The UK Government have released their sixteenth report highlighting adverse reactions to both the Pfizer / BioNTech and Oxford / AstraZeneca vaccines that have occurred since the roll-out began on the 8th December 2020 and it makes for shocking reading, showing the rate of adverse reactions has increased yet again.
The U.K. Governments report (which you can find here) has collated data inputted up to the 12th May via the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme. At this point an estimated 11.7 million first doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and 23.9 million doses of the Oxford University/AstraZeneca vaccine, had been administered. As well as 9.9 million second doses of the Pfizer jab and 9 million second doses of the AstraZeneca jab. There had also been approximately 200,000 first doses of the Moderna jab administered.
You may remember the earlier report we brought you back at the beginning of February 2021 which covered the first released report by the Government highlighting adverse reactions to the Covid vaccines, using data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme up to the 24th January.
Back then there had been 5.4 million first doses of the Pfier/BioNTech jab administered and 1.5 million first doses of the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab administered, and around 0.5 million second doses administered, with most of these being the Pfizer jab.
There had at this point, up to the 24th January been 49,472 adverse reactions to the Pfizer vaccine and 21,032 adverse reactions to the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine reported to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme, with the rate of adverse reactions occurring equating to 1 in every 333 people.
Well we can confirm that in the space of just just fifteen weeks the number of adverse reactions to the Pfizer vaccine has more than doubled, increasing by 235.5% standing at a total of 165,986. However the number of adverse reactions to the AstraZeneca vaccine is astounding, increasing by a whopping 2993.77% to a total of 650,681. The frightening fact about this is that experts believe around only 1% of adverse reactions to the Covid jabs are actually reported to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.
We can also confirm that in the same time frame the rate of adverse reactions to the experimental Covid vaccines occurring has increased from 1 in every 333 people to 1 in every 142 people.
This week we decided to take a look back at the number of different adverse reactions seen in the 1st update and compare them with what the Government / MHRA have just released in the 16th update, and this is what we found…
(We used the data shown in the UK Governments Analysis Print of the Pfizer vaccine {which you can find here} + Analysis Print of the Oxford Vaccine {which you can find here}.)
In the first update which covered data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme up to the 24th January we saw how thanks to the Pfizer vaccine, which uses MRNA technology to instruct human cells to carry out “a certain task” 5 people were now blind and a further 31 had their vision impaired.
In total there were 634 eye disorders reported to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.
But fast-forward to the 16th update which covers data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme up to the 12th May 2021 and we can see that the number of people now blind thanks to the Pfizer jab has increased almost 7-fold standing at a total of 34, the number of people with impaired vision has more than quadrupled standing at a total of 139, and the total number of eye disorders has increased by 323.8% to a total of 2687.
Imagine being confined to the same four walls for over a year and not being able to see family or friends. Then getting excited because you naively think an experimental “vaccine” is going to give you your life back and allow you to see them once more. But then leaving without the ability to ever see anything ever again.
But how has the AstraZeneca jab fared in the eye disorder department?
Well in the Government’s 2nd update which covered data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme up to the 31st January 2021, we saw that a total of 8 people were left blind, 15 left visually impaired, and a grand total of 456 eye disorders had occurred as a result of the AstraZeneca jab being administered
But fast forward 15 weeks and we can see that the number of people left blind as a result of the Oxford / AstraZeneca vaccine has increased to a shocking total of 176, the number of people with impaired vision has increased by 3060% to a total of 474, and the total number of eye disorders resulting from the Oxford jab has increased by 2092% to a grand total of 9996.
Now you may be wondering what could possibly cause people to be going blind, well blood is essential to vision, and a blockage in the retina’s blood vessels can permanently affect vision and lead to blindness. This of course has nothing to do with the reasoning behind several countries around the world suspending the use of the AstraZeneca jab due to blood clot concerns does it? It also doesn’t have anything to do with the MHRA and JCVI “reccomending” under 40’s are offered a different brand of vaccine does it? Maybe we should just take a look at what the data shows us…
A cerebrovascular accident is the sudden death of some brain cells due to lack of oxygen when the blood flow to the brain is impaired by blockage or rupture of an artery to the brain. What causes a blockage? Well we’re glad you asked, the answer is blood clots.
When the Government released the 2nd report of adverse reactions to the AstraZeneca jab using data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme up to the 31st January 2021, we saw that there had been a total of 11 cerebrovascular accidents reported as adverse reactions, with 4 of these sadly resulting in death. There had also been 1 brain stem stroke, 1 haemorrhagic stroke and 1 ischaemic stroke.
But when we look at the Government’s 16th report of adverse reactions to the AstraZeneca jab using data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme up to the 12th May 2021, we can see that the list has grown extensively, as well as the number of cerebrovascular accidents.
As of the 12th May the number of cerebrovascular accidents has increased by 6272.73% in just 15 weeks to a total of 701, with 32 of these sadly resulting in death. The number of ischaemic strokes have also gone up, increasing by 8300% to a total of 84. There have also been 122 cerebral haemorrhages, 57 cerebral infarctions, 74 subarachnoid haemorrhages, and 40 intracranial haemorrhages. This is truly shocking.
But whilst they authorities have managed to have you worried by the adverse reactions to the AstraZeneca vaccine they have distracted you from the worrying number of serious adverse reactions to the Pfizer vaccine, which has also seen a shocking number of strokes.
Back in the Government’s first update using data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme up to the 24th January we saw a total number of cerebrovascular accidents reported as adverse reactions to the Pfizer vaccine resulting in 1 death, 6 ischaemic strokes resulting in 1 death, and 1 brain stem infarction resulting in 1 death among numerous others types of stroke.
But fast-forward 15 weeks to the 16th report using data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme up to the 12th May we can now see that the Pfizer vaccine has caused a total of 211 cerebrovascular accidents, an increase of 904.76%, with 12 of these resulting death. Ischaemic strokes have increased by 333.33% to a total number of 26, and the total number of cerebral haemorrhages now stands at 23, with 6 of these resulting death.
In all the Pfizer jab has caused 30,778 nervous system disorders up to the 12th May 2021, this doesn’t just include strokes. This also includes conditions such as paralysis, seizure, tremors, brain damage, and bell’s palsy – of which there have been 239 reports to the MHRA alongside 167 reports of facial paralysis.
However the AstraZeneca jab has caused a devastating amount of nervous system disorders. Up to the 12th May the MHRA received 140,409 reports of nervous system disorder adverse reactions. These include 224 cases of seizure, 45 cases of paralysis, 4 cases where a person ended up in a coma, 239 cases of Bell’s palsy.
You’re probably wondering how many deaths have been reported as adverse reactions to the Covid vaccines?
Well back in the 1st report which included data inputted up to the 24th January there were a total of 107 deaths due to the Pfizer / BioNTech vaccine.
And back in the 2nd report which included data inputted up to the 31st January there were a total of 90 deaths due to the Oxford / AstraZeneca vaccine.
Well we can confirm that according to the Government’s 16th update on adverse reactions to the Pfizer vaccine using data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme up to the 12th May, the number of deaths due to the Pfizer jab has increased by 249.53% since the 1st report to a grand total of 374.
We can also confirm that according to the Government’s 16th update on adverse reactions to the AstraZeneca vaccine using data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme up to the 12th May, the number of deaths due to the AstraZeneca jab has increased by 773.33% since the 1st report to a grand total of 786.
There have also been 4 reported deaths due to the Moderna jab and 16 deaths where the brand of vaccine was not specified. This means the total number of deaths due to the experimental Covid vaccines stands at 1,180 as of the 12th May 2021.
We can also confirm that as of the 12th May the total number of blood disorders to have occurred due to receiving one of the Covid vaccines now stands at 11,313, the total number of cardiac disorders now stands at 8,813, the total number of ear disorders now stands at 8,450, and the total number of gastrointestinal disorders now stands at 82,315. But none of these come anywhere near to the total number of nervous system disorders, which includes brain damage, facial paralysis and strokes, which now stand at 171,187. The worrying thing? These are the only numbers that have been reported to the MHRA, estimated by the MHRA to be between 1% – 10% of the real life number.
These are also just the immediate side effects of the Covid vaccines. We dread to think what adverse effects we might see in the long term.
Will you be having the “jab”?
Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
WE URGENTLY NEED YOUR HELP…
We’re not funded by the Government
to publish lies & propaganda on their
behalf like the mainstream media.
Instead, we rely solely on our support. So
please support us in our efforts to bring you
honest, reliable, investigative journalism
today. It’s secure, quick and easy…
Just choose your preferred method
to show your support below support
Categories: Breaking News, Did You Know?, Latest News, The Expose Blog, World News
A new coronavirus might be from dogsEight people hospitalized with pneumonia in Malaysia several years ago had evidence of infection with a coronavirus that might have been caught from dogs. A test designed to detect all coronaviruses — even unknown ones — picked up the genetic signature of a canine coronavirus in samples from the people. It’s the first time that a canine coronavirus — which the researchers have named CCoV-HuPn-2018 — has been found in a person with pneumonia. It is not known whether the virus caused the people’s illness, and there’s no evidence that it can pass from person to person. If it is confirmed that the virus causes disease in humans, it will be the eighth unique coronavirus known to do so; others include those that cause some common colds, and SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19.
NPR | 6 min read
Reference: Clinical Infectious Diseases paper
As above – Humans can never reach herd immunity, when the Coronavirus/Covid can switch from animals, dogs, or bats, to us and back again.
What seems surprising about this Coronavirus, or Covid-19 is that it has been ferocious from the get go, as if it has not evolved, one animal lifetime, at a time, but as if it has been engineered as a bio-weapon, where an animal is injected with a virus and then when that animal is almost dead, the “new” virus from that animal, is put into another animal and so on, through many animals – speeding up the evolution of the virus into a disease which potentially could do to humans, what this Coronavirus/Covid has managed to do.
I was also interested to see that the American Government has been funding (US$60,000 was mentioned) the Wuhan Bio-lab for years, because they can do things in their bio-lab, which are totally unacceptable practices in the Western World and apparently the American Government has recently passed an act to “defund” the Wuhan Bio-Lab, to cut that funding -which is weird for the American Government to do, to a Chinese Bio-lab, working in Communist China, no less, where its politics are not American centered, but Communist Chinese..
When you remember that China has its own internal economy which easily underwrites Western Currencies, where for example US$1 might be one weeks Chinese pay – that US$60,000 might translate into 60,000 weeks of paid, Bio-Lab work and if payments have been ongoing for years, then US$60,000 would be a drop in the ocean, of what has been paid there, by the American Taxpayer, on behalf of their Government and what science “advantages” the American Government has gained from that experience..
Are you living in the 80’s? China is now 5x if not 10x more advance than the state and it has higher standard of living than the state too. $1 equal to one week pay? Dream on, their basic salary for freshgrad is $1k at least, let alone the scientist working in the lab with higher qualification. Open your eyes and see the real world, not just from an old fashioned outdated American point of view.
New guidance from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is making employers think twice about their COVID vaccine requirements.
On April 20, companies were put on notice they’ll be responsible for any adverse reaction should they require their employees be vaccinated with a COVID vaccine.
In the Frequently Asked Questions section of OSHA’s website having to do with COVID safety compliance, a question was asked whether an adverse reaction to a COVID vaccine had to be recorded if an employer mandated vaccination as a condition for employment.
Me: Passing the buck!!
Richard
I can’t see that question in the FAQs. I see below you have given a lot of useful information and often state “Link Copied” but there are no links. Are these links being removed?
Pfizer, Moderna CEOs: COVID-19 Vaccine Boosters Could Be Needed as Early as September
Spectrum News reported:
The earliest people to be vaccinated for COVID-19 may need booster shots as early as September, the CEOs of Pfizer and Moderna said.
In an interview with Axios on Wednesday, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla stressed that the company is still awaiting data from clinical trials, but he believes people will need an additional dose between eight and 12 months after receiving their second shot
Bourla added that the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would have to sign off on the boosters.
Me: Like we are Mid May now and September is 4 months away – variants must be overpowering test vaccines a lot quicker than was expected – 5.5 months since 8th December 2020.
Do my free, salt water sniffle and stay safe.
I am but one person. Pass my salt water cure around to everyone who you know and get them to pass it on to everyone they know and spread the word, far and wide.
Richard
Richard pls tell me how to do the salt water cure thankyou
Josephine, we’re sure you’ll find it within the comments of every single article we publish
SIGN THE PETITION: CHD Calls on FDA to Immediately Take COVID Vaccines Off the Market
Amid growing safety concerns, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Dr. Meryl Nass, on behalf of Children’s Health Defense (CHD), filed a Citizen Petition with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) asking the agency to immediately revoke the Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) for COVID vaccines and to refrain from licensing them.
Millions Against Medical Mandates (MAMM), a coalition of health freedom organizations and individuals, joins CHD and other vaccine safety and health freedom groups in inviting the public to comment on the petition here.
Richard
WRTV reported:
Brendon Hrepic says he is still shocked that COVID-19 caught up with him when WEWS spoke with him via Zoom from his hospital bed.
“The doctor that I saw at the ER was like ‘you are literally the worse case that I’ve ever seen post-vaccination,’” said Hrepic.
The 31-year-old essential worker from Mayfield Heights said he did everything right throughout the pandemic, from social distancing to masking up.
According to the vaccination card he shared with News 5 Cleveland, Hrepic has been fully vaccinated since April 19. But the man said last Wednesday his health began to take a turn.
Richard
Amid growing safety concerns, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Dr. Meryl Nass, on behalf of Children’s Health Defense (CHD), filed a Citizen Petition with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) asking the agency to immediately revoke the Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) for COVID vaccines and to refrain from licensing them.
Millions Against Medical Mandates (MAMM), a coalition of health freedom organizations and individuals, joins CHD and other vaccine safety and health freedom groups in inviting the public, including healthcare workers, parents and military members, to submit comments on the petition.
CHD compiled and submitted 72 references supporting the request for revocation and restraint. You can download the petition from the FDA website, or read the full petition here.
According to the most recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System data, there have been 192,954 reported adverse events following COVID vaccination, including 4,057 deaths between Dec. 14, 2020 and May 7, 2021.
These numbers stand in stark contrast to those reported following the aborted 1976 swine flu vaccine campaign that ended abruptly following approximately 30 reported deaths and 400 cases of Guillain–Barré syndrome.
Citing the extremely low risk to children from COVID, the petition calls on the FDA to immediately refrain from allowing minors to participate in COVID vaccine trials and to immediately revoke all EUAs permitting vaccination of children under 18.
“It’s time for the FDA to make a dramatic course correction before more deaths and injuries occur,” said Maureen McDonnell, MAMM founder.
CHD Calls on FDA to Take COVID Vaccines Off the Market – Sign the Petition
The petition also urges the FDA to revoke its tacit approval for pregnant women to receive COVID vaccines.
The law stipulates that to grant EUA status, no other effective intervention may exist. The petition calls upon the FDA to immediately amend its existing guidance for the use of chloroquine drugs, ivermectin and any other safe and effective drugs against COVID.
“It’s time for the FDA to make effective COVID treatments available and to revoke the vaccine EUAs,” said CHD President and General Counsel Mary Holland. “It’s shocking that the FDA has ignored the unprecedented reports of injuries and deaths for five months.”
CHD and MAMM are asking the FDA to take these seven actions:
FDA should revoke all EUAs and refrain from approving any future EUA, NDA [new drug application] or BLA [biologics license application] for any COVID vaccine for all demographic groups because the current risks of serious adverse events or deaths outweigh the benefits, and because existing, approved drugs provide highly effective prophylaxis and treatment against COVID, mooting the EUAs.
Given the extremely low risk of severe COVID illness in children, FDA should immediately refrain from allowing minors to participate in COVID vaccine trials, refrain from amending EUAs to include children, and immediately revoke all EUAs that permit vaccination of children under 16 for the Pfizer vaccine and under 18 for other COVID vaccines.
FDA should immediately revoke tacit approval that pregnant women may receive any EUA or licensed COVID vaccines and immediately issue public guidance to that effect.
FDA should immediately amend its existing guidance for the use of the chloroquine drugs, ivermectin and any other drugs demonstrated to be safe and effective against COVID, to comport with current scientific evidence of safety and efficacy at currently used doses and immediately issue notifications to all stakeholders of this change.
The FDA should issue guidance to the secretary of the defense and the president not to grant an unprecedented presidential waiver of prior consent regarding COVID vaccines for service members under 10 U.S.C. § 1107(f) or 10 U.S.C. § 1107a.
The FDA should issue guidance to all stakeholders in digital and written formats to affirm that all citizens have the option to accept or refuse administration of investigational COVID vaccines without adverse work, educational or other non-health related consequences, under 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3(e)(1)(a)(ii)(III) 1 and the informed consent requirements of the Nuremberg Code.
Pending revocation of COVID vaccine EUAs, FDA should issue guidance that all marketing and promotion of COVID vaccines must refrain from labeling them “safe and effective,” as such statements violate 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3.
The petition is available for review and comment. CHD urges parents, healthcare practitioners, military members and others to comment and to share the comment link with friends and colleagues.
Richard
05/20/21
•
Big Pharma › News
Employers May Be Held Liable for ‘Any Adverse Reaction’ if They Mandate COVID Vaccines
New OSHA guidance holds employers liable for adverse reactions if they require employees be vaccinated for COVID as a condition of employment, which could negatively impact the employer’s safety rating.
By
Megan Redshaw
Link copied
New guidance from OSHA is making employers think twice about their COVID vaccine requirements.
The Defender is experiencing censorship on many social channels. Be sure to stay in touch with the news that matters by subscribing to our top news of the day. It’s free.
New guidance from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is making employers think twice about their COVID vaccine requirements.
On April 20, companies were put on notice they’ll be responsible for any adverse reaction should they require their employees be vaccinated with a COVID vaccine.
In the Frequently Asked Questions section of OSHA’s website having to do with COVID safety compliance, a question was asked whether an adverse reaction to a COVID vaccine had to be recorded if an employer mandated vaccination as a condition for employment.
OSHA stated:
“If you require your employees to be vaccinated as a condition of employment (i.e., for work-related reasons), then any adverse reaction to the COVID-19 vaccine is work-related. The adverse reaction is recordable if it is a new case under 29 CFR 1904.6 and meets one or more of the general recording criteria in 29 CFR 1904.7.”
In general, an adverse reaction to the COVID vaccine is recordable if the reaction is: (1) work-related, (2) a new case and (3) meets one or more of the general recording criteria in 29 CFR 1904.7 (e.g., days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid).
According to OSHA, recording requirements of serious work-related injuries and illness may leave employers with worker’s compensation claims and impact their safety record.
Conversely, OSHA states it will exercise enforcement discretion and will not require adverse reactions be recorded when an employer only “recommends” that employees receive the vaccine, while noting that for this discretion to apply, the vaccine must be truly voluntary.
In determining whether a vaccine is “voluntary,” the website states, “an employee’s choice to accept or reject the vaccine cannot affect [his or her] performance rating or professional advancement,” and that an “employee who chooses not to receive the vaccine cannot suffer any repercussions from this choice.”
If employees are not free to choose whether or not to receive the vaccine without fearing negative recourse, then the vaccine is required and employers should refer to the section on COVID vaccines as a condition to employment.
In response to the news that COVID vaccine adverse reactions suffered by workers are reportable incidents, or incidents that count against a company’s safety record, several large contractors said they have changed or will change their vaccination policy to only recommend — not require — a vaccine.
CHD Calls on FDA to Take COVID Vaccines Off the Market – Sign the Petition
Construction firm Clayco stepped back from a previously announced firmwide vaccine mandate in response to the recent federal guideline.
“We, sadly, had to back off our [employee vaccination] mandate because OSHA did something I don’t understand at all,” said Bob Clark, founder and executive chairman of Clayco in a recent ENR Critical Path podcast. “I side with OSHA frequently, we’re in its VIP program, but on this they’re just wrong. It’s a terrible decision they’ve made and I think it’ll be overturned.”
“What they put forward could potentially discourage employers from supporting their workers getting the vaccine,” said Kevin Cannon, senior director of safety and health services at the Associated General Contractors of America (ACG).
ACG is not in support of any vaccine mandate, however the company participated in vaccine awareness week in April and hosted vaccine clinics on an active job site and in its offices.
Cannon said some contractors may have changed their approach to those events had they known, at the time, they could potentially “be on the hook for recording these potential adverse reactions.”
All businesses and institutions will be very reluctant to mandate vaccinations if OSHA says adverse reactions count as reportable against a company’s “experience modification rate.” It’s honestly ridiculous, Clark said.
An experience modification rate, or EMR, is a safety rating insurers use in calculating workers’ compensation. Part of the calculation includes reportable incidents — a higher number of reportable incidents damages the company’s safety ratings and could hike up the price of insurance, St. Louis Business Journal reported.
Clark noted that Clayco wants to set an example and plans to challenge the guidance through lobbying and outreach to senators, and it’s not alone in that effort. The company also will continue to strongly encourage employees to get vaccinated, log which employees do and are considering “vaccinated only” areas within its workspace.
According to the National Law Review, employers may want to make it clear in communications to employees whether COVID vaccines are required or voluntary.
Employers may also consider circumstances in which OSHA will investigate an employer’s recordkeeping practices. If an employer’s vaccination program is voluntary, an employer may not have any entries resulting from adverse reactions. Under those circumstances, OSHA will have to ask the employer about the vaccination program and whether any employee suffered an adverse reaction.
Employees may be more likely to make a complaint to OSHA when they have been denied time off for an illness that they consider to be work-related, which means post-vaccination paid time off may be helpful.
Although OSHA is facing scrutiny for its guidance, it is consistent with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), which requires any product with this designation to be voluntary. Currently, Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson are only approved for emergency use.
This was reiterated in August 2020 at a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, where its executive secretary, Dr. Amanda Cohn, stated:
“I just wanted to add that, just wanted to remind everybody, that under an Emergency Use Authorization, an EUA, vaccines are not allowed to be mandatory. So, early in this vaccination phase, individuals will have to be consented and they won’t be able to be mandated.”
richard
05/20/21
•
› News
J&J Vaccine Producer Drilled at House Hearing on Botched Vaccine Doses, Lavish Executive Bonuses, Stock Sales
A House panel investigation revealed taxpayers paid Johnson & Johnson vaccine manufacturer, Emergent Biosolutions, $271 million under vaccine contracts despite “serious deficiencies” at the Baltimore plant.
By
Megan Redshaw
Link copied
Company executives reaped a windfall as vaccines were destroyed.
Johnson & Johnson (J&J) documented serious contamination risks at a troubled Emergent Biosolutions Baltimore plant in June 2020 — seven months before a contamination incident ruined 15 million doses of COVID vaccine and derailed the company’s vaccine production plans.
The House Select Committee on Coronavirus launched a probe into Emergent last month after the company acknowledged “serious deficiencies” in the company’s manufacturing that caused a mix-up of AstraZeneca and J&J doses.
A memorandum released prior to Wednesday’s hearing raised questions about J&J’s lack of oversight of the Baltimore facility. The memo also cited large bonuses paid to top executives despite failures, and described other evidence recently obtained by the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis and the Committee on Oversight and Reform in their ongoing investigation into Emergent.
The memo revealed:
Emergent was paid millions despite destroying millions of vaccine doses. The company charged the federal government $26 million per month in reservation fees to maintain its “readiness” to manufacture vaccines pursuant to “current good manufacturing practices.” As a result of these contract terms, taxpayers paid Emergent more than $271 million.
New documents from two separate inspections performed in June 2020 showed Emergent was warned it needed “extensive training of personnel” and “strengthening of the quality function,” and that it had a “deficient” virus contamination control strategy. Despite concerns raised during four other inspections in 2020, Emergent failed to promptly and fully remediate the problems at the facility.
Emergent privately admitted to manufacturing problems during an April 2021 inspection by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
A key official who awarded contracts had previously been on Emergent’s payroll. Dr. Robert Kadlec, former consultant to Emergent, received at least $360,000 in consulting fees prior to joining the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Kadlec awarded Emergent billions in contracts.
Company executives reaped a windfall as vaccines were destroyed. In February, — eight months after J&J documented serious contamination risks at the production plant — Emergent awarded millions in raises and bonuses to its senior executives, praising them for their “exceptional leadership” and “exemplary” performance in 2020. The vice president responsible for manufacturing received a “special bonus award” of $100,000 for significant contract development and manufacturing and in recognition of his exceptional performance in 2020.
The House report also documented in detail Emergent’s persistent problems with contamination, unsanitary conditions, mold, poor training, improper equipment and insufficient attention to procedures.
While Emergent received much of the blame for the manufacturing crisis, documents showed J&J was aware of serious risks of contamination at the Bayview Baltimore plant. A report from a virtual audit conducted in June 2020, cited mold, inadequate growing and wipe-down procedures, and “deficient” contamination-control measures.
“The site virus-contamination control strategy is deficient,” the J&J audit report said. “There is not a formal Bayview contamination control strategy for the site.”
J&J did not comment on its audit and did not respond to The Washington Post’s questions about what steps the company took after its findings.
CHD Calls on FDA to Take COVID Vaccines Off the Market – Sign the Petition
The recent contamination incident at the Baltimore plant is not the first time Emergent has had to answer questions about its quality control.
ABC News previously reported on Emergent’s quality control issues at multiple locations, itemized in federal inspection reports over the course of more than a decade. Issues included leaks and cracks in critical equipment, mold, peeling paint, stained ceiling tiles, inadequate personnel training and IT infrastructures left vulnerable to data compromise, which were observed by investigators on site and flagged for immediate fixing.
The New York Times previously disclosed J&J’s negative findings from the June 2020 audit, but the full document released by the committee contained previously unreported details.
At Wednesday’s hearing, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) questioned Robert Kramer, president and CEO of Emergent, about his stock sales and suspicious timing in relation to the company’s vaccine problems. Between Jan. 15 and Feb. 8, Kramer made a series of stock transactions netting him more than $7.6 million. The transactions occurred just prior to revelations of the firm’s troubles, which promptly sent the company’s stock value tumbling.
“That makes me think you were more interested in enriching yourself than serving the public,” Maloney said. Kramer responded that all of his stock sales “were made pursuant to a plan that was approved by the company.”
According to the memo, Emergent’s compensation committee awarded Kramer a cash bonus of $1,225,020 in recognition of his performance in 2020 — on top of a base salary of $875,014 and $4.1 million in stock awards and options issued earlier in the year. The committee also approved a 2021 compensation package for Kramer of $7.8 million.
Emergent suspended production of the vaccine at the plant on April 19, at the request of the FDA, and still lacks certification necessary to resume. Vaccine production is expected to begin later this year with Merck.
J&J has history of misleading the public
J&J has a history of misleading the public with a long rap sheet spanning more than three decades.
In 2011, J&J was charged by the U.S. Department of Justice with conspiracy for paying off Greek doctors to advance its product sales. The Securities and Exchange Commission also charged civil complaints.
In 2010, the company paid out a $70 million penalty for buying off officials in Greece, Poland and Romania. An executive for J&J’s subsidiary, DePuy, was sentenced to a year in prison for corrupt payments to physicians within the Greek national healthcare system.
In 2013, J&J paid nearly $2.5 billion to compensate 8,000 recipients for its flawed hip implants. In 2016, another $1 billion was awarded to plaintiffs injured from this device.
When its Motrin IB caplets were discovered to not properly dissolve, J&J hired outside contractors to buy up store supplies in order to cover it up. It took a Congressional investigation to expose the deception.
In the 1990’s, J&J was fined $7.5 million for destroying documents in an effort to cover up an investigation into wrongful marketing of its Retin-A acne cream to remove wrinkles. It also paid out a settlement regarding false claims over condom protection against HIV and other STDs.
In 2001, J&J paid out $860 million in a class action lawsuit for misleading customers about prematurely discarding its 1-Day Acuvue soft contact lens.
In 2010 the company paid an $81 million settlement for misbranding its anti-epileptic drug Topamax to treat psychiatric disorders and hiring outside physicians to join its sales force to promote the drug for unapproved conditions. The following year, J&J paid $85 million for similar charges against its heart drug Natrecor.
In 2011, it was discovered that several J&J baby products contained carcinogenic ingredients. In 2013, the US Justice Department charged the company $2.2 billion in criminal fines for marketing its autism and antipsychotic drug Risperdal for unapproved uses.
In October 2019, a Philadelphia jury awarded a man $8 billion in punitive damages for failing to warn that the drug could cause young men to grow breasts. Other suits include litigation over its blood thinner Xarelto risks of internal bleeding, and a $775 million settlement to 25,000 plaintiffs.
In 2016, two women were awarded $127 million in damages for ovarian cancer linked to talc in J&J’s baby powder. J&J knew for decades asbestos lurked in its baby powder, reported Reuters. Over 14,000 lawsuits were brought against the company over the talcum-cancer risk.
More recently, J&J was ordered to pay out more than $4 billion for its role in the nation’s opioid epidemic.
Richard
Geneva Convention
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL No 7070 Volume 313: Page 1448,
7 December 1996.
Introduction
The judgment by the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg laid down 10 standards to
which physicians must conform when carrying out experiments on human subjects in
a new code that is now accepted worldwide.
This judgment established a new standard of ethical medical behaviour for the post
World War II human rights era. Amongst other requirements, this document
enunciates the requirement of voluntary informed consent of the human subject. The
principle of voluntary informed consent protects the right of the individual to control
his own body.
This code also recognizes that the risk must be weighed against the expected
benefit, and that unnecessary pain and suffering must be avoided.
This code recognizes that doctors should avoid actions that injure human patients.
The principles established by this code for medical practice now have been extended
into general codes of medical ethics.
The Nuremberg Code (1947)
Permissible Medical Experiments
The great weight of the evidence before us to effect that certain types of medical
experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds,
conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the
practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such
experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other
methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must
be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:
1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This
means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent;
should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without
the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching,
or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient
knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved
as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This
latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision
by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature,
duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is
to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected;
and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his
participation in the experiment.
The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests
upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is
a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with
impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of
society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random
and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal
experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other
problem under study that the anticipated results justify the performance of the
experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical
and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to
believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those
experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the
humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to
protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury,
disability or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons.
The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of
the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to
bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state
where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10.During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared
to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe,
in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required
of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury,
disability, or death to the experimental subject.
For more information see Nuremberg Doctor’s Trial, BMJ 1996;313(7070):1445-75.
Test vaccines don’t match the above requirements, do they?
See that bit about informed consent?
Richard
NOTICE FOR EMPLOYERS, UNIVERSITIES AND OTHER INSTITUTIONS
MANDATING COVID-19 VACCINES
April 26, 2021
This serves as notice that the requirement for any individual to be vaccinated
against COVID-19 for employment or participation at a university or other
institution violates federal law. All COVID-19 vaccines are merely authorized, not
approved or licensed, by the federal government; they are Emergency Use
Authorization (EUA) only. They merely “may be effective.” Federal law states:
Title 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I-III) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act states:
individuals to whom the product is administered are informed—
(I) that the Secretary has authorized the emergency use of the product;
(II) of the significant known and potential benefits and risks of such use, and
of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown; and
(III) of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the
consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the
alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.
EUA products are by definition experimental and thus require the right to refuse.
Under the Nuremberg Code, the foundation of ethical medicine, no one may be
coerced to participate in a medical experiment. Consent of the individual is
“absolutely essential.” A federal court held that the U.S. military could not mandate
EUA vaccines to soldiers. Doe #1 v. Rumsfeld, 297 F.Supp.2d 119 (2003). The court
held: “…the United States cannot demand that members of the armed forces also
serve as guinea pigs for experimental drugs.” Id. at 135. No court has ever upheld a
mandate for an EUA vaccine.
The liability for forced participation in a medical experiment, including injury or
death, may be incalculable. Medical and religious exemptions will be insufficient to
overcome the illegality of EUA vaccine mandates. Children’s Health Defense urges
U.S. employers, universities and other institutions to respect and uphold the rights
of individuals to refuse EUA COVID-19 vaccines.
Children’s Health Defense
Richard
May 16, 2021
Division of Dockets Management
Department of Health and Human Services
Food and Drug Administration
Acting Commissioner Janet Woodcock, M.D.
5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061
Rockville, MD 20852
Dear Acting Commissioner Woodcock:
Enclosed is a Citizen Petition filed on behalf of Children’s Health Defense by Meryl
Nass, M.D., Scientific Advisory Board member, and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Board Chair and
Chief Litigation Counsel, requesting that the FDA revoke Emergency Use Authorizations for
existing COVID vaccines and refrain from approving and licensing them.
Dr. Nass and Mr. Kennedy look forward to your timely review of this petition. They are
available to answer questions and to provide any additional relevant information.
Sincerely yours,
Mary Holland
President and General Counsel
(845) 445-7807
mary.holland@childrenshealthdefense.org
Richard
Stop begging.
What a load of scaremongering tosh people going blind people dying etc etc etc many of these events would have happened reguardless the fact that the country is in the process of mass vacinations (which has never happened before) another case of selective journalism you should ally yourselves with the Bias Broadcasting Company.
I presume you have got the shot???… maybe having a niggling doubt in your head now??… good luck…your going to need it
Punctuation is your friend! You should learn about it.
[…] DAILY EXPOSE ON MAY 20, 2021 Listen […]
Has the flu bug been isolated yet ?
[…] There have also been 822,845 adverse reactions to the Covid vaccines in the UK alongside 1,180 unnecessary deaths, you can read our latest analysis of the UK report here. […]
[…] https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/05/20/frightening-16th-update-on-adverse-reactions-to-covid-vaccines-… […]
[…] There have also been 822,845 adverse reactions to the Covid vaccines in the UK alongside 1,180 unnecessary deaths, you can read our latest analysis of the UK report here. […]
[…] allowing the virus to infect our bodies. Likewise, research within the scientific community also reveals various cardiovascular and heart problems, bleeding, and clotting when studying the disease in humans. That same research also establishes […]
[…] the virus to infect our bodies. Likewise, research within the scientific community also reveals various cardiovascular and heart problems, bleeding, and clotting when studying the disease in humans. That same research also establishes […]
[…] the virus to infect our bodies. Likewise, research within the scientific community also reveals various cardiovascular and heart problems, bleeding, and clotting when studying the disease in humans. That same research also establishes […]
[…] allowing the virus to infect our bodies. Likewise, research within the scientific community also reveals various cardiovascular and heart problems, bleeding, and clotting when studying the disease in humans. That same research also establishes […]
[…] virus to infect our bodies. Likewise, research within the scientific community also reveals various cardiovascular and heart problems, bleeding, and clotting when studying the disease in humans. That same research also establishes […]
[…] allowing the virus to infect our bodies. Likewise, research within the scientific community also reveals various cardiovascular and heart problems, bleeding, and clotting when studying the disease in humans. That same research also establishes […]
my daughter is having a reaction and im scared
It seems there is an error in :
Well we can confirm that in the space of just just fifteen weeks the number of adverse reactions to the Pfizer vaccine has more than doubled, increasing by 235.5% standing at a total of 165,986.
which should be apparently :
Well we can confirm that in the space of just just fifteen weeks the number of adverse reactions to the Pfizer vaccine has more than tripled, increasing by 335.5% standing at a total of 165,986.