This complaint by the Kansas AG is thoughtful, comprehensive, well researched - and lifted almost verbatim from the posts of our two favorite geezers. Tom, Carl, take a bow, or have a pint - your little blog here is demonstrating impressive reach. This lawsuit has firepower. Perhaps we will live long enough to see an honest reckoning yet.
There are 5 US states in total suing Pfizer, Texas was the first I believe. I've been following the situation via another substack writer Jeff Childers, @coffeeandcovid. We can but hope they get somewhere. The world's least favourite veterinarian should be in jail.
I am despairing as to how to get this out to mainstream coverage. My GP is still advertising Covid boosters today in the surgery. I don’t want to be a Jonah but I’m feeling quite disappointed, angry and frustrated.
The public were sold the propaganda ( for the 'vaccine') that 'we're all in this together' ( get your shots pronto). This fantastically well pulled together Article by TTE demonstrates that 'they' were all in it together, 'Joint Enterprise'.
To know the 'vaccine' had adverse events associated with it during trials, then proceeding to make false claims about it, and marketing it as a 'saviour' course of 'vaccines', must surely be worthy of court time, prison time.
This ( programme) wasn't 'contained' in one or two States, or one or two countries, it was a global roll out.... "no one is safe....", so how are they (going to) getting away with being tried and imprisoned?
It was a correct assumption that reading through this post would 'trigger' negative neural activity, not because it wasn't known (the deliberate and calculating deception of populations) before, but it is seeing so much of what was done, how it was done, and done to so many in one place ( this Article), well, it certainly drives it deep.
The points #6 to #10; #17 and all the way down from #20 should each be sufficient to garner a hefty guilty sentence in court. They also ought to garner an avalanche of condemnatory papers in the scientific community.
This report on its own is such an indictment of vast tracts of scientific reporting, never mind the question of forcing people to take this stuff against their will that huge swathes of mid-level executives, scientists and politicians should be drummed out of their offices and from their tax-paid sinecures.
Surely by now the slogan 'follow the science (and do as we say)' is now discredited forever. I wonder if there are any brave US Attorney Generals around doing the same to the climate scam ...
Here is a clinical trial sponsored by Yale University: “Persuasive Messages for COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake: a Randomized Controlled Trial, Part 1.” https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04460703
In mid-2020 they were testing the best propaganda to manipulate people into taking the juice.
Point #11: This was shocking at the time, but seeing it written down like this is a necessary reminder of the great madness which descended upon the world in 2021. What on earth possessed people to take such unnecessary risks with children's hearts?
It wasn't just Pfizer though - she says the Oxford-AZ children's trial was temporarily paused after the deaths in adults... but was later restarted and children were then given the second dose of a drug that had been withdrawn for under 40s, because most* deaths had occurred after 1st doses so 2nd doses were thought likely to be ok.
And the later Moderna booster trial recruited healthy 12-64y olds including healthy children, even though boosters had been stopped for most healthy under 65s at that stage.
It is worth noting btw that some healthy people with no comorbidities are still being offered vaccination - those aged 12 to 64 years who are household contacts of people with immunosuppression, as well as persons aged 16 to 64 years who are carers or frontline health or social care workers.
Dr Jones says there was no mention of ethics or scientific justification for vaccinating children in the protocols. And initially only 1 dose of mRNA vaccine was approved for children in the UK because of the risk of myocarditis, but after a few months they just decided to give second doses anyway, even though myocarditis risk is highest after repeated vaccination.
No wonder they deferred the vaccine module of the public inquiry. I'd like to see Whitty justify his recommendation for vaccinating children for their mental health as we were told it was his intervention that persuaded the JCVI to revisit their decision not to. He even said himself in April 2021: "The closer you get to someone who's right down at 20, and otherwise blameless in their health, the more you have to think through these really very rare side effects - the risk/benefits might get closer to parity." WTF happened?
It was, I clearly remember that time, being the parent of 2 children who were going to be pressured to have it. And they are autistic (but otherwise extremely healthy) so every 6 months we get a letter telling us its time for their seasonal covid shot, which goes straight in the bin. If anyone can explain to me, why having a communication disorder puts you at greater risk of a mild respiratory virus, I'd be all ears. To date, not one person has. I'm convinced they just want to kill autistic people off see my previous post about the soft eugenics being carried out re epilepsy drugs.
I’m not at all surprised to hear about those recalls, though if you look at the Green book Covid 19 vaccine chapter tables 3 and 4 lists the ‘clinical risk groups’ and autism is not on there, though severe/profound learning disability and epilepsy are. I wonder if it is a data coding issue. It reminds me of that poor man who was vaccinated early due to a historical coding mistake which pulled him into a list of people with morbid obesity. He died I think after Astra zeneca.
Omg that's dreadful, poor chap. It's me that's on the epilepsy meds, for chronic migraine. I'll have a chat with our gp about it to see if I can put a stop to the unwanted mail....
May be a centrally held database as many GP practices aren’t involved in these recall letters but definitely worth checking.
BTW I think the reason for advising women of childbearing age about contraception if they are on certain antiepilepsy meds is to do with the risk of fetal malformations being unacceptably high eg valproate. They have advised that topiramate carries the same high risk following an MHRA safety review which has brought up new evidence. So I think is a positive thing that GPs are actively contacting women to discuss. It is probably women on these meds for migraine who would have fallen through the net.
Yeah, I've seen all the bumf, they also mention the risks of having a child with autism or ADHD as well, which as you can imagine, being autistic, I found particularly offensive. A friend who is on top of all this has shared the guidelines, forms and everything with me. I knew about the risks as I had them explained to me, the first time I was offered topiramate 10 years ago and I declined it then. I waited until I was older to take it. It was actually the last gasp before botox. Thankfully it works. The reason I'm unhappy with the current state of play, is its like women are no longer being given a choice in the matter. It should always be a choice that someone makes, however unpalatable others might deem the outcome. It raises deeper questions about the right to life. I'm currently working on the basis I'll deal with it as and when, as I'm nearly 54 I'm at the top end of the age range anyway.
I am wondering why Moderna is not sued at the same time? Maybe they only used Pfizer in Kansas.
This whole saga is so fraudulent it is truly off the scale.
And we still don’t know if there are further long term implications, especially when considering point 18 (menstrual bleeding). Was this due to a primary clotting/vascular problem or do we have to worry about ovarian changes?
I think a word of thanks must go to the data crunchers who have been ploughing through the Pfizer documents tirelessly since they were released, enabling much of the granular detail about the trials and what Pfizer did and didn't know to be brought before the public, although mainstream media is still deep in denial (Nigel Nelson on gbnews was just last night spouting absolute rubbish about the jabs and how amazing they are 😬). There are so many folks who have literally made it their mission to bring the truth to light, lawsuits like this would not be possible without them.
On points 9, 10 and 11, what has always bothered me about myocarditis and pericarditis is the signal in the young and the parallel with Vioxx. It was young people on Vioxx dying of heart failure that showed there was a problem but what was missed was all the deaths from Vioxx in the older cohorts, that were written off as ‘normal’ due to age. I saw one study suggesting Vioxx killed 650,000 people before it was withdrawn, most dismissed at the time as ‘one of those things’ due to age. How far is this the case with the vaccine? Has anyone even looked?
Guernsey cardiologist Dean Patterson has suggested myocarditis may be being misdiagnosed as myocardial infarction in older adults as presentation, ECG and bloods are indistinguishable. I’m not sure of the evidence base behind that hypothesis. anecdotally I’ve noticed more discharge diagnoses of ‘type 2 myocardial infarction’ in the last couple of years often in conjunction with acute tachyarrhythmis. But an alternative explanation could be that of an increased use of that diagnostic label in secondary care rather than an actual increase. Another auditable phenomenon, alongside that of sudden death at home.
The DUP, who recognise vaccine injury, have agreed to host a meeting with the vaccine injured at Stormont (NIs parliament), but cannot host it unless a party from the other side of the community agree. SDLP, Sinn Fein (who now lead Stormont) and the Alliance party have all declined a meeting. The Vaccine Injured and Bereaved Support group (VIBS) are holding a peaceful protest on Tuesday 2 July from 10am to 12pm on the steps of Stormont. All welcome. https://x.com/VIBS_NI/status/1799897919551602766
#11: 'Pfizer decided to study . . .'. I think this is wrong. They were instructed to do these studies by the FDA in their authorisation letter dated 23/08/21. From the letter, p. 6: 'We have determined that an analysis of spontaneous postmarketing adverse events reported under section 505(k)(1) of the FDCA will not be sufficient to assess *known serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis and identify an unexpected serious risk of subclinical myocarditis* [my emphasis]. Therefore, based on appropriate scientific data, we have determined that you are required to conduct the following studies . . .' A number of studies follow, no. 8 (on p. 8 of the letter) is 'assess the incidence of subclinical myocarditis following administration of the second dose of COMIRNATY in a subset of participants 5 through 15 years of age'. This sounds like the study referred to at #11. It was due to report 30/05/24. It seems utterly crucial. Yet no one seems to be showing much interest in it.
The wording 'serious risk' and 'unexpected serious risk' is strikingly different from the 'very rare' wording attached to these risks everywhere else. It appears to be a significant admission from the FDA that these risks were/are indeed considered serious, quite contrary to most reporting and public health advice. I cannot understand why this letter is so rarely referred to - isn't it part of the regulatory stuff that TTE has just been examining? It is easily accessed on the FDA's own website; if you google FDA pfizer comirnaty approval letter it is the top result: https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download
...reading from a court attorney what some of us have known for a long time is comforting...however in Kansas, as in other states, a civil and not criminal action was brought.
Pfizer (like the rest of the gang) has received an E.U.A. authorization.
This authorization effectively makes it a partner of the DOD of the NHI and immunizes it from any request for compensation for damages... the civil case, by law, will have to be archived.... we hope it will serve to bring out criminal aspects... in that If so, we would have to applaud....
Please tidy-up missing words and gaps/ spacing in the post. I'd very much like to pass this on to others (also encouraging them to subscribe) but cannot do so as long as it's as untidy as this. Many thanks.
This complaint by the Kansas AG is thoughtful, comprehensive, well researched - and lifted almost verbatim from the posts of our two favorite geezers. Tom, Carl, take a bow, or have a pint - your little blog here is demonstrating impressive reach. This lawsuit has firepower. Perhaps we will live long enough to see an honest reckoning yet.
There are 5 US states in total suing Pfizer, Texas was the first I believe. I've been following the situation via another substack writer Jeff Childers, @coffeeandcovid. We can but hope they get somewhere. The world's least favourite veterinarian should be in jail.
In the wake of yesterday's Supreme Court ruling (missouri v. biden), it does give some hope.
Bourla should go to jail for what he did. And we can only hope that Pfizer goes the way of Purdue.
I am despairing as to how to get this out to mainstream coverage. My GP is still advertising Covid boosters today in the surgery. I don’t want to be a Jonah but I’m feeling quite disappointed, angry and frustrated.
There’s a template letter for GPs here https://peoplesvaccineinquiry.co.uk/take-action/
The public were sold the propaganda ( for the 'vaccine') that 'we're all in this together' ( get your shots pronto). This fantastically well pulled together Article by TTE demonstrates that 'they' were all in it together, 'Joint Enterprise'.
To know the 'vaccine' had adverse events associated with it during trials, then proceeding to make false claims about it, and marketing it as a 'saviour' course of 'vaccines', must surely be worthy of court time, prison time.
This ( programme) wasn't 'contained' in one or two States, or one or two countries, it was a global roll out.... "no one is safe....", so how are they (going to) getting away with being tried and imprisoned?
It was a correct assumption that reading through this post would 'trigger' negative neural activity, not because it wasn't known (the deliberate and calculating deception of populations) before, but it is seeing so much of what was done, how it was done, and done to so many in one place ( this Article), well, it certainly drives it deep.
The points #6 to #10; #17 and all the way down from #20 should each be sufficient to garner a hefty guilty sentence in court. They also ought to garner an avalanche of condemnatory papers in the scientific community.
This report on its own is such an indictment of vast tracts of scientific reporting, never mind the question of forcing people to take this stuff against their will that huge swathes of mid-level executives, scientists and politicians should be drummed out of their offices and from their tax-paid sinecures.
Surely by now the slogan 'follow the science (and do as we say)' is now discredited forever. I wonder if there are any brave US Attorney Generals around doing the same to the climate scam ...
re: #25
Here is a clinical trial sponsored by Yale University: “Persuasive Messages for COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake: a Randomized Controlled Trial, Part 1.” https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04460703
In mid-2020 they were testing the best propaganda to manipulate people into taking the juice.
Point #11: This was shocking at the time, but seeing it written down like this is a necessary reminder of the great madness which descended upon the world in 2021. What on earth possessed people to take such unnecessary risks with children's hearts?
Retired paediatrician Dr Ros Jones expands upon this topic - her testimony takes me well beyond the blood/p*ss boiling stage and hurtling towards spontaneous combustion territory: https://peoplesvaccineinquiry.co.uk/video/ros-jones-retired-consultant-peadiatrician/
It wasn't just Pfizer though - she says the Oxford-AZ children's trial was temporarily paused after the deaths in adults... but was later restarted and children were then given the second dose of a drug that had been withdrawn for under 40s, because most* deaths had occurred after 1st doses so 2nd doses were thought likely to be ok.
(*https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9612327/15-Britons-suffer-rare-blood-clots-SECOND-AstraZeneca-vaccine.html 15 Britons suffered rare blood clots after SECOND AstraZeneca vaccine but regulator says cases were 'milder' than first dose patients 24/5/21)
And the later Moderna booster trial recruited healthy 12-64y olds including healthy children, even though boosters had been stopped for most healthy under 65s at that stage.
It is worth noting btw that some healthy people with no comorbidities are still being offered vaccination - those aged 12 to 64 years who are household contacts of people with immunosuppression, as well as persons aged 16 to 64 years who are carers or frontline health or social care workers.
Dr Jones says there was no mention of ethics or scientific justification for vaccinating children in the protocols. And initially only 1 dose of mRNA vaccine was approved for children in the UK because of the risk of myocarditis, but after a few months they just decided to give second doses anyway, even though myocarditis risk is highest after repeated vaccination.
No wonder they deferred the vaccine module of the public inquiry. I'd like to see Whitty justify his recommendation for vaccinating children for their mental health as we were told it was his intervention that persuaded the JCVI to revisit their decision not to. He even said himself in April 2021: "The closer you get to someone who's right down at 20, and otherwise blameless in their health, the more you have to think through these really very rare side effects - the risk/benefits might get closer to parity." WTF happened?
It was, I clearly remember that time, being the parent of 2 children who were going to be pressured to have it. And they are autistic (but otherwise extremely healthy) so every 6 months we get a letter telling us its time for their seasonal covid shot, which goes straight in the bin. If anyone can explain to me, why having a communication disorder puts you at greater risk of a mild respiratory virus, I'd be all ears. To date, not one person has. I'm convinced they just want to kill autistic people off see my previous post about the soft eugenics being carried out re epilepsy drugs.
I’m not at all surprised to hear about those recalls, though if you look at the Green book Covid 19 vaccine chapter tables 3 and 4 lists the ‘clinical risk groups’ and autism is not on there, though severe/profound learning disability and epilepsy are. I wonder if it is a data coding issue. It reminds me of that poor man who was vaccinated early due to a historical coding mistake which pulled him into a list of people with morbid obesity. He died I think after Astra zeneca.
Omg that's dreadful, poor chap. It's me that's on the epilepsy meds, for chronic migraine. I'll have a chat with our gp about it to see if I can put a stop to the unwanted mail....
May be a centrally held database as many GP practices aren’t involved in these recall letters but definitely worth checking.
BTW I think the reason for advising women of childbearing age about contraception if they are on certain antiepilepsy meds is to do with the risk of fetal malformations being unacceptably high eg valproate. They have advised that topiramate carries the same high risk following an MHRA safety review which has brought up new evidence. So I think is a positive thing that GPs are actively contacting women to discuss. It is probably women on these meds for migraine who would have fallen through the net.
Yeah, I've seen all the bumf, they also mention the risks of having a child with autism or ADHD as well, which as you can imagine, being autistic, I found particularly offensive. A friend who is on top of all this has shared the guidelines, forms and everything with me. I knew about the risks as I had them explained to me, the first time I was offered topiramate 10 years ago and I declined it then. I waited until I was older to take it. It was actually the last gasp before botox. Thankfully it works. The reason I'm unhappy with the current state of play, is its like women are no longer being given a choice in the matter. It should always be a choice that someone makes, however unpalatable others might deem the outcome. It raises deeper questions about the right to life. I'm currently working on the basis I'll deal with it as and when, as I'm nearly 54 I'm at the top end of the age range anyway.
I am wondering why Moderna is not sued at the same time? Maybe they only used Pfizer in Kansas.
This whole saga is so fraudulent it is truly off the scale.
And we still don’t know if there are further long term implications, especially when considering point 18 (menstrual bleeding). Was this due to a primary clotting/vascular problem or do we have to worry about ovarian changes?
I get the feeling the dam is breaking….
So they're trying to sue the US Government basically. Good luck with that.
Pfizer walks away clean as does Moderna.
I think a word of thanks must go to the data crunchers who have been ploughing through the Pfizer documents tirelessly since they were released, enabling much of the granular detail about the trials and what Pfizer did and didn't know to be brought before the public, although mainstream media is still deep in denial (Nigel Nelson on gbnews was just last night spouting absolute rubbish about the jabs and how amazing they are 😬). There are so many folks who have literally made it their mission to bring the truth to light, lawsuits like this would not be possible without them.
On points 9, 10 and 11, what has always bothered me about myocarditis and pericarditis is the signal in the young and the parallel with Vioxx. It was young people on Vioxx dying of heart failure that showed there was a problem but what was missed was all the deaths from Vioxx in the older cohorts, that were written off as ‘normal’ due to age. I saw one study suggesting Vioxx killed 650,000 people before it was withdrawn, most dismissed at the time as ‘one of those things’ due to age. How far is this the case with the vaccine? Has anyone even looked?
Guernsey cardiologist Dean Patterson has suggested myocarditis may be being misdiagnosed as myocardial infarction in older adults as presentation, ECG and bloods are indistinguishable. I’m not sure of the evidence base behind that hypothesis. anecdotally I’ve noticed more discharge diagnoses of ‘type 2 myocardial infarction’ in the last couple of years often in conjunction with acute tachyarrhythmis. But an alternative explanation could be that of an increased use of that diagnostic label in secondary care rather than an actual increase. Another auditable phenomenon, alongside that of sudden death at home.
Many thanks
The DUP, who recognise vaccine injury, have agreed to host a meeting with the vaccine injured at Stormont (NIs parliament), but cannot host it unless a party from the other side of the community agree. SDLP, Sinn Fein (who now lead Stormont) and the Alliance party have all declined a meeting. The Vaccine Injured and Bereaved Support group (VIBS) are holding a peaceful protest on Tuesday 2 July from 10am to 12pm on the steps of Stormont. All welcome. https://x.com/VIBS_NI/status/1799897919551602766
#11: 'Pfizer decided to study . . .'. I think this is wrong. They were instructed to do these studies by the FDA in their authorisation letter dated 23/08/21. From the letter, p. 6: 'We have determined that an analysis of spontaneous postmarketing adverse events reported under section 505(k)(1) of the FDCA will not be sufficient to assess *known serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis and identify an unexpected serious risk of subclinical myocarditis* [my emphasis]. Therefore, based on appropriate scientific data, we have determined that you are required to conduct the following studies . . .' A number of studies follow, no. 8 (on p. 8 of the letter) is 'assess the incidence of subclinical myocarditis following administration of the second dose of COMIRNATY in a subset of participants 5 through 15 years of age'. This sounds like the study referred to at #11. It was due to report 30/05/24. It seems utterly crucial. Yet no one seems to be showing much interest in it.
The wording 'serious risk' and 'unexpected serious risk' is strikingly different from the 'very rare' wording attached to these risks everywhere else. It appears to be a significant admission from the FDA that these risks were/are indeed considered serious, quite contrary to most reporting and public health advice. I cannot understand why this letter is so rarely referred to - isn't it part of the regulatory stuff that TTE has just been examining? It is easily accessed on the FDA's own website; if you google FDA pfizer comirnaty approval letter it is the top result: https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download
...reading from a court attorney what some of us have known for a long time is comforting...however in Kansas, as in other states, a civil and not criminal action was brought.
Pfizer (like the rest of the gang) has received an E.U.A. authorization.
This authorization effectively makes it a partner of the DOD of the NHI and immunizes it from any request for compensation for damages... the civil case, by law, will have to be archived.... we hope it will serve to bring out criminal aspects... in that If so, we would have to applaud....
Please tidy-up missing words and gaps/ spacing in the post. I'd very much like to pass this on to others (also encouraging them to subscribe) but cannot do so as long as it's as untidy as this. Many thanks.
Hi Quentin, 98% of the text comes from Kansas.
Best wishes, Tom