10 Reasons I won’t take the jab.
Aug 8, 2021 08:20:19 #
I believe this guy is right in point.
By Christian Elliot
#1: V*****E MAKERS ARE IMMUNE FROM LIABILITY
The only industry in the world that bears no liability for injuries or deaths resulting from their products, are v*****e makers.
First established in 1986 with the National Childhood V*****e Injury Act, and reinforced by the PREP Act, v*****e makers cannot be sued, even if they are shown to be negligent.
The c***d-v*****e makers are allowed to create a one-size-fits-all product, with no testing on sub-populations (i.e. people with specific health conditions), and yet they are unwilling to accept any responsibility for any a*****e e***ts or deaths their products cause.
If a company is not willing to stand behind their product as safe, especially one they rushed to market and skipped animal trials on, I am not willing to take a chance on their product.
No liability. No trust.
Here’s why…
#2: THE CHECKERED PAST OF THE V*****E COMPANIES
The four major companies who are making these c***d v*****es are/have either:
Never brought a v*****e to market before c***d (M*****a and Johnson & Johnson).
Are serial felons (P****r, and Astra Zeneca).
Are both (Johnson & Johnson).
M*****a had been trying to “Modernize our RNA” (thus the company name)–for years, but had never successfully brought ANY product to market–how nice for them to get a major cash infusion from the government to keep trying.
In fact, all major v*****e makers (save M*****a) have paid out tens of billions of dollars in damages for other products they brought to market when they knew those products would cause injuries and death–see Vioxx, Bextra, Celebrex, Thalidomide, and Opioids as a few examples.
If drug companies willfully choose to put harmful products in the market, when they can be sued, why would we trust any product where they have NO liability?
In case it hasn’t sunk in, let me reiterate…3 of the 4 c***d v*****e makers have been sued for products they brought to market even though they knew injuries and deaths would result.
Johnson & Johnson has lost major lawsuits in 1995, 1996, 2001, 2010, 2011, 2016, 2019 (For what it’s worth, J&J’s v*****e also contains tissues from aborted fetal cells, perhaps a topic for another discussion)
P****r has the distinction of the biggest criminal payout in history. They have lost so many lawsuits it’s hard to count. You can check out their rap sheet here. Maybe that’s why they are demanding that countries where they don’t have liability protection put up collateral to cover v*****e-injury lawsuits.
Astra Zeneca has similarly lost so many lawsuits it’s hard to count. Here’s one. Here’s another…you get the point. And in case you missed it, the company had their c***d v*****e suspended in at least 18 countries over concerns of blood clots, and they completely botched their meeting with the FDA with numbers from their study that didn’t match.
Oh, and apparently J&J (whose v*****e is approved for “Emergency Use” in the US) and Astrazenca (whose v*****e is not approved for “Emergency Use” in the US), had a little mix up in their ingredients…in 15 million doses. Oops.
Let me reiterate this point:
Given the free pass from liability, and the checkered past of these companies, why would we assume that all their v*****es are safe and made completely above board?
Where else in life would we trust someone with that kind of reputation?
To me that makes as much sense as expecting a remorseless, abusive, unfaithful lover to become a different person because a judge said deep down they are a good person.
No. I don’t trust them.
No liability. No trust.
Here’s another reason why I don’t trust them.
#3: THE UGLY HISTORY OF ATTEMPTS TO MAKE C****AV***S V*****ES
There have been many attempts to make v***l v*****es in the past that ended in utter failure, which is why we did not have a c****av***s v*****e in 2020.
In the 1960’s, scientists attempted to make an RSV (Respiratory Syncytial V***s) v*****e for infants.
In that study, they skipped animal trials because they weren’t necessary back then.
In the end, the v******ted infants got much sicker than the unv******ted infants when exposed to the v***s in nature, with 80% of the v******ted infants requiring hospitalization, and two of them died.
After 2000, scientists made many attempts to create c****av***s v*****es.
For the past 20 years, all ended in failure because the animals in the clinical trials got very sick and many died, just like the children in the 1960’s.
You can read a summary of this history/science here.
Or if you want to read the individual studies you can check out these links:
In 2004 attempted v*****e produced hepatitis in ferrets
In 2005 mice and civets became sick and more susceptible to c****av***ses after being v******ted
In 2012 the ferrets became sick and died. And in this study mice and ferrets developed lung disease.
In 2016 this study also produce lung disease in mice.
The typical pattern in the studies mentioned above is that the children and the animals produced beautiful antibody responses after being v******ted.
The manufacturers thought they hit the jackpot.
The problem came when the children and animals were exposed to the wild version of the v***s.
When that happened, an unexplained phenomenon called Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE) also known as V*****e Enhanced Disease (VED) occurred where the i****e s****m produced a “cytokine storm” (i.e. overwhelmingly attacked the body), and the children/animals died.
Here’s the lingering issue…
The v*****e makers have no data to suggest their rushed v*****es have overcome that problem.
In other words, never before has any attempt to make a c****av***s v*****e been successful, nor has the gene-therapy technology that is m**A “v*****es” been safely brought to market, but hey, since they had billions of dollars in government funding, I’m sure they figured that out.
Except they don’t know if they have…
#4: THE “DATA GAPS” SUBMITTED TO THE FDA BY THE V*****E MAKERS
When v*****e makers submitted their papers to the FDA for the E*******y Use A***********n (Note: An EUA is not the same as a full FDA approval), among the many “Data Gaps” they reported was that they have nothing in their trials to suggest they overcame that pesky problem of V*****e Enhanced Disease.
They simply don’t know–i.e. they have no idea if the v*****es they’ve made will also produce the same cytokine storm (and deaths) as previous attempts at such products.
As Joseph Mercola points out…
“Previous attempts to develop an m**A-based drug using lipid nanoparticles failed and had to be abandoned because when the dose was too low, the drug had no effect, and when dosed too high, the drug became too toxic. An obvious question is: What has changed that now makes this technology safe enough for mass use?”
If that’s not alarming enough, here are other gaps in the data–i.e. there is no data to suggest safety or efficacy regarding:
Anyone younger than age 18 or older than age 55
Pregnant or lactating mothers
Auto-immune conditions
Immunoc*********d individuals
No data on t***smission of c***d
No data on preventing mortality from c***d
No data on duration of protection from c***d
Hard to believe right?
In case you think I’m making this up, or want to see the actual documents sent to the FDA by P****r and M*****a for their E*******y Use A***********n, you can check out this, or this respectively. The data gaps can be found starting with page 46 and 48 respectively.
For now let’s turn our eyes to the raw data the v*****e makers used to submit for e*******y use a***********n.
#5: NO ACCESS TO THE RAW DATA FROM THE TRIALS
Would you like to see the raw data that produced the “90% and 95% effective” claims touted in the news?
Me too…
But they won’t let us see that data.
As pointed out in the BMJ, something about the P****r and M*****a efficacy claims smells really funny.
There were “3,410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed c****-** in the overall study population, 1,594 occurred in the v*****e group vs. 1,816 in the placebo group.”
Wait…what?
Did they fail to do science in their scientific study by not verifying a major variable?
Could they not test those “suspected but unconfirmed” cases to find out if they had c***d?
Apparently not.
Why not test all 3,410 participants for the sake of accuracy?
Can we only guess they didn’t test because it would mess up their “90-95% effective” claims?
Where’s the FDA?
Would it not be prudent for the FDA, to expect (demand) that the v*****e makers test people who have “c***d-like symptoms,” and release their raw data so outside, third-parties could examine how the manufacturers justified the numbers?
I mean it’s only every citizen of the world we’re trying to get to take these experimental products…
Why did the FDA not require that? Isn’t that the entire purpose of the FDA anyway?
Good question.
Foxes guarding the hen house?
Seems like it.
No liability. No trust.
#6: NO LONG-TERM SAFETY TESTING
Obviously, with products that have only been on the market a few months, we have no long-term safety data.
In other words, we have no idea what this product will do in the body months or years from now–for ANY population.
Given all the risks above (risks that ALL pharmaceutical products have), would it not be prudent to wait to see if the worst-case scenarios have indeed been avoided?
Would it not make sense to want to fill those pesky “data gaps” before we try to give this to every man, woman, and child on the planet?
Well…that would make sense, but to have that data, they need to test it on people, which leads me to my next point…
#7: NO INFORMED CONSENT
What most who are taking the v*****e don’t know is that because these products are still in clinical trials, anyone who gets the shot is now part of the clinical trial.
They are part of the experiment.
Those (like me) who do not take it, are part of the control group.
Time will tell how this experiment works out.
But, you may be asking, if the v*****es are causing harm, wouldn’t we be seeing that all over the news?
Surely the FDA would step in and pause the distribution?
Well, if the a*****e e***ts reporting system was working, maybe things would be different.
#8: UNDER-REPORTING OF ADVERSE REACTIONS AND DEATH
According to a study done by Harvard (at the commission of our own government), less than 1% of all adverse reactions to v*****es are actually submitted to the National V*****e A*****e E***ts Reports System (V***S) – read page 6 at the link above.
While the problems with V***S have not been fixed (as you can read about in this letter to the CDC), at the time of this writing V***S reports over 2,200 deaths from the current c***d v*****es, as well as close to 60,000 adverse reactions.
“V***S data released today showed 50,861 reports of a*****e e***ts following C***D v*****es, including 2,249 deaths and 7,726 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and March 26, 2021.”
And those numbers don’t include (what is currently) 578 cases of Bell’s Palsy.
If those numbers are still only 1% of the total adverse reactions (or .8 to 2% of what this study published recently in the JAMA found), you can do the math, but that equates to somewhere around 110,00 to 220,000 deaths from the v*****es to date, and a ridiculous number of adverse reactions.
Bet you didn’t see that on the news.
That death number would currently still be lower than the 424,000 deaths from medical errors that happen every year (which you probably also don’t hear about), but we are not even six months into the rollout of these v*****es yet.
If you want a deeper dive into the problems with the V***S reporting system, you can check this out, or check this out.
But then there’s my next point, which could be argued makes these c***d v*****es seem pointless…
Wait, what?
(continued)
By Christian Elliot
#1: V*****E MAKERS ARE IMMUNE FROM LIABILITY
The only industry in the world that bears no liability for injuries or deaths resulting from their products, are v*****e makers.
First established in 1986 with the National Childhood V*****e Injury Act, and reinforced by the PREP Act, v*****e makers cannot be sued, even if they are shown to be negligent.
The c***d-v*****e makers are allowed to create a one-size-fits-all product, with no testing on sub-populations (i.e. people with specific health conditions), and yet they are unwilling to accept any responsibility for any a*****e e***ts or deaths their products cause.
If a company is not willing to stand behind their product as safe, especially one they rushed to market and skipped animal trials on, I am not willing to take a chance on their product.
No liability. No trust.
Here’s why…
#2: THE CHECKERED PAST OF THE V*****E COMPANIES
The four major companies who are making these c***d v*****es are/have either:
Never brought a v*****e to market before c***d (M*****a and Johnson & Johnson).
Are serial felons (P****r, and Astra Zeneca).
Are both (Johnson & Johnson).
M*****a had been trying to “Modernize our RNA” (thus the company name)–for years, but had never successfully brought ANY product to market–how nice for them to get a major cash infusion from the government to keep trying.
In fact, all major v*****e makers (save M*****a) have paid out tens of billions of dollars in damages for other products they brought to market when they knew those products would cause injuries and death–see Vioxx, Bextra, Celebrex, Thalidomide, and Opioids as a few examples.
If drug companies willfully choose to put harmful products in the market, when they can be sued, why would we trust any product where they have NO liability?
In case it hasn’t sunk in, let me reiterate…3 of the 4 c***d v*****e makers have been sued for products they brought to market even though they knew injuries and deaths would result.
Johnson & Johnson has lost major lawsuits in 1995, 1996, 2001, 2010, 2011, 2016, 2019 (For what it’s worth, J&J’s v*****e also contains tissues from aborted fetal cells, perhaps a topic for another discussion)
P****r has the distinction of the biggest criminal payout in history. They have lost so many lawsuits it’s hard to count. You can check out their rap sheet here. Maybe that’s why they are demanding that countries where they don’t have liability protection put up collateral to cover v*****e-injury lawsuits.
Astra Zeneca has similarly lost so many lawsuits it’s hard to count. Here’s one. Here’s another…you get the point. And in case you missed it, the company had their c***d v*****e suspended in at least 18 countries over concerns of blood clots, and they completely botched their meeting with the FDA with numbers from their study that didn’t match.
Oh, and apparently J&J (whose v*****e is approved for “Emergency Use” in the US) and Astrazenca (whose v*****e is not approved for “Emergency Use” in the US), had a little mix up in their ingredients…in 15 million doses. Oops.
Let me reiterate this point:
Given the free pass from liability, and the checkered past of these companies, why would we assume that all their v*****es are safe and made completely above board?
Where else in life would we trust someone with that kind of reputation?
To me that makes as much sense as expecting a remorseless, abusive, unfaithful lover to become a different person because a judge said deep down they are a good person.
No. I don’t trust them.
No liability. No trust.
Here’s another reason why I don’t trust them.
#3: THE UGLY HISTORY OF ATTEMPTS TO MAKE C****AV***S V*****ES
There have been many attempts to make v***l v*****es in the past that ended in utter failure, which is why we did not have a c****av***s v*****e in 2020.
In the 1960’s, scientists attempted to make an RSV (Respiratory Syncytial V***s) v*****e for infants.
In that study, they skipped animal trials because they weren’t necessary back then.
In the end, the v******ted infants got much sicker than the unv******ted infants when exposed to the v***s in nature, with 80% of the v******ted infants requiring hospitalization, and two of them died.
After 2000, scientists made many attempts to create c****av***s v*****es.
For the past 20 years, all ended in failure because the animals in the clinical trials got very sick and many died, just like the children in the 1960’s.
You can read a summary of this history/science here.
Or if you want to read the individual studies you can check out these links:
In 2004 attempted v*****e produced hepatitis in ferrets
In 2005 mice and civets became sick and more susceptible to c****av***ses after being v******ted
In 2012 the ferrets became sick and died. And in this study mice and ferrets developed lung disease.
In 2016 this study also produce lung disease in mice.
The typical pattern in the studies mentioned above is that the children and the animals produced beautiful antibody responses after being v******ted.
The manufacturers thought they hit the jackpot.
The problem came when the children and animals were exposed to the wild version of the v***s.
When that happened, an unexplained phenomenon called Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE) also known as V*****e Enhanced Disease (VED) occurred where the i****e s****m produced a “cytokine storm” (i.e. overwhelmingly attacked the body), and the children/animals died.
Here’s the lingering issue…
The v*****e makers have no data to suggest their rushed v*****es have overcome that problem.
In other words, never before has any attempt to make a c****av***s v*****e been successful, nor has the gene-therapy technology that is m**A “v*****es” been safely brought to market, but hey, since they had billions of dollars in government funding, I’m sure they figured that out.
Except they don’t know if they have…
#4: THE “DATA GAPS” SUBMITTED TO THE FDA BY THE V*****E MAKERS
When v*****e makers submitted their papers to the FDA for the E*******y Use A***********n (Note: An EUA is not the same as a full FDA approval), among the many “Data Gaps” they reported was that they have nothing in their trials to suggest they overcame that pesky problem of V*****e Enhanced Disease.
They simply don’t know–i.e. they have no idea if the v*****es they’ve made will also produce the same cytokine storm (and deaths) as previous attempts at such products.
As Joseph Mercola points out…
“Previous attempts to develop an m**A-based drug using lipid nanoparticles failed and had to be abandoned because when the dose was too low, the drug had no effect, and when dosed too high, the drug became too toxic. An obvious question is: What has changed that now makes this technology safe enough for mass use?”
If that’s not alarming enough, here are other gaps in the data–i.e. there is no data to suggest safety or efficacy regarding:
Anyone younger than age 18 or older than age 55
Pregnant or lactating mothers
Auto-immune conditions
Immunoc*********d individuals
No data on t***smission of c***d
No data on preventing mortality from c***d
No data on duration of protection from c***d
Hard to believe right?
In case you think I’m making this up, or want to see the actual documents sent to the FDA by P****r and M*****a for their E*******y Use A***********n, you can check out this, or this respectively. The data gaps can be found starting with page 46 and 48 respectively.
For now let’s turn our eyes to the raw data the v*****e makers used to submit for e*******y use a***********n.
#5: NO ACCESS TO THE RAW DATA FROM THE TRIALS
Would you like to see the raw data that produced the “90% and 95% effective” claims touted in the news?
Me too…
But they won’t let us see that data.
As pointed out in the BMJ, something about the P****r and M*****a efficacy claims smells really funny.
There were “3,410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed c****-** in the overall study population, 1,594 occurred in the v*****e group vs. 1,816 in the placebo group.”
Wait…what?
Did they fail to do science in their scientific study by not verifying a major variable?
Could they not test those “suspected but unconfirmed” cases to find out if they had c***d?
Apparently not.
Why not test all 3,410 participants for the sake of accuracy?
Can we only guess they didn’t test because it would mess up their “90-95% effective” claims?
Where’s the FDA?
Would it not be prudent for the FDA, to expect (demand) that the v*****e makers test people who have “c***d-like symptoms,” and release their raw data so outside, third-parties could examine how the manufacturers justified the numbers?
I mean it’s only every citizen of the world we’re trying to get to take these experimental products…
Why did the FDA not require that? Isn’t that the entire purpose of the FDA anyway?
Good question.
Foxes guarding the hen house?
Seems like it.
No liability. No trust.
#6: NO LONG-TERM SAFETY TESTING
Obviously, with products that have only been on the market a few months, we have no long-term safety data.
In other words, we have no idea what this product will do in the body months or years from now–for ANY population.
Given all the risks above (risks that ALL pharmaceutical products have), would it not be prudent to wait to see if the worst-case scenarios have indeed been avoided?
Would it not make sense to want to fill those pesky “data gaps” before we try to give this to every man, woman, and child on the planet?
Well…that would make sense, but to have that data, they need to test it on people, which leads me to my next point…
#7: NO INFORMED CONSENT
What most who are taking the v*****e don’t know is that because these products are still in clinical trials, anyone who gets the shot is now part of the clinical trial.
They are part of the experiment.
Those (like me) who do not take it, are part of the control group.
Time will tell how this experiment works out.
But, you may be asking, if the v*****es are causing harm, wouldn’t we be seeing that all over the news?
Surely the FDA would step in and pause the distribution?
Well, if the a*****e e***ts reporting system was working, maybe things would be different.
#8: UNDER-REPORTING OF ADVERSE REACTIONS AND DEATH
According to a study done by Harvard (at the commission of our own government), less than 1% of all adverse reactions to v*****es are actually submitted to the National V*****e A*****e E***ts Reports System (V***S) – read page 6 at the link above.
While the problems with V***S have not been fixed (as you can read about in this letter to the CDC), at the time of this writing V***S reports over 2,200 deaths from the current c***d v*****es, as well as close to 60,000 adverse reactions.
“V***S data released today showed 50,861 reports of a*****e e***ts following C***D v*****es, including 2,249 deaths and 7,726 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and March 26, 2021.”
And those numbers don’t include (what is currently) 578 cases of Bell’s Palsy.
If those numbers are still only 1% of the total adverse reactions (or .8 to 2% of what this study published recently in the JAMA found), you can do the math, but that equates to somewhere around 110,00 to 220,000 deaths from the v*****es to date, and a ridiculous number of adverse reactions.
Bet you didn’t see that on the news.
That death number would currently still be lower than the 424,000 deaths from medical errors that happen every year (which you probably also don’t hear about), but we are not even six months into the rollout of these v*****es yet.
If you want a deeper dive into the problems with the V***S reporting system, you can check this out, or check this out.
But then there’s my next point, which could be argued makes these c***d v*****es seem pointless…
Wait, what?
(continued)
Aug 8, 2021 08:54:11 #
SGM B wrote:
I believe this guy is right in point. br br By C... (show quote)
I can add one more reason, the warning not to get v******ted if you are allergic to any of the ingredients,
yet the makers refuse to divulge what those ingredients are. Catch 22!
Aug 8, 2021 08:57:23 #
Tiptop789
Loc: State of Denial
SGM B wrote:
I believe this guy is right in point. br br By C... (show quote)
You don't need 10 reasons, only 1, that you don't want to, but be prepared to live (or die) from your decision.
Aug 8, 2021 10:19:05 #
Gatsby wrote:
I can add one more reason, the warning not to get v******ted if you are allergic to any of the ingredients,
yet the makers refuse to divulge what those ingredients are. Catch 22!
yet the makers refuse to divulge what those ingredients are. Catch 22!
Yet another reason to avoid the jab, if you are 50 or younger:
The mortality rate for c***d infected is actually LOWER than the mortality rate for the non-infected!
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db355-h.pdf
https://doh.sd.gov/C***D/Dashboard.aspx
Aug 8, 2021 11:58:04 #
Tiptop789 wrote:
You don't need 10 reasons, only 1, that you don't want to, but be prepared to live (or die) from your decision.
I, like you have, an appointed time to die and neither the Chi-com flu or anything else can change that.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.