Tag: vaccines

Pfizer is acquiring drug companies to profit from chronic diseases caused by their own COVID-19 “vaccines”

If you want to know the long-term side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines, pay close attention to Pfizer’s latest acquisitions. Since the rollout of their COVID-19 vaccine, Pfizer has acquired specific pharmaceutical companies that treat immune-inflammatory diseases, heart inflammation and various cancers. As their experimental use vaccine was being mandated on the population (including on the military) Pfizer was investing in drugs that target health conditions that were created and/or exacerbated by their experimental vaccines.

Pfizer acquired a drug company that treats immune-inflammatory diseases, including myocarditis

For instance, in 2021, Pfizer acquired Arena Pharmaceuticals. The price tag of the acquisition was disproportionate to the market size of the drug they acquired, but the shrewd Pfizer executive team knew the acquisition would be worth it in the end. By acquiring Arena Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer was able to control the future of therapeutics for various immune-inflammatory diseases, including drugs that address heart inflammation (myocarditis and pericarditis). These health problems skyrocketed after 2021, when Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccines were unlawfully mandated on populations and haphazardly placed on the CDC’s childhood vaccine schedule. Today, Pfizer is profiting from health issues that they caused, keeping people in a state of illness and pharmaceutical dependence.

Pfizer acquires drug company that treats various cancers, capitalizing on the turbo cancer epidemic

By 2023, Pfizer spent $43 billion of their vaccine profits to acquire Seagen Pharmaceuticals, a little-known drug company that specializes in cancer treatments. Now, Pfizer is profiting from the surge in turbo cancers that are affecting vaccinated people of all age groups. Turbo cancer is a new phenomenon where oncologists describe a new wave of aggressive cancers that that kill people in weeks or days, as opposed to months or years. There’s no doubt that something is causing immunodeficiency. The very thing that populations were told to take to protect those with immunodeficiency has created an entire new class of people with immunodeficiency and turbo cancers. Meanwhile, their destructive biological weapons remain on the market, ensuring that these health issues continue to be profitable ventures for years to come.

Keep reading

RSV Vaccine Now Killing Babies — VAERS Reports

At least two infants died after they were mistakingly given Pfizer’s respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine along with Nirsevimab, a monoclonal antibody injection approved for infants that’s meant to prevent RSV.

A 29-day-old premature girl died after receiving an RSV shot meant for the elderly, according to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

“According to the mother, the patient departed the clinic at 1 pm after the vaccine was administered. Subsequently, the patient took a nap and at approximately 8 pm, the father observed that the patient was not breathing. The parents attempted CPR but it was unsuccessful,” the VAERS report said. “Shortly thereafter, the parents called both ambulance and police assistance. Upon the paramedics” arrival, the patient had already deceased; The causes of death are unknown, An autopsy is presently in the process of being investigated. The mother has not yet reported the exact cause of death, information was given via a telephone call.”

A 27-day-old boy also received the RSV shot, which resulted in a similar fate.

“Her son was only 27 days old and received the vaccine at doctor”s office and he passed away right there; Her son was only 27 days old and received the vaccine at doctor”s office and he passed away right there; This is a spontaneous report received from a Consumer or other non HCP. A 27-day-old male patient received rsv vaccine prot.subunit pref 2v (ABRYSVO), as dose number unknown, single (Batch/Lot number: unknown) for immunisation. The patient”s relevant medical history and concomitant medications were not reported,” the VARES report said. “The following information was reported: DEATH (death, medically significant), outcome “fatal”, PRODUCT USE ISSUE (non-serious), outcome “unknown” and all described as “Her son was only 27 days old and received the vaccine at doctor”s office and he passed away right there”. The date and cause of death for the patient were unknown. It was not reported if an autopsy was performed. The information on the batch/lot number for rsv vaccine prot.subunit pref 2v, rsv vaccine prot.subunit pref 2v will be requested and submitted if and when received.; Reported Cause(s) of Death: Her son was only 27 days old and received the vaccine at doctor”s office and he passed away right there.”

Keep reading

Supreme Court Rejects Challenges to COVID-19 Shot Mandates

The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected appeals to two COVID shot mandate-related cases brought by Children’s Health Defense (CHD). In one case, CHD appealed a lower court ruling that the non-profit group lacked standing to sue the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over its authorization of the COVID-19 shots for young children. In the other case, CHD challenged the COVID shot mandate for students at Rutgers University in New Jersey.1

The Supreme Court did not issue an explanatory statement along with their denial of these appeals.2 By refusing to hear the cases, the Supreme Court has allowed the opinions of the lower court to stand.3

Appellate Court Dismissed CHD’s Claims Against the FDA

CHD, together with five sets of parents, sued the FDA over its emergency use authorization COVID shots for minors. The District Court dismissed the case finding that the Plaintiffs did not have standing to sue and the 5th Circuit Appellate Court affirmed that ruling. Plaintiffs alleged that when the FDA granted pharmaceutical companies an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to distribute the experimental biologicals, it did not adhere to the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) reasoned decision-making requirements. Plaintiffs sought an injunction forbidding the marketing or promotion of the shots.4

A Plaintiff will have standing to sue when it has been demonstrated that the Plaintiff has suffered an injury in fact that is, “concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent;” the defendant caused the injury; and the injury would likely be redressed by the court.5 The injury must also be concrete, which has been defined as “whether the alleged injury to the Plaintiff has a ‘close relationship’ to a harm ‘traditionally’ recognized as providing a basis for a lawsuit in American courts.”6

The Appellate Court agreed with the District Court that the Plaintiffs did not satisfy their burden of showing that their injury was concrete, particularized or imminent, rather than merely speculative.

The Appellate Court wrote:

To begin, it is insufficient that Plaintiff allege that some hypothetical third party might, at some hypothetical point in the future and through some hypothetical means, will vaccinate their children against their wishes.7

The Appellate Court added that CHD also lacked standing because the organization has not “diverted significant resources to counteract” the EUA granted to the COVID shots by the FDA. The Appellate Court ruling went on to state that the Plaintiff also has not shown that the FDA’s authorization, “concretely and ‘perceptibly impaired’” its ability to fulfill their mission. The courts dismissed the action due to lack of standing.8

Keep reading

Prof. Angus Dalgleish: The use of mRNA injections is criminal negligence

Well well well, two of the most senior oncologists in the world this week shared their alarming findings with the experimental covid gene therapies. First, we have Prof. Fukushima, and now Prof Angus Dalgleish has reiterated his call to ban all mRNA vaccinations immediately in a forum with Senator Ron Johnson on 26 April 2024.

Throw Professor Gabriel Oon in there too, Singapore’s most senior oncologist and founding President of Singapore’s Society of Oncology, who has been warning about the dangers of mRNA tech for some time now.

Could it be that these eminent oncologists from different parts of the world suddenly stopped supporting experimental vaccines and together started saying no to mRNA gene therapy as if they planned it? Let’s get to the heart of it: what these three vocal critics have in common is that they’re retired. This means they don’t have to worry about losing their jobs or money for speaking up. But there are many others still working who keep quiet because they’re afraid of risking their jobs.

So, here comes Prof. Angus Dalgleish. He’s not just any doctor making noise online; he’s a major player in the health field, the genius behind the discovery of the CD4 receptor, and now the head of The Institute of Cancer Vaccines and Immunotherapy. Discovering the CD4 receptor is a massive deal because it’s like finding the secret entrance that the HIV virus uses to invade the body’s cells, causing AIDS. Prof. Dalgleish’s discovery has led to breakthroughs in medicine, allowing us to create treatments that lock this entrance and keep the virus out. Because of his work, we’ve been able to give people fighting HIV a fighting chance. That’s why Prof Dalgleish is such a big name in the battle against HIV/AIDS.

Regarding the mRNA gene therapy, Prof. Dalgleish didn’t just talk about the bad stuff linked to spike proteins, like blood clotting and the scary Guillain-Barre syndrome. He went even further, sharing stories about his patients. These were people who had been doing well in their fight against cancer, but after getting the booster shot, they faced big setbacks. Their cancer came back worse than before. “I started to see in my melanoma clinic patients who’d been stable for years, who suddenly came in, relapsed. Sometimes the relapse was quite vicious. I mean, they had very bad disease. We had to treat them all over again,” he said. This shows how tough things got for them after the booster.

On top of that, Prof Angus Dalgleish watched three of his friends get the booster shot because they wanted to travel after being trapped at home for two to three years. Tragically, all three of them saw their cancer come back. Even worse, two of them died because the cancer didn’t respond to the treatments that usually work. This heartbreaking experience is why Dalgleish has started to speak out so strongly. He calls the use of mRNA platform in infectious disease “a gross medical negligence… really, this criminal negligence now, knowing what we do.” If that’s not a mic drop moment, I don’t know what is.

Keep reading

98% of PE reports involve COVID shots

Pulmonary embolism (PE) occurs when a blood clot moves into the lungs and it is dangerous. Using reports in the VAERS database dating back to 1990, about 15,000 reports of PE have accrued over the past 34 years.

But when filtering them down to just those reports which involved COVID shots, you find that almost 98% of all PE reports involved COVID shots.

This majority is even more striking when one realizes that COVID shots make up just below 10% of all shots given in 34 years. Due to 98% of all PE reports involving COVID shots, you would have thought that government regulators would have warned the public about it. You would think that they would have a duty (legal obligation) to do so.

Keep reading

Biodefence: When A Military Coup Took Over Public Health

Lockdown-until-vaccine is not a public health response, it is a response to a bioterror attack, benefiting the biodefense-industrial-complex.

In previous articles, I analyzed government documents showing that the Covid pandemic response in the U.S. was not designed or led by the public health agencies. Rather, it was a biodefense response, led by the National Security Council and FEMA/Department of Homeland Security.

In addition to military/intelligence agencies, the biodefense cartel that ran the Covid response encompassed global pharmaceutical companies enmeshed in public-private partnerships with governments to create and disseminate “countermeasures,” and global NGOs – most notably, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust – who invest in and benefit from all the activities related to pandemic preparedness, first and foremost: vaccines.

The same thing happened in many countries:

  • Between January and mid-March 2020, the public health agencies were handling the coronavirus outbreak as they would any other. They monitored for local outbreaks where people were getting sick with symptoms, told people not to panic, and gave scientifically and epidemiologically sound advice: no masks necessary; wash your hands and stay home if you’re sick.
  • In mid-March there was a complete reversal on everything: suddenly both the political and the public health officials were saying millions would die if we did not shut everything down and wait for vaccines.

In this article I will discuss how this pattern was repeated in the British Covid pandemic response: the national public health agency was replaced at the helm of the response by military/intelligence entities, and the response switched from public health to lockdown-until vaccine – specifically, as a top UK minister testified – the mRNA vaccine.

Keep reading

Biden regime pressured Amazon to censor at least 43 books that discuss vaccine injuries and Big Pharma fraud

The House Judiciary Committee and its Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government has uncovered a book banning operation at Amazon that involves coercive, unconstitutional directives from Joe Biden’s rogue government. According to the Congressional report, Amazon was ordered by the federal government to change its algorithms to reduce visibility for books that are critical of pharmaceutical executives or vaccines.

The federal government compiled a “Do Not Promote” list that targeted at least 43 book titles, effectively limiting their reach and availability to the public. Representative Jim Jordan, Chair of the Judiciary Committee, highlighted these findings on social media, citing internal Amazon communications that link the censorship to requests from the Biden regime.

The Democrats, not the Republicans, are banning books and censoring important information

On numerous occasions, Joe Biden and his propaganda machine claimed that Republicans are fascists who are trying to ban books and take away our rights. We are constantly reminded that “MAGA Republicans are a threat to democracy!”

However, in 2021 and 2022, the Biden regime conscripted the Department of Homeland Security to target moms and dads who speak up at school board meetings about pornography in school libraries and the bodily restrictions that were forced on kids in the name of “safety.” Parents who stood up for common sense, who tried to get forced masking, pornography and perverse gender ideologies out of the schools were deemed “domestic terrorists” by Biden’s DHS.

Keep reading

New study may have identified an “off switch” for spike proteins produced in the body caused by mRNA injections

Covid-19 mRNA “vaccines” have shown wider distribution in the body than initially claimed, raising concerns about unintended effects and the need for an “off switch” to stop ongoing spike protein production. A recent study identifies a treatment that may act as an “off switch.”

A preprint study led by Dr. Peter McCullough suggests using siRNA and RIBOTACs to target and degrade residual mRNA from covid-19 vaccines, potentially mitigating long-term health risks associated with persistent spike protein production.

The study proposes using siRNA and RIBOTACs as potential methods to bind to and degrade vaccine mRNA in cells, offering a targeted approach to prevent adverse events from mRNA-based therapies.

“Long vax” symptoms, similar to long covid, have been reported following vaccination, including fatigue, brain fog, numbness and cardiovascular issues, highlighting the need for effective treatments for those affected.

Another study led by McCullough found a significant increase in cerebral thromboembolism risk associated with covid-19 vaccines compared to other vaccines, leading to calls for a moratorium on their use.

Keep reading

NewsGuard fact-checked me today, providing the opportunity to clarify questions about the Audenz vaccine and the extremely high mortality rate in its small trial.

The big guns, the Health Editor, approached me this afternoon. Happy to learn the presentation is getting attention.

Below is the email I received and below that is my detailed reply.

On Jul 3, 2024, at 1:26 PM, John Gregory <john.gregory@newsguardtech.com> wrote:

Dr. Nass, 

My name is John Gregory, health editor at NewsGuard. We’re a news organization that reports on and tracks online misinformation. 

I’m emailing in regards to your April 20, 2024, CHD video in which you cited the FDA package insert for the H5N1 vaccine Audenz, and said, “One in 200 people who got this vaccine in a clinical trial died,” and later added, “This is a dangerous vaccine for a nothing disease.”

Video of your remarks has begun circulating widely on social media platforms in the past two weeks, used as evidence for claims like “Dr. Meryl Nass: One of the approved Bird Flu quackccines, Audenz… had a death rate of 1 in 200 during clinical trials.” 

I noticed the screenshot included in your original video highlighted the sentence, ““Fatal SAEs [Serious Adverse Events] included 11 (0.5%) Audenz recipients and 1 (0.1%) placebo recipients,” even though the very next sentence said, ““No SAEs were assessed as being related to Audenz,” meaning that none of the reported serious adverse events – including deaths – that occurred among trial participants were caused by the vaccine.

You also did not mention that the FDA’s own statistical review of Audenz stated that, “No deaths occurred that were considered related to the vaccine,” and concluded, “No major statistical or safety issues have been identified” with the vaccine, or that the published results of the Audenz trial said:

None of the serious AEs or AEs of special interest reported by subjects who received aH5N1c were considered vaccine related. Two subjects in the placebo group reported a related AE of special interest (immune thrombocytopenic purpura and polymyalgia rheumatic); these events were also considered serious AEs. During the study, 12 (0.4%) subjects had serious AEs with a fatal outcome, none of which were attributed to the study treatment, and most (n = 11) occurred after Day 43 during the follow-up period in subjects ≥65 years with underlying severe comorbidities and multiple concomitant medications.

Is there any reason why you did not mention any of this countervailing information?

My deadline is 5pm eastern today, July 3. Thank you. 

— 

Best regards, 
John Gregory

john.gregory@newsguardtech.com

Office: ‪(312) 489-8676

More about NewsGuard criteria here.

Dear Mr. Gregory,

Since I provided a screenshot of the package insert of the Audenz licensed vaccine and repeated what it said, this can hardly be characterized as misinformation, which you claim to be investigating.  Since I included the next sentence in the presentation, it cannot even be construed as incomplete.

Had you been working on issues of vaccines for over 25 years as I have, you would have been aware that the sponsor (mfr) and FDA, who together craft the vaccine labels aka package inserts, ALWAYS assert that most or all of the deaths and serious adverse events occurring during a clinical trial were adjudged to be not due to the vaccine.  Had they judged otherwise, a license would probably not have been issued.  A license was issued for Audenz.

Later, when a vaccine is given to millions of people, not just a few hundred as in this case, one learns which side effects are IN FACT attributable to the vaccine.

For example, at least a hundred million Americans had received an mRNA COVID vaccine before it was determined to cause myocarditis, in late May of 2021 by FDA.

That is the reason why the raw data, which I presented, are important.  So that people have the information to judge for themselves what risks they may face when choosing vaccination.  In fact, clinical trials often exclude sick subjects, and drugs and vaccines almost invariably appear more safe and effective in clinical trial data than they do later, in the real world—a fact known to all medical researchers.

Why did I not mention material from an article?  Because I was referring to the Audenz label, which is the legal document that FDA attests is true, unlike published articles which are generally written by the vaccine sponsor and have a lesser degree of reliability.  In fact, the numbers in the article versus those in the label are not exactly the same.

Furthermore, if the US government was comfortable with the H5N1 Audenz vaccine, why did DHHS’ BARDA just place an order with Moderna for H5N8 mRNA vaccines, even though the avian flu circulating in the US is H5N1?  Even though it makes much more sense to match the neuraminidase portion of the vaccine to the circulating strain…  which is done every year when seasonal influenza vaccines are produced?

Finally, I invite you to take a look at the WHO data on deaths in humans worldwide from the H5N1 bird flu, which confirms it is a nothing disease in humans, having mutated to a different form than it once had.  The federal health agencies have monitored 9,000 farm workers and all they found were 4 mild cases of disease, no hospitalizations and no deaths in the US over the past several years.

Keep reading

Biden’s FDA rushed COVID-19 vaccine approval for children despite experts’ appeals for more time to study negative effects

The Biden administration pressured medical professionals to rush approval of the COVID-19 vaccine for children before there was sufficient testing to ascertain its safety, experts have testified, and when top FDA vaccine experts asked for more time to study the side effects of the jabs in young adults and children, they were fired.

This is according to testimony before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust this week looking into the politicization of the FDA during the pandemic.

The subcommittee also released an interim staff report about the topic, “Politics, Private Interests, and the Biden Administration’s Deviation from Agency Regulations in the COVID-19 Pandemic,” which explained how the Biden administration pressured the FDA to work outside of its regulatory authority to cut corners and change procedures to push through authorization of the Pfizer jab and booster shots, which effectively enabled them to issue vaccine mandates even as concerns persisted about vaccine injury.

During the hearing, Chairman Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky) read testimony from the former director of the FDA’s vaccine office, Dr. Marion Gruber. She told the FDA’s top vaccine regulator, Dr. Peter Marks, that the vaccine needed to undergo more testing in younger people, especially males aged 12 to 17. However, Dr. Marks reportedly brushed off her concerns.

Massie recounted: “Right when they were getting the warnings that myocarditis and pericarditis are real and serious side effects to the vaccine, the top scientists at FDA had already agreed to compress the schedule as much as possible, right when they got the message that there were serious side effects.”

Keep reading