The Curious Case of Pfizer Subject #12312982
ok, not so much curious as infuriating...
The fix is in.
I mean, this isn’t new. I’ve been reading about various forms of corruption around the approval of these shots for so long that I’m likely pretty desensitized. But here comes more evidence of the obvious lies and deceptive tactics that have become normalized within our drug regulation and approval processes, and it feels like salt on an open wound.
These practices are so dark and destructive that we hardly have to pull the curtain back. Regulatory capture has corroded it so irreparably that the curtain is crumbling before our eyes. And the mainstream media that we once counted on to reveal the truth now scrambles to obscure it, weaving together flimsy cover narratives so their biggest sponsors can continue to keep them afloat.
Even though Augusto had a negative PCR test at the hospital, and even though the doctor at the hospital wrote that his condition was due to the vaccine, when Augusto called the trial site on Sept. 14 to notify them he was in the hospital, they wrote down in his clinical trial record that he had been admitted for a bilateral pneumonia that had nothing to do with the “investigational product” — even though that was not what he told them.
On October 7, the clinical trial notes that “at the request of the sponsor” (AKA Pfizer), the adverse event code was update to COVID-19 disease. And that’s how Pfizer made cases of myocarditis and pericarditis disappear, by sweeping them under the rug of COVID-19. Moreover, the diagnosis of COVID-19 would not count against the efficacy calculations, since those required a positive PCR test to confirm diagnosis.
Read the whole post if you have time. If provides valuable insight into how the sausage is made.
The sad thing is that we only know about Augusto Roux because he was one of the more educated and empowered participants. According to Josh Guetzkow, “we know all of this because Augusto, a lawyer, successfully sued to get his medical and trial clinical records, even though it took him over a year.”
Like I said, this isn’t new. People have been trying to bring attention to their COVID vaccine injuries since the very beginning.
These were the kinds of headlines that were attributed to doctors and scientists who tried to warn people of these possibilities BEFORE all those people were injured and killed…
Among other wild assertions in the predictably absurd document, the motion seeking an injunction filed by “America’s Frontline Doctors” falsely claims the three vaccines authorized for emergency use in the U.S. do not actually curb the spread of the deadly virus…
…BOGUS CLAIM 1: The Three COVID Vaccines Don’t Prevent The Spread of COVID-19
In the motion, the group boldly claims that CDC data shows the two-dose vaccines by Moderna and Pfizer and the single-shot Johnson & Johnson vaccine “are not effective in treating or preventing” COVID-19. Hotez, however, notes that the three immunizations “not only reduce symptomatic illness up to 95 percent and asymptomatic illness in the lower 90 percentile, but they halt virus shedding.” Simply put, even if the vaccines are not 100 percent effective at stopping the spread of the deadly virus, the more people that get vaccinated, the lower the spread will be.
“If enough people get vaccinated, you stop transmissions,” he said. “It’s simple.”…
…BOGUS CLAIM 2: Vaccines Are More Harmful To Minors Than The Virus Itself
In the motion, the group falsely claims that minors under the age of 18 face “statistically zero chance of death from” COVID-19, while the vaccine could make them susceptible to heart inflammation, or myocarditis…
…BOGUS CLAIM 3: Americans Were Brainwashed by Pandemic Fear—And Unfairly Consented to the Vaccine
In one of the most bonkers claims in the 67-page memo, the group suggests that the nationwide lockdowns that occurred last year to curb the spread of the deadly coronavirus manipulated Americans into getting the lifesaving jab. It’s a move that they claim is similar to “authoritarian and totalitarian conditions.”
…BOGUS CLAIM 4: Forcing Previously Infected People To Get The Vaccine Will Make Them Sick
In the motion, the group expresses grave concern for individuals who have gotten the vaccine after previously testing positive for COVID-19, stating that “this population has reported seriously medical harm, including death.” Hotez, however, pointed out there is no data supporting that claim. He explained that the group was trying to use vaccine-driven disease enhancement—or the phenomenon that components of the immune system that should protect against COVID-19 will end up making individuals more ill—to justify their claim with proper data.
The claims, as it turns out, weren’t “bogus.”
The shots DON’T stop the spread. They DON’T stop viral shedding.
Children DO have virtually no risk of death from COVID.
The shots do present significant risks to minors. And the myocarditis risks are very real. There have been 113 child deaths reported to VAERS following COVID shots.
The lasting traumatizing impacts of pandemic fears are now being acknowledged. And coercive tactics used to make people comply are also well-documented.
How many lives could have been saved simply by considering what these (and other) doctors were saying?
Now people like Dr. Naomi Wolf are painstakingly reviewing the data and showing us how the dots connect.
Are we ready to look at the ugly truth? What’s it going to take?