Archive for the ‘vaccines’ Category

Vaccine Injury Reporting Systems ‘Utterly Inadequate,’ Independent Researchers Say

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/vaccine-injury-reporting-systems-utterly-inadequate/

01/19/21

Vaccine Injury Reporting Systems ‘Utterly Inadequate,’ Independent Researchers Say

New peer-reviewed study of adverse events following MMRV vaccines highlights the urgent need for independent research on vaccine safety and the importance of informed consent and vaccine choice.
The need for independent scrutiny of vaccine safety data has never been more apparent.

As health officials strive to brush off as “coincidences” the mounting number of deaths and other serious adverse reactions occurring worldwide in connection with Pfizer’s and Moderna’s experimental mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, the need for independent scrutiny of vaccine safety data has never been more apparent.

A new peer-reviewed study about adverse events following immunization (AEFI) and the measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMRV) vaccine brings home the urgent need for independent research.

The study, published by two northern Italian researchers on an open access platform suggests that most existing safety monitoring systems, whether in Italy or the U.S., are “utterly inadequate to document the real incidence of serious AEFIs and that current methods of assessing [vaccine-related] causality may be questioned.”

The study also reveals how an unbiased reanalysis of adverse event data puts the lie to the “reassuring conclusions” officials like to disseminate about vaccine safety.

Scrutinizing the existing data

Italy made MMRV vaccination compulsory for young children in 2017. In their 2021 open access study, Italian researchers Paolo Bellavite and Alberto Donzelli indirectly assess the impact of this policy by examining the incidence of MMRV-related AEFI as reported to or studied by Italy’s pharmacovigilance system.

Bellavite and Donzelli note that while Italy’s vaccine surveillance “is mainly of the ‘passive’ type” (characterized, as in the U.S., by vast underreporting), it also includes occasional “active vigilance” studies.

Bellavite and Donzelli summarize the findings of one such study, conducted in the region of Apulia in 2017 and 2018. The Apulia study’s university- and health-department-based researchers asked the parents of more than 2,500 children to keep diaries for three weeks post-MMRV-vaccination. The researchers then followed up with phone calls and review of relevant hospitalization records.

The Apulia researchers detected 992 post-MMRV adverse events among the 2,149 children for whom they were able to complete the three-week telephone follow-up — an AEFI reporting rate of 462 events per 1000 enrolled children. One hundred nine of the 992 adverse events (11%) met World Health Organization (WHO) criteria classifying them as “serious,” meaning fatal or life-threatening; requiring intervention or hospitalization; or causing persistent disability or incapacity.

The most common serious adverse events experienced by young MMRV recipients in Apulia were hyperpyrexia (very high fever in excess of 106°F — a medical emergency), neurological symptoms (including balance disorders and agitation), gastrointestinal problems and thrombocytopenia (abnormally low platelet levels). All of the adverse events are listed as side effects in the package insert for the Merck-manufactured MMRV vaccine (brand name ProQuad) as well as in the inserts for a number of other childhood and adult vaccines. (Notably, the healthy 56-year-old Florida doctor who recently died after getting Pfizer’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccine developed an ultimately fatal form of thrombocytopenia three days after vaccination.)

The MMRV insert also lists dozens of other post-vaccination reactions, including anaphylaxis, febrile seizures, muscle and joint pain, arthritis, bleeding disorders, autoimmune problems and serious infections, including both measles and varicella (chickenpox)!

The next step for the Apulia investigators was to apply the WHO’s causality assessment algorithm to their findings. According to the inflexible and somewhat paradoxical WHO criteria,

“Only reactions that have previously been acknowledged in epidemiological studies to be caused by the vaccine are classified as a vaccine-product-related-reaction. New serious adverse reactions that emerge post-licensure “are labelled as ‘coincidental deaths/events’ or ‘unclassifiable.’”

Even so, the Apulia study showed that 82 of 109 serious adverse reactions displayed a causal association “consistent with MMRV immunization.” This translates to 38 serious adverse events per 1,000 children enrolled — or one in 26.

In the U.S., which relies almost exclusively on passive surveillance, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has received 13,382 reports of MMRV-related adverse events since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved ProQuad in 2005 — an average of 836 reported incidents annually over the 16 years.

VAERS classifies roughly one in 20 of these (4.7%) as “serious,” including 19 deaths. Over the same time frame (that is, since 2005), VAERS accumulated another 40,070 reports of adverse events following MMR vaccination (2,500 annually on average), with one in 10 categorized as serious.

A 2016 FDA study that looked at 204 VAERS reports (through 2014) for infants who, largely due to “vaccination errors,” received the MMR or MMRV vaccines before nine months of age (rather than at the recommended 12 to 15 months of age) found that nearly one in six of the reported adverse events (17%) were serious.

Critiquing the spin
Knowledgeable experts have roundly criticized the WHO algorithm for being biased toward rejecting vaccine-related causality (describing the algorithm as being “not fit for purpose”).
Thus, the fact that there was one serious WHO-confirmed adverse event for every 26 enrolled children should have been extremely noteworthy.

Apparently, the Apulia researchers did not think so. As Bellavite and Donzelli note, though the Apulia study was unique in applying WHO causality assessment methods to comprehensive active surveillance data, the investigators vastly downplayed their own results, describing serious AEFIs as “absolutely rare” and reporting that “the active surveillance program confirmed and reinforced the safety profile of the [MMRV] vaccine.”

Bellavite and Donzelli dispute this tame characterization of the Apulia findings, explaining the following:

  • An AEFI rate of 38 per 1000 — one in 26 — should appropriately be classified as “common” rather than “absolutely rare.”
  • Apulia’s active surveillance data, when compared with Italian health authorities’ passive surveillance data, show a MMRV-related rate of serious AEFIs “hundreds of times higher than expected.”
  • Comparing the serious AEFIs that showed a consistent MMRV-related causal association (as per the WHO algorithm) to the Italian Medicines Agency’s passive surveillance data reveals an even greater “977 times difference.”
  • The frequency of serious, MMRV-related neurological and gastrointestinal symptoms identified through active surveillance — which stands out in comparison to the incidence documented in the literature and passive surveillance systems — should be interpreted as a safety signal.
  • Projecting the AEFI rate of 38 per 1000 onto an Italian birth cohort would yield “tens of thousands of serious AEFIs.”

In the U.S., the FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention researchers maintain that neither the MMR nor MMRV vaccines display “any major safety concerns,” despite the thousands of adverse events reported each year and the vast iceberg of additional adverse reactions that go unreported.

U.S. regulators’ nonchalance is further contradicted by a U.S. government study estimating that one of every 39 vaccines administered results in vaccine injury.

Bellavite and Donzelli also call attention to other considerations typically ignored or overlooked by researchers for whom a “confirmed” vaccine safety profile is the a priori conclusion — considerations that are as pertinent in the U.S. as they are in Italy. For example:

  • Studies focusing on vaccine-related adverse events should take into account each and all rounds of vaccination. The Apulia research was limited to reactions following the first MMRV injection only.
  • Vaccine safety surveillance rarely (if ever) accounts for administration of multiple vaccines at one time, yet the same-day injection of the MMRV and hepatitis A vaccines in Italy — and multiple combination vaccines in one healthcare visit in the U.S. — could be a factor contributing to elevated AEFI rates.
  • In persons with underlying genetic susceptibilities or a concomitant infectious or inflammatory disease, vaccination “can act as a synergistic or triggering factor” and should not be discounted when considering causality.
Drawing appropriate conclusions

Overall, Bellavite and Donzelli are unsparing in their critique of the systems usually relied on to monitor vaccine safety. Discussing “the inadequacy of passive surveillance to represent the real incidence of even short-term AEFIs, both of mild and serious kind,” they recommend directing more resources toward active surveillance of representative samples of the population, while also continuing to collect spontaneous reports through passive surveillance to capture “rare events that active surveillance would have little chance to intercept.”

These and other recommendations, articulated by Children’s Health Defenseand many others, have fallen on deaf ears in the U.S.

More broadly, the Italian authors emphasize the fundamental principles of vaccine choice and informed consent, stating that “the choice of whether to vaccinate or not [is] a choice that must be made by the patient or by parents of underage children, properly advised by their doctors.”

They also noted how vaccine mandates alter doctors’ roles and turn them into “public officer[s] enforcing the government’s decisions.” Americans who are leery of experimental COVID-19 vaccines — and the improbable fairy tales being spun about the vaccines’ risk-benefit calculus — would likely agree with the Italians’ conclusions. The principle of informed consent cannot be satisfied “by a generic statement of a ‘safe profile’ or ‘lack of worrying signals,’” particularly when researchers ignore evidence of serious adverse effects in a significant percentage of vaccine recipients.

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is implementing many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

______________________

For more:  

On January 26, 2021, ICAN reported the CDC after removing the claim that “Vaccines do not cause autism” six months ago, just put it back up on its autism-vaccine webpage after ICAN publicized its removal.

This isn’t about the Science, and it never was.  Our government profits from more than 50 vaccine patents.

Dr. Fauci, head of NIAID for six presidencies has ties to Moderna, one of the manufacturers of a COVID shot.

We can not expect transparency and honesty when the wolf is guarding the hen house.

Category:

Activism, research, vaccines

The Weaponization of Medicine & Straight Talk on COVID

Watch these quickly before they are taken down.

http://

Jan. 16, 2021

Interview with Dr. Lee Merrit

The Weaponization of Medicine

Since Youtube censored this talk, you can watch it on the following link which includes Merrit’s bio.

Dr. Lee Merrit’s bio:  https://drleemerritt.com  (past president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and member of America’s Frontline Doctors)

Very interesting talk.  A few key takeaways:

  • COVID-19 has a 99.991% recovery rate by doing nothing.  
  • There are successful treatments (in spite of all the propaganda and attempts to falsify the medical literature and attempts to dismiss anything they don’t agree with).  A vaccine isn’t needed or warranted.
  • The experimental mRNA injection is not a vaccine. ‘Authorities’ admit it doesn’t prevent transmission.
  •  Under the Obama administration we started funding PLA Communist Chinese virologists to work in our bioweapons labs.
  • Viruses are all around us and are a part of nature. We have preventions and treatments for them.
  • Vitamin D levels are important.
  • Vaccine informed consent is crucial but is being censored.
  • The mRNA biologic puts mRNA into your cells and tells it to produce a spike protein (or at least a part of it). You are actually creating the pathogen within your own body.  
  • All the animals in previous mRNA biologic studies DIED from ADE (antibody dependent enhancement).
  • This shot went out to distribution centers before they even made a show of caring about FDA approval.
  • This is a perfect binary weapon.
  • Merrit comes down hard on doctors who take money from Fauci/NIH, push Remdesivir and kill people, when they could have used successful early outpatient treatment.
  • If you want to escape the pandemic, turn off your TV, take off your mask (they don’t work), reopen your business, and live your life.

http://

Straight Talk on COVID-19

Again Youtube censored and removed this informative talk.  Go here  to listen about this censorship.

Go here to see many, many informative, important videos by America’s Frontline Doctors.

https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com, also contains a lot of great information.

 

 

Category:

Activism, vaccines, Viruses

COVID Vaccine – Genetic Reprogramming Without Informed Consent & Ronavax Roulette: All About the Adjuvants

https://worlddoctorsalliance.com/blog/reprogramming-of-cells-without-informed-consent/

WORLD DOCTORS ALLIANCE

 

WORLD DOCTORS ALLIANCE

Blockbuster conversation with Dr. Carrie Madej exposing the fact that the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-vaccine is experimental in nature, has not been properly tested in humans, has not been proven safe and effective- (she explains closely how the raw data has been manipulated), and raises many questions regarding dangerous side-effects and adverse events, including death, as well as pointing to the genetic reprogramming of human cells without informed consent provided to those who take it: this is a transhumanizing and nanobot-containing vaccine, but people do not seem to understand this; given the multiple numbers of adverse effects being reported, she calls for an immediate moratorium to halt the rollout and calls for medical professionals to speak out.

Watch on Bitchute

Numerous others have called for a moratorium to this dangerous shot but so far, nobody’s listening:

For an excellent article on how there are no completed clinical trials on the COVID-19 shot, and should you get vaccinated, you are actually a test subject in a drug trial:  https://theduran.com/what-vaccine-trials/

But more importantly:

THE DNA TEMPLATE DOES NOT COME DIRECTLY FROM AN ISOLATED VIRUS FROM AN INFECTED PERSON.
This brings us full-circle to the fact you can not have an effective vaccine or test without an isolated/purified virus.

click

https://www.activistpost.com/2021/01/ronavax-roulette-all-about-the-adjuvants.html

Ronavax Roulette:  All About the Adjuvants

JANUARY 22, 2021

By Julie Beal

The coronavirus vaccines are supposed to be ‘intelligent’, because they use novel adjuvants that can target the immune system in specific ways. On the other hand, many of them could cause immediate ‘hypersensitive’ reactions such as anaphylaxis or seizures, or what seems like a delayed reaction, i.e. one that results in an autoimmune disorder. An adjuvant (say ‘add-joov-unt’) is a substance that’s deliberately added to a vaccine to make you have a certain kind of immune response.

If a vaccine only contains an antigen (e.g. a virus), it doesn’t make people produce enough antibodies, so adjuvants are added to force a reaction and make it last longer:

Adjuvants may be molecules, compounds, or macromolecular complexes that boost the potency, quality, or longevity of specific immune responses to antigens, but which should cause minimal toxicity.

Note, in the quote above, they can only say ‘should’, because adjuvants are bad for the body – that’s the whole point of them. They’re supposed to make you react, but only a bit! So if you’re thinking, “Right, OK, so what are these things, and what will they do to me?”, the answer is, “It depends!”  This is partly because we’ve all got a different genetic make-up, and different kinds of microbes living inside us.  But it also depends on which vaccine we’re talking about, because every company makes its own special blend, so they’re all a bit different too.

“However!”  You can be empowered by learning about how genetic vaccines work, and how the reaction to a vaccine is linked to autoimmune disorders and the little bugs that live inside you! This means getting a bit ‘sciencey’, e.g. how the body works, and what microbes like bacteria and viruses actually do in the body, and maybe even what DNA is. All of this is well worth knowing, especially if you’re required to keep getting extra shots for the ‘health passports’ which are planned to be used globally.

An overview of the ronavax adjuvants

There are several new adjuvants being used in the coronavirus vaccines (or ‘ronavax’), sometimes in different combinations, and it’s all a bit bewildering, especially with all the strange names and stuff you’ve never heard of. So instead of trying to learn about the names of individual adjuvants, it’s easier and more helpful to think of them in terms of how they operate. To break it all down a bit, we’ll group them into these basic categories:

  1. Nanoparticles
  2. MRNA and DNA
  3. Genetic inserts
  4. Electroporation
  5. Aluminium
  6. Pretend bacteria (Lipid A and CPG ODNs)
  7. Xenobiotic chemical modifications
  8. Lipids

The old adjuvants, like mercury and thimerosol, have been largely abandoned, because the new ones are meant to be cleverer, and more desired for use in genetic vaccines. Some of the new adjuvants have been tested and some are already licensed in other vaccines, but on the whole, they’re still experimental, especially since they work in combination with the other parts of the vaccine, and yet few tests seem to be required or conducted for the ronavax. The Pfizer vaccine, for instance, contains mRNA, which in itself is an adjuvant, but so far they’ve only tested it on a few rats, because the World Health Organisation does not require further studies. This is in line with genetically engineered protein vaccines, for which tests of genotoxicity are not required.

Not only are the new adjuvants very powerful, they’ve also been largely omitted from the public conversation about coronavirus vaccines. They are now able to target specific parts of the immune system, so, like the genetic vaccines they’re added to, the adjuvants are considered smart or intelligent. (See link for article)

_______________________

**Comment**

This is very important information for Lyme/MSIDS patients to understand since many are suffering not only with multiple pathogenic infections but the blow-back they can cause such as a MCAS-like illness where the body essentially considers everything a threat – or allergen.  

When I attended the ILADS convention a while back I was surprised at the emphasis on MCAS (mast cell activation syndrome), since this was something neither my husband nor I experienced.  Since that time, I’ve been besieged by patients with this disorder (including my own daughter) and have had to learn about it.  A simple way to express it would be to understand that many patients with tick-borne illness (and many other chronic conditions) find themselves suddenly sensitive to nearly everything around them.  This can include certain foods, body products, WiFi, mold, and many, many other things they used to be able to handle.  

Please see:  

The following ingredients are listed in the AstraZeneca ronavax:  excipients and contaminants  histidine, sucrose, sodium chloride, magnesium chloride, Polysorbate 80, EDTA, ethanol and hydrochloric acid. But it might also contain bits of baby, because it’s grown in cells from an aborted foetus (same for the J&J vax).

The article points out a wide range of disorders could result from this shot such as:  anaphylaxis, arthritis, various types of myelitis, stroke, seizures, heart problems, pregnancy and birth problems, things that go wrong with the blood, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and, yes, even death.  Most of these have been detected already from those getting the jab.  While anaphylaxis would be immediate, many other disorders would take time to develop – perhaps leading to misdiagnosis and putting the blame on something other than the shot.  The author points out that any collateral damage from the shots will net a tidy profit for the pharmaceutical industry, so all’s well – except to those suffering.

For more on the shot:

Category:

Activism, vaccines, Viruses

CDC Stops Reporting COVID Injection Side Effects & 12,400 People in Israel Test Positive After Shot

https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/cdc-stops-reporting-on-experimental-covid-mrna-injection-side-effects/

CDC Stops Reporting on Experimental COVID mRNA Injection Side Effects

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has just released its weekly Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), and for the second week in a row, there is no new data on adverse reactions to the two FDA emergency use authorization (EUA) COVID mRNA injections.

The last report on the experimental injections and the adverse side effects was from January 6, 2021, and only covered the first week of injections with the experimental Pfizer COVID mRNA shots, with an emphasis on allergic reactions and anaphylaxis shock.

The report on January 6th did not cover the Moderna injections which have also received emergency use authorization by the FDA.

Injuries and deaths due to the experimental COVID injections are being reported in the U.S. and around the world, so why is the CDC not examining these adverse side effects and reporting on them?

The lack of reporting certainly cannot be blamed on the change in administrations, because an MMWR report was published this week …..

As of last week, fifty-five people in the United States have died after receiving a COVID-19 injection, 96 life-threatening events have been reported, as well as 24 permanent disabilities, 225 hospitalizations, and 1,388 emergency room visits.

(See link for article)

**Please also see** 

___________________________

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/thousands-of-israelis-tested-positive-for-coronavirus-after-first-vaccine-shot

12,400 People in Israel Tested Positive for Coronavirus AFTER Being Injected with the Experimental Pfizer COVID Shot

Jan. 20, 2021

A military nurse prepares to administers the coronavirus vaccine in Tel Aviv. Image source.

by Ido Efrati and Ronny Linder
Haaretz.com

Excerpts:

Over 12,400 Israeli residents have tested positive for COVID-19 after being vaccinated, among them 69 people who had already gotten the second dose, which began to be administered early last week, the Health Ministry reported.

This amounts to 6.6 percent of the 189,000 vaccinated people who took coronavirus tests after being vaccinated.

Some 2.15 million people have been vaccinated in Israel over the past month, of whom 300,000 have already gotten a second dose.

Read the full article at Haaretz.com.

______________________

**Comment*

For more:  

Many falsely believe decisions are being made with raw data.  Clinical trials are ongoing, so if you decide to submit to the experimental device (it’s not a vaccine) you are taking part in an experimental trial that has been fast-tracked, bypassing animal safety studies. There is little recourse if you are injured.

Please note the serious limitations of the ongoing vaccine trials:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/11/19/covidgate-the-corruption-of-clinical-trials-part-1/

  1. No one knows length of protection of the vaccine
  2. No one knows how this affects children as schools prepare to mandate the vaccine to obtain an education
  3. No one knows the synergistic effects of this vaccine with others
  4. No one knows the long-term effects of this vaccine
  5. The Pfizer clinical data is explained here: https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/11/14/pfizer-covid-vaccine-frenzy-high-volume-of-adverse-reactions-expected/
  6. The Moderna trial is also being tested on those with a low risk of COVID
  7. ZERO trials were designed to detect a reduction in any serious outcomes (hospital admission, intensive care, or death)
  8. ZERO trials are designed to determine if they interrupt viral transmission
  9. Moderna’s trial lacks adequate statistical power to assess severe COVID-19 outcomes.  The reason?  Hospital admissions and deaths are too uncommon in the study population of 30,000 people
On top of all of this, experts are warning it can cause sterilization.

Category:

Activism, vaccines, Viruses

WHO’s New PCR Rules Guarantee COVID Cases Will Drop Making it Look Like The ‘Vaccine’ is Working

The World Health Organization initiated new rules regarding the PCR assays used for testing for COVID-19.  The WHO previously recommended 45 amplification cycles to determine if someone was infected with COVID.  They now state:

“Careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.

Most PCR assays are indicated as an aid for diagnosis, therefore, health care providers must consider any result in combination with timing of sampling, specimen type, assay specifics, clinical observations, patient history, confirmed status of any contacts, and epidemiological information.  Source.

It is widely known that anything over 30 cycles magnifies the samples so much that even insignificant viral DNA sequences end up showing up positive even if viral load is extremely low or the virus is inactive and poses no threat.

COVID PCR tests don’t detect a virus, but identify a piece of RNA presumed to be from a virus.
Also, PCR tests can’t distinguish between inactive viruses and infectious viruses.

Now, with the WHO’s lower PCR thresholds, it’s practically guaranteed that COVID “case” numbers will drop dramatically around the world.

We’ve been warned about this tinkering with cycles to give whatever message our ‘authorities’ want us to believe. Previously they need high case numbers to justify draconian lockdowns, so they instituted a high cycle threshold. Now they desperately need us to believe their lucrative vaccines are working so they need case numbers to drop – hence the lowered PCR cycles.

For more on PCR tests:

COVID-19 would barely be a blip on the radar screen if the WHO hadn’t changed the definition of a ‘pandemic’.

The WHO also eliminated the pre-COVID consensus that herd immunity could be achieved by allowing a virus to spread through a population, and insists that that it comes solely from vaccines.  

Hopefully their agenda is becoming crystal clear to everyone.

Category:

Activism, Testing, vaccines, Viruses