he Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) on Tuesday, Oct. 26, approved the emergency use of Pfizer’s Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine for children aged five to 11. But during the eight-hour discussion, one doctor made a shocking admission: There was no way to guarantee how safe a vaccine is unless you start giving it to people.
Are vaccines really safe?
Six hours into the conference, Dr. Eric Rubin, editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, commented on how widespread the rollout of the coronavirus vaccine should be.
Rubin admitted that despite Big Pharma’s insistence that coronavirus vaccines are safe and that they are key to ending the pandemic, it’s impossible to find out how safe the vaccines are unless they’re administered first. He added that this is usually the case for vaccines and their many side effects and rare complications.
Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee – 10/26/2021
Join the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for an upcoming meeting of its Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) to discuss newly available data for the currently available COVID-19 vaccines. The committee will meet to discuss a request to amend Pfizer-BioNTech’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for administration of their COVID-19 mRNA vaccine to children 5 through 11 years of age.
The Food And Drug Administration (FDA) approved an emergency use authorization for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for children as young as 5 years old despite the fact that its Pfizer-connected advisory committee knew about numerous adverse events that were reported in Pfizer’s clinical trials for children, including adverse events that were determined to be “related” to the clinical vaccine trial.
The Briefing Packet for the FDA advisory committee meeting shows that the FDA advisers used clinical studies sponsored by BioNTech and conducted by or supported by Pfizer to approve the vaccine for young children.
ON PAGE 39 the FDA document states (emphasis added):
“Lymphadenopathy is considered an adverse reaction to vaccine and is noted as such in the EUA Fact Sheet. Among approximately 2250 children 5 to <12 years of age randomized 2:1 to receive BNT162b2 or placebo, as of the data cutoff date (06 September 2021), 13 participants (0.9%) in the BNT162b2 group and 1 participant (0.1%) in the placebo group had events of lymphadenopathy.” Lymphadenopathy is a lymph nodes disease. On page 40 the document states that “Lymphadenopathy has been identified as related to BNT162b2 in individuals ≥12 years of age and it is also observed in the pediatric 5 to <12 years of age group.” The document states that “One participant in the BNT162b2 group had a related AE of mild arthralgia (right elbow joint pain), with an onset the same day as Dose 2 (administered in the left deltoid muscle), that was reported as resolved the next day.” The document states that “One participant in the BNT162b2 group had a related AE of moderate paresthesia (bilateral lower extremity tingling) with onset at 1 day post-Dose 2 and reported as recovered/resolved 3 days after onset.” The document states that “In the BNT162b2 group, a psychiatric disorder event of tic was reported in 1 participant: One participant in the BNT162b2 group had an AE of Grade 3 tic with onset at 7 days post Dose 2 and reported as recovering/resolving at the time of the data cutoff. The AE was considered by the investigator as related to study intervention.” The document later notes that “There were 6 participants (0.4%) in the BNT162b2 group and 3 participants (0.4%) in the placebo group had events of lymphadenopathy.”
On PAGE 42 the document states that a trial participant dropped out of the trial due to an Adverse Event, stating “One participant (0.1%) in the BNT162b2 group discontinued from the vaccination period due to an AE (details in Section 3.7.2) and two participants (0.1%) in the BNT162b2 group and 1 participant (0.1%) in the placebo group withdrew from the study before the 1-month post Dose 2 visit. Neither of these withdrawals was reported as due to an AE.”
One participant had blood that passed through his/her anus, which is known as hematochezia, characterized by bloody stool. The document states that “One participant in the BNT162b2 group had a non-serious related AE reported by the investigator as moderate hematochezia 4 days after Dose 2. The participant had heme occult positive stool; was seen in the emergency department, and had no further tests done; and went home and the event resolved the same day without sequelae. This participant had a medical history of asthma and nondrug allergy and had no other reported AEs.”
The European Union and the U.S. Congress are working on reforms to their respective copyright laws, some of which have been deemed too extreme by critics. The EU, for instance, would like force websites to enable “upload filters” and to pay for linking to other websites, while the U.S. Congress would like to extend copyright to 144 years from the already quite long 70 years + life.
EU Copyright Law Changes
As soon as June 20, next week, the European Parliament will vote a draft legislation proposed by the European Commission (EU’s executive body). Critics have attacked the proposal as being quite extreme because it could impact many digital industries too severely.
Censorship Machines (Article 13)
One of the biggest issues with the new EU copyright reform proposal is the Article 13, which mandates that websites that accept user content (anything from videos to online comments) must have an “upload filter” that would block all copyrighted content that’s uploaded by users. Critics, such as Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Julia Reda, have also called upload filters “censorship machines.”
Under the censorship machine proposal, companies would be required to get a license for any copyrighted content that is uploaded to their site by its users. In other words, websites would be liable for any content their users upload to the site. It goes without saying that this could significantly hamper innovation on the internet.
For instance, YouTube or a site like it, probably wouldn’t even exist today if the site would have been liable for what users uploaded from day one. Not to mention that at the time the technology to identify potentially copyrighted content was quite rudimentary. Even today, YouTube has its occasional PR scandal over taking down content that shouldn’t have been taken down. Furthermore, those types of takedowns likely happen on a daily basis to many people, but they just don’t get enough media attention to turn into an issue for Google.
Some argue that upload filters wouldn’t be able to recognize “legal uses” of copyrighted content, even if they were 100% effective in identifying whether or not a piece of content is copyrighted or not. In this category would enter parodies, citations, and even internet memes, which typically make references to copyrighted content.
According to Reda, upload filters have already been made illegal by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which ruled that an obligation to filter all user uploads violates the fundamental rights to privacy, freedom of expression, freedom of information and freedom to conduct a business.
Impact On Foreign Companies
Article 11 and Article 13 of the new copyright directive look like they would have a much bigger (and probably negative) impact on companies operating in the EU than the GDPR did. The GDPR, although supported by most internet users, has already put many foreign companies on edge. Many either don’t show their content to EU users, have put it behind a paywall, or simply don’t fully or properly company with the law.
If the new copyright directive passes, most American companies may simply decide that serving EU users is no longer worth it, which most likely wouldn’t be positive outcome for the EU as a whole.
If you’re an EU citizen and would like to express your opinion to your MEPs, Mozilla has created a free calling tool, while the EFF and multiple European groups have developed an easy web tool to email your own MEPs.
The European Union is updating its 2001 Copyright Directive, with a key committee vote coming up on June 20 or 21; on GDPR day, a rogue MEP jammed a mass censorship proposal into the draft that is literally the worst idea anyone in Europe ever had about the internet, ever.
Under “Article 13,” sites that allow the public to post anything that might be copyrighted — text, pics, videos, games, sounds, code — will have to run user submissions through a copyright filter that will check to see if it matches the a known copyrighted work. It’s YouTube’s perennially busted, overblocking Content ID, but for everything from Github to the copyrighted images on that band tee you wore in your Tinder profile.
These black boxes will have the unaccountable power of life or death over everything Europeans say to each other online. They’ll ingest everything we say to each other — likely sending it to one of the giant American tech companies that specialise in this kind of filtering — and render a judgment.
Anyone can add to the blacklist, too: under Article 13, sites have to let people claim new copyrighted works — but the rule has no penalties for abuse. Trolls can lay claim to every word ever posted to Wikipedia and stop anyone from quoting it on a WordPress site or Twitter or Facebook.
Paul Offit – “Let me love your child”
Paul Offit makes millions of dollars selling and promoting vaccines. The information he disseminates through the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) is often among the first resources found by parents and medical professionals when investigating vaccine safety concerns. It is commonly understood, that he is paid by pharmaceutical companies to speak to medical students.
In 2016, at a UC Berkeley seminar entitled, “Communicating Science to the Public”, Dr. Offit instructed an audience of public health students to address parental vaccine safety concerns by being passionate and saying, “let me love your child”.
In 2017, when asked to interview on the Vaxxed bus, Dr. Offit became enraged and passionately declined to comment on the documentary that brings the confessions of CDC whistle blower, Dr. William Thompson, to parents worldwide who are already mistrustful of the apparent paradigm of corruption at the CDC.
Dr. Offit & Dr. Moss | Natural Materials
Often the first resources parents find when investigating vaccine safety concerns originate with Dr. Paul Offit and the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP). Dr. Offit’s comments in this clip are delivered to an audience of public health students at UC Berkeley. Clinical Professor Emeritus, Dr. John Swartzberg, introduced Offit as his, “infectious disease hero.”
The testimony of Dr. Alvin Moss, professor in the Center for Health Ethics & Law department at West Virginia University, is given before a Senate Committee in West Virginia in support of a bill which proposes to restore the state’s religious and philosophical exemptions.
Dr. Offit & Dr. Moss | Flu Shot
Often the first resources parents find when investigating vaccine safety concerns originate with Dr. Paul Offit and the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP). His comments in this clip are delivered to an audience of public health students at UC Berkeley. Clinical Professor Emeritus, Dr. John Swartzberg, introduced Offit as his, “infectious disease hero.”
Dr. Alvin Moss’ testimony is given before a Senate Committee in West Virginia in support of a bill to restore the state’s religious and philosophical exemption.
Dr. Suzanne Humphries, M.D. | Full Testimony (West Virginia Senate Education Committee)
Full testimony from Dr. Suzanne Humphries, M.D. at the West Virginia Senate Education Committee on Saturday, March 18, 2017. Dr. Humphries is a nephrologist (kidney specialist) physician who began researching vaccines after observing her patients fall ill after receiving vaccinations.
Dr. Alvin H. Moss, M.D. | Full Testimony (West Virginia Senate Education Committee)
Full testimony from Dr. Alvin H. Moss, M.D. at the West Virginia Senate Education Committee on Saturday, March 18, 2017. Dr. Moss is a physician and professor in the Center for Health Ethics & Law department at West Virginia University.
Alvin Moss, M.D. | Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)
Dr. Alvin Moss, M.D. testifies at the West Virginia Education Committee the morning of Saturday, March 18, 2017. He responds to the question, “What is in vaccines?”
Dr. Moss | What is in Vaccines?
Dr. Alvin Moss testifies at the West Virginia Education Committee the morning of Saturday, March 18, 2017. He responds to the question, “What is in vaccines?” Dr. Moss is a physician and professor in the Center for Health Ethics & Law department at West Virginia University.
West Virginia Senator, Patricia Rucker, asks Dr. Humphries for More Information
Senator Patricia Rucker asks Dr. Suzanne Humphries for more information during her testimony at the West Virginia Education Committee the morning of Saturday, March 18, 2017.
Dr. Humphries | Pertussis or “Whooping Cough” Vaccine
Dr. Suzanne Humphries testifies at the West Virginia Education Committee the morning of Saturday, March 18, 2017. She discusses history and problems with the pertussis or “whooping cough” vaccines (DPT, DTaP, & TDaP).
1 Corinthians 15 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2 by which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
Hebrews 6 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
2 of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
3 And this will we do, if God permit.
4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
7 For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:
8 but that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.
1 Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed?
2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant,and as a root out of a dry ground:he hath no form nor comeliness;and when we shall see him,there is no beauty that we should desire him.
3 He is despised and rejected of men;a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief:and we hid as it were our faces from him;he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4 Surely he hath borne our griefs,and carried our sorrows:yet we did esteem him stricken,smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But he was wounded for our transgressions,he was bruised for our iniquities:the chastisement of our peace was upon him;and with his stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;we have turned every one to his own way;and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,yet he opened not his mouth:he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter,and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb,so he openeth not his mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment:and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living:for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
9 And he made his grave with the wicked,and with the rich in his death;because he had done no violence,neither was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him;he hath put him to grief:when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin,he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days,and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied:by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many;for he shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great,and he shall divide the spoil with the strong;because he hath poured out his soul unto death:and he was numbered with the transgressors;and he bare the sin of many,and made intercession for the transgressors.
Her daughter was injected with 6 vaccines at one time and LISTEN TO WHAT HAPPENED!!
The Wild Doc – ZERO to THREE immunization webinar, doctors lie. And avoided my questions.
“You don’t mess with Parents” – Polly Tommey #VaxXed Worldwide
El Efecto del Aluminio en las Vacunas – Prof. Dr. Christopher A. Shaw, PhD, BS, MSc.
#VaXism NEWS
States ending free parent whooping vaccine PARENTS across Australia will no longer receive free whooping cough vaccinations because it is not effective in protecting newborns from the potentially deadly illness, a parliamentary committee has heard.
Since 2009 all states and territories except Tasmania have at some stage introduced the free parental vaccination program in an effort to shield infants from the illness.
Whooping cough, a highly infectious airborne bacterial disease, can kill if complications cause lack of oxygen to the brain.
It is most serious in babies under a year old, with newborns susceptible as they are unable to be vaccinated until they are at least four months old.
But at a Victorian Parliamentary Accounts and Estimates Committee hearing on Tuesday, Department of Health divisional executive director Chris Brook said states were abandoning the “cocooning” program from June 30.
He said the national Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) had determined vaccinating parents was not effective in protecting newborns, after two pharmaceutical manufacturers made submissions to the PBAC.
Study – Mercury in vaccines from the Australian childhood immunization program schedule.
Abstract
Despite the removal of the mercury (Hg)-based preservative thimerosal from vaccines listed on the Australian Immunization Program Schedule for children, concerns remain among some researchers and parents for the safety of the present schedule, in part due to a fear of residual trace levels of Hg. The purpose of this study was to independently assess childhood vaccines for the presence of Hg. Eight vaccines administered to children under the age of 5 yr were assessed for Hg content via a DMA-80 direct mercury analyzer. Seven of the 8 vaccines contained no detectable levels of Hg (less than 1 ppb); however, 1 vaccine (Infanrix hexa) tested positive for Hg at 10 ppb. The result was confirmed and validated by retesting the original sample. Follow-up testing was conducted on three additional samples of Infanrix hexa (one from the same production lot and two from a different lot). All three tested positive for Hg (average of 9.7 ppb). Although the levels of Hg detected are substantially lower than any established exposure safety limits, the results of this study reveal that inaccuracies exist in public health messages, professional communications, and official documentation regarding Hg content in at least one childhood vaccine. In the interests of public health, it is incumbent on vaccine manufacturers and responsible agencies such as the Therapeutic Goods Administration and the Federal Department of Health and Ageing to address this issue as a matter of urgency
VAXXED TV – Former researcher has unvaccinated children
Health professionals talk vaccinations
Vaccines gave my son autism
DTaP vaccine gave my daughter epilepsy
3 months ago my baby died following vaccinations
My unvaccinated extremely healthy children
My son has ADHD and rage from vaccinations
Read The Insert
15 children die in botched vaccine campaign in South Sudan
JUBA, South Sudan — Fifteen young children have died in a botched measles vaccination campaign that saw people as young as 12 years old administering the vaccines, South Sudan’s government announced Friday.
The United Nations said the children died of “severe sepsis/toxicity” from the contaminated vaccine, and the health ministry blamed the deaths on human error. One syringe was used for all the children during the four-day campaign, and the vaccine was stored without refrigeration the entire time.
Measles is yet another challenge facing the desperately poor East African country that already has been devastated by more than three years of civil war and a recently declared famine, as well as a cholera outbreak.
The government said all of the children who died were under the age of 5. It is setting up a commission to determine who is responsible and whether victims’ families will be compensated.
The measles vaccination campaign is targeting more than 2 million children across the country. About 300 children were targeted in the area where the children’s deaths occurred.
The children died in the rural town of Kapoeta in early May. Another 32 children suffered fever, vomiting and diarrhea but recovered, a joint statement by the World Health Organization and the U.N. children’s agency UNICEF said.
Ministerul Justiției: Proiectul legii vaccinării obligatorii prezintă riscuri de neconstituționalitate
Adi Mosoianu
Ministerul Justiției este de părere că proiectul legii vaccinării obligatorii a copiilor, elaborat de către Ministerul Sănătății, nu instituie norme suficient de clare și previzibile, în acord cu exigențele impuse în acest sens de jurisprudența Curții Constituționale, ceea ce ar putea duce la apariția unor vicii de neconstituționalitate și, în plus, consideră că draftul de act normativ ar putea afecta dreptul fundamental al persoanei de a dispune de ea însăși, prevăzut de Constituție. Aceste considerații ale Ministerului Justiției sunt menționate în avizul Consiliului Legislativ asupra proiectului legii vaccinării obligatorii, document datat 10 august 2017. Guvernul a aprobat proiectul pe 9 august.
“De asemenea, semnalăm faptul că, astfel cum a fost precizat și de către Ministerul Justiției în adresa nr. 69366/2017, “, se arată în avizul Consiliului Legislativ.
the news network 