Top of Pg 38: "Seven cases in participants 2-4 years of age met the criteria for severe COVID-19: 6 in the BNT162b2 group, of which 2 cases occurred post unblinding, and 1 in the placebo group." AM I MISSING SOMETHING? ARE YOU JOKING? IS ANYONE ELSE HAVING AN ANEURYSM OVER THIS?
Even for classical vaccines, the placebo is always the adjuvants minus the payload, a German ex-vaccine developer come anti-vaxxer says in a youtube interview somewhere; since they happen to be the cause of autism/auto-immune aggression etc, these have the exact effect you describe above. I presumed this to be widely known.
I read a recent piece on Children’s Health Defense which states the only reason to vaccinate children is to gain approval for the vaccines as part of the children's vaccine programme, after which the drug pushers will have zero liability, thereby protecting themselves from a potentially massive backlash when more people wise up to the harms they've done.
My reading of page 19-20: it shows way increased risk of Moderna over Pfizer’s vac in kids, not increased risk overall. In every mention of increased risk, it’s a comparison of one vaccine to the other, not mrna vaxxed people compared to unvaxxed. Just based on those paragraphs, even if Moderna was 5x worse than Pfizer, it could be Pfizer had a .0001% increase in myocarditis and Moderna had .0005% increase - 5x worse but not a huge deal. I don’t see in the paper on pages 19-20 that it says what you claim, that the mRNA shots lead to 2-7x increase in myocarditis risk.
For example, compare your interpretation of the paper: “By May of 2022, we have additional studies from the U.K., Denmark, several Nordic countries, Italy, and France showing a 3x to 7x increased risk of myocarditis from the Moderna shot.”
…with what is says…
“ International observational studies conducted in the United Kingdom,49 Denmark,50 Nordic countries,51 Italy,52 and France53 suggested a three- to seven- fold differential risk for mRNA-1273 relative to BNT162b2 after Dose 2”
It’s 2x-7x relative to the other shot, not relative to the overall population as your essay implies. The shots may still not be safe - I sure don’t trust them - but please take care in citing/quoting other papers.
You are correct that comparing two mRNA shots against each other is not a valid method. The correct comparator is the unvaccinated population. But then you lose the plot by making up a number to say nothing to see here. That is also incorrect. We know that Pfizer increases myocarditis risk above baseline and Moderna appears to increase that risk even further. I'm not sure how you twisted that to say an elevated harm and an even more elevated harm = no problem. There is a reason why the rest of the world is wary of these shots in young people (particularly males) -- myocarditis risk.
I’m not twisting anything, only comparing your words citing the paper with what the paper actually says and showing that the FDA paper doesn’t actually compare with baseline.
My made up number is simply to say that the fda paper doesn’t specify what your writing implies, which is a comparison with baseline. I recognize there’s a harm, but the FDA paper doesn’t say 2x-7x over baseline, it says 2x-7x over Pfizer and doesn’t specify Pfizer’s elevation over baseline. Thus they’re not covering up what you accuse them of covering up when you say the fda paper itself states the Moderna vac yields 2x-7x increase in risk and then a paragraph or two later dismiss it. What they dismissed was the increase over Pfizer, but they don’t say why they’re ignoring that issue either. Frustrating!
I don’t know how you interpreted my comment to read me as saying there’s no problem. I clearly said I don’t trust the vax, and clearly there’s some increase in risk of myocarditis - maybe a huge amount, I don’t know. All I’m saying is the increase in myocarditis risk is not as clear in the fda doc as you state, and I want to be clear on the evidence that we’re drawing conclusions from.
All that said, as this is my first time commenting and since I may have your attention, I’ll say I have found your work valuable, especially the insight around nntv, so thank you for your work on all this.
But, those are not the trials per se (indeed there are several trials described in the documents). So to find the actual trial data I imagine you go to clinicaltrials.gov AND wait for FOIA lawsuits to force FDA to release the rest of the actual trial data for the kid trials.
You're welcome Toby. I was booted off of Facebook a year and a half ago (and ALL other legacy social media) so I have not been able to keep up with a lot of people who I used to follow. Someone forwarded me your article. I'm now subscribed to your Substack. I've already had two people tell me they read your article and were happy I shared it. Keep up the amazing work!!!
Hi Larry! Your Stop Mandatory Vaccination page on Facebook was so life giving back when the internet was free. I learned so much from the thousands of people who posted to your site. I'm grateful for you and glad we can reconnect!
Also, if you are unaware, I created a short 15 min documentary about 3 healthy unvaccinated children that may interest you: https://www.unvaccinatedchildren.com
I'm taking the summer off but later I'll create more video stories like this :)
Thank you Toby! That group was my pride and joy and one of my biggest accomplishments. We saved so many children from vaccine harm through that group. I'm happy to hear you loved it as much as I did! I'm also glad for the reconnect!
Once we understand that the legal and regulatory framework for mass vaccination with experimental substances, with zero legal liability for anyone, was put in place over several years, and that companies, governments, and healthcare providers are all operating under now-existing legal and regulatory parameters (which classify the shots as something different from a "vaccine"), we can understand that the FDA can do whatever it wants to whomever it wants at any time it wants, and we citizens have little to no say in the outcome. Sounds grim, but that's the reality.
So I suppose an attempt to set up a security company to stop them might be blocked as people told cannot help anyone who would et up security company which would define security a integrity of the body also security company as protection from police brutality one for patrol and investigation. computer forensic bank analysis and forensic lab plus secondary skill in medicine and others in community mental health also social services. hiring to include full health benefits. small unit tactical swat type training. specialize in food security as well provide seeds to help people remain independent.
also for people who say want les government and use full for Black Lives matter. application forms sent to that as branches opened across U.S.A. Licensing applied for and security software plus computer science program t up. then just matter of getting an instructor for rappelling or swat course as target course to train to void non lethal force and identify adversaries also requires close quarters disarmament techniques and some law enforcement training and elite government fore ight be deployed if government does not respect the company arresting perpretrators as part of hired anti corruption force for DOJ. that is if contract offered by citizen to hire as justice marshals by victim maybe life site news.
Sometimes you're a little bit "out there" Toby, but other times, like in this post, you come through like a knight in shining armor, to highlight what's going on in these drug applications / studies/ etc. I've sent an email to the guy at UC Berkeley, as I figure that's a better shot than anyone at the FDA or other corrupt government body. I guess we'll see this week if enough members of the committe have a conscience.
I find it so hypocritical that so many fall over each other to condemn the mass school shootings, yet think nothing of approving or abiding by rules that kill and injure children via shots and drugs.
The FDA just released the Pfizer risk benefit document. Pages 15 to 60 are what matters.
https://www.fda.gov/media/159195/download
Let's get to work on tearing it apart. Please post any insights that you discover.
Top of Pg 38: "Seven cases in participants 2-4 years of age met the criteria for severe COVID-19: 6 in the BNT162b2 group, of which 2 cases occurred post unblinding, and 1 in the placebo group." AM I MISSING SOMETHING? ARE YOU JOKING? IS ANYONE ELSE HAVING AN ANEURYSM OVER THIS?
Did they inject all the placebo recipients?!
On it.
Jessica, are you seeing 6:1 (pfizer vs placebo)breakdown on severe covid cases on top of pg 38 in the Pfizer risk benefit that was just released?
Toby pin your comment so people see it 1st, please.
Good idea. Done! 🙌
Even for classical vaccines, the placebo is always the adjuvants minus the payload, a German ex-vaccine developer come anti-vaxxer says in a youtube interview somewhere; since they happen to be the cause of autism/auto-immune aggression etc, these have the exact effect you describe above. I presumed this to be widely known.
As shown in this documentary btw: https://www.theepochtimes.com/under-the-skin-documentary_4736070.html <3
6/29/2022 The baby murderers are planning again. It’s interesting to listen to them and watch the stutters and slips. https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/who-live-media-briefing-on-covid-19-other-global-health-issues?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=ab289076-6d60-4f70-8310-cd7a98e7aafe
Thank you! I emailed and shared with others.
"My strong suspicion in that Moderna rigged the placebo." Please change the word "in" to "is". Excellent article!
Fixed! Thank you!!! 🙌
This is helpful as a share with those that are wavering: Drug Recalls In The UK & US Are Eye Watering! https://rachelwild.substack.com/p/drug-recalls-in-the-uk-and-us-are
I read a recent piece on Children’s Health Defense which states the only reason to vaccinate children is to gain approval for the vaccines as part of the children's vaccine programme, after which the drug pushers will have zero liability, thereby protecting themselves from a potentially massive backlash when more people wise up to the harms they've done.
My reading of page 19-20: it shows way increased risk of Moderna over Pfizer’s vac in kids, not increased risk overall. In every mention of increased risk, it’s a comparison of one vaccine to the other, not mrna vaxxed people compared to unvaxxed. Just based on those paragraphs, even if Moderna was 5x worse than Pfizer, it could be Pfizer had a .0001% increase in myocarditis and Moderna had .0005% increase - 5x worse but not a huge deal. I don’t see in the paper on pages 19-20 that it says what you claim, that the mRNA shots lead to 2-7x increase in myocarditis risk.
For example, compare your interpretation of the paper: “By May of 2022, we have additional studies from the U.K., Denmark, several Nordic countries, Italy, and France showing a 3x to 7x increased risk of myocarditis from the Moderna shot.”
…with what is says…
“ International observational studies conducted in the United Kingdom,49 Denmark,50 Nordic countries,51 Italy,52 and France53 suggested a three- to seven- fold differential risk for mRNA-1273 relative to BNT162b2 after Dose 2”
It’s 2x-7x relative to the other shot, not relative to the overall population as your essay implies. The shots may still not be safe - I sure don’t trust them - but please take care in citing/quoting other papers.
Please correct me if I’m wrong.
You are correct that comparing two mRNA shots against each other is not a valid method. The correct comparator is the unvaccinated population. But then you lose the plot by making up a number to say nothing to see here. That is also incorrect. We know that Pfizer increases myocarditis risk above baseline and Moderna appears to increase that risk even further. I'm not sure how you twisted that to say an elevated harm and an even more elevated harm = no problem. There is a reason why the rest of the world is wary of these shots in young people (particularly males) -- myocarditis risk.
I’m not twisting anything, only comparing your words citing the paper with what the paper actually says and showing that the FDA paper doesn’t actually compare with baseline.
My made up number is simply to say that the fda paper doesn’t specify what your writing implies, which is a comparison with baseline. I recognize there’s a harm, but the FDA paper doesn’t say 2x-7x over baseline, it says 2x-7x over Pfizer and doesn’t specify Pfizer’s elevation over baseline. Thus they’re not covering up what you accuse them of covering up when you say the fda paper itself states the Moderna vac yields 2x-7x increase in risk and then a paragraph or two later dismiss it. What they dismissed was the increase over Pfizer, but they don’t say why they’re ignoring that issue either. Frustrating!
I don’t know how you interpreted my comment to read me as saying there’s no problem. I clearly said I don’t trust the vax, and clearly there’s some increase in risk of myocarditis - maybe a huge amount, I don’t know. All I’m saying is the increase in myocarditis risk is not as clear in the fda doc as you state, and I want to be clear on the evidence that we’re drawing conclusions from.
All that said, as this is my first time commenting and since I may have your attention, I’ll say I have found your work valuable, especially the insight around nntv, so thank you for your work on all this.
Please read this article and let me know your thoughts:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31401-5
Where can I find the actual trial data?
It's a fine question.
There are 4 documents that discuss the trials that are available here:
https://www.fda.gov/advisory-committees/advisory-committee-calendar/vaccines-and-related-biological-products-advisory-committee-june-14-15-2022-meeting-announcement
The FDA risk benefit document for Moderna.
The Sponsor briefing document by Moderna.
The FDA risk benefit document for Pfizer.
The Sponsor briefing document by Pfizer.
But, those are not the trials per se (indeed there are several trials described in the documents). So to find the actual trial data I imagine you go to clinicaltrials.gov AND wait for FOIA lawsuits to force FDA to release the rest of the actual trial data for the kid trials.
Unless someone can suggest a better plan?
Thank you!
I've put together a short post on how toxic drugs are made to look safe and effective https://georgiedonny.substack.com/p/how-power-couple-pharma-regulation?s=w
Jo
Very good information! Thank you for your caring and sharing!
Great article Toby. I shared in in my newsletter to my 55K list.
Thank you Larry!!! 🙌
You're welcome Toby. I was booted off of Facebook a year and a half ago (and ALL other legacy social media) so I have not been able to keep up with a lot of people who I used to follow. Someone forwarded me your article. I'm now subscribed to your Substack. I've already had two people tell me they read your article and were happy I shared it. Keep up the amazing work!!!
You can see it here: http://sendy.stopmandatoryvaccination.com/w/1kkJVucKq9r6bMhAj49YEw/lmYZR46TIsdn4wrwfQNVTA/fXpt5urGCBih3MxYVrT9fg
Hi Larry! Your Stop Mandatory Vaccination page on Facebook was so life giving back when the internet was free. I learned so much from the thousands of people who posted to your site. I'm grateful for you and glad we can reconnect!
Also, if you are unaware, I created a short 15 min documentary about 3 healthy unvaccinated children that may interest you: https://www.unvaccinatedchildren.com
I'm taking the summer off but later I'll create more video stories like this :)
Thank you Toby! That group was my pride and joy and one of my biggest accomplishments. We saved so many children from vaccine harm through that group. I'm happy to hear you loved it as much as I did! I'm also glad for the reconnect!
Once we understand that the legal and regulatory framework for mass vaccination with experimental substances, with zero legal liability for anyone, was put in place over several years, and that companies, governments, and healthcare providers are all operating under now-existing legal and regulatory parameters (which classify the shots as something different from a "vaccine"), we can understand that the FDA can do whatever it wants to whomever it wants at any time it wants, and we citizens have little to no say in the outcome. Sounds grim, but that's the reality.
https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/p/on-the-odds-of-nuremberg-20-prosecutions?s=w
So I suppose an attempt to set up a security company to stop them might be blocked as people told cannot help anyone who would et up security company which would define security a integrity of the body also security company as protection from police brutality one for patrol and investigation. computer forensic bank analysis and forensic lab plus secondary skill in medicine and others in community mental health also social services. hiring to include full health benefits. small unit tactical swat type training. specialize in food security as well provide seeds to help people remain independent.
also for people who say want les government and use full for Black Lives matter. application forms sent to that as branches opened across U.S.A. Licensing applied for and security software plus computer science program t up. then just matter of getting an instructor for rappelling or swat course as target course to train to void non lethal force and identify adversaries also requires close quarters disarmament techniques and some law enforcement training and elite government fore ight be deployed if government does not respect the company arresting perpretrators as part of hired anti corruption force for DOJ. that is if contract offered by citizen to hire as justice marshals by victim maybe life site news.
Whaaaat??
They are erasing any "herd immunity" that our children would naturally provide against this man-made franken-virus.
Sometimes you're a little bit "out there" Toby, but other times, like in this post, you come through like a knight in shining armor, to highlight what's going on in these drug applications / studies/ etc. I've sent an email to the guy at UC Berkeley, as I figure that's a better shot than anyone at the FDA or other corrupt government body. I guess we'll see this week if enough members of the committe have a conscience.
I find it so hypocritical that so many fall over each other to condemn the mass school shootings, yet think nothing of approving or abiding by rules that kill and injure children via shots and drugs.