5 Filters

Covid Vaccines Are “Obviously Dangerous” and Should Be Halted Immediately, Say Senior Swedish Doctors

Just looking round, it’s getting difficult to follow all the ‘adverse vaccination reactions’ (see what I did there?) around the world. These bad news stories and expressions of concern - mostly arising from the latest data - are not just popping up all over the place, it’s more like a torrent.
This is just three from one place as an illustration. Reported with a touch of attitood from the Daily Sceptic - but the stories seem solidly based.

There are as many bad news stories from top doctors like Meryl Nass and Pierre Kory as there are from committed vaccination opposed places like the DS.
One surprise who has come out - a bit, but significantly - is Dr Paul Offit - Mr Vaccine, to you and me. His coming out is analysed by Dr Pierre Kory (I haven’t watched it, but I expect a bit of relish)

Cheers
ED

13/1/23 FDA Vaccine Committee Member Calls For End to Mass Covid Vaccination

Will Jones

Dr. Paul Offit, a member of the U.S. FDA’s vaccine advisory committee, has written in the New England Journal of Medicine, the world’s top medical journal, calling for an end to the mass vaccination of anyone at low risk from the virus. In an op-ed titled “Bivalent COVID-19 Vaccines – A Cautionary Tale”, Dr. Offit writes that Covid boosters are “probably best reserved for the people most likely to need protection against severe disease”.

“I believe we should stop trying to prevent all symptomatic infections in healthy, young people by boosting them with vaccines containing mRNA from strains that might disappear a few months later,” he writes.

Dr. Offit, who is Professor of Vaccinology and Professor of Paediatrics at the University of Pennsylvania, goes through in detail the process that led to bivalent vaccines being recommended in the U.S. for everyone over five years of age with no relevant data from humans. He is clearly very unhappy about it.

On June 28th 2022, researchers from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna presented data on their bivalent vaccines to the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (of which I am a member). The results were underwhelming. Bivalent boosters resulted in levels of neutralising antibodies against BA.1 that were only 1.5 to 1.75 times as high as those achieved with monovalent boosters. Previous experience with the companies’ vaccines suggested that this difference was unlikely to be clinically significant. Safety data were reassuring. At the time of the FDA presentation, BA.1 was no longer circulating in the United States, having been replaced by more immune-evasive and contagious Omicron subvariants. But winter was around the corner. The FDA advisory committee, sensing the urgency of responding to these immune-evasive strains, voted to authorise bivalent vaccines with an understanding that they would target Omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA.5, which at the time had accounted for more than 95% of circulating strains.

A series of rapid-fire policy decisions followed. On June 29th 2022, the day after the advisory committee meeting, the Biden administration agreed to purchase 105 million doses of Pfizer-BioNTech’s bivalent vaccine containing BA.4 and BA.5 mRNA. One month later, on July 29th 2022, the administration agreed to purchase 66 million doses of Moderna’s bivalent vaccine, intending to offer both vaccines in the fall and winter. On September 1st 2022, the FDA withdrew its emergency use authorisation for monovalent vaccine boosters and the CDC recommended bivalent vaccine boosters for everyone 12 years of age or older. On October 12th 2022, the CDC extended this recommendation to include everyone five years of age or older. At that point, no data from humans, including immunogenicity data, were available for comparing the relative capacities of the monovalent and bivalent vaccines to protect against BA.4 and BA.5.

On October 24th 2022, David Ho and colleagues released the results of a study examining levels of neutralizing antibodies against BA.4 and BA.5 after receipt of a monovalent or bivalent booster dose. They found “no significant difference in neutralisation of any SARS-CoV-2 variant”, including BA.4 and BA.5, between the two groups. One day later, Dan Barouch and colleagues released the results of a similar study, finding that “BA.5 [neutralising-antibody] titers were comparable following monovalent and bivalent mRNA boosters”. Barouch and colleagues also noted no appreciable differences in CD4+ or CD8+ T-cell responses between participants in the monovalent-booster group and those in the bivalent-booster group. Neither research group found the bivalent boosters to elicit superior immune responses. The results are now published in the Journal.

The likely reason the bivalent vaccines failed is immune imprinting, Dr. Offit explains.

The immune systems of people immunised with the bivalent vaccine, all of whom had previously been vaccinated, were primed to respond to the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2. They therefore probably responded to epitopes shared by BA.4 and BA.5 and the ancestral strain, rather than to new epitopes on BA.4 and BA.5.

When epidemiological data did become available, they showed very poor protection.

On November 22nd 2022, the CDC published data on the effectiveness of the BA.4 and BA.5 mRNA vaccines for preventing symptomatic infection within two months after receipt of the booster dose. For people who had received a monovalent vaccine two to three months earlier, the extra protection associated with the bivalent booster dose ranged from 28% to 31%. For those who had received a monovalent vaccine more than eight months earlier, the extra protection ranged from 43% to 56%. Given the results of previous studies, it’s likely that this moderate increase in protection against probably generally mild disease will be short lived.

The bivalent vaccine had very poor take-up and the variants it was targeted against were quickly gone.

As of November 15th 2022, only about 10% of the population for whom the bivalent vaccine had been recommended had received it. By December 2022, the BA.4 strain was no longer circulating, and BA.5 accounted for less than 25% of circulating SARS-CoV-2 strains, having been partially replaced by more immune-evasive strains, such as BQ.1, BQ.1.1, BF.7, XBB, and XBB.1.

It’s welcome that Dr. Offit is breaking ranks and expressing dismay about the poor process and the lack of data, and calling for the end of the mass vaccination campaign. The intervention is particularly significant because it denotes a failure of the central U.S. biosecurity strategy of trying to use fast-track mRNA vaccines to provide a lightning response to an emerging biological threat. It is thus likely that his conclusions will be strongly resisted by those who are invested – financially, psychologically and politically – in this strategy.

That Dr. Offit is only doing so now, and not with any recognition of any safety problems, is less welcome, of course. Still, he will likely not be thanked by his paymasters, and it is in the right direction, so he should receive credit for that.

We still await the acknowledgement that the benefit of these vaccines was never favourable for people at low risk from the virus, who never needed them, and that their safety profile is far worse than the companies and regulators have led the public to believe.

Stop Press: CNN reports that Dr. Offit is “angry” that Moderna failed to include unfavourable infection data in its submission to the FDA last year. “I was angry to find out that there was data that was relevant to our decision that we didn’t get to see,” Dr. Offit said. According to CNN: “The data that was not presented to the experts looked at actual infections: who caught COVID-19 and who did not. It found that 1.9% of the study participants who received the original booster became infected. Among those who got the updated bivalent vaccine – the one that scientists hoped would work better – a higher percentage, 3.2%, became infected.” Does it make you wonder what else they’re not telling you, Dr. Offit?

13/1/23 Covid Vaccines Are “Obviously Dangerous” and Should Be Halted Immediately, Say Senior Swedish Doctors

by Dr Johan Eddebo

There follows a public statement by a group of five senior Swedish doctors who, in collaboration with Dr. Johan Eddebo, a researcher in digitalisation and human rights, are raising the alert about the Covid vaccines, which they describe as “obviously dangerous”. They say there should be an “immediate halt” to the mass vaccination pending “thorough investigations” of the true incidence and severity of adverse effects.

The true character and scope of the harm caused by the unprecedented mass vaccinations for COVID-19 is just now beginning to become clear. Leading scientific journals have finally begun publishing data corroborating what the underground research community has observed over the last two years, especially in relation to complex problems of immune suppression.

Truly concerning numbers pertaining to both births and mortality are also emerging.

At this moment in time, a new, allegedly super-infectious Omicron variant is all over the headlines. A sub-variant of XXB, this strain is said to possess immune escape capabilities of precisely the type that some independent researchers predicted would follow on the heels of the mass vaccinations’ narrow antigenic fixation.

The WHO maintains that worldwide, 10,000 people still die due to Covid every single day, an implausible death toll more than ten times that of an average flu. It reiterates the urgent need for vaccinations, especially in light of China’s reopening and allegedly falsified data on mortality and infections.

The EU has even called an emergency summit in light of the purported Chinese “Covid chaos” that “calls to mind how everything began in Wuhan, three years ago”.

In Sweden, the Minister for Health and Social Affairs has said he cannot rule out new restrictions, and states that everyone must take “their three doses”, since “only” 85% of the population is ‘fully inoculated’.

That such an extensive vaccine coverage has not yielded better results after nearly two years is a remarkable fact.

13/1/23 Japan’s Experts Baffled by High ‘Covid’ Deaths From Heart Problems Despite High Vaccination Rate

by Guy Gin

After three booster campaigns in 2022, the Japanese are now in a league of their own among mRNA consuming countries, administering far more boosters than countries that had far more coercive vaccination campaigns.

(Shows graph of rising boosters, and rising covid deaths (2 ever-increasing waves since March 2022).

Japanese over-65s have done their best to reduce Japan’s 612-million-dose stockpile of mRNA jabs, with third, fourth and fifth jab rates of 91%, 82.5%, and 56%, respectively. But unfortunately, Japan has started 2023 by reporting its highest ever daily Covid death tolls. During the booster era starting in early 2022, each wave has been noticeably higher than the last.

What could possibly explain this? Let’s ask Takaji Wakita, Chairman of Japan’s Covid Response Advisory Board: “The cause of the rise in Covid deaths is hard to explain.”

Nice to see an expert admit the limit of his knowledge. But there must be something Dr. Kamayachi can tell us, right?

Dr. Kamayachi, citing the rapid spread of Covid infections as one reason, explained that the majority of those who died were over 60 and many had underlying medical conditions. The direct cause of death is often heart failure or kidney disease, and he said that “thorough analysis is needed”.

Heart failure, you say? Well, it’s not like most Japanese over 60 have been injected multiple times with anything that causes cardiovascular problems, is it? And kidney disease is coincidentally a side-effect of Remdesivir, an approved Covid treatment in Japan.

3 Likes

“The independence of our scientific and academic institutions is threatened…”

Pretty heroic understatement there by the Swedish medics! Threatened? Loooooong gone, more like!

2 Likes

Here’s the obvious way out for the slow-to-get-it troobleevers:

3 Likes

This is very well done :smile:

1 Like

Yes, that’s very good.

And yet only this morning an old friend posted on her facebook feed that she has had her ‘jab #5’. There’s no point arguing with some people.

Hi @KarenEliot , I’m not a fan of the currrent OffGuardian site but this article seemed to fit your post:

One thought to add to that article is that where people have taken the plunge and are not able to reverse their actions they can panic and then anything can happen. I remember my first exposure to contact lenses, as soon as they were put into my eyes I almost feinted with a claustrophobic type response. I had these foreign things in my eyes and I had no idea how to take them out … help, help was the reaction. Well if you’re jabbed and you are suddenly exposed to all sorts of reactions in the jabbed community and you’re stuck with it - internal and or external reactions of panic could result.

cheers

3 Likes

Thanks @CJ1, I usually read Todd Hayen’s posts on his SubStack but went for the OffG version this time. I think what he’s describing is basically the sunken costs fallacy.

“We’ve spent £2 billion on this third runway feasibility study AND I said in Parliament we will build it, so we’re building it.”

Cause of many a multi-year IT project that is obsolete before you even start the beta tests . . .

1 Like