Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's Blog: The Most Revolutionary Act , page 395
July 13, 2023
Why Did Pfizer Halt COVID Vaccine Clinical Trials for Pregnant Women?
By Dr. Joseph Mercola In 2021, when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — without any evidence of safety — authorized the mRNA shot for pregnant women and anyone 6 months and older, Pfizer suddenly stopped its randomized trial for pregnant women. The vaccine maker has yet to disclose its study data.
Story at a glance:In February 2021, Pfizer launched a randomized, placebo-controlled, observer-blind study to evaluate the safety of its COVID-19 shot — BNT162b2 — in healthy pregnant women.The injections were set to take place between 24 and 34 weeks gestation, with participants randomized 1-to-1 to receive a COVID-19 shot or placebo.The study was initially set to enroll 4,000 women, but Pfizer only signed up 349, then stopped enrollment entirely.The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) widespread endorsement of COVID-19 shots for pregnant women before the study was completed may have negated the need for the trial.Pfizer stated that because so many pregnant women had already gone ahead and gotten the shot, due to the government’s endorsement, enrollment dropped and there was no reason to move ahead with the study.No randomized trial data are available for use of the COVID-19 shot in pregnant women, and Pfizer cut its pregnancy trial short.
But this doesn’t stop the CDC from recommending COVID-19 injections for everyone 6 months and older, including “people who are pregnant, breastfeeding, trying to get pregnant now, or those who might become pregnant in the future.”
“Not having any good data didn’t seem to bother the CDC,” Dr. Martin Makary, a professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, wrote in Tablet.
He and a team of scientists petitioned the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to add a disclaimer to the shot’s label about the lack of trial data on its safety in pregnant women. The FDA declined, stating that this information wouldn’t be relevant.
Pregnant women, however, do need to know about the shot’s lack of testing during pregnancy — it’s the foundation of informed consent. They’d also likely be interested to know why Pfizer stopped its pregnancy trial early and has yet to make the results it did find public.
Pfizer stopped COVID jab pregnancy trial, withholds data
In February 2021 Pfizer launched a randomized, placebo-controlled, observer-blind study to evaluate the safety of its COVID-19 shot — BNT162b2 — in healthy pregnant women. The injections were set to take place between 24 and 34 weeks gestation, with participants randomized 1-to-1 to receive a COVID-19 shot or placebo.
But while the study was initially set to enroll 4,000 women, Pfizer only signed up 349, then stopped enrollment entirely.
“Most concerning,” Makary explained, “the pregnancy outcomes of those who participated in the trial, and their babies, are still not public today, nearly two years later.”
Pregnant and breastfeeding women were excluded from Pfizer’s and Moderna’s Phase 3 clinical trials, but in April 2021, CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky announced, “CDC recommends that pregnant people receive the COVID-19 vaccine.”
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine soon echoed this statement, recommending pregnant women get injected, as did the UK’s Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
So, as the months passed, hundreds of thousands of pregnant women globally rolled up their sleeves to receive the vaccine, despite the absence of any clinical trials.
“The message from authorities was clear — the harm from COVID-19 infection outweighed any harms from the mRNA vaccine — but in truth, they couldn’t possibly have known,” noted Maryanne Demasi, Ph.D., a former medical scientist with the University of Adelaide and former reporter for ABC News in Australia.
Animal studies show fetal loss, skeletal variations
Pfizer’s product labeling suggested, “No vaccine-related adverse effects on female fertility, fetal development or postnatal development were reported.”
But, Demasi reported, a freedom of information request from 2021 showed this was based on an animal study of just 44 rats, which showed concerning findings about fetal loss:
“The study found the vaccine led to a statistically significant doubling in fetal loss (9.77% mRNA vs 4.09% saline), but Pfizer concluded that the difference between the two groups was ‘not biologically meaningful.’
“The label also states that Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine was not tested for its potential to cause carcinogenicity (ability to cause cancer), genotoxicity (ability to damage genetic information), or impairment of male fertility.”
An animal study conducted by Moderna also showed a significant number of rats were born with skeletal variations after their mothers were injected with the COVID-19 shot while pregnant.
But, according to Demasi, “Moderna concluded that the ‘Skeletal variations are structural changes that do not impact development or function of a developing embryo’ and therefore ‘not considered adverse.’”
Trial stopped because many pregnant women already injected
Pfizer hasn’t publicly explained why its trial on pregnant women was stopped short, nor why the resulting data hasn’t been published. It’s possible they ended the trial because of unfavorable results. It wouldn’t be the first time.
However, in this case, it appears the CDC’s widespread endorsement of COVID-19 shots for pregnant women — before the study was completed — may have negated the need for the trial altogether, at least from Pfizer’s perspective.
[…]
Because so many pregnant women had already gone ahead and gotten the shot, due to the government’s endorsement, there was no reason to move ahead with the study.
Demasi published Pfizer’s email response, which reads:
“In the fourth quarter of 2021, enrollment was stopped in C4591015 Study (a Phase 2/3 placebo controlled randomized observer-blind study to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of BNT162b2 against COVID-19 in healthy pregnant women 18 years of age and older). This study was developed prior to availability or recommendation for COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women.
“The environment changed during 2021 and by September 2021, COVID-19 vaccines were recommended by applicable recommending bodies (e.g., ACIP in the U.S.) for pregnant women in all participating/planned countries, and as a result the enrollment rate declined significantly.
“With the declining enrollment, the study had insufficient sample size to assess the primary immunogenicity objective and continuation of this placebo controlled study could no longer be justified due to global recommendations. This proposal was shared with and agreed to by FDA and EMA.”
As for the lack of published data, Pfizer stated it doesn’t have it:
“Pfizer does not yet have a complete data set from the maternal immunization study, C4591015. Pfizer and BioNTech plan to complete the analysis of the clinical trial C4591015 and share it with global public health regulators and seek publication or presentation as is our standard practice.
“It is important to note that relevant real-world evidence on the use of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women has been presented and published numerous times by various parties in multiple journals and forums.”
Natural immunity is still being ignored
Not only does ACOG “strongly recommend” that pregnant women get a COVID-19 shot, but they also recommend a booster dose.
“Vaccination may occur in any trimester, and emphasis should be on vaccine receipt as soon as possible to maximize maternal and fetal health. This recommendation applies to both primary series and booster vaccination,” ACOG states.
But missing from their information is data about natural immunity.
Research by Makary and colleagues, published in JAMA, showed that natural immunity to COVID-19 — achieved by prior infection, not an injection — was durable for about two years, suggesting it’s longer lasting than any protection gained from a COVID-19 shot.
A systematic review and meta-analysis published in The Lancet also revealed natural immunity to be at least as effective as, and likely superior to, COVID-19 injections.
Health officials don’t have the data from Pfizer’s randomized trial of the shots in pregnant women. But rather than erring on the side of caution — especially for those with natural immunity — they’re still recommending everyone get the shots.
Scientists warn pregnant women not to receive COVID shots
Not everyone’s on board with health agencies’ push for pregnant women to get injected.
“The pushing of these experimental COVID-19 vaccines globally is the greatest violation of medical ethics in the history of medicine, maybe humanity,” Dr. James Thorp, a maternal-fetal medicine expert, told Tucker Carlson.
Thorp and colleagues published a preprint study that found striking risks to pregnant women who received the shots, along with their unborn babies.
The outcomes were so dire that the researchers concluded pregnant women should not receive COVID-19 shots until further research is completed.
“A worldwide moratorium on the use of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy is advised until randomized prospective trials document safety in pregnancy and long-term follow-up in offspring,” they explained.
Compared to the flu vaccine, COVID-19 shots were associated with a significant increase in adverse events including:
Menstrual abnormalityMiscarriageFetal chromosomal abnormalitiesFetal malformationFetal cystic hygromaFetal cardiac disordersFetal arrhythmiaFetal cardiac arrestFetal vascular mal-perfusionFetal growth abnormalitiesFetal abnormal surveillanceFetal placental thrombosisLow amniotic fluidFetal death/stillbirthThe data also revealed a 27-fold higher risk of miscarriage and a more than twofold increased risk of adverse fetal outcomes across six different categories, according to board-certified internist and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough.
[…]
Fit, Healthy, Young Rugby Players – Dying Suddenly.
NZDSOS
Recent Herald articles detail a number of medical ‘incidents’ relating to rugby players. The articles are somewhat confusing and lacking in medical detail but there has been enough reported to be concerned about and for us to have questions. At least four players have been mentioned as experiencing medical events or needing medical care in the last month.
Piecing together the details from several articles it is possible to glean the following information.1) Suburbs Rugby Club’s Premier Development side and Manukau Rovers Rugby Football Club. The player collapsed moments after the final whistle. The player is believed to have suffered a seizure and stopped breathing. Paramedics performed life-saving CPR. He was transported to Auckland Hospital to receive treatment.
2) On June 17 Adrian Lole was seen stumbling back to the try line before collapsing. Lole was rushed into surgery, where he had a blood clot removed from his brain. Auckland Rugby Union are still unaware of the cause.
3) Bay of Plenty rugby league player Tere Livingstone suffered a critical brain injury while playing and died in hospital days after the incident. After receiving a scan and surgery he had been putting up a fight for the past few days.
4) The events come after a Bay of Plenty rugby league player (Tere Livingstone) and a rugby union player from Ruatōria both died after on-field incidents.
That is four incidents in a short space of time. The reporting is ambiguous and refers to “a tragic incident”, “a major brain injury”, “severely injured”, “on-field incidents”. However, it is not clear whether the players were injured in the course of play or whether they suffered an injury to their brain due to a medical event. Certainly in at least two of these cases it would seem to be the latter. The players have collapsed or had a seizure rather than experiencing a blow to the head.
Surgery has been needed – to remove blood clots in one case.
There have been previous reports in 2021 and 2022 involving young rugby players dying suddenly from medical events.Rugby player Taniela Moa (36) suddenly dead following a medical event in Dec 2021.
Sulamai Lavea (48) a rugby league player passed away from a heart attack on Saturday 11 Dec 2021 in Brisbane. He had walked up the ‘death stairs’ during fitness training and collapsed on the second level.
Mike Salase (39) was a rugby league player. He died on 10 Jul 2021 having suffered a medical event while playing league in Broadwood, Northland.
A rugby player died during an East Coast Centennial celebration match.
Rising star, Maori All Black Sean Wainui (26) died mysteriously, without the proper post-mortem needed, especially since he was reportedly unwell since his first jab.
What is going on? Has anyone asked the obvious question? Were these players injected with a covid 19 ‘vaccine’ and have they experienced one of the many potential adverse effects that could cause a person to suffer a seizure, collapse, heart attack, have a brain bleed or need clot removal?
Of course, as we have stated repeatedly, it is not just rugby players who are suffering so-called sudden unexpected injuries and death. All age groups and walks of life are suffering unexplained elevated death rates.
Something is killing us off and we have to do something.It is becoming increasingly known that the injection of synthetic genetic material along with lipid nanoparticles and possible contaminants, as well as the subsequent production of spike protein (and perhaps other proteins) by multiple cells in the body, is associated with a number of serious medical conditions showing up in many people.
Once injected, the mRNA ends up in the circulation where it can be taken up by any body cells. It seems the heart muscle, brain and lining of blood vessels are common sites for production of spike protein. When human cells produce a foreign protein they become a target of the immune system. Inflammation occurs as the body tries to remove the foreign protein.
Inflammation in the heart muscle is known as myocarditis. If it affects electrical pathways in the heart, heart-stopping rhythm disturbances can occur. This can cause a sudden collapse and/or death. Post-mRNA vaccine myocarditis affects young men particularly and seems to be exacerbated by physical exertion.
Inflammation in brain tissue can cause seizures, in addition to a multitude of other symptoms.
Inflammation in blood vessels can weaken the walls and cause them to swell (aneurysm), split (dissection) or burst. Inflamed blood vessels may also contribute to blood clots forming inside them causing damage to tissues downstream.
The reason for bringing this up is because if possible adverse reactions from a novel injection are not considered in the possible diagnoses in these cases and then ruled out, the potential for treatment may be missed. In addition, damage is cumulative and the more injections a person has, the more likely adverse effects are to occur. It is looking like there really are deadlier batches and placebos out there, according to published studies.
We keep mentioning such situations because until there is acknowledgement that the vaccine can cause serious and significant harm in some people and open discussion and debate is allowed, there won’t be any research about how to treat people potentially affected. Nor will there be discussion about how to prevent further damage which could affect other rugby players and other Kiwis.
We and others have written on some of the hundreds of post-vaccine deaths by name – Divya Simon, Isabella Alexander, Rory Nairn, Louis Amos, Liam O’Sullivan, Sarah Barnes, and we have referred to numerous children, suddenly dead, as a group. Using their actual names this time will hopefully help stimulate a call for a proper enquiry so we can move to protect ourselves, in the absence of any public officials acting on massive ‘safety signals’, to put it mildly.
So here is a roll-call of some suspicious deaths in children and young people, with huge respect, compassion and sorrow for the families’ losses, whatever the cause may be:Felix (13), Ethan (12), Max (12), Tiare (16), Isabella (17), Faith (14), Aramea (12), Ropiha (17), Layk (18), Declan (17), Celia (13), Sai (12), Te Kahui (14, another gifted rugby player), Luke (19), Louis (19), Catelyn (17), Liam (19), Hannah (15), Leila (13), Riley (14), Asher (17), Shya (17), Eliana (4 days old – mum Nishi died suddenly in pregnancy, and Eliana born by emergency Caesarean section).
Most of these children were definitely jabbed, one or two may not have been. People who report these deaths are not always 100% certain of the exact details.
Such sudden deaths DO happen very rarely in normal times but not in these numbers, nor paralleled with thousands of serious jab injuries, that could be described themselves as ‘near miss’ deaths. Remember too that acknowledged under-reporting means the actual numbers will be even higher.
[…]
Via https://nzdsos.com/2023/07/09/fit-healthy-young-rugby-players-dying-suddenly/
School science curriculum: Teachers shocked at leaked draft – ‘Where’s the science?
Secondary Chemistry Educators New Zealand co-chairperson Murray Thompson said he read the document and was left asking where the science was. Photo / Peter McIntosh, Otago Daily Times, File
By John Gerritsen of RNZ
Science teachers are shocked that an advance version of the draft school science curriculum contains no mention of physics, chemistry or biology.
The so-called “fast draft” said science would be taught through four contexts – the Earth system, biodiversity, food, energy and water, and infectious diseases.
It was sent to just a few teachers for their feedback ahead of its release for consultation next month, but some were so worried by the content they leaked it to their peers.
Teachers who had seen the document told RNZ they had grave concerns about it. It was embarrassing, and would lead to “appalling” declines in student achievement, they said.
One said the focus on four specific topics was likely to leave pupils bored with science by the time they reached secondary school.
But another teacher told RNZ the document presented a “massive challenge” to teachers and the critics were overreacting.
“It’s the difference from what’s existed before and the lack of content is what’s scaring people. It’s fear of the unknown,” he said.
Association of Science Educators president Doug Walker said he was shocked when he saw a copy.
“Certainly, in its current state, I would be extremely concerned with that being our guiding document as educators in Aotearoa. The lack of physics, chemistry, Earth and space science, I was very surprised by that.”
New Zealand Institute of Physics education council chairman David Housden said physics teachers were not happy either.
“We were shocked. I think that physics and chemistry are fundamental sciences and we would expect to find a broad curriculum with elements of it from space all the way down to tiny particles.”
Institute president Joachim Brand said he was worried teenagers would finish school without learning fundamental knowledge about things like energy and matter.
He warned the draft was heavy on philosophy and light on actual science.
“There is too little science content. Science needs to be learned by actually doing it to some degree. You need to be exposed to the ideas of how maybe atoms work, how electricity works, how electric forces and if that is not specified and you’re only given these broad contexts, then I’m really worried there will be huge gaps,” he said.
Brand said if the draft went ahead, fewer students would specialise in science and universities might find themselves forced to teach basic science to new students.
Secondary Chemistry Educators New Zealand co-chairperson Murray Thompson said after he read the document he was left asking where the science was.
“The stuff in there is really interesting, but we have to teach basic science first. Where’s the physics and chemistry and why can’t we find words like force and motion and elements and particles, why aren’t those words in there?
“It’s the same mistake that they made with maths and literacy. They said ‘here’s the system, here’s the way’ and the maths was all about problem-solving and written problems and all that stuff without the basic skills,” Thompson said.
Michael Johnston from the New Zealand Initiative blew the whistle on the draft document after it was leaked to him.
[…]
The Dissolution of NATO May Be the Only Way to Prevent WWIII
Dennis Kucinich
The proxy war of the US vs. Russia in Ukraine could easily develop into World War III. The litany of dangerous weaponry presaging a direct, full-scale war between the U.S. and Russia is instructive: The most advanced tanks, F-16s, depleted uranium munitions, cluster bombs, and even discussion of “tactical” nuclear weapons are thrown into an already toxic admixture, always open to further miscalculation.
This is not to absolve Russia of the invasion. One cannot ignore the dialectic of conflict, which left unchecked, will lead to a greater disaster than has already befallen the people of Ukraine.
Key to this miasma is NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, whose principal European members are committed to a total war with Russia, but on the U.S.’ tab.
NATO military strategies have lacked cohesion and coherence and have led to stasis on the battlefield. Victory over Russia has occurred in the western media, but not on the battlefield. There will be no ceasefire because trickery is no longer an option.
NATO officials will look to escalate the war. The U.S. knows it cannot. Clearly Europe needs a new security architecture which includes Russia with security guarantees for all member states. How can this be achieved with NATO resistance to an end to the war?
As the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) gathers to deliberate in Vilnius, Lithuania, one item that should be on the agenda is the sunsetting of the treaty which established NATO.
The dissolution of NATO itself may be the only way to prevent wider war and to stop the United States and the world from being plunged into the abyss of a wider, cataclysmic war.
Here are (at least) 10 reasons why NATO ought to be disbanded:
1. NATO, formally known as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, (headquartered in Brussels, Belgium) was formed April 4, 1949, to protect Europe against the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union ended on December 25, 1991. NATO fulfilled its founding purpose thirty-two years ago.
2. NATO, has far exceeded the geographical boundaries of the North Atlantic. It has expanded its membership to include nations in the Baltic Sea, the Mediterranean Sea, the Adriatic Sea, the Aegean Sea and the Black Sea.
3. As an expansionist military organization, NATO has extended its military activities far beyond the North Atlantic to Afghanistan, the Gulf of Aden, Iraq, Libya, Darfur, Sudan, and off the Horn of Africa. It has even flown airborne early warning and control systems (AWACS) over United States air space.
4. The founding purpose of NATO was as a defensive alliance. Article One from the North Atlantic Treaty, which established NATO, reads as follows:
“The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.”
5. NATO is an instrument of war, contravening the founding purpose of the 193-member United Nations, formed in 1948 “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.”
6. NATO operates under the color of international authority, while threatening to bring “the scourge of war” to the world. It has aggressively asserted itself, in reliance on the assets of the United States of America, without which it would be a nullity. NATO’s rejection of diplomacy, its unbridled commitment to regime change, its support for ongoing escalation, is a threat to the peace of the region.
7. NATO’S global pretensions are on full display. On July 10, 2023, it presumed to deliver a warning to China.NATO’s Secretary General Jen Stoltenberg, said “The Chinese government’s increasingly coercive behavior abroad and repressive policies at home challenge NATO’s security, values and interests.”
8. NATO is not an independent body. More than 50% of NATO’s budget is paid for by the U.S., yet NATO’s Brussels leadership presumes to implicate the U.S. in wider war, a matter of Constitutional concern to the U.S. Congress.
9. NATO members are required to pay 2% of their GNP for NATO membership. This has turned NATO into an arms bazaar, at the expense of the social and economic needs of the people of its member states, leading to the militarization of Europe.
10. NATO is helpless to protest policies which are antithetical to European social and economic concerns. The destruction of the Nordstream Pipeline, has enabled US interests to price-gouge Europeans for energy. US sanctions policies have cut off European access to markets, further crippling economic growth.
[…]
Via https://denniskucinich.substack.com/p/the-dissolution-of-nato-may-be-the/
Attacks on RFK Jr. as “Conspiracy Theorist” Show Hallmarks of CIA Disinformation
[Source: foxnews.com]By Jeremy Kuzmarov
Covert Action Magazine
Whether One Agrees or Disagrees With Aspects of His Outlook, the Media is Clearly Slanted Against Him
In January 1967, the CIA sent a memo (marked “SECRET,” “RESTRICTED,” and “DESTROY WHEN NO LONGER NEEDED”) to its army of media “assets” secretly embedded in virtually every area of U.S. communications.
This army of covert operatives (exposed as “Operation Mockingbird” in a historic 1977 Rolling Stone article by Carl Bernstein) extended all the way up to world famous columnists, bureau chiefs, managing editors, newspaper publishers and CEOs of major radio and television broadcasting networks.
What did the CIA’s secret memo instruct its media assets to do?
Entitled “Countering Criticism of the Warren Report,” the memo provided guidance for countering “conspiracy theorists” who challenged the Warren Report’s false conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin of John F. Kennedy.
It recommended the strategy of smearing critics of the Warren Report by describing them as being financially motivated; or having “anti-American, far-left or communist sympathies,” or being hasty, inaccurate or ego-driven in their research.
Sound familiar? Although five decades old, the tactics recommended by the memo seem chillingly current, a virtual operating manual for how the present-day CIA tries to smear and discredit anyone who dares to question official government propaganda.
Although the specific term “conspiracy theorist” pre-dates the JFK assassination, it was enthusiastically embraced and deployed by the CIA as one of its most powerful psychological weapons, to be wielded against anyone who suspects the government of secret wrongdoing. It is an effective way to silence dissenting voices by marginalizing them and leaving them open to ridicule.
[Source: reddit.com]Ever since Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced his candidacy for the Presidency on April 19, mainstream media have attacked him with the very same tactics outlined in the CIA’s secret memo of 1967.
This is not surprising since Kennedy has re-invoked the ghosts of Earl Warren and Lyndon B. Johnson, who set up the Warren Committee, by publicly asserting that Lee Harvey Oswald was not the lone assassin of his uncle (JFK), and that his father had considered the work of the Warren Commission to be a “shoddy work of craftsmanship.”
According to Kennedy Jr.: “the evidence that the CIA murdered my uncle is overwhelming, I would say, beyond a reasonable doubt. As an attorney, I would be very comfortable arguing that case to a jury. I think that the evidence that the CIA murdered my father is circumstantial but very, very, very persuasive. Or very compelling. Let me put it that way—very compelling. And of course the CIA participation in the cover-up of both those murders is also beyond a reasonable doubt. It’s very well documented.”
Kennedy has criticized the CIA for other major crimes that it carried out during the Cold War, tweeting out, for example, an article from Truthout about MK-ULTRA (unethical drug testing) and its abuse of black and indigenous children. Kennedy stated in the tweet that: “CIA conspiracy theories are not just ‘right wing’ and they are not just theories.”
[…]
A characteristic hit piece in the June 26 New York Times by columnist Farhad Manjoo was titled “It’s Not Possible to ‘Win’ an Argument With Kennedy.” The subtitle read: “Conspiracy theorists don’t care about facts, just attention.”[1]
Manjoo started the article by asserting that, in the summer of 2006, he entered a debate with Kennedy about the 2004 election, which Kennedy claimed had been stolen from John Kerry.
Manjoo said that Kennedy’s position was based on reckless claims and did not hold up—though in fact Kennedy was presenting considerable evidence to corroborate his view.
As he outlined at the time, nearly half of the six million American voters living abroad never received their ballots, and a consulting firm hired by the Republican National Committee to register voters in six battleground states was discovered shredding Democratic registrations.
Additionally in New Mexico, which was decided by 5,988 votes, malfunctioning machines mysteriously failed to properly register a presidential vote on more than 20,000 ballots and, in Ohio, the critical battleground state that clinched George W. Bush’s victory in the Electoral College, local officials purged tens of thousands of eligible voters from the rolls, neglected to process registration cards generated by Democratic voter drives, shortchanged Democratic precincts when they allocated voting machines, and illegally derailed a recount that could have given Kerry the presidency.[2]
Manjoo says that he was a reporter at Salon during the 2004 election cycle and investigated Kennedy’s theories about the election and concedes that Kennedy was right that the 2004 election was “rife with irregularities,” particularly in Ohio.
[…]
However, another expert, journalist Craig Unger, who wrote a biography of Republican Party kingmaker Karl Rove, suggests that Kennedy may have been correct and that Kerry was cheated out of an election victory when voting data in Ohio was inexplicably switched over to a technology service company, SmarTech, after the news networks had called Florida for George W. Bush.
The shift coincided with serious anomalies that saw an increase in votes favorable to Bush, who decisively won the state.[3]
With regard to vaccines, Manjoo in his column admits that “some vaccines have serious side effects,” which is Kennedy’s position, but again smears him as a “conspiracy theorist” on this matter without either effectively articulating or challenging his views on the topic.
[…]
Kennedy is also routinely disparaged for “cavorting with right-wing figures.”[4] This inverts the old smear of being a Marxist or of the far-left, primarily because the right wing is now identified with “conspiratorial views” and criticism of the CIA and “deep state,” as Kennedy has pointed out, and is also much stronger than the left.
That Kennedy’s political supporters include libertarians opposed to what they consider coercive medical practices and government surveillance, and that he is branding himself as a candidate capable of bringing together Americans on the right and left, should not generally be considered a bad thing; it makes sense for someone who wants to win people’s votes.
New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg acknowledged that Kennedy was bringing together a “coalition of the distrustful” cutting across traditional “divisions of right and left” and that this is “giving him surprising strength in many polls.”[5]
On June 26, The Atlantic ran a characteristic hit piece on Kennedy titled “The First MAGA Democrat: Robert Kennedy Jr. is Feeding America’s Appetite for Conspiracies,” which scoffed at Kennedy’s sensible belief that “Ukraine is engaged in a ‘proxy’ war” and that Russia’s invasion, although “illegal,” would not have taken place if the United States “didn’t want it to.”[6]
On June 22, Slate ran another typical smear piece right out of the CIA’s playbook by Molly Olmstead entitled “RFK Jr.’s Conspiracy Theories Go Way Beyond Vaccines.” The subtitle of the article was: “The 2024 candidate sure is a man of, um, ‘ideas.’”
Kennedy is indeed a man of ideas; but not in a negative way. By any objective measure, his book, The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health (New York: Skyhorse, 2021), is an impressive feat of scholarship that sold more than a million copies.
The book provides a deeply researched account of the corruption of Anthony Fauci and Big Pharma along with insightful analysis about the CIA’s involvement in and cover-up of lethal and unethical Gain of Function research and germ warfare practices that date to the era of the Cold War.
[…]
When another reporter used the term “anti-vax” to describe Kennedy, former Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, Kennedy’s campaign manager, responded that the term was a “left-handed smear” and “a clipped assessment that has been used for political purposes by the adherents of the pharmaceutical industry,” when Kennedy stands for vaccine safety.
[…]
In her Slate piece, Olmstead claims that Kennedy has progressed from being an anti-vaxxer to advancing more conspiracies, such as one that “Wi-Fi radiation from cellphones causes cancer—or, more specifically, ‘Wi-Fi radiation’ from cellphones causes ‘cellphone tumors.”
In fact, there is a growing body of scientific research that verifies these latter concerns, including by highly reputable scientists like Dr. Joel Moskowitz, director of the University of California at Berkeley’s Center for Family and Community Health, who has been on a decades-long quest to prove that radiation from cell phones is unsafe, which he says most people do not want to hear because they are addicted to their smart phones.[9]
[…]
Jan Wenner, founder of Rolling Stone Magazine, which has published some of Kennedy’s writings, characterized him as a “crusader much like his father: pursuing justice and fairness for people….The acorn doesn’t fall far from the tree.”
[…]
The refrain about Kennedy and his father and uncle’s assassination was nevertheless echoed in a) a New York Times article by Rebecca Davis O’Brien on June 29, b) a New Yorker article by David Remnick entitled “The Alternative Facts of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.,”[10] c) a New York Magazine profile by Rebecca Traister that calls Kennedy’s ideas on the assassination “unproven to ludicrous to dangerously irresponsible,” and d) in yet another New York Times piece on July 6 by Anjali Huynh, which invokes the authority of the widely discredited Warren Commission.
[…]
Kennedy’s vilification in the media, ironically, may be one major source of his popularity across the country in an electorate that no longer has much faith in the mainstream media.
[…]
Buddhism in India’s Mauryan Empire
Episode 12 Ashoka’s Imperial Buddhism
A History of India
Michael Fisher (2016)
Film Review
Ashoka, the first emperor (268 – 232 BC) of the Mauryan empire, eventually conquered nearly all of South Asia. Eight years after ascending the throne, Ashoka overcame fierce Adivasi resistance to conquer Kalinga. Approximately 150,000 Adivasi were killed and 150,000 more enslaved. Thousands more died in the general chaos of battle.
Deep regret over these deaths caused Ashoka to convert to Buddhism. He sent missionaries to Sri Lanka (presently 80% Buddhist). By 250 BC, Buddhism had been systematized across the Mauryan Empire. Ashoka became vegetarian and although he didn’t ban other religions, he prohibited animal sacrifices in the capitol Paliputra. He collected Buddhist relics and built stupas* to protect them. He also erected 40-foot sandstone pillars on the borders of his empire expressing his regret and commitment to protecting slaves and the poor.
He also built roads throughout his empire with shady trees and refreshing wells and appointed governors (sometimes his relatives) to rule directly over provinces.
There were still a dozen Indo-European languages spoken in the Mauryann empire (the elite spoke Sanskrit, while Pali was most popular with the common people). There were four different Dravidian languages spoken in south India.
It was under Ashoka’s rule that the first Indian script developed (sacred texts were memorized prior to the advent of writing). There are three theories about the origin of so-called Bramhi script. The first asserts it developed from Semitic script through contact with Indo-European Aramaic speakers. This was the source of the Kharoshtai script used along Ashoka’s western frontiers. Indian scholars dispute this theory because unlike Aramaic, Brahmi reads from left to rightand has “retroflex”* consonants not present in Aramaic. The second is that Brahmi derived from Indus Valley script, which was made up of 400 pictograms and also read from right to left. The third is that in originated from written symbols developed by merchants to enhance trade.
Brahmi script eventually evolved into North and South Indian script, which are now so divergent they are mutually unintelligible.
Under the early Mauryan empire, Brahmi letters and legal documents were written on flattened palm leaves or wood. Outside coins and stone inscriptions, no permanent evidence of the language survives out. It wasn’t decoded until the 1950s, when coins were discovered with bilingual Brahmi and Greek/Latin inscriptions.
The short lived Mauryan Empire ended in 187 BC after a Brahmin general assassinated the last Mauryan king assassinated the last Mauryan king.
*A stupa is a Buddhist shrine used for meditation.
The film can be viewed free with a library card on Kanopy.
https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/366254/366195
July 12, 2023
If Vaccines are Modern Medicine’s Miracle, Why Are Our Children So Sick?
Rights and Freedoms
In our upside down world, parents who’ve lost a healthy child to a severe vaccine injury are being dismissed as ignorant, selfish, science deniers. Despite having obeyed government mandates and followed the advice of their pediatrician, their child was irreparably harmed or killed by a vaccine. Based on their experience and knowledge, these parents advocate for greater vaccine safety, transparency and health freedom for all of us. With nothing to gain but the derision of an uninformed public, they rightfully raise serious concerns about violations to vaccine safety protocols, the absence of high level research on vaccine adverse effects and the consequences of the US government violating our health freedom in its mandate of inherently risky products.
Our president’s fed-up Dad rhetoric can’t disguise what these dissenters who have nothing to gain are trying to point out to a somnolent citizenry:
The US government sponsors and mandates highly profitable, patented vaccines, some of which have massive adverse side effects, including long term disability and death. The very governmental agencies charged with protecting US citizens from harm caused by these corporate products refuse to conduct independent, high level clinical studies on adverse vaccine outcomes. Instead, they rely on corrupt data from transnational corporations who reap obscene profits, despite paying astronomical fines.
[…]
For more than a century it has been accepted public health dogma that vaccine benefits far outweigh the risks. Vaccines are modern medicine’s greatest miracle, after all. They save lives and improve the quality of life for millions of people worldwide. It is a fervent belief that’s widespread, but is it backed up by unbiased data? As in most complex situations, there are no tidy truths, as shades of grey often lie concealed beneath blaring headlines.
Mass Suffering, Death and Chronic Debilitating Illness are Tragic, Whether Caused by an Infectious Disease or a Faulty Vaccine
Written in fine print on vaccine inserts are the known adverse side effects. The very real risk you must accept if you consent to any vaccine injection for your child: She may suffer injury or death from known or unknown side effects. If that data point makes you hesitant to comply with a mandate, you will be reassured that her risk is one in a million. If you ask for a list of vaccine ingredients and their synergistic effects on a seven pound infant, your doctor cannot provide it. If you hesitate and ask for clarification on the severity of side effects or question the likely risks based on your child’s unique medical history, you’ll likely be shamed with a lofty retort: Giving your child a vaccine is a small price to pay for protecting all of humanity from the scourge of dreaded infectious diseases. Besides, they’re mandated. You must comply if you want to enroll her in school.
Is The Greater Good Vaccine Argument Proven? Or is it a Mirage?
If vaccines are safe and the benefits outweigh the risks, one would presume that all of the ingredients are independently studied and tested before being forcibly injected into small children. They’re not. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) publishes a list of vaccine ingredients. Here are just some of the ingredients that may be in the vaccines your doctor recommends and the government mandates for your child:
live weakened viruseskilled bacteriaaluminummercuryformaldehydephenolsodium boratePolysorbate 80Triton x-100HydrocortisoneSugarYeastmilk and egg proteinvirus like protein particlesMSGantibioticscalf serumhuman, animal and insect DNAEven though these ingredients in vaccines may be present in miniscule amounts, not every ingredient has been adequately tested for negative effects on the brain and immune system of a child. Because each child is unique, with a different genetic and epigenetic heritage, a different microbiome, and a different health history, they won’t all react the same way to vaccine ingredients. It’s not rational to think that we can give an ever-increasing number of these immune-system-altering injections to young children without some recipients suffering toxicity, adverse reactions and lasting biological damage.
If Vaccines Are a Modern Medical Miracle, Why are Our Children so Sick?
While their grandparents might never have swallowed a single pill as children, the current generation is a pharmaceutical rep’s dream come true: One in four children is taking at least one prescription drug. Eight million prescriptions for psychiatric disorders are dispensed to children under 17, with more than one million prescriptions for psychiatric drugs written for children under five.
Today’s children are allergic, asthmatic, anxious, autoimmune, autistic, hyperactive, distracted and learning disabled. Forty-three percent suffer from at least one chronic illness, not including obesity. Once rare pediatric disorders like autism are now soaring to alarming rates: Before 1990, the rate of autism was 1 in 10,000 children. By 2000, it rose to 1 in 250, and by 2018, the rate of autism in children had reached 1 in 59. Our government can’t explain why. Environmental factors like insufficient nutrition and toxic chemical exposure can contribute to children becoming chronically ill or medically fragile, but those exposures don’t fully explain the scale or scope of the increase in the number of childhood illnesses over the past forty years.
There is one exposure that has skyrocketed alongside the epidemic of childhood illnesses, but remains unexamined by our governmental agencies in charge of public health policy:
The US government refuses to investigate the biological basis of unexpected or nonspecific adverse outcomes of vaccination on children, yet they continue to claim that current vaccine policies are evidence-based.
Our government has betrayed two generations of children by relying on drug company data to make vaccine policy rather than conducting independent, high level research on the synergistic, biological effects of vaccines on children. It may claim vaccines are safe and effective and their policies evidence based, but evidence requires proof, dissent and peer review, not blind faith in the good intentions of drug companies. Meanwhile, our children get sicker and sicker.
If the US government were truly concerned with your child’s safety, wouldn’t it study the effects on children of 69 doses of 16 immune-altering pharmaceutical vaccines by age one, and 50 doses of 14 vaccines administered by age six? Claiming ethical concerns, the federal government refuses to conduct clinical trials on the overall health outcomes of highly-vaccinated children. Our government is forcing injections with unknown impact on children, based on data supplied by the very companies that stand to profit from the wide distribution of childhood vaccines.
[…]
When you’ve been given only one side of the story, it is impossible to make informed consent on behalf of your child. Drug companies are not incentivized to prioritize your safety. With the covid shot, only drug companies enjoy immunity; your child will not. She can still contract and spread the virus and potentially become vaccine injured without any recourse. Ask yourself: Is this product something your child actually needs or are you being sold something, like coke or video games?
Unvaccinated Children Enjoy Superior Health Outcomes Compared to their Highly-Vaccinated Peers
Meanwhile, there is data on vaccines’ effect on children’s health, but it goes unreported by the mainstream media. The five main corporate news outlets are prohibited from reporting on vaccine injuries by their pharmaceutical industry sponsors. Since the dawn of covid, hard censorship across platforms suppresses any information that counters the official claims.
[…]
Despite the near 95% vaccination rate in the US, privately funded researchers based in five countries have had no difficulty finding unvaccinated children to study, and their research is as overwhelming as it is consistent. Here are two examples: The Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute (CMSRI), a medical and scientific collaborative providing research funding for independent studies on causal factors underlying the chronic disease epidemic present a snapshot of their findings.
Another example is an ongoing research survey in Germany with over 12,000 participants. The results of this survey show that unvaccinated children are far less affected by common diseases than vaccinated children.
[…]
If Vaccines are Modern Medicine’s Miracle, Why Are Our Children So Sick?
The Medical Uses of Baking Soda
Dr Mercola
Story at-a-glanceBaking soda (sodium bicarbonate or NaHCO3) has a number of medicinal uses and benefits. It’s commonly known to have alkalinizing, antacid and electrolyte replacement propertiesStudies have shown drinking baking soda solution can help pregnant women who are having a slow or difficult labor to avoid C-sections in about 20% of cases by neutralizing acid in the wombResearch funded by the National Institutes of Health suggests baking soda may be a safe and effective treatment for autoimmune diseases by priming your immune system against inflammationThe data suggests drinking baking soda-infused water activates an anti-inflammatory pathway that is mediated by the neuronal-like function of mesothelial cells that line your internal organsBaking soda may also enhance sports performance (a strategy known as soda doping)Baking soda (sodium bicarbonate or NaHCO3), popularized by Arm & Hammer more than 150 years ago, is a staple in many homes for baking and cleaning purposes, but this inexpensive ingredient also has a number of medicinal uses and benefits. It rates right up there with hydrogen peroxide as one of the most inexpensive and safe health tools around, so it makes sense to learn all you can about the many uses of baking soda.
It’s commonly known to have alkalinizing, antacid and electrolyte replacement properties.1 When taken internally, baking soda is thought to raise the pH of your blood. This appears to be the basic premise behind its recommended use against colds and influenza symptoms, recounted in a 1924 Arm & Hammer booklet on the medical uses of baking soda.2,3
Long-distance runners have also engaged in a practice known as “soda doping” — taking baking soda capsules — before races to enhance performance — a measure thought to work similarly to carbohydrate loading. In this case, by increasing the pH of your blood, this practice is thought to offset the acidity produced in muscles during intense activity. While I do not suggest or recommend you try this at home, use of baking soda has also been shown to improve speed among swimmers.4
Research5 has also shown drinking baking soda solution can help pregnant women who are having a slow or difficult labor to avoid C-sections in about 20% of cases by neutralizing acid in their womb. This could spell the difference between life and death in developing countries and/or instances where C-section is not an option.
Baking Soda May Be an Inexpensive TreatmentMore recently, research funded by the National Institutes of Health suggests baking soda may be an effective treatment adjunct for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other autoimmune diseases. According to this study,6,7 led by renal physiologist Paul O’Connor and published in The Journal of Immunology, drinking a solution of water and baking soda appears to prime your immune system against inflammation.
Baking soda dose is about 1/2 tsp to 1 tsp a few times a day. I personally take 3/4 tsp three times a day in a four ounce glass of orange juice. You need to stir the orange juice for a chemical reaction to occur and you wind up getting carbonated orange juice that is much tastier than baking soda in water.
The theory was initially tested on rats, and later in human subjects. According to O’Connor, baking soda may indeed be “a really safe way to treat inflammatory disease,”8 including arthritis. As reported by Medical News Today:9
“Their experiments tell a complex story about how this salt provides a signal to a special kind of cell called ‘mesothelial cells,’ telling them that the body is fine and not under attack, rendering an aggressive immune system unnecessary. Thus, harmful autoimmune responses are averted. Mesothelial cells line the internal organs as well as many different cavities in the body …
Baking Soda Alters Immune Cell ActivationBasically, in O’Connor words, mesothelial cells learn that ‘[i]t’s most likely a hamburger not a bacterial infection.’ So they, in turn, do not activate the spleen’s ‘army’ of macrophages, or white blood cells tasked with clearing up potentially harmful cellular detritus. ‘Certainly, drinking bicarbonate affects the spleen and we think it’s through the mesothelial cells,’ O’Connor explains.”
Mesothelial cells are found in your blood and kidneys, and baking soda is already used in the treatment of chronic kidney disease. It was this that led the researchers to explore the mechanisms by which baking soda benefits renal function, slowing the progression of kidney disease.
It was during this investigation they noticed that baking soda shifted the balance of immune cells in the kidneys, boosting anti-inflammatory immune cells while simultaneously decreasing inflammatory cells.
Further tests revealed baking soda has the same anti-inflammatory effect on blood and spleen as well. But how does it do this? Mesothelial cells, which line your internal organs, communicate with the organ in question via microvilli that emit a neurotransmitter called acetylcholine, and this appears to be an important part of the equation.
A previous hypothesis suggested the anti-inflammatory signals were being transmitted through the vagus nerve, which connects your gut, brain and other organs. Experiments revealed this idea did not hold true. Even when the vagus nerve was completely severed, it did not suppress the anti-inflammatory signaling of the mesothelial cells.
Eventually, they realized the inflammatory response is being mediated via acetylcholine signals through the microvilli connecting the mesothelial cells and the organ they line. The anti-inflammatory response triggered by drinking baking soda-infused water was found to continue for a minimum of four hours. As explained by the authors:
“Following oral NaHCO3 loading, macrophage polarization was shifted from predominantly M1 (inflammatory) to M2 (regulatory) phenotypes, and FOXP3+CD4+ T-lymphocytes increased in the spleen, blood, and kidneys of rats. Similar anti-inflammatory changes in macrophage polarization were observed in the blood of human subjects …
Conventional RA Treatment Is Fraught With Health HazardsOur data indicate that oral NaHCO3 activates a splenic anti-inflammatory pathway and provides evidence that the signals that mediate this response are transmitted to the spleen via a novel neuronal-like function of mesothelial cells.”
Considering the devastating side effects inherent with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) drugs, the idea that something as safe and inexpensive as baking soda water may alleviate the inflammation driving this and other autoimmune diseases is as welcome as it is intriguing. Indeed, the drugs commonly prescribed for rheumatoid arthritis are among the most dangerous on the market.
These include prednisone, TNF-alpha inhibitors (sold under brand names such as Humira, Enbrel and Remicade. Side effects of these drugs include infection and an increased risk for cancer), and harsh anticancer drugs like methotrexate. Chronic use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and analgesics like Tylenol can also result in life-threatening liver and/or kidney damage.
Acetaminophen is actually the No. 1 cause of acute liver failure in the U.S. It’s tragic that conventional medicine doesn’t promote lifestyle changes before drugs for arthritis as, in my own practice, about 80% of my arthritic patients were able to achieve significant improvement or complete remission simply by following my nutritional and lifestyle recommendations.
In 2015, I interviewed a former patient of mine, Sarah Allen, about her successful remission. You can review that interview, and a summary of the most important lifestyle changes required to control this condition, in “Inspiring Account of How to Put Rheumatoid Arthritis Into Remission,” hyperlinked earlier.
Other Medicinal Uses for Baking SodaVideo Link[…]
Keep in mind, you do not need to seek out aluminum-free baking soda, as all baking soda is aluminum-free. The aluminum issue is related to baking powder, some brands of which may contain aluminum sulphate.10
[…]
Covid Censorship Proved to Be Deadly
Bill Rice Jr’s Newsletter
I wanted to make a quick post to recommend an exceptional and important essay published by The Wall Street Journal’s Opinion section.
In a brief essay (“Covid Censorship Proved to be Deadly”) author Brett Swanson shows how the Censorship Industrial Complex – or what he perfectly describes as “full spectrum censorship” – has effectively caused the unnecessary deaths (and misery) of huge numbers of world citizens.
As the essay makes clear, “truth” and “facts” have become “false narratives” or “dangerous misinformation” …. while false beliefs have become accepted as gospel/infallible truths.
Claims that are wrong, dangerous or dubious cannot be challenged.
As Swanson points out, the masses on social media quickly gleaned the speech they could not make (this shows the toxic effects of “self censorship.”)
The opinions of those who believe the “experts” might be “ignorant” were censored or not allowed to reach large numbers of people. Because of this, “falsehoods” could NOT be “dispelled.”
Swanson points out such a surreal template is the exact opposite of real science, which exists to challenge dubious claims.
A technology (the Internet) that could and should have been used to save many lives – and rebut many falsehoods – was instead used to bully and silence skeptics, who were really just trying to save lives and prevent outcomes that ultimately produced mass misery and devastating consequences for billions of world inhabitants.
The censored, bullied and demonetized skeptics are the real altruistic heroes, not the villains.
Theme fits perfectly with my next big story ….I’m currently working on a story regarding the Covid outbreak aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier.
The true/vital lesson from this case study should have been that Covid does NOT threaten “everyone.” Per the lessons of the Roosevelt outbreak, this virus certainly doesn’t pose any real mortality risk to the young and middle age.
But the “false narrative” quickly became that Covid threatens “everyone” … that younger adults and children were also “vulnerable.”
The truth – which would have eliminated irrational fear in most people – could NOT be disseminated as it would threaten the most important (false) narratives/initiatives.
As Swanson points out, the real goal in all of this “full spectrum censorship” is to PROTECT “authority.”
It would have constituted a “crisis” for those in authority if their pronouncements were exposed as “ignorance.”
The bottom line is that the massive and coordinated Censorship Industrial Complex was created to protect the power, wealth and continued control of those in authority.
At least The Wall Street Journal published this essay ….
… Also, The WSJ op-ed section deserved kudos for publishing this piece.
The author didn’t have the space to document the evidence of the huge spike in all-cause (non-Covid) excess deaths, but he still worked those points into his essay.
This by itself is a “win” for our side.
Shocking numbers of “vaccine” deaths/injuries and iatrogenic deaths/injuries are the giant elephants in the room in the mainstream media.
The reason most every-day citizens aren’t shocked by these scandals/truths … is that this story has been … censored. That is, this is NOT a “story.”
But at least The WSJ acknowledged this by publishing Swanson’s superlative essay.
Maybe the “news” division of the WSJ will follow-up on the author’s points and do some real journalism on these taboo topics?
Somehow I doubt this … but, still, the needle exposing the false narratives is moving in the right direction.
[…]
Via https://billricejr.substack.com/p/covid-censorship-proved-to-be-deadly
July 11, 2023
Germany on track to bin 200 million COVID-19 vaccine doses
Germany has a population of 83 million people and has administered a total of 192 million jabs over the course of the whole pandemic | Jens Schlueter/Getty ImagesBy Carlo Martuscelli The total waste is likely to run into the billions of euros.
Germany has thrown out 83 million doses of coronavirus vaccines at a rough cost of €1.6 billion and has 120 million more doses sitting unused in stock, even as it is set to receive more jabs at a time when vaccination has flatlined.
According to data provided by the country’s health ministry, Germany scrapped 54 million COVID-19 vaccine doses by the end of 2022 and another 29 million in the first quarter of 2023.
However, the real tally is likely to be higher. The ministry didn’t provide waste figures for the second quarter of this year and also stressed that federal states and health care providers aren’t required to report vaccine waste. “Accordingly, a total volume of total disposed COVID-19 vaccine doses acquired by the Federal Republic of Germany cannot be quantified,” it said in an email to POLITICO.
Meanwhile, another 120 million doses are still in stock as the number of people getting vaccines has plummeted. The EU’s disease control agency’s most recent data shows that a total of 268 doses were administered in Germany in the week of June 5. And 1,462 people were jabbed in the three weeks before that.
While vaccination rates are likely to pick up in the fall as health systems brace for seasonal infections, this is unlikely to make a dent in the 120 million vaccines sitting unused. Germany has a population of 83 million people and has administered a total of 192 million jabs over the course of the whole pandemic.
The cost of this waste is almost certain to run into the billions of euros.
While the ministry didn’t provide a breakdown of the type of vaccines wasted, it did say that of the 29 million vaccines that had expired by the end of the first quarter of 2023, 5 million were Moderna, 18 million were BioNTech/Pfizer, and another 6 million were Novavax.
Assuming a similar breakdown for the doses that expired at the end of 2022, as well as the remaining 120 million that are unused, that would put the total value of the unused vaccines at roughly €4 billion based on leaked prices of €19 ($20.90) per dose for Novavax, €23 ($25.50) for Moderna and €19.50 for BioNTech/Pfizer.
EU countries, including Germany, are still on the hook for even more doses after a recent deal negotiated between the Commission and U.S. pharmaceutical Pfizer. The exact number of deliveries that the bloc is set to receive isn’t public, but one participant of a confidential meeting where details of the revised contract were shared with a select group of MEPs told POLITICO that the figure is 260 million doses spread out over the course of the next four years — or 65 million doses per year.
[…]
Via https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-bin-200-million-covid-19-vaccine-doses/
The Most Revolutionary Act
- Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's profile
- 11 followers
