1 of 71 Infants Experienced Severe Adverse Events (SAE) in Pfizer Trials

This is an excellent article by Jessica Rose (Unacceptable Jessica). Under no circumstances should infants be receiving this vaccine! None! They are not at risk. The entire article is worth the read. The accompanying poster/chart by Jessica hits the highlights (or lowlights). Print, post and distribute where you can. The article following Jessica’s by Toby Rogers is also excellent.

It’s important, I think, to have this information documented even if the FDA okays the shots. They knew the risks and we know they knew.

  • And Pfizer enters the running for best made up last minute document for VRBPAC race!

    Just so you know, they determined the efficacy of this dose of Pfizer products in infants by measuring and comparing the concentration of neutralizing antibodies against a ‘randomly selected subset’ of 16-25-year-old participants. I’m sorry, but that’s absolute sheit. You can read Toby’s Substack to find out how and why in a more detailed way.

    Why Get Rid of the Control Group?

    So they had 1,178 infants in the drug arm (3 ug) and 598 in the placebo arm. The placebo arm participants were monitored for 2 months. Then apparently, most of the remainder of the placebo participants (58%) were injected with the drug following unblinding. I guess this again, was due to the fact that it was ‘unethical’ to refuse these babies the joy of being injected with an experimental product during a clinical trial?

    When you destroy the control group, you destroy the study. It is not a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT), in this case. The ‘gold standard’ is for fools. (See the cleverness there in that word-smithing?) It’s in the name. That’s what the ‘C’ stands for, see?

    Good poster/image. Please share. (thanks to Jessica Rose)

    Pfizer Infant Trials, 1 out 71 experience severe adverse event

  • The sole purpose of the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA shots in kids is to eliminate the control group. There are no health benefits, only harms

    This is the article that Jessica quotes from and references. It is also an excellent article. I recommend the whole thing. These monsters are going to okay this vaccine for our young children. Do not comply! Do not let them inject your children with this vaccine. They do not need it.

    The FDA is willing to sacrifice the health of 19 million little kids to cover up the evidence of a crime

    The Game

    All these paragraphs are worth quoting. These pharmaceutical companies are evil. Seriously. They are.

    The risk benefit document(opens new window) for Moderna is 190 pages single-spaced. It was released two business days before the June 14-15 VRBPAC meeting(opens new window). A similar risk benefit assessment for Pfizer’s EUA application for kids under 5 will be released tomorrow (just 24 hours before the meeting). This guarantees that NONE of the members of the VRBPAC will have read either of these documents prior to the meeting — which is exactly what the cartel wants.

    One of the ways that 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 by lumping them together it 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.

    Pandemics Forever

    Moderna is in a race against natural immunity. But natural immunity has already won because 74.2%(opens new window) 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…

    Problems for Moderna

    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(opens new window) 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, 2022, 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.

    The 3rd Problem

    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.

    I never knew this. It makes sense.

    In Jessica’s article above I noticed the placebo group’s issues were closer than I expected to the group receiving the vaccines. That just seemed odd to me. This would explain it.

    My strong suspicion in that Moderna rigged the placebo. Why wouldn’t they — the FDA has no regulations concerning the contents of placebos (see Golomb 1995(opens new window) and Golomb et al. 2010(opens new window)). The dirty little secret of the vaccine program is that manufacturers almost always use rigged placebos(opens new window) to create an artificially high “background rate” to hide adverse events.

    He quotes Jessica Rose with a similar observation:

    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 quoting a lot from this article, but it is extremely important. This next bit about myocarditis shows just how evil they are.

    The way that 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(opens new window). It’s one of the most chilling things I’ve ever read. The FDA’s argument goes like this:

    ‘Yes, by spring and summer of 2021 there were already seven high quality studies from around the world showing that mRNA shots increase myocarditis risk. By 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 of 2022, 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.’

As censorship increases also consider using email and text messages to send links.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *