Contamination, myocarditis, seizures: COVID vax revelations put regulators worldwide on defense

Researcher who caught dozens of CDC errors calls agency's talking points "really irresponsible." Possible roadmap for challenging mRNA vaccines after Gilead denied legal immunity for tainted remdesivir.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is going to greater lengths than Pfizer to minimize the risk of heart inflammation in teenagers after COVID-19 vaccination.

The FDA authorized the latest mRNA boosters for children as young as 6 months in September despite its own researchers finding a "safety signal" for post-vaccination seizures and convulsions in 2- to 5-year-old children, a demographic at near-zero risk from SARS-CoV-2 itself.

The disconnect between agency brass and their own researchers and regulated entities is becoming more stark as other problems with COVID therapeutics emerge worldwide, especially batch contamination.

That's why critics of mRNA products are seizing on a Michigan court ruling that denied legal immunity to a drugmaker under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, seeing it as an opening to challenge their authorization.

The CDC recently invoked a limited study in its own in-house journal to promote the latest boosters, which have prompted a yawn from the vast majority of Americans and sent Pfizer's guidance and share price tumbling.

The planet was poisoned by pelosi and schumer in their Satanic hatred of President Trump and the invention of a fictitious pandemic.

Millions have been poisoned already, hundreds, if not thousands already dead and NO ONE WANTS TO CONNECT THESE DOTS ! ! !

The Satanic democrats are gleefully out of control and that tool gaets should be brought up on the same charges they're trying our President with.

Obstruction of duly elected politicians trying to perform their appointed task.

gaetz made that ridiculous rule to be able to oust a sitting Speaker just by being a loudmouth asshole, and every traitorous republican should be tried as co-conspirators.

“Purchaser acknowledges that the vaccine and materials related to the vaccine, and there are components and constituent materials, are being rapidly developed due to the emergency circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and will continue to be studied after provision of the vaccine to purchaser under the agreement. Purchaser further acknowledges that the long-term effects and efficacy of the vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the vaccine that are not currently known. Further, to the extent applicable, purchaser acknowledges that the product shall not be serialized.”

Pfizer Purchaser Agreement Released – Reckless and Insane
https://www.independentsentinel.com/pfizer-purchaser-agreement-released-reckless-and-insane/

________________________________________

When the majority of the jabbed come to understand the above and its ramifications and the culpability of Big Pharma execs, deep state government agents, and sycophants like you in this, I would not want to be in your shoes. I hope you get what is coming to you good and hard.

Let’s flip your own words back on you

“Where are the links to the scientific data published by the scientific community? “

Please show us such studies that validate the efficacy of the shot, that it is proven safe for pregnant women, that the long term effects are know and are not significant.

This is from your own words so easy enough to dismiss the accusation that Pfizer does know all the above, produce the studies.

HINT: What studies they have actually show it does indeed cause inflammation of the heart and does not actually prevent anyone from getting covid. All they had was they “think” it will reduce its symptoms. I have read the studies and my RN wife helped me understand some the of medical jargon, so unlike you I have researched this!)

I will wait.........

It means no lot was tracible, no serialized number to track who received a dose from which lot/vial.

So even if it was something the company would normally be liable for, like contaminated vials from an improperly sterilized bottle during manufacturing, there is no way to ever trace anything back.

In a nutshell literally 0 liability for any wrongdoing regardless of the level of incompetence or malfeasance of the manufacture.

There is no way to prove what vial / lot you received a dose from. This means there was no way to know if it was handled properly after it was shipped; so no way to hold the company accountable. The traceability chain was destroyed from the very inception of the process.

I have already posted numerous links either directly to studies or to articles that reference/link to those studies. Here are links to some of my previous detailed posts containing scientific references:

Reply #35 to "US Government Pays 2 More People Injured by COVID Vaccines."

Reply #17, same thread.

Safety of Covid vaccine during pregnancy:

COVID Vax During Pregnancy Linked to Lower Risk of Poor Neonatal Outcomes. And a link to the journal used as the source for this article: Newborn and Early Infant Outcomes Following Maternal COVID-19 Vaccination During Pregnancy.

As for studies on safety and efficacy of Covid vaccines, there are thousands of them published in the medical/scientific literature. Rather than trying to provide thousands of links, I will provide only the link to a search result in the medical/scientific literature database PubMed.gov search term "efficacy of covid vaccine."

In addition, the FDA posts open access web pages for every drug it approves. There, you can read through their decision memoranda, the data presented to them by the pharmaceutical company seeking drug approval, etc. Here is an example: Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. This webpage contains links to hundreds of pages of data. You can also look up study registrations at ClinicalTrials.gov is a place to learn about clinical studies from around the world. Scientists all over the world register their clinical studies here. These scientists can work at any kind of institution that employs scientists: university, pharmaceutical company, research institute, etc. You can read the study design and often the results.

Here is a link to a real study assessing the incidence of peri/myocarditis following Covid vaccination: Incidence of Myocarditis/Pericarditis Following mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination Among Children and Younger Adults in the United States. According to this study, in the group at highest risk, peri- or myocarditis occurred in 1 out of 30,000 vaccinees. That's a pretty low figure, especially when compared to the rate of peri/myocarditis caused directly by Covid infection.

COVID-19, Myocarditis and Pericarditis. This study found that "The incidence of myocarditis pre-COVID was reported at 1 to 10 cases/100 000 individuals and with COVID ranging from 150 to 4000 cases/100 000 individuals." Translated into actual incidence, that means one peri- or myocarditis case for every 25 to 667 cases of Covid. Not only is that incidence rate far higher than the rate following vaccination, it is far more serious medically because it involves physical damage to the heart. Viruses kill the cells that they infect, and the SARS-CoV2 virus directly infects heart cells. Myocarditis caused by an infection sometimes destroys the heart to the point that the patient cannot live without a heart transplant.

It is seriously funny that you claim that you have researched this, "unlike me." I guess you didn't read my tag line. I spent my career as a PhD scientist in infectious disease and countermeasures research. Since I was part of a pandemic preparedness team for a few years, I recognized that Covid was a pandemic weeks before the WHO made that determination.

Do you want more references? I have collected dozens, maybe hundreds of them. And I have read every single one. Unlike you, I don't need anyone to translate them for me, since I happen to be a PhD scientist who is familiar with the jargon.

I've provided links to numerous studies here, probably hundreds of pages' worth of reading material. Get back with me once you have read it all.

So, the government of South Africa was so concerned about Covid that they entered into a contract with Pfizer to purchase vaccine before any were available?

And the government added a clause stating that they were (at the time) aware that no vaccine had yet been approved by a regulatory agency?

And this legal language giving the government of South Africa a legal means to break the contract without penalty if no Pfizer vaccine ended up being approved is, somehow, a statement that governments/pharmaceutical companies were being reckless and irresponsible with people’s lives?

In simple, everyday language, what this means is that the government of South Africa expected a vaccine that has met all safety and efficacy criteria in order to be granted market approval by a regulatory agency. They never had any intention of giving an unapproved vaccine candidate to their population.

The ways that professional antivaxxers twist routine legal and medical language into something sinister never ceases to amaze me.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.