In the US, transparency of actual effects, side effects, and deaths is being fought out in court. Pfizer wanted to postpone the publication of the internal data on the vaccines until St Juttemis, but a US court has now thwarted the plan. But sometimes it goes even faster: hackers have now cracked the servers of the vaccine manufacturers. And the facts are even more chilling than “conspiracy theorists” feared, reports Nikki Vogt.
In Pfizer’s case, it concerns 450,000 pages that the company must now publish. The Food and Drug Agency (FDA) had magnanimously stated that it would be releasing 500 pages each month, which would have taken 75 years. But a federal judge in the US threw a spanner in the works. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), he has instructed the FDA to release 55,000 pages per month. According to the ruling, full data should be available to the world in about eight months. Here is the link to the original text of the verdict.
However, we may have to wait until the end for the most explosive data. The FDA will likely show the less interesting material to the world first. But maybe we’ll get a surprise.
But it seems we already have it, from a completely different source. Apparently, hackers hacked into the data servers of the major vaccine manufacturers and captured vaccine data, and put it on the net. People know how to help themselves, and the whole bubble will burst. The documents can be viewed on the website “ www.howbad.info ”. Since the site is partially flooded, there is another backup site that contains the same information: HowBadisMyBatch.com
This one is very clear and it is the original manufacturer documentation. You can also check your own batch number against the lists there.
What the data shows is frightening in its cold-bloodedness and unscrupulousness. What many already suspected. But what has been laughed off as a completely insane conspiracy theory: Certain batches of vaccines have extremely high death rates and side effects – across all manufacturers. So the “fairy tale” of the deadly batches of parties is most likely a fact.
For example, Wochenblick writes :
“This is because the data includes the number of deaths and serious adverse events associated with each lot number, and also allows for comparison with other lots. It is alarming that in some cases the death rate after vaccination or the risk of serious side effects increases 50-fold. (…) Another document (starting on page 16) goes into detail about serious side effects. Anaphylactic reactions, myocarditis and heart problems, thrombosis, etc. are much more common in percentage than the statistical chance of dying from Corona. And it should be remembered that the data only covers cases that occurred within a 90-day period after the vaccine was made available, as well as only cases reported directly to Pfizer.
This publication also supports the report that Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg together with Prof. dr. Michael Yeadon has drafted.
For those who don’t know him:
“Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg is a German internist, social and environmental physician, and politician. Wodarg was a member of the SPD parliamentary group in the Bundestag from 1994 to 2009 and then a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. As a European politician, he was responsible for safety, medicine and health issues and initiated a Council of Europe inquiry into the 2009/2010 H1N1 pandemic.”
Dit is wat we over hem vinden op Wikipedia. Vandaag is hij in de partij “De Basis”. Zijn hele carrière tot aan de Coronapandemie is die van een bekwaam, zeer gerespecteerd medisch deskundige en sociaal geëngageerd persoon en op geen enkele manier “rechts”. Zijn reputatie veranderde abrupt toen hij het woord nam tijdens de Coronaperiode. Hij was zoals vele internationaal gerespecteerde deskundigen en professoren (Bhakdi, Hockertz, Yeadon, van den Bossche, Höcker, Malone, Ioannidis enz. …). Zij werden “rechts”, gekken, mafkezen, dwazen, samenzweringstheoretici en plotseling als onbekwaam afgeschilderd omdat zij een afwijkende mening hadden. En vaak door “factcheckers” en schrijvers die geen flauw benul hebben van de feiten of het onderwerp.
Het verslag van Dr. Wodarg, dat hij samen met Craig Paardekooper en Prof. Dr, Michael Yeadon, voormalig wetenschappelijk directeur bij Pfizer, heeft opgesteld. (Prof. Dr. Michael Yeadon wordt natuurlijk ook op Wikipedia afgeschilderd als een krankzinnige samenzweringstheoreticus, waarbij zijn kwalificaties slechts zeer terloops worden vermeld (vertaling uit de Engelse Wikipedia):
“He was chief scientist and vice president of Pfizer’s Allergy and Respiratory Research Division in Sandwich, Kent, where he oversaw drug development for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). At Pfizer, Yeadon was responsible for target selection and the development of new molecules in human studies. His unit developed inhaled and oral NCEs that have shown positive results in clinical trials for asthma, allergic rhinitis and COPD.”
The report of the two scientists and the statistical expert who analyzed the US VAERS data (that is the US version of the German Paul Ehrlich Institute, which collects and evaluates side effects and harm of drugs) shows that the four largest vaccine manufacturers, BioNTech /Pfizer, Moderna, Janssen, and Astra-Zeneca, have dosed complete batches of vaccines differently in ongoing vaccination campaigns. It is in fact a large-scale experiment with hundreds of millions of people as guinea pigs in the laboratory. According to Wodarg and Yeadon, they naturally want to find out at what composition and dose people suffer damage or die:
“ The deviations are so extreme that they cannot be due to random or application-related toxicity fluctuations. On the contrary, there are indications that large-scale genetic engineering experiments are currently being carried out on the broad, unsuspecting population under the protection of the alleged emergency and that this has been made possible, even aided, by the legal political preparatory work and the assistance of the governments and authorities.
Meanwhile, several international research teams have systematically examined the US adverse events database VAERS and established as early as October 31, 2021 that all serious adverse events and deaths reported in the US can only be attributed to a very small proportion of batches or lots ( here is a report from the VAERS analysis site† Now, more and more such results are emerging, revealing frightening correlations. The VAERS database contained evidence of batches of vaccines with widely varying effects. It contains data on reported adverse events from each batch. It was therefore obvious to draw up a graph showing how the toxicity of batches varied in time and place over 2021. Diagrams show when the toxic batches were used and how toxic they were. One can also see who has used them and how the participating pharmaceutical companies seem to have acted in concert so as not to disrupt each other’s given time window. Finally, one can even guess at the purpose of these distributions, such as testing the effects of different dosages (types of damage and deaths), etc.”
Former Pfizer head of research Mike Yeadon comments:
“As for the intent to cause harm, including death, I am convinced. Nor am I alone: several completely independent analysts agree on these points:
1. Several of us believe that the whole “Hot Lots” situation points to intent, but the data needs to be properly understood.” Craig Paardekooper’s original analysis is flawed in one important respect. He has wrongly, but understandably, equated lot numbering with chronological order. This is not right. So these patterns, which appear to me as a dose-response relationship illustrated over time, with firms apparently coordinating to avoid each other, arise as a result of this baseless assumption.
2. However, these lot numbers and the associated serious adverse reactions values are REAL, and they are present in VAERS. Pfizer, for example, could request the data for its parties and plot it against SAE (serious adverse events) rates, and it would produce graphs very similar to Paardekooper’s evaluation.
3. We believe this is intentional as the patterns of SAEs associated with lot numbers are not random. The variability of SAEs per batch is enormous and cannot be explained by innocent factors. For example, instability and deterioration of the product cannot cause these effects. In general, degradation results in a loss of activity and not in the acquisition of greater toxicity. Although one could argue that this is the exception to the rule. I show that this is not possible because the same extraordinary pattern of a small percentage of batches that are extremely toxic is observed in three products with two technologies (mRNA and DNA). No: this is intentional and must be known to the companies.
(These are only excerpts and you can read the full, poignant text here on Dr. Wodarg’s site. If that has sunk to the bottom because the latest posts are always put above it, it can also be found here ).
The scientists come to the truly shocking conclusion:
“What’s shocking is that all three companies are conducting similar studies with greatly increased toxicity. They apparently do so in such a way that they do not get in each other’s way and apparently divide their toxic experiments in such a way that it is hardly noticeable at first glance. (…) Hence my strong suspicion that the false pandemic is being used to try a lot of things that would otherwise have been far too risky and illegal.”
According to her, the “harmless” batches of vaccine are used very deliberately:
“The intercalated “salt parties” have five consequences for the companies:
- They dilute the otherwise alarming side effects.
- They cost little and still fetch a full price.
- They supply the control groups that Big Pharma would otherwise have had to pay dearly for in phase 2 or 3.
- They are also fully funded with taxpayer money.
- The risks of these “telescopic” studies are borne by the government budget.
However, through VAERS we now have clear indications of study structures in the state-mandated and funded mass vaccinations with completely new products from Biotech, Janssen, and Moderna, which were only implemented and planned on a large scale after approval.
This is prohibited and punishable and constitutes a clear violation of the Nuremberg Code and all corresponding laws regarding the conduct of studies and the marketing of drugs respectively. This is clearly not inattention or neglect of quality, but a planned violation. In this stage of institutional corruption, many companies see huge opportunities and are already announcing to their investors a continuation of the risky mRNA hype . The primary interest of a drug company.”
The graph shows the distribution of adverse reactions in relation to the lot number:
Leave a Reply