCollum/sta...c6wZncmHo60jmQ

https://twitter.com/DavidBCollum/sta...c6wZncmHo60jmQ

[onawah]

First Ever NIH/NIND Study on Vaccine Caused Neurological Injuries
244,941 views May 20, 2022
9K
Drbeen Medical Lectures
575K subscribers

(Outright lies in the conclusion from the vaccine trial, one of the participants in it joins in the discussion.)

"First Ever NIH/NIND Study on Vaccine Caused Neurological Injuries "

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=9XGpe6MTaFg

[mountain_jim]

[Delight]

CV19 Vax Deaths & Injuries is an Ignored Humanitarian Catastrophe – Dr. Pierre Kory
Greg Hunter's USAWatchdog.com
Published June 11, 2022

One-on-One with Dr. Pierre Kory, one of the top Pulmonary and Covid Critical Care experts on the planet, who is co-founder of the Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance (flccc.net).

Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v15iggj/?pub=mpxgj

[Delight]

8 - On Pfizer's Former Global Head of Respiratory Diseases, the Whistleblower Dr Mike Yeadon
June 12th, 2022

Radical w/Maajid Nawaz
@MaajidNawaz

We speak at length in this special episode to whistleblower Dr Mike Yeadon, author of The Covid Lies and former global Head of Respiratory Diseases for Pfizer.

Source: https://odysee.com/$/embed/EP8-Radical:9

[mountain_jim]

Forwarded from
The Vigilant Fox 🦊
3:40
Athletes Dropping, Record Life Insurance Deaths: On a Clear and Convincing Basis, It's Because of the Vaccines

The Bradford Hill Criteria for Causality Confirm

- Is there a large signal? Yes, an astronomical number of deaths.

- Is there a temporal association? Yes. It turns out that 80% of these deaths occur within a week. 50% will occur within a couple of days.

- Is it internally consistent? Are there near-misses? Yes. Blood clots, heart attacks, myocarditis, and so on.

- Is it externally consistent? Yes. Record life insurance deaths and a record number of athletes dying on the field.

- Do randomized trials affirm? Yes. More deaths in Pfizer's vaccine group than in the placebo."

Dr. Peter McCullough: "On a more probable than not basis, and probably on a clear and convincing basis, the vaccines are causing the death of people who take them."

https://thevigilantfox.locals.com/

[Delight]

This is an important interview because it does not talk around the issue that this is a death treatment. A tidal wave of "SADS" will continue until we STOP the JAB.


Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v14q26l

[Satori]

If I did this right the following is a link to an article I wrote in May of 2022 and which is posted on DailyClout. It concerns the absence of any distinction, other than a legal fiction, between Pfizer's FDA EUA poison and the FDA's approved Pfizer/BioNTech's other poison, COMIRNATY. Titled: "Were We Lied To By The FDA?"

https://dailyclout.io/were-we-lied-to-by-the-fda/

[Michi]

Here is the "Grand Jury Day 8 - Closing Arguments from Dr. Reiner Fuellmich" video:
He summarizes the entire plandemic crime and it's perpetrators.

Source: https://odysee.com/$/embed/Grand-Jury-Day-8-Fuellmich-Odyssee/9247bd1d793b5ca1c4bfdb7cd3c93eff81540f60?r=G9HnoaVtbDeEW97uDXCRFukHvfZD3Y5t

[KimmyLove]

Thank you!!! I firmly believe anything such as vaccines allow huge risk to the immune system.

[onawah]

Is ModeRNA planning to commit fraud?

Posted by onawah (here)
Is ModeRNA planning to commit fraud?
Tune in this Tuesday (June 14, 2022) and Wednesday (June 15, 2022) to watch the VRBPAC meetings to see for yourself.
James Roguski
https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/...urce=email&s=r

(Many hyperlinks in the article which are not embedded here)

"SORRY MODERNA, YOUR REQUEST MUST BE DENIED!
“We the People” do not appreciate your attempt to deceive us. Your misrepresentation of the data from your clinical trials is clearly fraudulent.
Below is the letter that the FDA MUST, by law, send to ModeRNA to reject their request for Emergency Use Authorization of their injectable “biological product.”

Dear ModeRNA,

In order for the FDA to authorize any biological product for emergency use, THE LAW REQUIRES THAT ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA BE PROVEN:

EMERGENCY: There must be an emergency involving a disease that poses a risk of death to the target patient demographic.

EFFECTIVENESS: The biological product being considered must be shown to be effective in PREVENTING the deadly disease.

SAFETY: The biological product being considered must be shown to be safe.

POSITIVE BENEFIT/RISK RATIO: The benefits of the biological product must outweigh the risks.

The evidence below shows that ModeRNA has FAILED to prove all of the above mandatory criteria, so the FDA has no other legal recourse than to reject ModeRNA’s request for Emergency Use Authorization of their biological product.

See the rumble video embedded at the end of this post

https://rumble.com/v189ihy-fauci-ouc...r-infants.html

It is time to wake up:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZeLU4cGXYA8

My request to all of my readers:
Watch the videos above.

Inform yourself by reading this article.

Pray (literally) for EVERYONE to awaken to the truth.

CLICK HERE to review the meetings’ agenda.

Watch the VRBPAC meetings (live or recorded).

CLICK HERE to submit your public comment to the FDA

CLICK HERE to send a comment to your Senators, Congressional Representative, Governor and State Assembly Representative.

CLICK HERE to read Robert F. Kennedy’s statement.

Contact me if you have any questions (310-619-3055).

Share this article with everyone you can A.S.A.P.

Share

NOTE: This article primarily analyzes the information regarding ModeRNA’s data about children ages 6 months to 5 years.


SAVE THE DATES: June 14-15, 2022
REVISIT THIS PAGE TO WATCH BOTH OF THE VACCINE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGS LIVE STREAMED OR RECORDED:
Tuesday June 14, 2022 5:30 am Pacific Time
VOTING QUESTIONS FOR MODERNA
Based on the totality of scientific evidence available, do the benefits of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine when administered as a 2-dose series (100 μg each dose) outweigh its risks for use in adolescents 12 through 17 years of age?

Based on the totality of scientific evidence available, do the benefits of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine when administered as a 2-dose series (50 μg each dose) outweigh its risks for use in children 6 through 11 years of age?"

MUCH MUCH MORE AT THE LINK: https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/...urce=email&s=r

FDA Risk-Benefit Analysis Hides ‘Bad Data’ on Moderna Shots for Kids
06/13/22
By Toby Rogers, Ph.D.
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...f-9adae2dcd863

"Editor’s Note: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine advisory council will meet June 14 to consider granting Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines for children under 5 years old, even though the White House last week announced it is already filling orders for the vaccines placed by states and healthcare providers. Click here to tell your members of Congress to oppose EUA of these vaccines for young children.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) last week released its risk-benefit assessment of Moderna’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) application to inject mRNA into kids 0 to 17 years old.

I’ve been reading it for the past two days and here are the things that stood out to me.

Introduction, a shell game to hide the bad data

The risk-benefit document for Moderna is 190 pages single-spaced. It was released two business days before the June 14-15 Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, or VRBAC meeting.

A similar risk-benefit assessment for Pfizer’s EUA application for kids under 5 will be released today (just 24 hours before the meeting).

This guarantees that NONE of the members of the VRBPAC will have read either of these documents before the meeting — which is exactly what the cartel wants.

One of the ways Moderna and the FDA rig the game is by adding endless layers of complexity to hide how bad the data really is.

This should have been four separate documents — Moderna in adolescents 12 to 17, Moderna in kids 6 to 11, Moderna in kids 2 to 5, and Moderna in kids 6 months to 23 months.

Looked at individually, the shot fails in each of these four age groups. But lumping them together creates noise that makes it difficult to understand what’s going on.

Another really pernicious thing that Moderna does is to further subdivide these populations into eight different subpopulations (Randomization Set, Full Analysis Set, Immunogenicity Subset, Per-protocol Immunogenicity Subset, Per-protocol Set for Efficacy, Modified Intent-to-treat Set, MITT1 Set, Safety Set, Solicited Safety Set).

See what they did there? The public just wants to know — does the product work and what are the side effects?

By dividing the data into eight subcategories involving four different age groups now you have to wade through 32 different tables to try to make sense of what happened in the clinical trial.

They do something similar with the adverse events by dividing it across five tables x four age groups = 20 adverse event tables in all.

Subdividing the data in this way also allows Moderna to eliminate or hide data that it does not like.

This is what people call “massaging the data” and it is unethical and a violation of scientific norms. We’ll return to this topic below.

No actual health benefits so Moderna/FDA use the immunobridging trick

The risks of COVID-19 are so low in the childhood population that there were ZERO severe cases of COVID-19 in either the treatment or the control group.

Therefore, the number needed to vaccinate, to prevent a single severe case of COVID-19 in the childhood population, is infinity. (Technically it’s undefined because you cannot divide by zero, but you take my point.)

The FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC guidance documents for how to write a risk-benefit assessment state that one must provide a number needed to treat, the absolute risk reduction, and the relative risk reduction.

Moderna just skipped all that because the cartel makes its own rules.

Moderna is in a race against natural immunity. But natural immunity has already won because 74.2% of kids had natural immunity by February — so by now, the number is probably closer to 100%.

The God-given immune system in kids has already done its part to stop the pandemic and now the FDA wants to mess that up to enrich the cartel and keep the pandemic going forever.

So how does Moderna/FDA claim that this shot was “effective”? They use an unethical statistical trick called “immunobridging.”

It makes me mad that I even have to explain it because it’s such junk science. But we all need to know exactly how the FDA rigged the process so that we can explain to the jury at Nuremberg 2 why these monsters should be convicted so here goes.

Remember, the Moderna shots produced NO reductions in severe outcomes because the risk of COVID-19 in this age group is infinitesimally small (see studies: here, here, here, and here).

So Moderna ignored the actual health outcomes and switched to looking at antibodies in the blood. In the process, they engaged in two egregious sleights of hand.

First, Moderna claims that the sample size for each of the four subgroups of children is about 3,000. But when it came to looking at antibodies in the blood, Moderna threw out about 90% of the sample and only looked at the bloodwork of about 300 kids in each age group.

No explanation was given for the criteria they used to exclude 90% of the sample from their analysis. We know that up to 30% of kids have no antibody response at all to COVID-19 shots so perhaps they actually started with a much larger sample and then threw out the data that showed no effect from the shot?

The second sleight of hand is that “no placebo recipients were included in the Immunogenicity Subset” (p. 26). Do you realize how huge this is? This is no longer an RCT at all — they did not include the bloodwork from anyone in the placebo group.

So the study cannot rule out the possibility that the increase in antibody levels was not from the vaccine at all but could have been from natural immunity. Just astonishing.

After these sleights of hand, Moderna then compares the antibody levels in the blood of about 10% of the children against the antibody levels in a sample of about 300 adults ages 18 to 25 enrolled in a previous clinical trial. If the antibody levels are similar (which they are), Moderna claims, ‘And therefore it will prevent disease in the future in kids!’

A few problems with that claim:

The Moderna study only measured antibody levels two months after the second dose — the time period when the antibody levels are at their peak (what Berenson calls “the happy valley”). But real-world experience with these vaccines shows that any efficacy quickly wanes to zero by six months and then goes NEGATIVE after that.

The second problem — and this is unresolvable and instantly disqualifying for Moderna — is that at the April 6 meeting of the FDA’s “expert advisory committee” one member after another acknowledged that there are no “correlates of protection” for these vaccines.

What that means in plain English is that you cannot use antibodies (or B-cells, T-cells, or any other proxy) to predict whether someone is immune or not.

Eric Rubin, who serves on that committee and is also the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) stated it bluntly:

“We know what kind of antibody response can be generated, we just don’t know if it works.”

You can watch it yourself in the video below.The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s risk-benefit document in connection with the Moderna mRNA shot in kids is dishonest, and evidence that the public health establishment has abandoned science, logic, reason, rationality, empathy, health and medicine.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=x8rq247E80I

The third problem is that the Moderna study was completed back in mid-2021 — when the original Wuhan and Alpha strains were prevalent. Since then, the Omicron variant has entirely replaced the original strains and real-world data show that both Moderna and Pfizer shots are not effective against the Omicron variant.

So in spite of all of the chicanery (discarding 90% of the sample, immunobridging, claiming correlates of protection that are not valid) Moderna cannot show any evidence that this shot will be effective against SARS-CoV-2 as it exists now.

It’s all harms

Let’s talk about harms from this shot (and remember, it’s all harms in this population because the shot made no difference in real-world health outcomes). And there, things get really weird really fast.

The median study follow-up duration was just 53 days after dose 2. After that, they wiped out the control group. Here’s how they justified it (p. 26):

“Following authorization of an alternative COVID-19 vaccine for this age group on May 10, 2021, participants in the study were permitted to unblind to study treatment. Crossover vaccination with mRNA-1273 of participants initially randomized to placebo began in October 2021.”

For each age category, Moderna spreads the adverse events across 5 different tables to increase the noise to hide the signal. But the bottom line is that the adverse events are off the charts. “In the adolescent population 99.2% of vaccine recipients reported at least one adverse reaction after any injection with 25.3% reporting a reaction that was Grade 3 or higher” (p. 54).

Holy sh*t those numbers are high. Grade 3 means: unable to return to work or school the next day because the person is so sick.

A different FDA staffer must have written the summary statements for the other three age groups because they don’t say it this plainly but the adverse event rates are similar across all of the children.

This adverse event data is so high it’s disqualifying.

But then things get even weirder — the adverse event rates in the placebo group were also very high in many, but not all, categories. Moderna used this to say, ‘well yes, the adverse event rate in the treatment group was higher than anything anyone has ever seen before but the rates were also somewhat high in the placebo group and so, therefore, nothing-to-see-here(TM).’

My strong suspicion is that Moderna rigged the placebo. Why wouldn’t they — the FDA has no regulations concerning the contents of placebos (see Golomb 1995 and Golomb et al. 2010).

The dirty little secret of the vaccine program is that manufacturers almost always use rigged placebos to create an artificially high “background rate” to hide adverse events.

The brilliant quantitative analyst Jessica Rose made a similar observation yesterday in her analysis of the FDA risk-benefit document:

“I still have a very strong suspicion that these ‘placebos’ are not saline and rather empty LNPs. [Lipid nanoparticles — the delivery vehicle that Moderna uses to get mRNA into the cell. An ‘empty LNP’ would be the nanoparticles without the mRNA antigen.]”

I’m almost certain this is what Moderna did. In the 2- through 5-year-old age group 37.5% of placebo recipients reported unsolicited adverse events as compared with 40% of vaccine recipients (see p. 139). A number that high in the placebo group would have been impossible if Moderna had used an inert saline placebo

The way the FDA rigged the myocarditis data is absolutely sinister

I know that this article is already long but I need to flag one more essential point.

FDA review of the Moderna mRNA shot in adolescents has been held up for a year because the Moderna shot causes myocarditis in this age group — particularly in boys.

So I was curious to see how the FDA would attempt to get around this. And it’s all right there on pages 19 and 20. It’s one of the most chilling things I’ve ever read. The FDA’s argument goes like this:

‘Yes, by the spring and summer of 2021 there were already seven high-quality studies from around the world showing that mRNA shots increase myocarditis risk. By the fall of 2021, the reports continued to come in from the U.K., Europe, Canada, and Nordic countries showing a 2x to 7x increased risk of myocarditis from mRNA shots.

‘Yes, the CDC’s own study of the Vaccine Safety Datalink showed a 2x higher risk of myocarditis from Moderna shots. By May, we have additional studies from the U.K., Denmark, several Nordic countries, Italy, and France showing a 3x to 7x increased risk of myocarditis from the Moderna shot.’

In all, the FDA cited TWENTY-SIX STUDIES showing that mRNA shots in general, and Moderna in particular, increase the risk of myocarditis.

‘But not to worry!’ the FDA announces in the 4th paragraph in this section.

The FDA, CDC, and Kaiser Permanente put their fixers on the case in February and March of this year and made the safety signal shrink down to a more manageable 7% to 50% increased risk of myocarditis and even those results were massaged to make sure that they were not statistically significant, so, nothing-to-see-here(TM).

It was the same fixers who they always use — Tom Shimabukuro and John Su — whose entire job is making vaccine safety signals disappear. Those guys are absolutely going to hell.

‘So that’s that,’ the FDA announces. ‘Just ignore those 26 high-quality studies from around the world showing an increased risk of myocarditis. Our fixers laundered the data for Moderna so we’re all good.’

What is to be done

Children’s Health Defense just launched an excellent 1-click call to action that I highly encourage you to do (and please share it with all of your friends).

Up until tonight (June 13) at 11:59 p.m. Eastern time, you can officially register your profound displeasure with the FDA by submitting a formal comment (here). Look for the blue Comment button in the upper left corner of the website — 129,397 comments have already been received. Let’s see if we can get that number above 140,000.

If you want to write to public health political appointees, FDA staff, and VRBPAC members, all of their email addresses are here:

sean.mccluskie@hhs.gov, commissioner@fda.hhs.gov, DeanofPublicHealth@brown.edu, Aux7@cdc.gov, Peter.Marks@fda.hhs.gov, Hong.Yang@fda.hhs.gov, Richard.Forshee@fda.hhs.gov, Huilee.Wong@fda.hhs.gov, Leslie.Ball@fda.hhs.gov, Doran.Fink@fda.hhs.gov, CBERVRBPAC@fda.hhs.gov, hanae@bcm.edu, paula.annunziato@merck.com, adam.berger@nih.gov, hbernstein@northwell.edu, acohn@cdc.gov, anc0@cdc.gov, hjanes@fredhutch.org, hgans@stanford.edu, david.kim@hhs.gov, asmonto@umich.edu, offit@chop.edu, spergam@fredhutch.org, Jportnoy@cmh.edu, erubin@hsph.harvard.edu, erubin@nejm.org, ashane@emory.edu, swamy002@mc.duke.edu, fullerao@umich.edu, bgellin@rockfound.org, RandyHawkins@cdrewu.edu, officeofthepresident@mmc.edu, JYLee@uams.edu, ofer.levy@childrens.harvard.edu, wayne_marasco@dfci.harvard.edu, cmeissner@tuftsmedicalcenter.org, mrn8d@virginia.edu, stanley-perlman@uiowa.edu, reingold@berkeley.edu, mhsawyer@ucsd.edu, mew2@cdc.gov

Please be polite but let them know that they absolutely must vote NO on the EUA applications from Moderna and Pfizer.

Conclusion

The FDA risk-benefit document in connection with the Moderna mRNA shot in kids is dishonest. The public health establishment has abandoned science, logic, reason, rationality, empathy, health, and medicine.

The FDA is more than happy to sacrifice children in order to ingratiate themselves further with the cartel. The proposal to expand the Moderna EUA to kids 0 to 17 is a crime against humanity.

We are absolutely going to win this fight, either in the short term or in the long term. These shots will eventually be withdrawn from the market because they do not work and cause catastrophic harm.

The members of the VRBAC can save themselves a lot of misery (and additional criminal charges at Nuremberg 2.0) by rejecting these applications from Moderna and Pfizer this week."

Originally published by Toby Rogers on his Substack page, uTobian.
Toby Rogers, Ph.D.
Dr. Toby Rogers has a Ph.D. in political economy from the University of Sydney in Australia. His doctoral thesis, “The Political Economy of Autism,” explores the regulatory history of five classes of toxicants that increase autism risk.

(Those email addresses can be easily copied and pasted with just one click into an email TO: line.. And you can then just copy and paste the article into the email, and put something like "You really ought to read this" in the subject line. )


Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v15nck6/?pub=ijro7

[onawah]

FDA Uses Unreliable Data to Justify COVID Shots for Infants and Toddlers
06/13/22
By James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D.
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...f-9adae2dcd863

"Editor’s Note: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine advisory council will meet June 14 to consider granting Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines for children under 5 years old, even though the White House last week announced it is already filling orders for the vaccines placed by states and healthcare providers. Click here to tell your members of Congress to oppose EUA of these vaccines for young children.

As promised, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has ginned up a report that ostensibly will be used to try to justify “approval” (whatever they mean by that now) of COVID-19 vaccines for infants and toddlers (children < 5 years old).

This report comes after a torrent of massive reports from Moderna and Pfizer that claim to review studies of the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in children.

It is not hard to see what shenanigans the FDA has been up to — to try to bolster a vaccine that fewer and fewer adults want. It’s more of the same: exaggerating the apparent risk of the virus and minimizing the perception of risk posed by the vaccines.

In other words, lies.

1. There is no evidence of clinical urgency.

Infants and toddlers (and children in general) do not get COVID-19; they do not (yet) die from COVID-19.

All that can change when antibody-dependent enhancement kicks in for the vaccinated.

The FDA’s own reports cite 1,086 deaths “from COVID-19” and 10,700,000 “cases” of COVID-19 in children aged 0-17. There have been 832 days since April 1, 2020, when diagnoses started for COVID-19.

For the entire population of children in the U.S. (73,000,000), the risk of COVID-19 infection since the onset of COVID is 10,700,000/73,000,000 = 0.14657.

The risk of a child dying if they have a diagnosis is 1,086/10,700,00 or 1086/10700000 = 0.00010149532. The risk of any child dying of COVID-19 over this time period is 1,086/73000000 = 0.00001487671.

The per-day risk is on the order of 1.78806611e-8 (0.000000001788). There is no real unmet clinical need and the FDA needs to go back to college to understand how to use RT-PCR correctly. Children do not get COVID-19, and they do not die.
2. Inconsistent use of the idea ‘vaccinated.’

This has been the pattern from the very first study. The FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Moderna, Pfizer and others pull out whatever definition of “vaccinated” they want.

Examples: “Vaccinated” is defined in the original trials as people who received both doses and who did not develop COVID-19 before two weeks passed after the second exposure to the vaccine.

In fact, that means that people who developed COVID-19 due to disease enhancement were dropped from the study calculations.

First, this is the first time people were dropped from a vaccine trial for getting infected with the pathogen targeted by the vaccine up to 13 or 14 days after being vaccinated.

Second, it’s actually five entire weeks — one month and one week — 44 days — after the first exposure. ALL of the vaccine efficacy being cited by the FDA is suspect.

Moderna’s and Pfizer’s vaccines never achieved >90% true vaccine efficacy; the best estimate is more like 75%.

3. Inconsistent use of the idea ‘vaccine efficacy.’

Over the time period since the first COVID-19 vaccine trials, various definitions of “vaccine efficacy” have been used.

Decreased transmission. Reduction in infection rates. Reduced hospitalization. Presence of neutralizing antibodies. Presence of antibodies.

All are used and cited in the FDA’s report whenever convenient, all in an ad-hoc manner. It’s more than irritating. It’s moving the goal post and represents reckless (and ineffective) attempts to manipulate public perception.

This practice continues in the reports and studies that are cited by the FDA. I do not trust the efficacy data the FDA cites in their report.

Further evidence of the futility of the evidence used to claim efficacy comes from Moderna’s Sponsor Briefing report to the FDA:

“3.3 Regulatory Considerations for Clinical Development of COVID-19 Vaccines in Children

“Effectiveness…

“Regulatory precedent with other preventive vaccines provides a basis for inference of vaccine effectiveness in pediatric populations based on immunobridging to a young adult population in which clinical disease endpoint vaccine efficacy has been demonstrated for the same prototype vaccine. The immune marker(s) used for immunobridging do not need to be scientifically established to predict protection but should be clinically relevant to the disease.

“Based on available data in humans and animal models, FDA considers neutralizing antibody titers (a functional measure of the vaccine immune response against SARS-CoV-2) to be clinically relevant for immunobridging to infer effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in pediatric age groups.

“Because no specific neutralizing antibody titer has been established to predict protection against COVID-19, two immunogenicity endpoints (GMT and SRR) are considered appropriate for comparing the range of neutralizing antibody responses elicited by the vaccine in pediatric versus young adult populations.”

Also embedded in this piece of work is the fact that the FDA does not need evidence of long-term immunity; they are settling for something called “immunobridging” — guessing at the efficacy of a vaccine in one clinical population from measurements made from other clinical populations.

They also are making people dependent on vaccines … expecting patients to have antibodies from one vaccine to the next. This makes no sense immunologically. We don’t need continuously high antibody levels against any pathogen.

We have memory B-cells and T-cells. In accepting this paradigm, the FDA is completely off its rocker and will cause immune exhaustion with constant vaccinations every three to four months.

4. Incomplete consideration of the scientific data (Barnstable County, Israel, Ontario).

We know that months after vaccination, those who are vaccinated are at higher risk of infection and now of hospitalizations.

According to Jeremy Hammond, data show “vaccine effectiveness (VE) in children becomes(sic) negative within several months since receipt of the second dose.in children.”

Hammond wrote:

“Researchers from the New York State Department of Health published a study on the preprint server medRxiv on February 28 noting that the evidence for vaccine effectiveness in children, particularly those aged five to eleven, was ‘limited.’

“So, they aimed to provide data to inform policymaking.

“‘During Omicron variant predominance,’ the authors concluded, ‘VE against infection declined rapidly’ for young children in the state of New York, ‘with low protection by one month following full-vaccination.’

“Comparing COVID-19 cases during January between unvaccinated and vaccinated children, they estimated initial vaccine effectiveness for children aged twelve to seventeen to be 76 percent, but this dropped to below 50 percent after just five weeks since receipt of the second dose.

“Moreover, for young children (aged five to eleven), they observed a drop from 65 percent to just 12 percent after only one month.

“Thereafter, their estimate indicated significantly negative effectiveness for this age group, as shown in Figure 2 of their paper: by 35 to 41 days, VE reached negative 10 percent, and by 42 to 48 days, it reached negative 41 percent.”



’m on an email thread with Steve Kirsch (he considers me part of his “debate team.)” Last week, Steve challenged Marks to a debate:

“Hi Peter,

“You are right about the vaccine uptake problem. According to independent survey we just commissioned, only 33% of Americans opted to go further than the first 2 doses.

“You were quoted in that CNN article:

‘We do have a problem with vaccine uptake that is very serious in the United States and anything we can do to get people more comfortable to be able to accept these potentially life-saving medical products is something that we feel we are compelled to do.’

“Isn’t it time for you to end the misinformation problem by debating us in a public forum?

“My colleagues and I look forward to hearing from you.

“The only way to end the misinformation is to debate the top misinformation spreaders. You will never win by trying to censor us.

“We would be HAPPY to debate to you to end the misinformation problem. As you can see from this slide deck, all the evidence we’ve been able to find shows there was clinical trial fraud and that the vaccines are very dangerous. We would love to know how we got it wrong. I look forward to hearing from you.

“-steve”

To my knowledge, Marks has not replied. I replied to Steve and the entire email thread, including Marks, though:

“Steve,

“History is going to remember one person on this email thread in a manner in which I would not ever care to be seen associating with.

“I would therefore decline to participate in such a debate.

“Sincerely,
James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D.”

I could continue and debate dozens more points in the report dump by the FDA. I don’t have to.

Marks himself provides evidence of being way off-target immunologically and of lying about the “need” for COVID-19 vaccines for children.

Here’s an old video of “Prevaricating Peter” lying about the need for “high antibody titers” for immunity, and that children’s immune response is “not enough for some of these variants” (no data on that, just words):

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=_j8ziaOpl7o

The comments in that video have not aged well.

Call your senator and representatives and demand that Marks resign. Email them this article.

Marks and the FDA are NOT basing their considerations on independent fact, science and logic. He and his cronies are either incompetent or working for the industry. Either way, he and his cronies have to go."

Originally published on James Lyons-Weiler’s Popular Rationalism Substack page: https://popularrationalism.substack....unreliable?s=r

TAKE ACTION!URGENT! Send Your Lawmakers RFK, Jr.’s Letter to FDA VRBPAC Committee Members
HERE: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/c...f-9adae2dcd863

"Our children need your help! On Tuesday and Wednesday, June 14 and 15, the FDA VRBPAC committee is likely to make a catastrophic decision by voting to grant Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA) to allow for infants and young children to receive Pfizer’s and Moderna’s COVID shots.

Please take 30 seconds to tell your lawmakers to STOP the FDA from granting EUAs for COVID vaccines in babies and children by sending Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s letter to FDA VRBPAC committee members. His letter lays out all of the available science and data that proves vaccinating children for COVID is not only unnecessary, but will recklessly endanger their lives. There is no emergency whatsoever for children from COVID, therefore there is no justification for issuing an Emergency Use Authorization.

Time and mounting evidence have continued to prove that children have essentially zero risk of dying from COVID (99.995% recovery rate), and the vast majority of kids have little to no symptoms. There is no statistically valid evidence that shows the Pfizer and Moderna COVID injections are able to prevent severe disease or deaths in children at all. These shots have a worse safety record than all previous vaccines combined, and have been found to cause serious injuries including myocarditis, encephalopathy, blood clots, diabetes, neurological issues and death."

[Satori]

Make no mistake about it. They, the policy planning criminal oligarchs at WEF, Pfizer, Moderna, WHO, CDC, FDA, et al., know exactly what they are doing. They intend to maim and, preferably, kill as many people as possible. Period. Full stop.

[mountain_jim]

RFK Jr's org continues to do great work - this can not be emphasized enough

TAKE ACTION!URGENT! Send Your Lawmakers RFK, Jr.’s Letter to FDA VRBPAC Committee Members
HERE: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/c...f-550df71e6d4c

from the link

Our children need your help! On Tuesday and Wednesday, June 14 and 15, the FDA VRBPAC committee is likely to make a catastrophic decision by voting to grant Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA) to allow for infants and young children to receive Pfizer’s and Moderna’s COVID shots.

Please take 30 seconds to tell your lawmakers to STOP the FDA from granting EUAs for COVID vaccines in babies and children by sending Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s letter to FDA VRBPAC committee members. His letter lays out all of the available science and data that proves vaccinating children for COVID is not only unnecessary, but will recklessly endanger their lives. There is no emergency whatsoever for children from COVID, therefore there is no justification for issuing an Emergency Use Authorization.

Time and mounting evidence have continued to prove that children have essentially zero risk of dying from COVID (99.995% recovery rate), and the vast majority of kids have little to no symptoms. There is no statistically valid evidence that shows the Pfizer and Moderna COVID injections are able to prevent severe disease or deaths in children at all. These shots have a worse safety record than all previous vaccines combined, and have been found to cause serious injuries including myocarditis, encephalopathy, blood clots, diabetes, neurological issues and death.

Use the form below to tell your lawmakers to STOP THE FDA from harming our children with these disastrous shots.

[onawah]

Dr. Christiane Northrup-Today's Brave New World
6/13/22
https://live.childrenshealthdefense....ime/F0eexL2HYc

Video at the link above which I don't know how to embed.

(She pulls out all the stops re the depopulation agenda and infertility being deliberately caused.)

"Today’s “Tea Time,” guest is Christiane Northrup. Focusing on infertility, she discusses the impact of vaccination on the body and reproductive organs. Christiane also analyzes the societal impacts of the break-down of feminine and masculine as well as the depopulation agenda. The burning question is this: What is the solution, and who will pursue it? Tune in to hear the answer!"

Posted by onawah (here)
Repairing a Genocide — Post Vaccine Syndrome Protocol With Dr. Pierre Kory + Dr. Paul Marik
6/6/22
Video here: https://live.childrenshealthdefense....5-f6fcb93585be
And a new documentary on Infertility coming, recommended by Catherine Austin Fitts

************************

"New Documentary Exposes WHO Program Resulting in Sterilization of African Women Without Their Consent
https://rumble.com/v184bw8-infertili...cumentary.html

A new CHD Films documentary, "Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda," exposes a World Health Organization program resulting in the sterilization of African women without their knowledge or consent.

By Children's Health Defense Team
June 9, 2022

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...ertility-film/

https://live.childrenshealthdefense....bolical-agenda

https://infertilitymovie.org/

From award-winning filmmaker Dr. Andy Wakefield, in collaboration with executive producer Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman of Children's Health Defense (CHD), and CHD Films, comes the documentary "Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda."

The film exposes a World Health Organization (WHO) population control experiment carried out under the guise of a vaccination program, that resulted in the sterilization of women in Africa without their knowledge or consent.

The film premieres tomorrow, Friday, June 10 at 2 p.m. ET on CHD.TV. Immediately following the 30-minute film, a special edition of CHD.TV's "Friday Roundtable" will feature Wakefield, Dr. Christiane Northrup, Dr. Jim Thorp, Brian Hooker, Ph.D. and Dr. Liz Mumper to discuss the dramatic rise in infertility issues across the globe.

"It is with timely irony that the World Health Organization reveals its true colors as it makes a desperate grab for control of global health," said Wakefield, who directed the film. "This story is a true 'WHO' dunnit."

"Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda" pulls back the curtain to reveal the truth behind WHO's nefarious collaboration with the Kenyan government in which an experimental tetanus vaccination -- later found to be laced with the pregnancy hormone βhCG (human chorionic gonadotropin) -- was given to millions of unknowing African women of childbearing age in the 1990s and early 2000s. Consequently, their right to carry children was stolen.

Wakefield chronicles this tragic story and brings shocking new evidence to light. As the late Dr. Stephen Karanja warns in the film, "When they're through with Africa, they're coming for you."

"The truths exposed in this film cast a long shadow from a tetanus trial in Africa to the symptoms of infertility that are happening all over the world, including reports after the Gardasil vaccine and the COVID-19 shots," said CHD Chief Science Director Dr. Brian Hooker.

Mary Holland, CHD president and general counsel and author of "The HPV Vaccine on Trial: Seeking Justice for a Generation Betrayed," had this to say about the film:

"This film documents evidence that strongly supports the idea that the WHO was conducting an experiment on women of childbearing age to make them infertile without informed consent.

"The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, signed by most countries of the world, specifies that enforced sterilization is a war crime. This film highlights that rendering human beings infertile without their consent, as was done to the most vulnerable people during the eugenics era in the U.S., is truly diabolical.

"The film asks whether the global community should vastly empower the WHO to regulate and enforce global health policy."

CHD.TV will air the film with special programming featuring leading experts discussing their concerns about the rise in infertility rates and how other vaccines, including the COVID-19 shot, are linked to infertility.

The line-up includes the following highlights:

• Friday, June 10 at 2:30 p.m. ET: "Friday Roundtable" featuring Dr. Andy Wakefield, Dr. Christiane Northrup, Dr. Jim Thorp, Brian Hooker, Ph.D. and Dr. Liz Mumper.

• Monday, June 13 at Noon ET: "Tea Time" featuring women's health expert Dr. Christiane Northrup who will answer questions from the public regarding infertility.

• Tuesday, June 14 through Friday, June 17 at 10 a.m. ET: "Good Morning CHD" will feature Dr. Patrick Flynn, Dr. Lawrence Palevsky and a representative from CHD Africa.

• Thursday, June 16 at 1:30 p.m. ET: "Doctors and Scientists" with Brian Hooker, Ph.D. will be joined by obstetrician and gynecologist Dr. Jim Thorp.

• Wednesday, June 22 at 1:30 p.m. ET: "Against the Wind" with Dr. Paul Thomas will be joined by Dr. Andy Wakefield.

• Watch on-demand "The Solution" with Dr. Tony O'Donnell interviewing Dr. Andy Wakefield.

"An abiding principle of ethical medical practice is that every patient has the right to fully informed, voluntary consent," said Kennedy.

"We expose the WHO's gross violation of this principle in its surreptitious campaign to prevent and abort pregnancies in millions of unsuspecting African women. WHO led these women to believe that they were part of a public health program to protect their newborn babies. This is a timely message that the WHO is not fit, on any level, to dictate global health policy."
➡️ InfertilityMovie.org

Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v15i5yg/?pub=ijro7

[Matthew]

I don't want to undercut the above post that focuses on children's health and people's infertility. ^ ☝️ 😳

Slightly less harrowing imho is this from The World Council For Health

Press Release: Independent Pharmacovigilance Report Confirms Evidence for Recall of Covid-19 Vaccines
By World Council for Health
June 11, 2022

https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/ne...accines/75683/

Contact: Dr. Katarina Lindley at katarina@thewc4h.org

Independent Pharmacovigilance Report Confirms Evidence for Recall of Covid-19 Vaccines
Adverse Reactions for Novel Covid-19 Vaccines More Numerous Than for Similar Products by Factor of Between 10 and 169
BATH, UK — A new report prepared by the World Council for Health (WCH) has confirmed that data on adverse drug reactions from the experimental Covid-19 vaccines exist in an amount sufficient for the recall of similar products in the past.

The report was prepared to determine whether sufficient pharmacovigilance data exist on official and public databases (WHO VigiAccess, CDC VAERS, EudraVigilance, and UK Yellow Card Scheme) to establish a safety signal on the novel Covid-19 injections.

On all databases, it was found that adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports linked to Covid-19 injections are more numerous than other similar products by a factor of between 10 and 169 (see graph below). Many of the ADR reports are serious in nature and there exists sufficient evidence of associated harm on these databases to indicate a product recall.


Total Adverse Events per Pharamacovigilance Database

In total, more than 40,000 deaths are linked to the novel Covid-19 vaccines in the official databases analysed.

In addition, the WCH pharmacovigilance report found that several thousand adverse drug reactions on official databases are related to the use of the experimental Covid-19 vaccines among young boys and girls for whom the vaccine had not been approved at the time.

The purpose of pharmacovigilance databases is to provide a signal of safety, and not to prove causality. To ensure that harms are detected in time, suspicion that an event is linked to the administration of the medicine is enough to register an event. “There is no need to prove that the medicine caused the adverse reaction, just the suspicion is good enough,” Dr. June Raine, head of the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, said in 2006. When sufficient pharmacovigilance data show a signal of harm, administration of the product should be ceased, the product recalled, and the safety signal investigated.

It should also be noted that such systems of passive surveillance result in significantly fewer ADR reports than active surveillance reporting. As a result, the actual number of adverse events that occurred in temporal relation to Covid-19 injections is likely to be much higher than revealed by the available official data.

In December 2021, World Council for Health called on regulators and governments around the world to immediately cease use of all experimental Covid-19 injections.

Dr. Tess Lawrie, co-founder of the World Council for Health, calls for people to come together to raise awareness of vaccine injury so that those harmed can get the help they deserve. “It is concerning that a grassroots organisation has had to do this work and point out that none of these experimental vaccines are safe according to publicly available official data. Why have the regulators not done their job and protected us?“

[DaveToo]

Posted by Matthew (here)
I don't want to undercut the above post that focuses on children's health and people's infertility. ^ ☝️ 😳

Slightly less harrowing imho is this from The World Council For Health

Press Release: Independent Pharmacovigilance Report Confirms Evidence for Recall of Covid-19 Vaccines
By World Council for Health
June 11, 2022

https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/ne...accines/75683/

Contact: Dr. Katarina Lindley at katarina@thewc4h.org

Independent Pharmacovigilance Report Confirms Evidence for Recall of Covid-19 Vaccines
Adverse Reactions for Novel Covid-19 Vaccines More Numerous Than for Similar Products by Factor of Between 10 and 169
BATH, UK — A new report prepared by the World Council for Health (WCH) has confirmed that data on adverse drug reactions from the experimental Covid-19 vaccines exist in an amount sufficient for the recall of similar products in the past.

The report was prepared to determine whether sufficient pharmacovigilance data exist on official and public databases (WHO VigiAccess, CDC VAERS, EudraVigilance, and UK Yellow Card Scheme) to establish a safety signal on the novel Covid-19 injections.

On all databases, it was found that adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports linked to Covid-19 injections are more numerous than other similar products by a factor of between 10 and 169 (see graph below). Many of the ADR reports are serious in nature and there exists sufficient evidence of associated harm on these databases to indicate a product recall.


Total Adverse Events per Pharamacovigilance Database

In total, more than 40,000 deaths are linked to the novel Covid-19 vaccines in the official databases analysed....

I am in no way disputing the horrific adverse events caused by the CV jab, however so many charts and statistics such as those presented in the above graph are misleading.

Perhaps it's appropriate to read James Corbett's recent piece on "Why Do People Believe Fake Statistics?"

There are two main problems with the chart in question.
First there is no period of time associated with the numbers.

Second, and most problematic, since we are comparing absolute numbers
it is an unfair comparison.

We are not told how many Covid, Tetanus, MMR and Polio shots were administered.

So to take an extreme example, say 4 billion Covid shots were administered and
40 million Tetanus shots were administered. Is it fair to compare the absolute number of
adverse reactions between the two?

VigiAccess may declare that 3.8 million adverse events were recorded for the Covid shots
and they may declare that 38 thousand adverse events were recorded for the Tetanus shots.
That sounds like a huge difference between the number of adverse Covid and Tetanus events.

Let's examine the numbers the way they should be treated:
3.8 million events /4 billion shots = .095% (Covid)
38 thousand events/40 million shots = .095% (Tetanus)

So when compared this way (as it always should be) we see that the number of adverse
events as a percent are the same, between Covid and Tetanus.

We do not see a percent (%) comparison in the graph provided.

[Matthew]

I'm wondering if I should send your feedback to Dr. Katarina Lindley, but if you are suggesting these are fake statistics I wonder if I should stay out of it. I'll have a think and see how the spirit moves me

[DaveToo]

Posted by Matthew (here)
I'm wondering if I should send your feedback to Dr. Katarina Lindley, but if you are suggesting these are fake statistics I wonder if I should stay out of it. I'll have a think and see how the spirit moves me

Yes, if you can, please do send my feedback to Dr. Lindley.
No, I am not suggesting they are fake statistics.
However, they are misleading statistics.

[onawah]

FDA Advisors Unanimously Endorse Pfizer, Moderna COVID Shots for Infants and Young Kids, Ignore Pleas to ‘First Do No Harm'
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...-e851d64328b40
6/15/22

(Many hyperlinks in the article not embedded here)

"The administration today voted 21-0 to recommend Pfizer’s and Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines for infants and young children.

'All the risks are to the innocent children and all of the billion-dollar rewards go to the government-protected pharmaceuticals,' said Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), after advisors to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration today voted 21-0 to recommend Pfizer’s and Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines for infants and young children.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) vaccine advisory panel today unanimously voted 21-0 to recommend Pfizer and Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines for infants and young children, stating the totality of the evidence available shows the benefits of the vaccines outweigh the risks of use.

Pfizer’s three-dose vaccine would cover children 6 months to 5 years old, while Moderna’s two-dose vaccine covers children 6 months to 6 years old.

States have already ordered millions of doses made available prior to FDA authorization by the Biden administration.

Depending on whether the FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) accept the recommendations of their advisory panels, White House officials have said the administration of vaccines for these age groups could start as early as June 21.

The Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) ignored pleas from experts, the vaccine injured and a congressman representing 17 other lawmakers to halt authorization until questions about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines for the nation’s youngest children could be properly addressed.

Many of the committee members, including pediatrician Dr. Ofer Levy, said the decision to authorize the shots was about providing a choice to parents who wanted access to COVID-19 vaccines, despite concerns by public commenters the panel was not adhering to the requirements for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) and that authorization would eventually lead to mandates — as it did with adult vaccines.

“I know that the death rate from COVID and young children may not be extremely high,” said Dr. Jay Portnoy, professor of pediatrics at Children’s Mercy Hospital in Kansas City, Missouri. “It’s absolutely terrifying to parents to have their child be sick.”

Portnoy said there are “so many parents who are absolutely desperate to get this vaccine” and he thinks the committee “owes it to them to give them the choice.”

Several committee members, including Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, raised concerns about Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine for kids and the minimal protection it provided after two doses.

Offit said he still supports authorizing a three-dose regimen for the youngest age groups but expects four doses may be needed.

Moderna’s vaccine for infants and toddlers consists of two 25-microgram shots, while Pfizer’s vaccine is a triple-dose regimen of 3-microgram shots each.

Combining all ages together, Pfizer said its three-dose regimen for children 6 months to 5 years old was 80% effective at preventing illness from the Omicron variant based on preliminary data from its clinical trial.

The 80% number was calculated 30 days after the third dose. As noted by committee members, the efficacy number is likely to go down after 30 days and post-approval monitoring was suggested.

Moderna said its two-shot vaccine was about 51% effective against infection from Omicron in children under 2, and about 37% among kids 2 to 5 years old, citing different efficacy numbers than what was reported by the company in March.

In a March 23 press release, Moderna said its vaccine in the 6-month to 2-year age group was only 43.7% effective. In the older age group, the company said its vaccine was 37.5% effective.

A top official at Moderna has already said a booster will be necessary.

All previously authorized COVID-19 vaccines and boosters for all age groups were required to meet the FDA’s 50% requirement prior to obtaining EUA.

But Dr. Peter Marks, director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research at the FDA, last month told the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis the agency would not withhold authorization of a pediatric vaccine if it fails to meet the agency’s 50% efficacy threshold for blocking symptomatic infections.

Congressman calls out FDA for failing to answer lawmakers’ questions

During the public hearing portion of the meeting, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said there are many unanswered questions regarding the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, especially for babies and young children.

“I’m deeply concerned that the push to vaccinate these children is nothing more than a dystopian experiment with unknown consequences,” Gohmert told the committee. “Some of us have outlined these questions in a letter to VRBPAC but have not received any answers, and I pose some of them here.”

Gohmert said:

“Number 1, why has the FDA refused to release the hundreds of thousands of pages of data from preapproval manufacturer studies, post-approval adverse events data and other post-approval manufacturer data?

“Number 2, what is the cardiac risk factor in administrating these COVID vaccines to children?

“Number 3, world-renowned immunologists have raised concerns about potential antibody-dependent enhancement, or ADE, resulting from COVID vaccines, and since ADE was a problem in prior unrelated respiratory vaccine trials, we need to know what studies, if any, the FDA has that it’s used regarding ADE from COVID vaccines in children 5 and under or any age group. Can the FDA affirm there’s no risk of ADE for vaccinated children?

“Number 4, if widely approved among children 5 and under, how many lives, if any, does FDA estimate will be saved next year? Given the injuries reported in the FDA’s VAERS [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] system, how will FDA evaluate serious vaccine injuries versus serious COVID outcomes?

“Number 5, is it possible the proposed COVID vaccines in young children could create increased risk in future novel COVID variants?

“Number 6, why has the FDA recently lowered the efficacy bar for COVID vaccines for youngest children? This change significantly lowers the expected benefits from any COVID vaccination for young children and it’s of particular concern given that over 70% of that age cohort already is seropositive.”

Gohmert said these questions and 13 other questions posed by lawmakers are critical and deserve answers from the FDA and VRBPAC prior to any EUA with the “accompanied protection for liability for all harm done.”

Gohmert added:

“In conclusion, some of us have grave concerns that in balancing the risk to rewards here, all the risks are to the innocent children and all of the billion-dollar rewards go to the government-protected pharmaceuticals, leaving me to wonder if Republicans get a majority I may need to have a bill […] to allow civil and criminal liability to vaccine providers and accessories despite an EUA which would force more sensitivity towards vaccine harm to our young children.”

Vaccine-injured speak out

During the public hearing session of the meeting, numerous individuals discussed the injuries they experienced after being vaccinated with Moderna and Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccines, pleading with officials to look at what’s occurring with the adult population before they authorize vaccines for kids.

Jasmine King, a 38-year-old lawyer whose law license lapsed after she was injured by her first dose of Moderna, said she has been to more than 50 doctor appointments and has spent more than $20,000 in co-pays, treatments and supplements to heal from her injuries.

King said she is being monitored for Lou Gherig’s disease and developed sensory nerve symptoms, motor nerve problems, heart palpitations and autonomic nervous system issues after being vaccinated.

King asked the advisory panel to look at what’s happening in the adult population to see what could happen in the pediatric population — if authorization is given — and consider vaccine injuries when discussing the risks of COVID-19.

Kathlyn Hinesley pointed out that the FDA is legally prohibited from approving any biological product for emergency use unless there’s an emergency that poses a risk of death to the target group, the product is effective in preventing the disease, it is safe and the benefits must outweigh the risk.

Hinesley stated:

“With regard to the first point, children without comorbidities who acquire COVID-19 have a 99.98% survival rate. There is no emergency. Moving forward to effectiveness, a study […] which includes data analysis of 145 countries found that COVID-19 vaccines were in fact associated with a 38% increase in COVID cases and a 31% increase in deaths. Could these vaccines be negatively affecting immunity?

“The number of severe adverse events affecting children ages 5 to 17 reported to VAERS as of June 3 was 8,811, including 114 deaths and 1,346 cases of myocarditis — a condition that can be fatal.

“We can assume if these vaccines are authorized, some babies will die. The benefits of these vaccines are questionable and the risks are clear.”

Hinesley told the committee if they authorized injections for this age group, they would be participating in the killing of children.

Sam Dodson, an intellectual engineer, called out the FDA for doing “nothing” with the “massive safety signals,” colluding with pharmaceutical companies to suppress trial data for 75 years, ignoring fraudulent data, ignoring adverse events like myocarditis and prion diseases and ignoring issues with infertility.

Dodson also expressed concerns about biodistribution data he accused the agency of “doing nothing” about.

“You turned a once-respected agency into a corrupt vessel for the very corporations you swore to protect the American public from,” Dodson said. “If you have one shred of humanity left you will call for an immediate halt to the shots […].”

Before his time ended, Dodson said the panel might want to figure out how they’re “going to diagnose myocarditis in very young babies who can’t talk.”

Dr. Katarina Lindley, a physician and member of the steering committee for the World Council for Health, said data from the CDC from February showed 74.2% of children have already acquired COVID-19 and expressed concerns over Moderna and Pfizer’s data presented to the FDA.

Lindley stated:

“Over 150 studies show that natural immunity is superior. The infection fatality rate under 5 years of age is 0.1 in 100,000 or 1 in a million. The risk of the shot in the already immune is higher than 1 in a million.

“Both Pfizer and Moderna expressly eliminated those that were naturally immune from their study. They did this to avoid the hyperimmune response and possibly death.

“Vaccinating the already immune puts them at risk of having a hyperimmune response. This means you’ll be voting for some children to have a severe adverse reaction and possibly death if you vaccinate the immune. This is bad medicine.”

FDA advisors fail to discuss vaccine imprinting among infants and toddlers

Immune imprinting was not on the agenda at the VRBPAC meeting, nor was it discussed among experts.

However, the authors of an op-ed published this week in STAT, a pharmaceutical industry publication, raised the issue as justification for calling on the FDA panel to reject Pfizer and Moderna’s EUA for young children.

Steve Brozak, founder of the WBB Research Institute, and Dr. Richard Marfuggi, surgeon and medical director of the WBB Research Institute and member of the New Jersey State Biomedical Ethics Committee, wrote:

“The vote on this vaccine for this vulnerable sector of the population is not inexorable. The availability of a therapy is not a justification for its use when benefits of such use are so poorly justified and no data on future consequences for this population to specifically include imprinting even exists.

“The VRBPAC should say ‘no’ to vaccinating infants and toddlers with the Moderna or Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines. ‘First do no harm’ has never been a more important dictum.”

Immune imprinting, or original antigenic sin (OAS), results from exposure to proteins or other biological structures of viruses, like the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, that allow a virus to penetrate host cells and cause infection.

OAS refers to the preference of the immune system to recall existing memory cells — that recall the same pathogen for antibody production — rather than stimulating a new response when encountering a novel but closely related antigen.

According to Brozak and Marfuggi, imprinting can come directly from an acute infection acquired naturally or indirectly through vaccination.

“It can result in reduced — or enhanced — responses to future variants with unknown clinical consequences,” they wrote. “The former is beneficial, the latter is not.”

Immune system imprinting and the negative effects of imprinting are not new concepts. A team of researchers in a 2013 paper described how infants who survived the 1889 Russian pandemic were more likely to experience excess mortality as adults during the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918.

Infants who survived the 1918 Spanish flu were more likely to experience excess mortality as adults during the Hong Kong flu of 1968 and infants exposed to the swine flu pandemic of 1957 were more likely to experience excess mortality as adults during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic in Mexico.

According to the Doctrine of Original Antigenic Sin by Dr. Thomas Francis, the initial priming of the immune system (initial exposure to the virus, either in the wild or via a vaccine) gets “fixed” for life.

If the initial priming of the immune system is sub-optimal and biased, then that sub-optimal initial priming can effectively derange and bias the immune response long-term, which would guide all future immunological responses, said Dr. Paul Elias Alexander, a global expert on COVID-19.

According to Brozak and Marfuggi, the immune systems of infants and toddlers — the latest targets of COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers and health agencies — are immature and developing.

They wrote:

“If an immature immune system is immunologically imprinted, either by acute infection from the currently circulating viral variant or by a COVID-19 vaccine based on the original, wild-type variant that is no longer in circulation, it may fail to develop appropriate defenses when confronted — even years later — by a Covid variant or another totally different pathogen.”

According to Alexander, “The COVID-19 vaccines being administered in the U.S. only reduce symptoms, thus allowing the host to stay alive (an evolutionary future it did not have) while remaining capable of transmitting. Evidence shows vaccinated persons are indeed susceptible to infection, and as alarmingly, carry as high a viral load as the unvaccinated.”

In addition, vaccinated persons are likely to spread the virus to other members of their household, Alexander said.

“Imperfect, leaky and harmful COVID-19 vaccines could rob children of robust, durable and potent natural innate immunity that has always protected them and helps reduce the infectious pressure while contributing to population herd immunity.”

Some vaccines could drive the evolution of more virulent pathogens, and “Marek’s disease effect and vaccination may well be at play here with COVID vaccines — moderating symptoms while not stopping infection or transmission, thus posing a danger to the unvaccinated and vaccinated,” Alexander added.

As The Defender reported Tuesday, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Children’s Health Defense chairman and chief legal counsel, sent a letter to VRBPAC members last week warning that the organization is poised to take legal action should the EUAs be granted."

Also posted here: https://projectavalon.net/forum4/sho...=1#post1503089