Does The Vaccine Actually Work?

On Monday, The Epoch Times posted an article about a recent study of the effectiveness of the Pfizer–BioNtech’s COVID-19 vaccine against the Omicron coronavirus variant.

The article reports:

The protection afforded against the Omicron coronavirus variant fades quickly after a second and third dose of Pfizer–BioNtech’s COVID-19 vaccine, according to a peer-reviewed study published in the JAMA Network.

A Danish study published in the JAMA Network on May 13 found that there was a rapid decline in Omicron-specific serum neutralizing antibodies only a few weeks after the administration of the second and third doses of the vaccine.

The study evaluated 128 adults who were vaccinated, and of that number, 73 people received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, and 55 people received three doses between January 2021 and October 2021 or were previously infected before February 2021, and then vaccinated.

“Our study found a rapid decline in Omicron-specific serum neutralizing antibody titers only a few weeks after the second and third doses,” an abstract of the study reads. “The observed decrease in population neutralizing antibody titers corresponds to the decrease in vaccine efficacy against polymerase chain reaction–confirmed Omicron infection in Denmark and symptomatic Omicron infection in the United Kingdom.”

The antibody levels, which are associated with protection against future infections, dropped within a few weeks of getting the vaccine doses. They were also much lower than the antibodies specific to the Delta and original COVID-19 strains, according to the study.

The article concludes:

Those antibodies (Omicron-specific antibodies) increased with a third dose, increasing 21-fold three weeks after the dose before dropping to eightfold at week four. But with the third dose, antibody levels dropped as early as three weeks, falling 5.4-fold between the third and eighth week, the researchers said.

They concluded that it may be needed to provide additional booster doses to combat the Omicron variant, which emerged last fall, primarily among older individuals.

However, a study from Israeli researchers published in early April in the New England Journal of Medicine found that a fourth dose, or a second booster, of the Pfizer vaccine, doesn’t offer strong protection.

“Overall, these analyses provided evidence for the effectiveness of a fourth vaccine dose against severe illness caused by the omicron variant, as compared with a third dose administered more than 4 months earlier,” the study’s authors wrote at the time, after analyzing data from the Israeli Ministry of Health. “For confirmed infection, a fourth dose appeared to provide only short-term protection and a modest absolute benefit.”

I really think that the only real protection against Covid is actually getting Covid. I realize that the disease can be dangerous for some people, but what good does continually giving shots to people only to receive a short-term benefit do? We have reached the point where most Covid cases are similar to the common cold. Finding a vaccine that will work against all of the variations of Covid is about as likely as finding a vaccine for the common cold. I think it’s time to accept the fact that Covid is now with us forever and simply learn to deal with it without creating a population of pin cushions.

 

When Medicine Became About Money

On April 29th, The Wall Street Journal reported that Pfizer’s Covid-19 pill has failed its latest test.

The article reports:

The Covid-19 pill from Pfizer Inc. failed to prevent symptomatic infections in adults who had been exposed to the pandemic virus, a late-stage study found.

Pfizer said Friday that the drug, named Paxlovid, failed the study’s main objective of meaningfully reducing the risk of confirmed and symptomatic Covid-19 infections in adults who were exposed to the virus by someone in their household.

Paxlovid was cleared for use in December by U.S. health regulators to treat people 12 years and older early in the course of their disease who are at high risk of developing severe Covid-19.

A website called uncoverdc.com reported the following:

Tennessee Governor Bill Lee signed a bill on Apr. 22, 2022, allowing Ivermectin to be dispensed without a prescription. The new law states, “a pharmacist, in good faith, may provide Ivermectin to a patient who is eighteen (18) years of age or older pursuant to a valid collaborative pharmacy practice agreement containing a non-patient-specific prescriptive order and standardized procedures developed and executed by one (1) or more authorized prescribers.” 

Introduced by Sen. Frank Niceley (R-Strawberry Plains) on Jan. 31, Senate Bill 2188 was co-sponsored by Sen. Rusty Crowe (R-Johnson City). The amended version of the bill signed by Gov. Lee will create a standard procedure for pharmacists to easily dispense Ivermectin to patients while protecting a pharmacist or doctor from being held liable for doing so. 

The article includes the following chart:

Ivermectin can cost up to $4 a day. As of April 2022, the cost of the Paxlovid  treatment costs $530. I think it’s time to take a really good look at big pharma and its relationship to the FDA and related organizations. American medicine has prioritized profit over patient treatment and that needs to change.

The Swamp Runs Deep

The following is a Press Release put out by Judicial Watch on January 18, 2022. Note that none of this has been reported in the mainstream media:

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) told Judicial Watch in a response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that it has communications from Pfizer in an investigative file targeting Project Veritas. (In October 2021, Project Veritas, a nonprofit investigative journalism organization, published two viral stories [here and here] about the Pfizer covid vaccine.)

On December 21, 2021, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA request for:

All records of communications, whether by email (on .gov or non.gov email accounts), text message, or instant chat, between officials in the FBI, including but not limited to officials in the offices of the FBI New York Field Office on the one hand, and employees and representatives of Pfizer Inc. on the other hand, regarding Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe and/or Project Veritas.

Email communications with Pfizer Inc. employees or representatives include but are not limited to those with the email domain “@pfizer.com”.

On January 6, the FBI denied the request for all “communications regarding Project Veritas between FBI officials and employees/representatives of Pfizer” the following reason:

The material you requested is located in an investigative file which is exempt from disclosure pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A). 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A) exempts from disclosure:

records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information … could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings….

The records responsive to your request are law enforcement records; there is a pending or prospective law enforcement proceeding relevant to these responsive records, and release of the information could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.

On January 10, the FBI denied the request for “email communications with Pfizer Inc. employees or representatives including email domains ‘@pfizer.com’ (On or after September 1, 2021),” stating: “Please be advised the FBI will neither confirm nor deny the existence of such records …”

On November 9, 2021, the CEO of Pfizer, Albert Bourla, participated in an online discussion in which Bourla states that he was working with the FBI regarding “dark organizations” that were “targeting” Pfizer.

“It is disturbing to see that Pfizer evidently has the Biden FBI at its beck and call to target journalists at Project Veritas,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This development is especially concerning coming on the heels of the FBI’s outrageous Ashley Biden diary raid on the home of Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe.”

###

The April 2022 issue of “The Judicial Watch Verdict” reports:

On January 10, the FBI denied the request for “email communications with Pfizer Inc. employees or representatives including email domains @pfizer.com (on or after September 1, 2021),” stating: “Please be advised the FBI will neither confirm nor deny the existence of such records…”

So much for transparency.

 

Now They Tell Us

On Monday, Townhall posted an article with the following headline:

CDC Makes Major Admission About Rushed Vaccine Timeline and Heart Inflammation

The article explains:

The Centers for Disease Control is considering changing the timeline for the administration of a second Moderna and Pfizer Wuhan coronavirus vaccine dose. The consideration comes after a rushed timeline caused heart inflammation in a number of patients. 

“Dr. Sara Oliver, an official at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), said the agency was considering making the recommendation for Moderna (MRNA.O) and Pfizer (PFE.N)/BioNTech shots during a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, a panel of outside advisers to the CDC,” Reuters reports.

Currently, the CDC recommends individuals receive their second dose of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines three and four weeks after an initial dose. The government agency may now recommend a second dose eight weeks after the first. 

In October a number of European countries limited Moderna’s use due to an alarming number of myocarditis cases. 

The article concludes:

Meanwhile an Oxford University study show the risk of myocarditis for young people is higher from the vaccine than it is from natural infection.

…”In under 40-year-old people…dose two of Moderna has exceeded the risk of myocarditis after infection with a second dose,” Dr. Vinay Prasad said about the study. “There have been many people who have been reluctant to take serious the risks of myocarditis after the Moderna product.”

“If you’re under 40 and if you pool men and women together, there is more myocarditis associated with dose two of Moderna than there is with an infection. That is a bombshell finding,” he continued.

This is information that anyone who has not yet taken the shot needs to know. This is also information that should end the vaccine mandates if indeed we are going to ‘follow the science.’

Following The Science

On Friday, PJ Media posted an article about the dangers of giving the Covid vaccines to children.

The article reports:

If you’re a parent of young children and are feeling pressure to get them vaccinated against COVID, I urge you to stand firm.

Or move to Sweden.

Health officials in Sweden have decided against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-12, arguing that the benefits don’t outweigh the risks.

“With the knowledge we have today, with a low risk for serious disease for kids, we don’t see any clear benefit with vaccinating them,” Health Agency official Britta Bjorkholm said Thursday.

Studies have shown that the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are more likely to cause myocarditis in young men than natural infection from COVID.

Kids in high-risk groups can get the vaccine, and Swedish health official could change their recommendations in the future if a new variant makes it worthwhile.

Imagine that? A nation that is following the science, not promoting fear. I’m guessing that health officials in Sweden did what conservative pundits have been doing in the United States for two years now: looked at the data. The data shows that COVID is less deadly to kids than the seasonal flu. Also, a recent study out of the United Kingdom found that unvaccinated kids are at a lower risk of death from COVID than fully vaccinated adults of any age.

Evidently the ruling class in Sweden is not in the pocket of the big pharmaceutical companies.

The Dog Ate My Homework

Yesterday The Conservative Treehouse posted an article with the following headline:

What!?

The article reports:

The Moderna and Pfizer vaccine tests were conducted, as customary, with a control group; a group within the trial who were given a placebo and not the test vaccine.  However, during the trial -and after the untested vaccines were given emergency use authorization- the vaccine companies conducting the trial decided to break protocol and notify the control group they were not vaccinated.  Almost all the control group were then given the vaccine.

Purposefully dissolving the placebo group violates the scientific purpose to test whether the vaccine has any efficacy; any actual benefit and/or safety issues.  Without a control group there is nothing to compare the vaccinated group against.  According to NPR, the doctors lost the control group in the Johnson County Clinicial Trial (Lexena, Kansas) on purpose:

(Via NPR) […] “Dr. Carlos Fierro, who runs the study there, says every participant was called back after the Food and Drug Administration authorized the vaccine.

“During that visit we discussed the options, which included staying in the study without the vaccine,” he says, “and amazingly there were people — a couple of people — who chose that.”

He suspects those individuals got spooked by rumors about the vaccine. But everybody else who had the placebo shot went ahead and got the actual vaccine. So now Fierro has essentially no comparison group left for the ongoing study.  “It’s a loss from a scientific standpoint, but given the circumstances I think it’s the right thing to do,” he says.

People signing up for these studies were not promised special treatment, but once the FDA authorized the vaccines, their developers decided to offer the shots. (read more)

The article notes:

Just so we are clear, the final FDA authorization and approval for the vaccines are based on the outcome of these trials.  As noted in the example above, the control group was intentionally lost under the auspices of  “the right thing to do”, so there is no way for the efficacy, effectiveness or safety of the vaccine itself to be measured.

There’s no one left within the control group, of a statistically valid value, to give an adequate comparison of outcomes for vaxxed -vs- non-vaxxed.

Whiskey – Tango – Foxtrot !!!  This is nuts.

That NPR article is one to bookmark when people start claiming the vaccination is effective.

How can the vaccine not be considered effective when there is no group of non-vaccinated people to compare the results to?

Somehow I don’t believe this fits the requirement of “follow the science.” Please follow the link to read the entire article. We are definitely being played.

News About The Vaccine

Just the News posted an article today reporting the following:

Regulators in the United Kingdom are encouraging people with a serious history of allergic reactions to avoid taking the Pfizer/BioNTech coronavirus vaccine, following significant reactions in two people who took the shot on Tuesday.

The National Health Service (NHS) of England confirmed Wednesday that two care-providers who received the shot on Tuesday suffered bad anaphylactoid reactions. Both are expected to make a full recovery. The two individuals reportedly had histories of serious allergic reactions.

The article notes that there have been few incidents of an adverse reaction to the vaccine:

“In the pivotal phase three clinical trial, this vaccine was generally well tolerated with no serious safety concerns reported by the independent Data Monitoring Committee. The trial has enrolled over 44,000 participants to date, over 42,000 of whom have received a second vaccination,” she continued.

The article concludes:

Dr. June Raine, the Chief executive of the MHRA said it is clear from the “extensive clinical trials” run on the vaccine, that the allergic reactions of these two individuals are not a “feature” of the drug. However, “if we need to strengthen our advice now that we have had this experience in the vulnerable populations … we will get that advice to the field immediately,” she said.

I understand the reasons to fast-track this vaccine, but we need to make sure that it is safe. It has become obvious that the death rate from the coronavirus is not significantly higher than the death rate from the seasonal flu. There is no point in giving people a vaccine that will do more harm than the disease.

Wait! What?

Just the News posted an article yesterday about Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine.

The article reports:

With three promising vaccines for COVID-19 in the pipeline, there’s still uncertainty about how effective they will be.

Albert Bourla, chairman and CEO of Pfizer Pharmaceutical – which has applied to the Food and Drug Administration for emergency use authorization for its vaccine – sat down with CBS’s Lester Holt on “Dateline NBC” for an interview that will air Thursday night.

Holt said: “And then what about the question, Albert, of even though I’ve had the protection, am I still able to transmit it to other people?” according to transcript provided by the network.

“I think this is something that needs to be examined,” Bourla said. “We are not certain about that right now with what we know.”

Biotech firm Moderna on Monday said it will ask the FDA to approve its experimental COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use. Moderna said new data showed the vaccine was 94.1% effective in its late-stage clinical trial, just under Pfizer’s efficacy rate of 95%. The Moderna vaccine was developed in conjunction with the Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed.

“We believe that our vaccine will provide a new and powerful tool that may change the course of this pandemic and help prevent severe disease, hospitalizations, and death,” Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel said in a statement. Bancel said last week that 20 million doses will be available by the end of the year.

So the vaccine can prevent a person from getting the coronavirus, but the manufacturers are unsure if it will prevent a person from spreading the coronavirus. I wonder if they know how long the vaccine will last. I am asking these questions because I have had the coronavirus. I have been told that I should be immune to the virus for an unspecified amount of time and that there are questions as to whether I can transmit the virus while being immune to it. I have also been told that if I decide to get the vaccine, I should wait at least 90 days from the time I recovered from the virus. Frankly, at this point, I am not convinced that the vaccine is going to get the result that is needed. It is probably a good idea for people who have not had the coronavirus to get the vaccine–at least that will slow if not stop the spread-but how long will that protection last and how thorough is the protection provided by the vaccine?

Good News

Yesterday One America News posted an article about progress toward a coronavirus vaccine.

The article reports:

According to the CEO of Pfizer, the company’s coronavirus vaccine is likely to get approved before 2021. On Sunday, Albert Bourla announced the pharmaceutical company will probably know whether their vaccine works or not by October of this year.

“I don’t know if they have to wait until 2021,” he said.

In the meantime, Bourla confirmed Pfizer has manufactured hundreds of thousands of doses to distribute and is still preparing more.

“We started already manufacturing and have manufactured hundreds of thousands of doses,” he explained. “So just in case we have a good study read out, conclusive and FDA plus the advisory committee feels comfortable, that we will be ready.”

Hopefully, we will have the vaccine quickly.

 

Some Details On Congressional Insider Trading

 

U.S. Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts

Image via Wikipedia

Big Government posted an article today showing documents it has obtained detailing some of John Kerry’s stock trades during the debates before the passage of Obamacare. Oddly enough, the trades took place in pharmaceutical stocks and were executed in such a manner to insure significant profits. Was he just a really good investor?

The article reports:

Sen. John Kerry’s position on the powerful Senate Finance Committee’s Health Subcommittee gives him direct access to critical information regarding health care policy. In July 2009, pharmaceutical industry representatives met with key members of Congress to flesh out the Obamacare bill. Then, in November 2009, with the bill’s passage was looking more likely, the Kerrys’ portfolios reflect a drug stock buying spree.

The article also cites some of the Kerry family’s trading during the negotiations on the prescription drug plan:

The Kerrys’ investment funds bulked up on:

  1. More than $500,000 of Johnson & Johnson
  2. As much as $1 million of Pfizer
  3. At least $200,000 in Oxford Health Plans
  4. Between $500,000 and $1 million in United Health Group
  5. At least $100,000 of Cardinal Health
  6. At least $240,000 of Merck

The result: after the bill was signed into law in 2004, some of the Kerrys’ investments were sold, which netted between $100,000 and $1 million from Oxford Health Plans, plus tens of thousands from Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and Cardinal Health.

Please follow the link to the article in Big Government to read the entire article and see the documentation of the trades.

This sort of behavior on the part of our elected officials is simply unacceptable.

Enhanced by Zemanta