February 2024
« Jan    

Watch out babies! Pfizer and Moderna Jabbermen are gonna get you too!

weekend blog

First, a reader wrote that he couldn’t find any reference of the study of 1,305 children aged 5 to 11 which the European Medicines Agency (EMA) used as the basis approving  giving the mRNA vaccine to children. So, here’s the link to the official EMA announcement which I quoted from in my blog:

This shows that my example was genuine. Unlike our lying politicians, lying supposed ‘scientists’, lying Big Pharma companies and lying media, I don’t make things up.

Now my weekend blog

Jabbermen are after our babies too

In my Thursday/Friday blog I questioned why the Covid Jabbermen were jabbing 5- to 11-year-olds. Then on Thursday afternoon this week, just after I had written my Thursday/Friday blog, Moderna announced that the company was asking the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorisation for their WuFlu supposed ‘vaccine’ on babies/children from 6 months old to 6 years old:

This is madness. Complete madness.

I then checked on the Pfizer vaccine. This has already been approved for 5- to 11-year-olds. Apparently Pfizer made a submission to the FDA in February for approval for use in babies/children from 6 months to 4 years old. I don’t know the current status of this submission.

Why are we vaccinating babies/children?

Obviously I’m no expert in anything useful. But I imagine there are three key questions which have to be addressed for any vaccine or supposed ‘vaccine’ to be used:

  • is the vaccine effective against some particular disease?
  • do the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks?
  • is the disease being vaccinated against widespread and hazardous to health?

Let’s try to briefly answer these three questions:

Is the vaccine effective against the Chinese lab-leaked plague?

From the little I understand, none of the vaccines actually reduce the likelihood of people being infected or infecting others. Ooops, that’s not so great.

All the vaccines do is reduce the risk of people needing hospitalisation when infected. They seem to have done this quite well during the first more dangerous variants of the Wuhan flu. But as new, less dangerous variants have become dominant, it appears questionable how useful the vaccines are. Moreover, we now know that the vaccines’ effectiveness declines after just a few months. Hence some people are on their fourth shot and a small group are even being offered a fifth shot.

Do the benefits of the vaccines outweigh the risks?

In the US they have the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and in the UK we have the Yellow Card reporting system to the MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Agency). But what percent of adverse events actually get reported? To effectively report an adverse event in the UK you ideally need to see a GP. Good luck with that!

I know from personal experience that when I had a severe adverse reaction to the AstraZeneca jab – inflamed sciatic nerve which prevented me from being able to walk for over a week – the private GP I went to see dissuaded me from reporting this by claiming that nobody else had the same reaction. I later found out that my sister had precisely the same problem.

Here’s a link to the MHRA page about the latest Yellow Card reports:

It looks more like a PR release from the Big Pharma companies extolling how wonderful the miracle vaccines are rather than a serious scientific announcement. Moreover, it makes no attempt to differentiate the level of adverse events and the likelihood of vaccines being necessary by age group. It just claims that the benefits of the vaccines outweigh the risks even though we know that the Chinese plague is much more dangerous to older people so the risk/benefit ratio must be different for different age groups.

I have a feeling that the reporting process is so time-consuming and bureaucratic that most people don’t know how to report adverse events and most doctors can’t be bothered. Moreover, if you look at the MHRA page, I don’t think you’ll find any mention of the heart muscle inflammation (myocarditis and pericarditis) which has affected many athletes and killed almost 100 young, previously healthy athletes. Very odd!

Is the disease being vaccinated against widespread and hazardous to health?

We have a vaccine against rabies. If you’re travelling to some Third-World hell-hole, you might be advised to get a rabies shot. But we don’t vaccinate the whole population in the developed world against rabies as the number of cases is negligible.

From what I understand, the likelihood of children under say 11 years old suffering serious health problems from the Chinese lab-leaked plague are extremely small. From what little I understand, there is absolutely no healthcare justification for jabbing small children.

But look at all the antibodies!

It seems to me that our politicians, Big Pharma companies, joke ‘scientists’ and pig-ignorant media have approached the issue of vaccination from the wrong end. Big Pharma have developed some stuff which causes an increase in some kind of antibodies. Big Pharma then inject people with this stuff and shout excitedly “look at all the wonderful antibodies! Look at how effective our miracle vaccines are!” And the dumb-as-turds politicians and media swallow this nonsense.

The questions that should be asked are:

  • what is the risk of Covid causing harm?
  • is Covid so widespread and dangerous that we need to vaccinate people?

The answer to these questions is that we probably shouldn’t be vaccinating anybody under the age of 40 and probably not even anybody under the age of 50 except those with a serious medical condition which makes them vulnerable to respiratory infections.

More absurdity from our ludicrous rulers?

As media fury rages around whether a male/female/trans (IMHO) thingy/freak should be allowed to compete in women’s cycling, here to cheer us up is a male/female/trans (IMHO) thingy/freak explaining why it/ze should be allowed to compete in women’s swimming:

(By the way, this is a satire! But only just)

4 comments to Watch out babies! Pfizer and Moderna Jabbermen are gonna get you too!

  • A Thorpe

    David, I did find the reference you give above, but that is not a trial report. It is a report about a trial and none of the references in it are to the trial. However, I have just found the Pfizer trial report
    but not read it. At first glance the numbers do not appear to be the same. I assume that Moderna must also have conducted trials for children.

    You ask why we are vaccinating children. For the same reasons as we vaccinate adults and you need to be more specific. The basic reason is to stop infection and the CDC changed this definition of vaccines to allow for the useless covid vaccines. If the vaccine stops infection, then it stops spread, hospitalisation and death. Sarah Gilbert in her Dimbleby lecture on Covid compared it with the success of the Smallpox vaccination. The Smallpox vaccination is highly effective as far as I am aware but the disease cannot be compared with an airborne respiratory virus. It wasn’t just the vaccine that allowed it to be eliminated, it was the fact that people with smallpox can be identified before they become infectious. Their misinformation known no bounds.

    I’ve seem quite a few reports on childhood viruses and Robert Kennedy is opposed to a lot of the vaccinations. There are graphs showing the steady decline of say measles and polio well before the vaccines were developed and the vaccines don’t seem to have increased the rate of decline. It is claimed that better standards of living and hygiene are the reason for the decline. I don’t know what or who to believe, but health professionals are at the bottom of the list.

    I think you have to be very careful about concluding anything that has not come from a properly organised randomised control trial. The trials were nothing more than fraud to get a vaccine rapidly approved. They did not meet any acceptable standards. They did not show that hospitalisation was reduced or that anybody infected was not as severely infected. All sorts of claims are now being made that were not confirmed by the trials.

    The vaccine adverse event reporting systems are not a replacement for randomised control trials. My understanding of the control trials is that it is not possible to identify the cause of every health problem and trials do not attempt to do that. They are looking for a statistically significant different outcome between the vaccine and control group, for specific outcomes, say lower death, no infection, etc. If people are said to have died from the covid vaccine then an autopsy is required and I imagine that it is difficult to specifically say the vaccine was responsible. The trials avoid this problem because they depend on statistics.

    The reporting systems are proof of the failure of the trials. I have seen graphs of the number of reports in the VAERS system and there is a sudden spike when the covid vaccines were introduced. It shows that all previous vaccines went through proper trials to prove their safety but they are still not 100% safe, so a small number of events is expected. The covid vaccines are not safe and not even effective and should be banned immediately.

  • A Thorpe

    David, I have just been through the Pfizer trial report. It mentions 1305 taking the vaccine and 663 the placebo, but the case number are as you gave 3 with the vaccine and 16 with the placebo, so it might be the same trial. I don’t understand why the numbers were not allocated equally which is not recommended.I suspect the statistics are made more favourable. There were no serious cases of Covid in any of the children, so what does the trial really prove? There were no hospitalisations and no deaths.

    The introduction says there were no serious adverse events, but it goes on to report quite a number of events and one serious event.

    There is a lot of comment about cases increasing in children and the need to prevent spread, and also the impact on education. But this is all politics and policy and nothing from the trial supports it. This is typical – health and politics are being conflated.

    The other concern I have about all the trials is that healthy people are selected, and this makes sense. But what happens when the vaccines are given to people with other illnesses? It is the same with the elderly who are said to be more vulnerable, but are they more vulnerable to vaccine adverse events. It is just the same with flu. I have failed to find any evidence that supports the flu vaccination reducing deaths of the elderly.

  • Mark Ager

    Don’t forget that even if you had the AstraZeneca first two shots, which do not use mRNA technology, the booster shots in the UK are made by Pfizer. So, it is mixed technology. The mRNA technology must be taking over from the AstraZeneca technology.

    Coronavirus vaccine – weekly summary of Yellow Card reporting

    Updated 28 April 2022

    “As of 20 April 2022, for the UK,169,660 Yellow Cards have been reported for the COVID-19 Pfizer/BioNTech Vaccine, 244,908 have been reported for the COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca, 37,478 for the COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna and 1,634 have been reported where the brand of the vaccine was not specified.”

    Not a word about this on the mainstream media, but it is non-stop traffic about an MP who watched porn in parliament, snitched on by two Tory female MPs, followed by the usual liberal drive to get more female MPs.

    This is going to end very badly. Have a look at the most notable female politicians – Theresa “Brexit means Brexit” May, the Scottish Krankie, New Zealand’s Jacinda Ardern, Angela Merkel, who let in millions of migrants to the EU and made Germany heavily dependent on Russia for energy, Hillary (Pay for Play) Clinton, Nancy Pelosi.

    Thank goodness for Anne Widdecombe, who tells the truth about this liberal agenda..

  • Brenda Blessed

    Marc, don’t forget the grea6t Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, who made a huge mess of Germany’s military as the Minister of Defence.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>