quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
I find it curious that the FDA is asking the court to seal all of the Pfizer covid data for 55 years.

I wonder what it is they’re trying to hide - evidence of fraud and collusion, falsified data?

It’s just some more of that good old fashioned democRAT transparency doncha’ know. The last thing these traitors want is the light of truth shining on their misdeeds.

quote:

Originally posted by stickman428:
Well, I should know today or by tomorrow whether or not I have the covid. I don’t think I do but when I explained my symptoms my local urgent care acted like I told them I had just been exposed to anthrax. I had to leave wait in my car and come in the side entrance to a room right next to the exit. All that over what is likely some other nasty virus and
/or a possible allergic reaction to something.

Come on man, you know there are no other ailments plaguing society at this point. Covid has cured virtually everything.

Why do they say the "unvaccinated" are a danger to the "vaccinated"?

It's convoluted logic, but goes something like this: If you are "vaccinated" your over-all immune system may be weaker, so you have to stay away from the "unvaccinated"... so everyone must get "vaccinated"?

Covid vaccines will keep you from acquiring full immunity EVEN IF YOU ARE INFECTED AND RECOVER
Alex Berenson, Oct 21

Don’t take it from me, I don’t even get to tweet anymore.

Take it from a little place I call the British government. Which admitted today, in its newest vaccine surveillance report, that:

“N antibody levels appear to be lower in people who acquire infection following two doses of vaccination.” (Page 23)

What’s this mean? Several things, all bad. We know the vaccines do not stop infection or transmission of the virus (in fact, the report shows elsewhere that vaccinated adults are now being infected at much HIGHER rates than the unvaccinated).

What the British are saying is they are now finding the vaccine interferes with your body’s innate ability after infection to produce antibodies against not just the spike protein but other pieces of the virus. Specifically, vaccinated people don’t seem to be producing antibodies to the nucleocapsid protein, the shell of the virus, which are a crucial part of the response in unvaccinated people.

This means vaccinated people will be far more vulnerable to mutations in the spike protein EVEN AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN INFECTED AND RECOVERED ONCE (or more than once, probably).

It also means the virus is likely to select for mutations that go in exactly that direction, because those will essentially give it an enormous vulnerable population to infect. And it probably is still more evidence the vaccines may interfere with the development of robust long-term immunity post-infection.

Aside from that, everything is fine.

https://alexberenson.substack....ll-keep-you/comments

MORE>>>

Do mRNA Covid vaccines interfere with the development of natural immunity following Sars-Cov-2 infection?

A fascinating paper in the Journal of the American Medical Association hints the answer may be yes

Nov 8

Last week, JAMA published a paper comparing natural-plus-vaccine Covid immunity versus vaccine-only immunity in over 500,000 people in Qatar.

Researchers looked at about 140,000 people who had received either the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines after a previous Covid infection and 400,000 who received the vaccines and had no prior infection.

No surprise, they found combined immunity is far superior to vaccine-only immunity.

After adjusting for age and other factors, people who had received vaccines but didn’t have natural immunity were about SIX times as likely to be infected with Covid as those who had a base of natural immunity.

It is important to understand this finding does NOT prove that the vaccines offered ANY additional protection beyond natural immunity to people who had already been infected.

First, the researchers did not include a third comparison group - people who had natural immunity but didn’t receive vaccines. Doing so would have been an obvious step, and I’m not sure why they didn’t. Perhaps they couldn’t find enough people, as Qatar has very high vaccination rates.

Second, the 6x rate ratio is in the range of what Israeli researchers found when they directly compared natural-only and vaccine immunity in a similar large study in August.

Third, the study found a notable trend towards a WIDENING gap between the natural-plus-vaccine group and the vaccine-only group in months five and six - when we know vaccine efficacy fades.

Infections in the natural-plus-Pfizer-vaccine group remained roughly steady throughout, at about 5 per 10,000 per month. But after starting at about 20 per 10,000 month in the first four months, infections in the Pfizer-vaccine only group doubled in month five and doubled again in month six, to 80 per 100,000 per month. (The researchers didn’t have six months of data on Moderna, which was used later in Qatar.)

The fact that the natural-immunity-plus-vaccine group didn’t see a similar rise in infections in later months is strong circumstantial evidence that the vaccine was NOT helping them early on.

The obvious inference is that their immunity remained strong throughout, because the vaccines weren’t helping it.

—

But the researchers hardly commented on their MOST interesting finding:

Vaccinated individuals with prior infection 6 months or more before dose 1 had statistically significantly lower risk for breakthrough infection than those vaccinated less than 6 months before dose 1 (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.42-0.92]; P = .02 for BNT162b2 and 0.40 [95% CI, 0.18-0.91]; P = .03 for mRNA-1273 vaccination).

What does this mean?

The scientists divided people with natural immunity into two groups. One group had been infected and recovered well before they received their mRNA shots (at least six months). The other had been infected sooner.

They found that people who had been infected more than six months before being vaccinated had were much less likely to be reinfected as those vaccinated sooner.

So? Why should we care?

Other scientists have found that natural immunity from Sars-Cov-2 continues to strengthen for at least six months after Covid infection and recovery - perhaps more than a year

The Qatar paper at least suggests that the vaccines may hinder that evolution of memory B-cells. In other words, they may actually damage the body’s ability to build broad protection against reinfection.

Otherwise, why would people who received the vaccines SOONER after infection and recovery be more likely to be reinfected than those who received them later?

And why would the Qatar study find a SMALLER gap in infection rates (6x) between combination immunity and vaccine-only immunity than the Israel study did between pure natural immunity and vaccine-only immunity (13x)?

These are not rhetorical questions, by the way. All thoughts welcome.

https://alexberenson.substack....d-vaccines-interfere

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin101:
My father had two trips to the ER in the month that he was sick. He said he was going to get vaccinated when he was eligible. but we will see

Why? He has the antibodies, which are better than provided by the jab. Seems like an unnecessary risk, with little upside.

Federal Judge Fast-Tracks Lawsuit Against Vaccine Mandate for Healthcare Employees

A judge has expedited a lawsuit against the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for healthcare employees. Judge Terry Doughty has fast-tracked a suit from 12 states headed by Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry.

“Biden’s Jab or Job policy is unconstitutional and immoral. It is yet another attempt to break the backs of America’s working class but also an unprecedented attack on access to health care services for the poor and elderly,” Landry said in a press release. “I am pleased with the expedited order issued by Judge Doughty and look forward to quickly defeating the federal government’s overreach.”

The other states involved in the lawsuit are Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and West Virginia.

The suit challenges a mandate by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) that full- and part-time employees, along with contractors and volunteers, at facilities that benefit from federal Medicare and Medicaid funding receive the COVID vaccine.

The expediting of the briefing schedule means that all briefs relating to the case must be completed by December 1.

Judge Doughty’s order was a concise two pages.

Landry said that he will continue to lead the battle against this mandate and similar ones the Biden administration is foisting on the American people. “Joe Biden can continue trying to bully our citizens, but I will keep fighting for them and the chief principle of our great country – freedom.”

Stay tuned as this case goes before the court soon. We’ll definitely be watching to see if the states that seek medical freedom for their citizens will prevail.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-p...e-employees-n1534275

I guess the mandates for the booster will now commence.


FDA Authorizes Moderna, Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Boosters for All Adults

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...WGWqsaGHIOGR2LprWmpg

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Friday authorized boosters of the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines for all Americans 18 or older.

“The FDA has determined that the currently available data support expanding the eligibility of a single booster dose of the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines to individuals 18 years of age and older,” Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said in a statement.

An FDA analysis of immune response data supported the decision. For Moderna’s vaccine, the FDA analyzed how 149 participants from the original clinical studies reacted after being given a third dose. For Pfizer’s shot, the FDA analyzed the immune response of approximately 200 participants who got a booster.

Those who got a booster had higher antibody levels than those who did not.

Studies and real-world data show the vaccines protect well against infection and hospitalization in the months after the primary series. But after a certain point, the antibody levels begin dropping and the effectiveness plummets against infection and decreases to a lesser extent against severe disease.

The drop is more pronounced in the elderly and those who have serious underlying health conditions like obesity.

Health officials previously tried to expand access to boosters to everybody but were effectively blocked by the FDA’s vaccine advisory panel, which voted against the move. The FDA could have overruled the recommendation but did not. Instead, the agency took up a separate recommendation to make a booster available to everybody over 65 and certain groups 64 and under.

The FDA has now side-stepped its vaccine advisory panel in making boosters available to anybody 18 or older.

Food and Drug Administration FDA headquarters White Oak Maryland
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) headquarters is seen in White Oak, Md., in a file photograph. (Andrew Kelly/Reuters)
“I think it would have been of value for the public to hear an open discussion about the need for boosters. I wish we had had the chance to discuss this,” Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and a panel member, told The Epoch Times in an email.

Dr. Paul Spearman, an infectious diseases specialist at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, and another panel member, told The Epoch Times that widening booster access is warranted by “declining antibody levels and breakthrough infections.”

He said in an email that he wasn’t sure why the FDA didn’t convene the panel.

“There was some reluctance on the committee to say that everyone needed boosters, and perhaps they wanted to move this ahead without much controversy, but that is just speculation,” he said. “I think the data support giving boosters, and with cases rising in some parts of the U.S., it makes sense to boost protection rather than wait until antibodies decline to the point that the individual is put at risk for serious disease.”

The FDA said it did not hold a meeting because “the agency previously convened the committee for extensive discussions regarding the use of booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines and, after review of both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s EUA requests, the FDA concluded that the requests do not raise questions that would benefit from additional discussion by committee members.”

Outside experts were divided on the move.

“With rising cases amongst vaccinated nationally, I think this is the right move,” Dr. Leora Horowitz, director of director of NYU Langone’s Center for Healthcare Innovation and Delivery Science, wrote on Twitter.

But Dr. Walid Gellad, an associate professor of medicine and health policy at the University of Pittsburgh, said there appeared to be no new safety data on Moderna boosters for young men. He noted that multiple countries have paused or restricted use of the jab in people under 30 because of the heightened side effect risk and that the FDA delayed a decision on authorizing the vaccine for 12- to 17-year-olds because of the risks.

“Can’t just ignore all of this,” he said.

The Moderna one is 50 micrograms, half the dosage of each primary series shot. Pfizer’s is unchanged at 30 micrograms.

Albert Bourla, Pfizer’s CEO, said that he hoped boosters for all “will help accelerate our path out of this pandemic.”

Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel said the widening of booster access “comes at a critical time as we enter the winter months and face increasing COVID-19 case counts and hospitalizations across the country.”

Nationwide COVID-19 cases started dropping in early September. They went down 88 percent by Oct. 24, according to federal data. Cases have started ticking up since then, reaching about 110,000 on Nov. 17.

Hospitalizations with COVID-19 followed a similar track, but have barely gone up after reaching on Nov. 6 the lowest number since late July.

A rising share of both metrics, as well as COVID-19 deaths, have been among the vaccinated in recent months.

COVID-19 is the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

Some 228.5 million Americans (68.8 percent of the population) had finished a full vaccination series—two doses of the Pfizer or Moderna shots, or the single-dose Johnson & Johnson jab—as of Nov. 18. All but about 17 million got the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines.

quote:

Albert Bourla, Pfizer’s CEO, said that he hoped boosters for all “will help accelerate our path out of this pandemic.”

"Complete failure is the phrase that fits best here."

Fauci Finally Admits Vaccines Don’t Protect Against Serious Covid or Death
By Vasko Kohlmayer

Last week Dr. Anthony Fauci made perhaps the most damning confession in the Covid vaccine saga. So far-reaching are the implications of his statement that the interview in which he made it may well prove a turning point in the fight against the vaccine fraud that is being perpetrated on the peoples of the world.

In a November 12 podcast session with the New York Times, Fauci was forced to admit the fact that the vaccines do not reliably protect their recipients from serious Covid or death.

Called upon to explain the data coming from Israel – a country with one of the highest vaccination rates in the world – Fauci said the following:

“They are seeing a waning of immunity not only against infection but against hospitalization and to some extent death, which is starting to now involve all age groups. It isn’t just the elderly” [emphasis added].

In other words, the vaccines’ protective efficacy wanes not only in regard to the threat of infection, but also in regard to severe Covid and death. Speaking about the effectiveness of the vaccines in countries with high vaccination rates, Fauci admitted:

“It’s waning to the point that you’re seeing more and more people getting breakthrough infections, and more and more of those people who are getting breakthrough infections are winding up in the hospital.”

Even though Fauci tries to palliate the hard impact of his answer in soft language, the harsh truth behind his words is painfully evident.

Fauci’s words amount to the admission that the vaccinated are getting infected and more and more of them are ending up in hospital where they keep succumbing to Covid at increasing rates.

This is what data from Israel and other highly vaccinated countries has indicated for some time now. In the United Kingdom, for example, between February and September of this year, 72 percent of all Covid-related deaths were among the vaccinated. In Scotland the situation was even worse: 80 percent of Covid deaths occurred among those who had been injected with the vaccines.

For months Fauci and his fellow vaccinators censored the unfavorable data while claiming that the injections protected against serious Covid and death. The evidence to the contrary was clear and extensive. More than two months before Fauci’s admission we marshalled some of it a piece titled The Vaccines Do Not Stop Severe Covid or Death. Fauci was, of course, well familiar with the data we used, but he did everything he could to keep it concealed from the public for as long as he possibly could. Rather than coming out clean, he kept spreading misinformation about the vaccines’ alleged efficacy to protect people from falling seriously ill and dying. But in the end, even such an adroit prevaricator as Dr. Fauci could not hold out any longer under the weight of evidence.

If you notice in Fauci’s latest New York Times interview there is almost a sense of panic, as he mentions younger people. Those who are familiar with the actual data rather than the misinformation narratives propagated by the mainstream media know that Covid has been primarily a disease of the elderly. In almost all places and regions, the median age of Covid-related deaths tends to be higher than the average life expectancy. Younger individuals who were healthy were generally safe from the most severe forms of the disease. But now in countries with high vaccination rates we are seeing younger vaccinated individuals coming down with serious Covid and even dying.

This appears very much like the case of antibody dependent enhancement. Some of the world’s best scientists in the field have warned precisely against this danger. Included among them are Dr. Robert Malone and one of the world’s leading virologists Luc Montagnier. Professor Montagnier won the 2008 Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology for his work on the virus that causes HIV. Their warnings have, however, have not only gone unheeded, but both men have been censored and suppressed by the vaccinators with the help of Big Tech and the mainstream media.

It is not our purpose, however, to discuss antibody dependent enhancement in this piece. What we wish to do here is to focus on Fauci’s game-changing admission that the vaccines fail to protect against hospitalization and/or death.

We have already known for some time that the vaccines do not protect from infection even though we were initially told that they were 95 percent effective. This turned out to be a big lie, which the vaccinators managed to keep alive for nearly 9 months. Eventually, however, under the overwhelming weight of data coming in from highly vaccinated countries that experienced subsequent surges of infection, they did have to admit the truth. On August 5 of this year CDC Director Rochelle Walensky confessed on CNN that the vaccines can no longer “prevent transmission.”

In other words, the vaccines have little effectiveness in protecting people from becoming infected with the virus and then in turn infecting other people with it. Just how completely ineffective the vaccines can be seen from a recent Wall Street Journal report about the Ottawa Senators hockey team which has 100 percent vaccination rate. And yet, despite this, 40 percent of the players on that team are currently testing positive for Covid.

The disturbing part of this is that the vaccinators have known about the vaccine failure at least from the early summer. But rather than calling off the worldwide vaccination drives that have injected hundreds of millions of people with ineffective substances, the vaccinators changed their tack and argued that even though the vaccines will not protect you from infection they will still keep you from serious Covid and death.

Last week, however, this lie was also put to rest by none other than Dr. Fauci himself.

How, then, should we describe vaccines that:

Do not protect their recipients from getting infected and infecting others, and
Do not protect their recipients against hospitalization and death?

Complete failure is the phrase that fits best here.

But these vaccines are worse than useless. They are, in fact, very likely among the most deadly and dangerous vaccines ever released upon the public.

The question is this: Why are we still injecting people with these ineffective and dangerous substances? What is the purpose other than to enrich those who are involved in their production and distribution?

Now Big Pharma, Fauci and Co. and their media shills say we need to take their boosters to keep ourselves protected (which we never really were). The boosters, however, will likely be as ineffective as the original failed shots. The CDC has recently approved a fourth shot for the vulnerable. This is an indirect admission on their part that the previous three shots have failed. Why in the world would anyone believe that the fourth injection will work?

The Covid vaccination travesty must be stopped now and paused until effective, reliable, and safe alternatives are found.

https://www.americanthinker.co..._covid_or_death.html

chellim1 - Thank you for your contributions to this important thread. You're a monster.
Mike

quote:

You're a monster.

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:

Hopefully a whistleblower with some integrity at Pfizer will release the documents. 55 years? That screams “coverup”.

55 years? That's fine, no problem. Let them have their 55 years. Let them have as long as they want. Just place a moratorium on all vaccine mandates until the documents have been released, with additional time for public review of those documents. Review time should be at least 50% of the time that it takes to release the documents in response to the FOIA request.

They finally admit that the vaccine is not working; their inevitable answer will be “throw more vaccine at it!”.

^As I've said before, it's a China virus. You get the vaccination, then an hour later, you need another jab.

quote:

Originally posted by kkina:
^As I've said before, it's a China virus. You get the vaccination, then an hour later, you need another jab.

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
They finally admit that the vaccine is not working; their inevitable answer will be “throw more vaccine at it!”.

That's the way it's been since the beginning, am I right? 15 days didn't work so double down and make it 30 more days. Then that didn't work so triple down and make it six months. Now we're going on two years. Then it's you have to wear one mask; that didn't work so double down and thrown in a second mask. More masks!. Then it's lock down again. Then it's get the vaccine, but we can't force you. Then it's you have to get the vaccine and we will force you. Then it's thanks for getting the vaccine but now you need a booster. Then another booster. We need more booster cowbell!!

And then we will keep doubling and tripling down on everything because it's all we know how to do. And anyway, we like the power, so keep complying, sheep.

And sadly a lot of people just keep complying.

About 3 weeks ago we thought my wife had food poisoning. Figured it wasn't Covid since she never leaves the house, plus she has been jabbed twice. Didn't take the grandkids visits into consideration though. Then on Nov 10 I came down sick. took the nasal jab on Nov 12. on the 15th the results came back positive. On the 17th I was able to get the infusion because of my heart issues. I'm almost over it now.

^^^ sorry to hear. Hang in there.

quote:

plus she has been jabbed twice.

We now know it doesn't prevent the contraction or spread of Covid. Were you jabbed as well?

If so, I would avoid the booster:

Should everyone get booster shots? Especially, those with natural immunity from prior infection and vaccine immunity from full vaccination? This is called hybrid immunity. Here is what MedPage Today said:

“With a COVID-19 booster shot available for a segment of the U.S. population, an emerging group may wonder if they really need it — those with “hybrid immunity.”

These are the people who are fully vaccinated but have also recovered from a case of COVID-19.

If you have hybrid immunity, “I would call yourself a victor,” said Paul Offit, MD, the director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. ‘Call it a victory and bow out.’”

https://noqreport.com/2021/11/...ndemic-will-not-end/

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/w...pean-nation-rcna6231

Dutch police fire on anti-lockdown protesters

“If you have hybrid immunity, “I would call yourself a victor,” said Paul Offit, MD”.

I disagree with this statement, especially if you do not have comorbidity that puts you at risk. Any booster threatens to destroy your hard won natural immunity, making you reliant on the jab.

^^^ I think that's what Paul Offit, MD is saying: ‘Call it a victory and bow out.’”
In other words, don't get the booster.

I had come down with what I believed to be Covid back in JAN - FEB, 2019. It laid me up for two weeks. So I just thought I had natural immunity and fought against my wifes pestering to get the vaccinations. So no I hadn't gotten any shots. But she insisted on me getting the covid infusion due to the heart issues I have. Hopefully I'll be good for another two years.