The mRNA vaccines were released globally in early 2021 with the slogan ‘safe and effective’. Unusually for a new class of medicine, they were soon recommended by public health authorities for pregnant women. By late 2021, working age women, including those who were pregnant, were being thrown out of employment for not agreeing to be injected. Those who took the mRNA vaccines did so based on trust in health authorities – the assumption being that they would not have been approved if the evidence was not absolutely clear. The role of regulatory agencies was to protect the public and, therefore, if they were approved, the drugs were safe.
Recently, a lengthy vaccine evaluation report sponsored by Pfizer and submitted to the Australian regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) dated January 2021 was released under a Freedom of Information request. The report contains significant new information that had been supressed by the TGA and by Pfizer itself. Much of this relates directly to the issues of safety in pregnancy and impacts on the fertility of women of child-bearing age. The whole report is important, but four key data points stand out:
- The rapid decline in antibody and T cells in monkeys following a second dose;
- Biodistribution studies (previously released in 2021 through an FOI request in Japan);
- Data on the impact of fertility outcomes for rats;
- Data on foetal abnormalities in rats.
We focus on the last three items as, for the first point, it is enough to quote the report itself: “Antibodies and T cells in monkeys declined quickly over five weeks after the second dose of [Pfizer Covid vaccine] BNT162b2 (V9), raising concerns over long term immunity.” This point indicates that the regulators should have anticipated the rapid decline in efficacy and must have known at the outset that the initial two dose course was unlikely to confer lasting immunity and would, therefore, require multiple repeat doses. This expectation of failure was recently highlighted by Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director at the U.S. NIH.
The three remaining items should be a major cause for concern with the pharmaceutical regulatory system. The first, as revealed in 2021, involved biodistribution studies of the lipid nanoparticle carrier in rats, using a luciferase enzyme to substitute for the mRNA vaccine. The study demonstrated that the vaccine will travel throughout the body after injection and is found not only at the injection site but in all organs tested, with high concentration in the ovaries, liver, adrenal glands and spleen. Authorities who assured vaccinated people in early 2021 that the vaccine stays in the arm were, as we have known for two years, not being honest.
In terms of the impact on fertility and foetal abnormalities, the report includes a study of 44 rats and describes two main metrics, the pre-implantation loss rate and the number of abnormalities per foetus (also expressed per litter). In both cases the metrics were significantly higher for vaccinated rats than for unvaccinated rats.
Roughly speaking, the pre-implantation loss ratio compares the estimated number of fertilised ova and the ova implanted in the uterus. The table below is taken from the report itself and clearly shows the loss rate for vaccinated (BNT162b2) is more than double the unvaccinated control group.
In a case control study, a doubling of pregnancy loss in the intervention group would represent a serious safety signal. Rather than take this seriously, the authors of the report then compared the outcomes to historical data on other rat populations – 27 studies of 568 rats – and ignored the outcome because other populations had recorded higher overall losses. This range is shown in the right hand column as 2.6% to 13.8%. This analysis is alarming as remaining below the highest previously recorded pregnancy loss levels in populations elsewhere is not a safe outcome when the intervention is also associated with double the harm of the control group.
A similar pattern is observed for foetal malformations with higher abnormality rate in each of the 12 categories studied. Of the 11 categories where Pfizer confirmed the data are correct, there are only two total abnormalities in the control group, versus 28 with the mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2). In the category which Pfizer labelled as unreliable (supernumerary lumbar ribs), there were three abnormalities in the control group and 12 in the vaccinated group.
As with the increased pregnancy losses, Pfizer simply ignored the trend and compared the results with historical data from other rat populations. This is very significant as it is seen across every malformation category. The case control nature of the study design is again ignored, in order to apparently hide the negative outcomes demonstrated.
These data indicate that there is no basis for saying the vaccine is safe in pregnancy. Concentration of lipid nanoparticles in ovaries, a doubled pregnancy loss rate and raised foetal abnormality rate across all measured categories indicates that designating a safe-in-pregnancy label (B1 category in Australia) was contrary to available evidence. The data imply that not only was the Government’s ‘safe and effective’ sloganeering not accurate, it was totally misleading with respect to the safety data available.
Despite the negative nature of these outcomes, the classification of this medicine as a ‘vaccine’ appears to have precluded further animal trials. Historically, new medicines, especially in classes never used in humans before, would require a very rigorous assessment. Vaccines, however, have a lower burden of proof requirement than ordinary medicines. By classifying mRNA injections as ‘vaccines’, this ensured regulatory approval with significantly less stringent safety requirements, as the TGA itself notes. In fact, these mRNA gene therapy products (to use the proper term) function more like medicines than vaccines in that they modify the internal functioning of cells, rather than stimulating an immune response to presence of an antigen. Labelling these gene therapy products as ‘vaccines’ means that, as far as we are aware, even today no genotoxicity or carcinogenicity studies have been carried out.
This report, which was only released after a FOI request, is extremely disturbing as it shows that authorities knew of major risks with mRNA COVID-19 vaccination while simultaneously assuring populations that it was safe. The fact that mainstream media have (as far as we are aware) completely ignored the newly released data should reinforce the need for caution when listening to the advice of public health messaging regarding COVID-19 vaccination.
Firstly, it is clear that regulators, drug companies and the Government would have known that vaccine induced immunity tails off very rapidly, with this being subsequently observed in real world data with efficacy against infection falling to zero. Accordingly, the single point in time figures of 95% and 62% efficacy against symptomatic PCR-positive infection quoted for Pfizer and AstraZeneca respectively meant almost nothing since a rapid decline was to be expected. Similarly, the concept of a two dose course was inaccurate as endless boosters would likely have been required given the rapid decline in antibodies and T-cells observed in the monkeys.
Most importantly, the data do not in any way support the ‘safe’ conclusion with respect to pregnancy; ‘dangerous’ would be much more accurate. The assurances of safety were, therefore, completely misleading given the data disclosures in the recent freedom of information release. Regulatory authorities knew that animal studies showed major red flags regarding both pregnancy loss and foetal abnormalities, consistent with the systemic distribution of the mRNA they had been hiding from the public. Even in March 2023, it is impossible to give these assurances, given the fact that important studies have not, to the best of our knowledge, been done. Pfizer elected not to follow up the vast majority of pregnancies in the original human trials, despite high miscarriage rates in the minority they did follow. Given all of the problems with efficacy and safety, the administration of these products to women of childbearing age and administration to healthy pregnant women is high risk and not justified.
Alex Kriel is by training a physicist and was one of the first people to highlight the flawed nature of the Imperial Covid model; he is a founder of the Thinking Coalition which comprises a group of citizens who are concerned about Government overreach. David Bell is a public health physician with a PhD in population health and formerly worked as a scientific and medical officer at the World Health Organisation.
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.
The population us being primed to see and feel high temperatures just as it was primed to see piles of covid corpses.
Most people I speak to mindlessly yap about high temperatures and look at me very confused when I suggest it’s not true. Basically like telling people there were few deaths from covid. They think you’re mad and weird.
I think it fair to say that a lot more people are wise to Climate lies than they were at this point in Covid. That said, lots of sheep still trapped in the narrative.
I would love to see and feel a high temperature at the moment – 15 degrees and raining here in Gloucestershire. I notice headlines keep popping up on my computer about ‘when the 40 degree heatwave will hit the UK’. Fat chance.
People who have spent their entire lives trusting the BBC find it incomprehensible that they could be lying. Why don’t people think for themselves?
What really annoys me is I have enough problems of my own to sort out without people wailing around me about the end being nigh and that I should be very worried. Sorry, I am reserving my worry for use closer to home!
“Sorry, I am reserving my worry for use closer to home!”
No need to be sorry T o b.
Those headlines that keep popping up may well use phrases like “40 degree heatwave”, but all that means is the vague possibility that the mercury might just about peak at 40 for a brief moment then reduce for the rest of of the heatwave. And anyway, for people who have real things to worry about, it’s quite an insult!
I had exactly that experience the other day when I said the European hot weather was being exaggerated.. the woman serving in the shop closed me down toute-suite with “it is true I’ve seen people interviewed on television”.. then proceeded to look very smug..
‘It’s true ‘cos it was on the telly.’ A well-washed brain indeed.
Absolutely.. well-washed and then some..
When I’ve mentioned the tornado jet cause of last year’s 30 seconds of 40 degrees to people they’ve gone all startled-rabbit-in-the-headlights, as though the actual reason simply can’t penetrate the cognitive dissonance reverberating between their propagandised indoctrination and the several layers of clothing they’re currently wearing in this ‘hottest ever’ year. I despair.
I also wonder if this ‘hottest ever year’ will produce a bitterly cold winter in the UK. In some ways I hope it does (although it sounds selfish). A few prolonged power cuts due to cold, still, cloudy conditions, and people finding the limitations of air source heat pumps might wake some people up, especially if they can’t charge their ev’s either.
I understand you completely. I spent the entire insane corona years hoping for economic collapse.
Fear mongering as the casus belli for the next LD.
I heard on classical fm that 1) man is responsible for soaring temps, confirmed by unnamed ‘experts’, as I sat in an office, in July, 17C and raining oustide;
and 2) UK will see 40C temps in the ‘future’ on a ‘regular’ basis – say the unknown ‘experts’
There is no science to any of this – but I know that half the sheeple will be shatting their diapers and believing the totalitarian propaganda.
This autumn get ready for a new scariant and viral wave of some sort….with end of the world attached to the ‘expert’ testimony.
Jeremy Grantham and Dale Vince are just two of the most obviously malicious and venal mega-liar super rich in the UK.
Then there is Charles III, with a different level of power, assiduously lying but likely believing his lies.
Then there are the mass of political, academic and media liars thirsting for wealth and power, control, over ordinary people.
Most people reject habitual liars but, in the case of “Climate” and it’s evil bastard offspring “Covid”, the enemy has been lying so long and with such resources that up until now they have held sway. Especially as anything “sciency” leads to glassy eyed awe.
Obviously the truth eventually will out. But we have a very long and very rocky road before we arrive there.
I just hope I survive to see some of these swine properly held to account.
But his (Charles) plants tell him it is true.
Give me dandelion to talk to any day over HRH.. 😉
A while ago I linked this Crown Estate site
https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/en-gb/what-we-do/asset-map/#tab-2
to a comment along the lines of – no wonder Charles is in favour of Offshore wind, the firm is coining it. I was told the profits are remitted to the Treasury. I should have asked, how much?
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak cut the wind farm profits used to finance King Charles III’s household, directing the funds instead to boost the UK’s public finances.
The sovereign grant — used to fund the royal family — will be frozen at £86.3 million ($111 million) in the 2024-25 tax year, the Treasury said in a statement on Thursday. That’s despite a 41% jump in profits at the Crown Estate linked to income from new leases for six offshore wind farms. The estate manages much of the UK seabed on behalf of the monarchy. The Treasury said it’s slashing in half the proportion of the Crown Estate’s profits that will be directed to the monarchy. The reduction to 12% from 25% will give the government an extra £24 million in 2024/2025, and £130 million in the two subsequent years, it said.
Still coining it.
(Paywalled https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-20/sunak-takes-wind-farm-profits-from-king-charles-to-fund-services?in_source=embedded-checkout-banner&leadSource=uverify%20wall )
Surely Chris the cause of these fires is more to do with land management, drought and arson than a heat wave.
Sure.. management plays a part Bill, but I bet the majority are arson, or those sneaky so&so’s DEW’s (directed energy weapons) from up on high.
It was DEW’s responsible for the majority of Californian fires. The incineration of the buildings had to be seen to be believed.. even glass and porcelain toilets were totally destroyed..
I agree, Bill. I lived in Portugal for a number of years until recently and we had many fires, one of which tore through my land. In most cases, it was down to a combination of monoculture (vast tracts of dense eucalyptus forest), the dry undergrowth which is not being cleared because there are fewer people working on the land these days, hot weather (it’s southern Europe) and arson. Once land is burned, it can either bought up cheap and either be re-designated or allowed to grow another cash crop of eucalyptus. Wood pulping for toilet paper is a huge industry for Portugal. Most of our toilet paper probably comes from there in fact.
There are only two sources of ignition available: Lightning ground strikes and man. Thigs do not catch fire even at 60C however dry, it takes ignition at several hundred degrees. If a man leaves a suitably shaped glass bottle part which happens to focus the sun then it may be delayed man ignition, but it is still man! Just to be clear man as a specis not sex!
Watching F1 racing is quite instructive because they often highlight the extreme difference between air temperatures and those of the track aka ground.
I expect weather driven fear-porn from the BBC and Sky, which is why I never watch ’em. However, GB News were at the same game this morning regarding the Greece fires. Wall-to-wall computer modelling guff predicting that 40 degree temperature ‘MAY’ become a feature of UK weather by 2060. Oh really? And no mention of the part played by arsonists setting the fires, despite televised video evidence backing up the fact. Shameful reporting!
..unfortunately I think the ‘science of modelling’ is one of the big parts of the scam, that people were naturalised to during Convid.
We will see a lot more of it..let’s face it, it’s good for the ‘experts’, as they can make any old crap up.. and present it in a ‘model’…..and as with everything, no one is ever held to account for the fact that they haven’t got anything right yet!!?
40C temps for the UK.. 🙂 hahaha.. say that again !!!!!
On sky I saw a segment about the heat in Spain..the ticker-tape underneath was talking about 40+ temperatures, and Armageddon…..but in the actual video you could clearly see 38 on one of those temperature clocks they often have outside Pharmacies….I wonder how many other people noticed? LOL!
When they start with A.I we’ve got no chance!?
Yes.. I saw that on a Telegram channel.. as bold as brass.. you couldn’t miss it..
“BBC Dragon’s Den celeb Deborah Meaden” As always the virtue signalling Ukraine flag in the profile tells its own story.
And I wonder which countries are being ‘abandoned’ due to climate change?!
Ukraine is undergoing a planned genocide to prepare for its new occupants.
Pushing thousands of young men into a meat grinder is not the tactics of modern warfare, there’s no need for it, but its being ordered day after day. Reminiscent of WW1 when Britain lost the flower of its manhood to exactly the same tactics.
Perhaps the downvoter shuold phuque oph to Ukraine and dye for their cause..
I hear that a Senior BBC Climate Change Disinformation journalist contacted Robin Monotti to say that he will debunk that extreme temperatures across Europe were somehow ‘faked’. This was in answer to Robin’s Tweets showing that there is no cataclysmic heatwave going on, just a hot spell. The fact that the BBC have a Climate Change Disinformation journalist, and a senior one at that, shows just how committed they are to spread the fear. Most people coming back from holiday in Europe to escape our current wash-out, report nice hot weather.
I wish the phantom downticker would explain their objection. It is really quite brainless.
You need to pay to comment but not to tick.
When I first came here I used to comment without paying, although I do pay now. The requirement was then to be logged in, which as far as I am aware is still free.
Ah, he/she was joined by other brainless ones.
The climate is changing but it’s mainly through entirely natural causes. We’re still technically coming out of the last Little Ice Age. If humans are in any way responsible for weather changes it’s due to out of control population growth, the resulting construction of concrete heat trapping megacities and the resulting slashing and burning of cooling forests.
It’s got NOTHING to do with beneficial CO2 or cow burps. But, our money is being chucked at the CO2 Net Zero Holy Grail of the Climate Zealots, where it will be utterly wasted, gone forever, our futures bolloxed up by an utterly false notion.
The BBC Propaganda Ministry of CO2 linked Climate Alarmism makes me want to vomit.
“Last week’s heatwaves in southern Europe would have been “virtually impossible” without humans altering the climate, “
Nothing to do with the ongoing recovery from an Ice Age 12 000 years ago, and the end of a mini-Ice Age 170 years before which temperatures were higher than now?
I get the impression that as with Covid we are continuously on the back foot.
Hysterical climate reporting without balance and without debate is rife.
There must be a way to turn the tables? Or are people simply loving all this doom and gloom stuff?
I checked temps for Sardinia over that period on TimeandDate and the peaks were 43C on 19th, 44C on 24th, not far off what was prognosticated. Have they retrospectively altered things or has the writer of this made a mistake or cherry-picked?
Why was my last comment removed re the top temp in Sardinia being 44C not 40C as shown on that site? 19th shows as 43C. Has it been tampered with?
https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/@8410803/historic
Oops! Had comments sorted by ‘oldest’, my bad
BBC (and SKY) newsreaders and reporters are visibly drooling over wildfires. All their Christmases have come at once. They are quivering with excitement and have this lovely warm glow inside that the world is “boiling” just like they knew it would all along.
radio news said ‘ extreme’ weather and is going up to 96 fahrenheit today 20 years ago it was 104 was over 100 Fahrenheit for a few days and no constant warning about the climate or dangerous heat.just called it a heat wave . people are crazy, aside from us of course
Great article. The pillars supporting the net zero edifice are crumbling
https://davidturver.substack.com/p/pillars-supporting-net-zero-crumbling