Well, what do you know? It feels like yesterday, and we have already written loads about Comirnaty, the Pfizer/BioNTech Covid vaccine, and the properties of its two lipid nanoparticles (LNP) and modified messenger RNA. So, have our readers, who have commented in their droves, Just look at this diagram drawn by Picasso Heneghan:
This is a list of firm points and 15 questions we have established so far on the pharmacokinetics (how the body interacts with a drug) of Cominarty:
The lipid ‘excipients’ ALC-0315 and ALC-0159 were new. Regulators note the limited experience with these compounds.
1. Whose job is it to close the gap in evidence and ensure patient safety when new experimental compounds are included in vaccines?
Experience of their use in humans was limited. They act as the carriers; the RNA is a different story. The metabolites were found everywhere in the rats’ organs (liver, spleen, ovaries and so on).
The significance of their widespread distribution is unclear for humans, but the concentrations were very high in the liver and ovaries and almost certainly toxic.
2. Does this hold true for humans, too?
3. What is the possible toxicity of LNPs in humans, especially after repeated exposures?
Vaccine particles (antigens, adjuvants and excipients) in other vaccines are not usually found in many internal organs; they are usually concentrated around the injection site. We are unclear about the half-life, although the EMA seems to think it is long.
4. Is there a dose-response?
5. What is the half-life of mmRNA in the elimination phase in different organs?
6. What happens to the mmRNA in humans in different organs?
One or more of their ingredients are considered carcinogenic.
7. Why were no carcinogenic studies carried out in animal models prior to provisional licensing?
8. Why were no genotoxicity studies carried out in animal models prior to provisional licensing?
Nanoparticles are vastly different, and some are toxic, which is concerning. Our understanding of their behaviour in complex biological systems is extremely limited.
9. Where are the post-marketing studies following up on the cancer risk?
The Japanese regulator considers Cominarty as a “powerful drug”. Cominarty is a formulation consisting of tozinameran encapsulated in LNP.
10. Should mmRNA vaccines be classified as a drug?
11. Why is a modified messenger RNA abbreviated to mRNA, which we are taught stands for messenger?
The Japanese regulator reports Pfizer’s explanation that the pharmacokinetics of mmRNA formulation encapsulated in LNP is dependent not on the encapsulated mmRNA but on the LNP.
12. Is the LNP inert as Pfizer claims it is?
The MHRA enabler (formerly a regulator) does not know anything about the metabolism of the nanoparticles or the mmRNA, nor does it hold vigilance data for the Covid vaccine harms, and it knows nothing about the rate of underreporting of harms.
13. Whose job is it to ensure patient safety if the regulator/enabler is wilfully ignorant of the evidence of harm at the approval stage of novel vaccines?
There are no published studies of Cominarty in pregnant women. All the regulators report in the package insert that: “No data are available yet regarding use during pregnancy” (EMA and MHRA) and “The available data on COMIRNATY administered to pregnant women are insufficient to inform vaccine-associated risks in pregnancy” (US FDA).
14. Why has the only randomised controlled trial on pregnant women not been published?
15. Why does the messaging to the public differ from what is reported in the package inserts for pregnancy?
For now, we are leaving the pharmacokinetics behind (we’ll likely return) and moving on to the heavy lifting of determining the effects of Cominarty.
This post was not written by impersonators and is not commercial in confidence. It is not carcinogenic and will not self-disrupt or autodelete. We are not on the payroll of any pharmaceutical company, and given the content of our posts, we have been notified that HMG will award us the order of the boot.
Dr. Carl Heneghan is the Oxford Professor of Evidence Based Medicine and Dr. Tom Jefferson is an epidemiologist based in Rome who works with Professor Heneghan on the Cochrane Collaboration. This article was first published on their Substack, Trust The Evidence, which you can subscribe to 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.
If you look at the relationship between the government and the governed a particular way you can argue that the government ‘farms’ the ordinary people for their taxes. Part of farming includes the ordinary people generating another generation of tax payers.
Perhaps ordinary people realise that they have been ‘farmed enough’ and don’t care enough to raise a new set of tax payers?
Possibly. Taxes are a necessary evil – the problem IMO is that the state keeps growing and wanting more and more, and people seem to accept that the state should “fix all our problems” (LOL).
A colleague of mine frequently makes the assertion…
“The problem with this country is that people don’t pay enough taxes.”
He is recently retired. Highly qaualified microbiologist. A firm believer that the PCR test is one of the most accurate tests ever produced. I make a point of rubbishing this comment of course.
Surprisingly, when it comes to parting with cash he’s always at the back of the queue or AWOL.
God help us!
I’m reminded of this:
“It was the blunt but ingenious billionaire Kerry Packer who memorably explained to a stunned Parliamentary committee exactly how the tax system works.
The late business tycoon said: “I am not evading tax in any way, shape or form. Now of course I am minimising my tax and if anybody in this country doesn’t minimise their tax, they want their heads read because as a government I can tell you you’re not spending it that well that we should be donating extra.””
Thanks for the Kerry Packer reminder.
I must say that my opinion on taxation has somersaulted. I firmly believe that it is now our duty as citizens to avoid paying tax at any and every opportunity.
And as for charity donations…nothing more than secondary taxation for the gullible.
I have made a similar journey.
Packer makes some good comments here: Two minutes with a brilliant billionaire: politics, legislation and tax
This is also hilarious: Trump: I Understand the Tax Code Better Than Anybody
Well, at least nothing really desperate is in store for us! They didn’t even contemplate to end state-sponsoring of childlessness so that people can have “sex lives” as substitute for anything else which might have provided some meaning to their non-sex lives.
Do you mean free contraception? I’ve never really thought about it, but I think you have a point.
At some point they will want to wipe the slate of debt clean with a Reset and CBDCs. They will use it as an answer to leaving the next generation in debt.
Once the Kommissars lead us to the potato fields of Absolute Zero, procreation will be just about the only pleasure left in life.
Throw in the ministrations of the Department of Energy, Food and Health Insecurity to re-create the infant mortality of past centuries, and no further incentivisation needed to go forth and address Babygeddon until further notice, other than a crack corps of UKHSA matrons to knock on doors with powers to confiscate illicit contraceptives.
https://www.ukfires.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Absolute-Zero-online.pdf
“crack corps of UKHSA matrons to knock on doors with powers to confiscate illicit contraceptives.”. Wow, yes, like the firemen in Fahrenheit 451, the role turned on its head
https://www.globalresearch.ca/video-denis-rancourt-there-was-no-pandemic-it-was-the-state-that-killed-granny/5876206
Further confirmation. I know we on here don’t need this but still…
As Jordan Peterson put it: any society that does not value motherhood is committing suicide. And of course the current social-economic conditions force women to be employees and taxpayers first and foremost.
But, presumably, at some point the technologically developed countries will collapse together with industrial manufacturing and then contraception will no longer be available. At that point women will start having babies again.
Plus the orthodox religious communities have more babies anyway so they will outbreed the “progressive” societies.
Nobody’s forcing women to do any such thing. We work out of free will, because it’s considered ‘normal’ in this day and age. You know, because we’re made up of unique individuals, as opposed to one hive mind, controlled by our XX sex chromosomes common denominator?Besides, if we were being “forced” to go out to work, explain how there’s so many people of both sexes collecting dole/disability benefits. So not a lot of ‘forcing’ taking place there, is there? Why’d you think they’re shipping in so many immigrants? One of the reasons is because they’re prepared to go out and perform the low-skilled jobs natives are unwilling to get off their arses ( and benefits ) and do. This is especially true of those from Eastern Europe, in my experience. They’re not afraid of hard work.
Sorry to break it to you but if there was no contraception available the other issues would still exist. Such as cost of living, child care etc, so there’s a good chance women would just avoid having sex. Unless you’d want to take that specific choice and basic right to consent/bodily autonomy away from us as well? You know, like a certain demographic whose attitude to females is stuck in the dark ages, who we spend a lot of time complaining about on here?
“This is especially true of those from Eastern Europe, in my experience. They’re not afraid of hard work.”
Thank you. I’m one of them.
In my many years of experience it’s those people, often Poles, who are over-qualified for a position, due to what their profession was back home, but they’re not afraid to role up their sleeves and get cracking with more menial jobs. They’re grafters. Whereas it’s the non-EU migrants who we’re more likely to see living on state handouts years after arriving in the country.
But we know Muslims outbreed natives, partly due to their culture, because procreation is a duty, with little in the way of choice, but partly because of the extent of government support they’re given.
A FOI request I’d personally be interested in getting data on is how many non-EU migrants, who have, say, 2+ kids, are living on benefits, and how that compares to the native population. It’s my theory that these particular migrants wouldn’t be having so many kids if they had to support them themselves. This would also include family reunification. Family should only be allowed into the country to join the ( usually ) man if he has an established income and the means of supporting a large ( usually, again ) brood. Because otherwise the whole demographic shifts due to a topsy-turvy way of dealing with this issue. The governments are incentivizing the wrong people to have larger families, hence the gradual ‘replacement’ occurs, which we know all about by now. It’s natives that need incentivized, not just third world economic migrants. Nearly said “third world scroungers”, there…
Sorry to break it to you but if there was no contraception available the other issues would still exist. Such as cost of living, child care etc, so there’s a good chance women would just avoid having sex.
Yep. Just as they did during thousands of years before this US invention for the benefit of mankind was made. The contraceptive pill was actually never invented because mankind died out five thousand years earlier because all women were so exceptionally keen to get exploited for other people’s economic benefit that they just wouldn’t have sex.
If you honestly don’t understand that working for money is a necessity for most people and not some kind of exciting hobby they’ve taken up because it’s just better than sex (!!1) which your statement seems to suggest, I pity your total cluelessness about the real world. Try talking to some shop or bar staff to find out if they really work because to them, it’s better than sex, and not perhaps rather grudgingly because they need the money.
Sheesh.
What are you droning on about? Where have I stated that going out and earning a living ISN’T a necessity for people? I haven’t got a clue what you’re on about!
Maybe re-read my post and try cobbling together a response which borders on making sense next time. Just a suggestion…
This article accurately describes how the great replacement has been implemented over many decades. We are reaching the final stage of a very long game.
According to Emile Durkheim, the “cult of the individual” is a new religion that Western society has adopted since the decline of Christianity. Durkheim believed that this religion is based on the idea that the rational individual is sacred. It’s a complex society that’s united by modern science and individual democratic rights.
The cult of the individual is an anathema to the concept of raising a family. To bring up children generally requires that you put yourself second and your children first, this goes against the modern way of living and thinking. When you hear about the way the state and the ‘authorities’ are dictating on so many issues including trans-gender, who would want to be a parent and be hectored and dictated to in that way? The so called education system seems to have become a propaganda machine that dictates and indoctrinates. Who would want to be a parent and have to contend with the plethora of climate change and gender dogma coming back from the schools?
It is a dark World we have created and it will not go well but in the end the human spirit is indomitable and new life and new times will come, albeit it will be a painful process to get there.
I agree, even though I didn’t know about this book.
The problem with the cult of the individual is that eventually the ego finds itself so unbearable, it rather kills the host than carries on.
I think maybe that’s what Matthew 16:25 means.
“For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it.”
Guys – what happened to my comment?
One of the things that I thought might wake people up to the covid scam would be the dire consequences on pregnant women who took the jabs. I haven’t looked at the stats but I hear anecdotal reports that still births and miscarriages are significantly on the rise.
One leftfield suggestion as to why we are having fewer children is – car seats!! In a normal car how many car seats can you get in the back? Two. Unless you can afford one of this more seats but then those cars are no longer on sale as SUVs take over. Have more that two children and you have a space problem unless you wait to have a third until the first pair are past child seat age – whatever that is.