Pfizer Admits Vaccine Does Not Prevent COVID

Analysis by Dr. Meryl Nass

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• Public health officials have said over and over that they do not know if COVID-19 vaccines prevent spread
• Pfizer did not test human subjects to see if those vaccinated could get and spread the infection, but when they tested primates, vaccinated animals still got COVID-19 despite being vaccinated
• Both the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are made from messenger RNA and lipid nanoparticles containing polyethylene glycol (PEG); no vaccines made from messenger RNA nor this type of lipid nanoparticles have ever been used in humans; we have no idea about their long-term side effects
• No one knows how long “immunity” lasts from COVID-19 vaccines, if in fact the vaccines do provide some degree of immunity — should it be called immunity if you can still catch and spread the virus?
• This is a document designed to force EMTs to take the vaccine by using false information and veiled threats; when a product is good for you, there is no need to scare or threaten people into taking it

People have asked why I was not blogging about the Covid vaccines. To be honest, I felt there was not enough information for me to be decisive, and I was waiting for more information to become available. However, someone called me and told me about a lot of allergic reactions, including one anaphylactic reaction, at a local hospital after 30 doses were given. Staff were instructed to keep this quiet.

Then I watched a nine-minute Ben Swann video1 about the vaccines, in which he read the “declination form” that must be signed by EMTs in Maine who refuse the vaccine. It contained false and misleading statements, and I realized I should no longer delay discussing what I know about the vaccines.

1.Both the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are made from messenger RNA and lipid nanoparticles containing polyethylene glycol (PEG).

a.Messenger RNA (or any RNA) can potentially be converted to DNA in the presence of reverse transcriptase. That DNA potentially, or bits of it, could become linked to your native DNA.

While I have no idea how likely this is, I began to take the possibility seriously only after two members of FDA’s advisory committee (the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, or VRBPAC) asked about it during their meeting to approve the Pfizer vaccine on December 10.2

I watched the entire meeting and took copious notes. Virologists tell us that much of our DNA is, in fact, originally viral DNA that found its way into ours.3 I now consider the potential for vaccine RNA to be converted to DNA and permanently inserted in my DNA a remote possibility — but one that I would like proven wrong before being vaccinated.

b.70% of Americans have pre-existing antibodies to PEG. FDA suspects that these PEG antibodies may be the cause of anaphylaxis post vaccination. The U.K. recommends against people with severe allergic conditions receiving the mRNA vaccines.

The CDC, however, recommends people receive it regardless of their allergy history, only asking that those with severe allergies wait an additional 15 minutes (total of 30 minutes) in the clinic in case they need to be resuscitated.

Anaphylaxis is occurring at about 1 in 45,000 doses,4 or 17 times the rate CDC has determined it occurs after other vaccines (1.3 episodes per million vaccinations5). Therefore, getting the shot in a drugstore or anywhere that trained physicians are not close by to perform a resuscitation seems like a bad idea.

According to the American College of Allergy, “The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine should be administered in a health care setting where anaphylaxis can be treated.”6 California has temporarily halted use of a lot of Moderna’s vaccine due to a high rate of anaphylaxis.7

2.No vaccines made from messenger RNA nor this type of lipid nanoparticles have ever been used in humans. We have no idea about their long-term side effects. The clinical trials followed subjects for only two months after two doses of vaccine at the time the vaccines were authorized for use.

3.Neither the Moderna nor the Pfizer trial enrolled many frail elderly subjects. Since both vaccines entered general use less than one month ago, we have heard tales of nursing home residents catching Covid or dying in higher numbers after receiving the vaccines.

But we do not know if this is a random event or a reaction to vaccination, since reliable data are not yet available. The elderly often fail to mount an immune response to a vaccine; if this is the case, they should not receive the vaccine, because they will be subject to the side effects without the benefit.

UPDATE: Norway has recorded 23 deaths after the vaccinations. Thirteen have been investigated, autopsied and occurred in the frail elderly. Norway has now decided to recommend the obvious: “‘If you are very frail, you should probably not be vaccinated,’ Steinar Madsen at the Norwegian Medicines Agency said at a webinar on corona vaccine for journalists …”8

On January 15 from Bloomberg, “Norway said Covid-19 vaccines may be too risky for the very old and terminally ill, the most cautious statement yet from a European health authority as countries assess the real-world side effects of the first shots to gain approval.”9

Public health officials have said over and over that they do not know if the vaccines prevent spread. Pfizer’s lead representative to the VRBPAC meeting, Kathrin Jansen, Ph.D., said that Pfizer did not test human subjects to see if those vaccinated could get and spread the infection.

But Jansen admitted that Pfizer did test primates — and found that vaccinated monkeys did get Covid infections despite being vaccinated. Their duration of infection was shorter than in the unvaccinated monkeys.10

You can watch Jansen first claim that primates did not get infection in the lung but then admit they did get infections, of shorter duration than unvaccinated primates — at 7 hours 30 minutes into the meeting.11 By the way, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin do exactly the same thing — reduce duration of viral carriage — as shown in a new review article by Didier Raoult.12

Are the data from the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials reliable, especially the claim that both yield 95% efficacy?

a. Members of the VRBPAC advisory committee wanted more information. Two of them asked to be given the results between November 14 (the date the data collection ended) and December 10 (the date of the meeting). Separately, at two different times, both FDA and Pfizer refused to provide this to the committee.

b. There were relatively few Covid-19 cases in Pfizer’s trial (under 200) despite 40,000 enrollees. Peter Doshi, blogging for the British Medical journal,13 noted that 20 times as many subjects had Covid-like symptoms as those who were diagnosed positive using PCR tests, but the much larger group had negative PCR tests.

We now know there are large numbers of false positives and negatives with PCR tests. Cycle threshold information was not supplied. No sequencing was done to assure that PCR positive individuals actually had Covid. I don’t trust these data.

c. Both Moderna and Pfizer provided rudimentary information to the FDA to apply for Emergency Use Authorizations14 — much less than is required to issue a vaccine license, according to US law15 — despite what Drs. Stephen Hahn and Peter Marks at FDA may have claimed to sooth the public.

d. FDA made the incomprehensible decision to NOT perform inspections of the manufacturing facilities of the Covid vaccine manufacturers.16 What did FDA not want to find? FDA misled its advisory committee by claiming to have reviewed all the manufacturing paperwork supplied to it. That is a far cry from inspecting the facility…