Steve Kirsch and Kyle Beattie have been going through the documents from the Pfizer Covid vaccine trial that the company has been compelled to release (150 so far with many more to come). While they warn that their findings are preliminary and need double-checking, here are some of the key points from their analysis so far.
1. Despite recent claims that the vaccines were only ever intended to reduce serious illness, it’s clear in the documents (see excerpts below) that Pfizer’s submission to the FDA was for a vaccine that would provide: “Active immunisation to prevent COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2 in individuals 16 years of age and older.” This purpose of the drug is stated repeatedly. That’s what it’s supposed to do, what it was authorised for. This means it has failed on its own terms, and it is unclear why this should not invalidate the authorisation in the eyes of the approving body.
2. A high number of adverse events were observed, and it was clear that many were reactions to the vaccine as they were much higher in the vaccine arm and increased with each dose.
The dose relationship was observed particularly in the animal trials. In the documents, Pfizer states:
Local reactions were observed in male and female animals dosed IM with BNT162b2 (V8). The incidence and severity of the reactions were higher after the second or third injections compared with the first injection. The majority of animals had very slight edema or rarely slight erythema after the first dose. After the second or third dose, the severity of edema and erythema increased up to moderate or rarely, severe grades.
The animal trials also showed serious adverse reactions of muscle necrosis and increased spleen size and weight.
BNT162b2 (V8)-related higher absolute and relative (to body) spleen weights (up to 1.62 times controls) were evident and correlated with the macroscopic observation of increased spleen size… Injection site inflammation was associated with moderate edema, mild myofiber degeneration, occasional muscle necrosis, and mild fibrosis.
The documents show that vaccine recipients were much more likely to suffer severe adverse events than placebo recipients – anywhere from twice to 25 or more times as likely to have severe systemic events compared with the placebo group.
Systemic events were more than twice as likely in the vaccine arm, with almost a quarter of the cohort suffering them. Steve writes:
Within seven days after each dose, twice as many people (23%) in the vaccinated group suffered systemic events compared with the placebo group (11.3%), while severe fever was noted in the vaccinated group 14 times as much as the placebo group.
3. It’s very clear in the documents that the vaccine does not stay at the injection site but travels extensively throughout the body.
The data from the animal trials show that with one dose over a 48 hour period the vaccine quantity decreases from the injection site and increases substantially in the ovaries, liver, and spleen in particular, but also in adrenal glands, bladder, bone, bone marrow, eyes, large intestine, lymph nodes, pancreas, salivary glands, skin, small intestine, testes, thymus, thyroid, and the uterus.
Specifically, 0.09% of the injection ends up in the ovaries, 1.03% of the injection ends up in the spleen, and around 16.2% of the injection ends up in the liver after 48 hours. The table below shows some of the data. This confirms what was known from Japanese data.
4. The data also show that the efficacy of the vaccine wanes very quickly over time, by as much as 50% in a month after the second dose, judging by S1-binding and RBD-binding IgG antibody levels.
5. In the documents, Pfizer defended the side-effect reporting system VAERS as a “robust” system that is “designed to detect safety concerns with vaccines” when it wanted to get out of monitoring side-effects itself (see below). Yet subsequently the extraordinary number of VAERS reports have largely been treated as incidental and unrelated to the vaccines, despite the trial data giving every reason to expect high numbers of adverse reactions.
Read Steve’s post in full here.
Stop Press: Dr. John Campbell has switched to recommending against vaccination following the revelations in these documents. Watch the video here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
https://watsonjack351.substack.com/p/breaking-labour-win-election
It’s very important that we receive the views of the non voting elite.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13604919/BORIS-JOHNSON-Starmers-majority-built-sand-mile-wide-inch-deep-ten-point-guide-bashing-Labour-getting-power.html
Traitor.
Foxtrot Oscar Johnson.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/07/05/britain-has-entered-a-new-era-of-sectarian-politics/
A point I have been making these last few weeks.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13603707/Moment-furious-Labour-MP-Jess-Phillips-takes-pro-Palestinian-mob-booed-beat-independent.html
Suck it up you scruffy sod. Reality bites.
https://x.com/GMB/status/1809114873894228261
Well why on earth did you want to be an MP in the first place? Nobody forced you. What a bloody insult to the electorate.
Useless failure. Any skeletons Steve?
Steve Baker is a good man. Please remember that he was almost alone in Parliament (honorable mentions to Mark Harper, Desmond Swayne, Charles Walker and Christopher Chope) in articulating the case against lockdowns and against mandatory vaccination.
Yes, he dropped the ball on the rushed vaccines, and took it himself, and is a bit too ‘Church of England’ on the alphabet people and woke issues, but he was done vastly more for our side in Parliament than almost anybody else.
He was also the leader of the Brexit “Spartans” during May’s miserable tenure as Prime Minister.
Bridgen is a particular case and was late to the party.
The case of Andrew Bridgen shows me how hopeless the situation is.
He got beaten very badly and lost his seat, despite the fact that he stood up bravely to denounce the horror perpetrated on the public with the covid jabs.
The establishment obviously chewed him up and spat him out. That is to be expected, that is what this disgusting system does with anyone who confronts it.
But the really hopeless part is that the public who he stood up for have rejected him so completely. We have a population that has lost its ability to distinguish good from bad. Or perhaps worse doesn’t care.
The British public don’t deserve him.
To me however he stands with people I consider hero’s. Ed Snowden, Assange and the many others who perhaps in less public ways stand up against the tyranny of the system, at great expense to themselves and more often than not get no thanks for it.
I wish Mr Bridgen the best.
The support was fake and state sponsored? Or perhaps it was real but actually quite small – just because there seems to be strong support, on the scale of the population it is quite small.
I’m no longer surprised at how dumb people are. One poster yesterday referred to me as a “nasty lefty”, which then got a load of up-votes. I honestly couldn’t make this sh*t up. I used to believe that most people are are just asleep, and once woken will demand real change, but that’s not true. It’s so much simpler. Most people are simply thick as f*ck.
Nice strategy. Anyone who doesn’t agree with you is thick. I am not sure how thick “f*ck” is, so your analogy is lost on me.
‘Thick’ isn’t very precise, but nevertheless the quality of the electorate is the major issue of this country, and in virtually all countries.
In due course I expect there will be a global separation.
I don’t have a strategy on here, I just say what I believe to be true. My opinions are just that – opinions. You may agree or disagree, I really don’t care tbh. So there’s that. My reference to “thick as f*ck”, and it seems that this may surprise you, really wasn’t intended to be a meaningful analogy; it’s just a saying. And I was saying that about the type of people who believed, and still do, all the Covid nonsense and the type of person that doesn’t understand the difference between right and left, right and wrong. I doubt you’re one of those people.
Well, it was a criticism of one poster and those who agreed. It was also undoubtedly an opinion, which is what every comment is on here is.
I’m struggling to understand why you’re struggling to understand. The comment was about me being left-wing, which is factually incorrect. Not an opinion in any way at all. Anyone that reads my comments and construes them to be left-wing are, yes, thick as f*ck.
Ah, not seeing your original comment I assumed, clearly wrongly, that you were a leftist and that you were having a pop at those of us here who are not. My apologies.
As adequately demonstrated from the scamdemic years, can’t blame the MSM propaganda for all this stupidity, has taken me a few years to fully understand just how thick the general population are…..sigh
It was disappointing that the Reform party didn’t embrace him. Tice is behind that, no doubt, although Bridgen’s somewhat colourful personal history won’t have helped.
When it comes down to it, the Reform party’s manifesto called for a full investigation of vaccine harms, so in practical terms not that different from what Bridgen has advocated.
It was also frustrating that Bridge was not given credit for his role in uncovering the Post Office scandal, having first raised the issue ten years before the BBC programme.
It seems it wasn’t Richard Tice, but Lee Anderson who put the kibosh on Bridgen joining Reform, after Lee walked over to the restaurant table where Andrew and a Scotsman friend were discussing politics, and told them he took umbrage at Andrew’s comments. When the Scotsman leapt to Andrew’s defence in a heated exchange, Lee Anderson called him “grandad”, and challenged him to step outside to settle things. The Scot replied in the historical manner “Pistols or Claymores?” 🙂
It’s too bad Lee and Andrew couldn’t have been persuaded to patch things up for the sake of the nation.
Sad but true.
Headline on the Daily Mail this morning about Starmer: “Now he must deliver”. Sums it up for me. The Mail presumably endorsed the Tories or Reform, and they want Starmer to “deliver”. Deliver what? I hope they deliver nothing. The less the better.
I imagine they mean Labours pledge regarding immigration control.
But I see it all as part of the gaslighting operation making the public think elections decide things.
Maybe, but they can’t possibly believe that Labour will reduce any kind of immigration, surely?
Not for a minute. They are surely just setting it up so that when they don’t they can criticise them and do their job as Team As propaganda arm.
Seconded 👍
Wind Can’t Power Toasters & Kettles – latest leaflet to print at home and deliver to neighbours or forward to politicians, your new MP, your local vicar, online media and friends online. We have over 200 leaflet ideas on the link on the leaflet.
https://www.severreal.org/a/vrag-prikryvaetsya-blagimi-namereniyami-deputaty-i-svyaschenniki-boryutsya-s-satanizmom/33017607.html
What’s really going on?
‘This week, the State Duma held a round table on the topic of ‘On counteracting the spread of Satanism and other destructive phenomena in the media-culture space of Russia’
‘The round table (is) chaired by General Vladimir Shamanov (sic)…..under the auspices of the State Duma Committee on the Development of Civil Society, Public and Religious Associations.’
‘Deputies, political scientists, priests and state propagandists seriously discussed ways to fight Satan and his minions. In which, as you might guess, they included LGBT people, childfree supporters, abortion rights defenders, eco-activists and even children who have fun playing furries…….
Deputies have nothing better to do? Definitely. But the problem is that what was said at this event was not just hot air.’
Shortly before launching the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Putin claimed that “the hegemony of the West is aimed at a complete denial of faith, acquiring features of Satanism.”
Kremlin-backed propaganda immediately picked up on this new moniker for Europeans, adding it to old tropes about “Nazis” and “sodomites.”
In other words, any opponent of the current regime becomes a “Satanist” in the language of propaganda.
‘The head of the committee for the development of civil society, issues of public and religious associations, Olga Timofeeva, said that it is necessary “not just to adhere to traditional values, but also to actively defend them, opposing destructive ideology,” since “we are confronted by fascists, Satanists, Nazis, who consciously rely on the forces of evil.’
Putin’s negotiators will be eating loads of garlic.
Top Tip for Trump’s negotiators: Don’t forget the parsley…….
Another barrel-scraping comment. Just for balance Sever.real is based in Prague and rates at around the 11,000th most viewed media website in Russia.
The JX Fund conducted a study of Russian media outlets in exile. According to this study, the combined monthly Russian audience of media in exile today is about 10 million people.
I presume you are talking to me, and not talking to yourself. That statistic says nothing about Sever.real. Stop using squirrels.
… it is necessary “not just to adhere to traditional values, but also to actively defend them, opposing destructive ideology” …
It depends naturally on what traditional values are but this statement could equally apply to European countries suffering from open borders – unless you are a globalist.
… we are confronted by fascists, Satanists, Nazis, who consciously rely on the forces of evil …
Was it only yesterday that Ukraine fired British Storm Shadow missiles at Sevastopol, missiles presumably configured by UK personnel using either US or UK intelligence information? And that only recently after US ATACMS missiles were fired in the same direction, killing and maiming children and other civilians enjoying a relaxing Sunday on the beach?
‘Satanists’ is perhaps slightly old fashioned, otherwise fascists and Nazis (apparently the Azov battalion is being reconstituted) certainly fits to these attacks on innocent civilians by Ukraine, which is unfortunately nothing new, using weapons and money supplied by us, western tax payers.
And then you had the Ukrainian deputy something-or-other who claimed that the civilians killed in the Sevastopol attack deserved to die because they were “Occupiers”, contradicting the otherwise typical Ukrainian claim that Crimeans are victims of Russian occupation.
The “Occupier” statement came from Mikhail Podoliak, adviser to the Office of the President of Ukraine, who “controls the entire information policy of the Office of the President and advises Volodymyr Zelensky directly” (Wikipedia).
The problem with Crimea is that Russia has explicitly breached the Geneva Convention.
The Fourth Geneva Convention specifically prohibits the transfer of the population of an occupying power into the territory it occupies.
I’m not quite sure why Ukraine would need any assistance with targeting information for static targets on its own territory. It also receives targeting information from Atesh.
If you have reliable evidence that Ukraine is receiving targeting information from third parties, you should present it. Without it, your comments lack credibility.
I am not quite sure why you are quoting the Fourth Geneva Convention, of which there are apparently 159 articles: civilians are to be protected from murder, torture or brutality, and from discrimination on the basis of race, nationality, religion or political opinion.
Civilians are to be protected from murder … and from discrimination on the basis of race: both these main points were breached by, firstly, Ukraine’s missile attack and, secondly, Podoliak’s comment.
I wrote “presumably configured”: the https://www.youtube.com/@judgingfreedom channel has repeatedly reported that ATACMS missiles can only be configured and operated by US personnel, and indicated the same applies to the British (and French) missiles. I think the idea one can type in a simple latitude and longitude and press ‘Fire’ to operate these missiles is rather too simplistic since they are “guided by a combination of GPS, terrain-matching and infrared imaging”.
Every time an election is held the next day people lament the voting system this country has. And quite rightly so.
A result of this system is that a lot of people are not represented and unheard.
And it is not in the interest of the ruling party to change the system.
My opinion is that we need a party whose sole aim is to change the voting system. We need to think outside the box to work out a system that gives the best possible representation of people’s views on the whole.
If we can get this party into power, they would change the system and then call a re-election.
Daft idea?
Worth a try?
If you’re interested in a relatively local experiment – Wales – have a look at this one: https://www.gov.wales/senedd-reform No doubt the Permanent Secretary and others in Westminster will be watching that!
At any rate, the Welsh outcome would most likely be used as part of any revised system in England. Not sure what would happen in Scotland & NI.
Having done a little homework on it, all the UK regions that do some kind of proportional voting – including the London Assembly – use a “Modified d’Hondt Formula”. No doubt there would be arguments about the geographical structure nationally to achieve that. E.g. the London one is some kind of hybrid between FPTP & d’Hondt. https://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-voter/counting-votes
To achieve an equivalent without expanding the size of the House of Commons and maintaining constituency allocations would need some sort of geographical set up with larger constituencies spread across them.
Changing the voting system is something the public can do without waiting 5 years and voting for an ineffectual Party. The government promotes this elsewhere.
80% of those who voted gave their support to parties of the globalist left. The public had the chance to vote for Andrew Bridgen. He came virtually last. The problem is not the voting system, it’s the voters. I think that is the sad truth we have to face. We need to win people over with our ideas, but I think we will fail and things will have to collapse completely before enough people wake up. I will probably get lots of downvotes for being so pessimistic. But to be clear, just because I think the situation is bleak doesn’t stop me from trying.
I only partly agree.
With the current system people vote strategically and often negative.
There is no party or candidate even close to expressing their views with a chance of a parliamentary seat, so they either don’t vote, spoil their ballot paper, protest vote or vote for the least bad option.
A more representative democracy would at least engage more people in a positive way.
I guess it might make some
marginal difference.
Which views do you think are not represented among the choices on offer?
Good question. The current offering is bland. All parties worried by loss of votes if they really have a distinct vision.
I grew up with a PR system, with a lot of different parties.Problem with straight PR is that the rural vote gets lost (most people live in cities). Maybe a combination of PR within slightly larger constituencies, each providing 5 MPs might work?
Or active participatory democracy with a direct line between the voting public and their representatives?
The Swiss system?
Reform on paper looked fairly unbland to me
Heritage, Freedom Alliance and Alliance for Freedom and Democracy and Bridgen didn’t look bland to me. Nobody voted for them.
You are right about the rural vote, because I read that the only reason Macron defeated Le Pen at the last election was that France does not have an electoral college. So even though all of the Indigenous French in rural areas and small towns voted for Le Pen, all the 3rd World Invaders and their Communist Enablers in the big cities voted for Macron, so he won.
If I remember correctly, the article said that was the whole reason the American Founding Fathers created the electoral college, because they realised very early on that the big cities would dominate every election, elbowing out the rural areas and small towns.
And that’s why the Globalist Traitors encourage the 3rd World Invaders to concentrate their settlement in the big cities of the West.
There is nothing pessimistic in facing facts. The situation, as I have posted more than once, is grim.
But we won’t let them grind us down
“No one anticipated how many pro-Gaza independents would be elected to Parliament”
Alongside the pro-Israel MP’s that we’re not supposed to draw attention to. Parliament seems more a representation of the Middle East at the expense and to the detriment of the nations it is supposed to represent.
https://labour.org.uk/change/mission-driven-government/
Oh Beggar!
And there everyone was thinking it was ‘Working From Home’ that was causing the productivity problems within public sector bureaucracies…..
Nope!
Its the new wonks wet dream that, unsurprisingly, is making government wonky.
‘Mission Driven Government’?
What The Dickens?
Don’t Worry. It’s from the same people who brought us ‘The Precautionary Principle’, you know, the one that tried to kill everyone in 2020.
Disaster……..Starmer Space Station day one:
‘Mission-driven government means raising our sights as a nation and focusing on ambitious, measurable, long-term objectives that provide a driving sense of purpose for the country.’
This is really why we are so comprehensively fecked as a country
‘The organization I visited did a great job of defining and tracking goals. Few of those goals, however, connected to a broader sense of purpose. Yes, reaching goals could bring a greater bonus, and, yes, reaching goals could lead to promotions and salary bumps. Chasing goals day after day, week after week, however, did not bring engagement to the organization. It brought the sense of living on an endless treadmill.’
As the great Lord Botham might have said: ‘They forgot the leadership!’
Mission driven anything doesn’t work with drivers. It only works with leaders.
But ‘mission driven management’ has redefined leadership!
‘….a third model of leadership is embedded in what we might call mission-based management. When grounded in a mission, all members of an organization–from top to bottom–are both leaders and followers.’
We’re all leaders…….and followers……
No more ‘How shall we feck off, Lord?’. Plenty of ‘Feck off yourself, Lord!’
‘…mission-based management…..is directive guidance in the service of transcendent aims.’
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brettsteenbarger/2015/07/19/mission-based-management-the-leadership-of-purpose/
Got that? Right, off we go….
Mission based manage this:
Oh for heavens sake! Earth to Starmer space station:
‘Can we all feck off at the next stop, Lord?’
Steve Baker always spoke well but watching that, you know he generally held back. Osborne in particular was without reply. The succinct truth hurts
The “17 years ago” dismissal of his motivations gives a glimpse of the political mindset that thinks events like Hillsborough, infected blood, Horizon etc. will disappear without consequence. It was refreshing to hear mention of extraordinary rendition: a reminder that our freedom promoting governments considered kidnap and torture acceptable.
“some migrants near Dunkirk have welcomed Starmer’s victory and say they’ll make the journey across the channel as soon as they can.”
Hold your foot up just a minute lads, why take the risk of a small boat? After all, the uber rnli is finding it difficult to cope with all the extra custom.
Starmer will send Luxury ferries to come and pick you all up! Just try to be patient 😌
Too true!
“Labour election result most distorted in history”
If one hundred people can vote, but only one does, then its a landslide for the winner!
Starmer’s Government of service. Am I alone in thinking the Kneeler sounded exactly like a vicar preaching at a church service; that lowering of the voice at the end of the sentence?
I was amused to read it had been written by former speech writer to Justin Welby!
“How long until the ‘Joe must go’ faction prevails?”
Biden’s plan was always to step aside for the Ethnic African/Indian woman, as he said when he first chose her as his Vice President: “I’m just a place-holder for disadvantaged ethnic minorities”, he said.
It could well be that he’s not even senile, but just acting out his part in order to “nudge” the public to accept the woman they NEVER would have voted for.