SEARCH
COVID 19: European Medical Agency (EMA) Receives Urgent Petition to Stop Vaccine
Related: antibody dependent enhancement, Medical Industrial Complex, risk assessment, SARS-CoV-2 aka COVID-19 aka Coronavirus
re: COVID 19: Efficacy of Vaccines, Particularly a New and Minimally Tested COVID-19 Vaccine
re: Will the Vaccine Now Being Shipped Have More Risks than Benefits?
Dr Francis Collins of the NIH (National Institute of Health):
"I would like to plead to people who are listening to this this morning to really hit the reset button on whatever they think they knew about this vaccine that might cause them to be so skeptical," Dr. Francis Collins of the NIH told NBC News' "Meet the Press."
Well, Dr Collins, perhaps if you weren’t a total duplicitous ahole about not mentioning legitimate concerns and addressing them head-on, then you’d be worthy of trust as a medical “expert” instead of what you seem to be—a con-artist and political hack bent on persuasion over anything else. Because that’s what you look like in avoiding the issues, even if the concerns raised turn out to be a non-issue.
Having suffered through 6 months of what seems to have been long-haul COVID (and only now recovering), I have no immediate intention of getting any vaccine that is to be tested by mass vaccination to see who gets irrevocably damaged and who doesn’t (and IMO, it’s almost certainly a “how many” not an “if”). I’ve had my fill of doctors directly and indirectly damaging me over my life through incompetence and sheer ignorance.
I don’t take a position on whether these claims below (by medical doctors!) are true. But if even one of these claims turns out to be valid, then the vaccine may damage large numbers of people. The potential risk of infertilityis one that should cause grave concern among women planning to have children. Maybe it isn’t so, but you don’t given 50 million women of childbearing age a vaccine for which this question has not been proven to be a non-concern. OTOH, is it ethical even to test it, since to do so, would require a woman to take the risk? That alone is a huge red flag.
Why aren’t concerns below spoken to directly by our medical “experts” here in the USA?
Why are positive COVID-19 test results potentially bullshit (high cycle threshold cutoff) and no one is addressing that?
PETITION/MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE/REGULATORY ACTION REGARDING CONFIRMATION OF EFFICACY END POINTS AND USE OF DATA IN CONNECTION WITH THE FOLLOWING CLINICAL TRIAL(S)
...High cycle thresholds, or Ct values, in RT-qPCR test results have been widely acknowledged to lead to false positives.
...In the Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA vaccine candidate, polyethylene glycol (PEG) is found in the fatty lipid nanoparticle coating around the mRNA. Seventy percent of people make antibodies to PEG and most do not know it, creating a concerning situation where many could have allergic, potentially deadly, reactions to a PEG-containing vaccine. PEG antibodies may also reduce vaccine effectiveness.
...Several vaccine candidates are expected to induce the formation of humoral antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. Syncytin-1 (see Gallaher, B., “Response to nCoV2019 Against Backdrop of Endogenous Retroviruses” - https://virological.org/t/response-to-ncov2019-against-backdrop-of-endogenous-retroviruses/396), which is derived from human endogenous retroviruses (HERV) and is responsible for the development of a placenta in mammals and humans and is therefore an essential prerequisite for a successful pregnancy, is also found in homologous form in the spike proteins of SARS viruses. There is no indication whether antibodies against spike proteins of SARS viruses would also act like anti-Syncytin-1 antibodies. However, if this were to be the case this would then also prevent the formation of a placenta which would result in vaccinated women essentially becoming infertile.
...For a vaccine to work, our immune system needs to be stimulated to produce a neutralizing antibody, as opposed to a non-neutralizing antibody. A neutralizing antibody is one that can recognize and bind to some region (‘epitope’) of the virus, and that subsequently results in the virus either not entering or replicating in your cells. A non-neutralizing antibody is one that can bind to the virus, but for some reason, the antibody fails to neutralize the infectivity of the virus. In some viruses, if a person harbors a non-neutralizing antibody to the virus, a subsequent infection by the virus can cause that person to elicit a more severe reaction to the virus due to the presence of the non-neutralizing antibody. This is not true for all viruses, only particular ones. This is called Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE), and is a common problem with Dengue Virus, Ebola Virus, HIV, RSV, and the family of coronaviruses. In fact, this problem of ADE is a major reason why many previous vaccine trials for other coronaviruses failed. Major safety concerns were observed in animal models. If ADE occurs in an individual, their response to the virus can be worse than their response if they had never developed an antibody in the first place. This can cause a hyperinflammatory response, a cytokine storm, and a generally dysregulation of the immune system that allows the virus to cause more damage to our lungs and other organs of our body. In addition, new cell types throughout our body are now susceptible to viral infection due to the additional viral entry pathway. There are many studies that demonstrate that ADE is a persistent problem with coronaviruses in general, and in particular, with SARS-related viruses....
80,000 people sgn vaccine petition – EMA silent
Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, pulmonologist and former head of a public health department, and Dr. Michael Yeadon, ex-Pfizer research director for respiratory diseases, petitioned the EMA, the European Medicines Agency, on December 1, 2020, to immediately stop clinical trials of the Corona vaccines. The petition has been supported by at least 80,000 people and can be further supported. The flood of emails from concerned supporters was so high so that during the peaks the EMA’s server was temporarily unavailable. Nevertheless, as of December 11, 2020, there has been no response, no comment from the EMA on the petitioners’ submission.
... It is unclear why the EMA has not sought dialogue regarding the concerns raised with the institutes of the EU member states.
...
Dr. Wordarg and Dr. Yeadon see major vaccine threats to the population. They point to the extremely short period of clinical trials: vaccines are supposed to be emergency licensed after a few months of human clinical trials, whereas in the normal course it takes five to ten years for a vaccine to undergo all safety testing. There are significant concerns about the possible occurrence of an exuberant immune response, which, for example, had led to the death of all cats in a Corona vaccine under development for cats.
In addition, there are fears that the vaccine could render women infertile because it can trigger antibodies that can then attack not only the Corona viruses but also special proteins that are structurally very similar to the viruses and essential for the formation of a placenta. These dangers cannot be ruled out due to the extremely shortened observation period...
...In the USA, the precautionary principle does not apply. Here, the regulations regarding potentially hazardous products are much more manufacturer-friendly...
