Is anyone here, but me reading these papers... I could do with some help..
55,000 pages per month is somewhat huge..12,000 in first tranche.
"A court loss for the FDA in a Texas district court means the agency on Tuesday began to release a massive trove of hundreds of thousands of documents related to its review of Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine."
As an M.D. with both CLL and a a special interest in Immunology I'm slowly reading through them, not exactly an easy read.
There's an old saying that a new boat design can't be released for service until the weight of the accompanying documentation exceeds the weight of the vessel. So what do you do if the boat has passed sufficient testing to prove its effectiveness when a state of emergency exists? Wait for the documentation, or save some lives?
Update: 13th March 2022 (with my emphasis)
6 Months of U.S. Data Support Safety of mRNA COVID Vaccines
— CDC reports find that most AEs were minor, transient, and few patients sought medical care
Out of almost 300 million mRNA vaccine doses administered in the U.S. from Dec. 14, 2020 to June 14, 2021, 92% of self-reported AEs to VAERS were not serious, and under 1% of individuals reporting data to v-safe said they sought medical care for their AEs after dose one and dose two, reported Julianne Gee, MPH, of the CDC in Atlanta, and colleagues, writing in Lancet Infectious Diseases.
:
The authors examined self-reported data from both VAERS and v-safe on 298,792,852 individuals in the U.S. who received Pfizer or Moderna vaccines. Of the 340,522 reports to VAERS, 92% were non-serious, 6.6% were serious (non-death), and 1.3%, or 4,496, were deaths.
However, Gee's group noted caveats to the deaths, namely that reporting on any deaths after vaccination was required since the products were under emergency use authorization, but no unusual patterns were detected in the cause of death reports. They added that 80% of deaths were among adults ages 60 and up. They also pointed out that a different surveillance system demonstrated no increased risk of non-COVID-19 mortality in vaccinated people.
Plus from FDA Begins Releasing Pfizer COVID Vax Documents
— Court-ordered release runs risk of "cherry picking and taking things out of context"
Anti-vaccine advocates have already capitalized on the release of these documents to further call COVID-19 vaccines into question. Children's Health Defense, a nonprofit that has taken a stance against the use of COVID vaccines in kids, highlighted a list of adverse events reported in the documents -- a list that includes any adverse events that occurred in people who participated in the clinical trial, even those who received placebo, and is misleading, experts have said.
"There's a risk of cherry picking and taking things out of context," Zalewski said. "Just because you will have all the data in front of you, that doesn't mean you'll reach any different conclusions."
Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency includes several physicians known for spreading false or misleading information during the pandemic, including Aaron Kheriaty, MD, Harvey Risch, MD, PhD, and Peter McCullough, MD.
Pfizer’s confidential document shows adverse events reported following vaccination; it doesn’t demonstrate that the vaccine caused the events or is unsafe
I think the bone of Contention here are the m-RNA ones...Your link seems to be an all vaccines list and therefore is not relevant...The vaccines on offer are certainly not equivalent in action or side effects...I cannot tell if India the world's largest vaccinated population refused to use m-RNA or not...They seemed to be heading that way, but then as far as I can see ..didn't proceed..Perhaps you know?
This seems to agree with me as they are using standard vaccs plus a DNA one as opposed to an RNA one
"In mid-July, it was reported that approval of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, as well as a shipment of vaccines donated by the United States (which includes the AstraZeneca, Janssen, Moderna, and Pfizer vaccines), had faced delays due to requests from their manufacturers for indemnity clauses from Indian authorities, which would relieve them from legal liability for adverse reactions"
I simply don't agree with you Aussie Neil. So why don't we just wait and see how the excess deaths get accounted for, and who sues whom? It shouldn't be long and already I'm being asked to prepare a Covid Vaccine Damage Injuries case. I also intend to close this account down and make a formal complaint, if I get any more abuse here, in which the Admins here don't intervene.
CLL Journey...ex Radiotherapist and Immunologist...Now a very senior Medico-Legal Expert...Probably got my CLL from the radium we used to treat cancer, plus my time on nuclear submarines. I'm dealing with the legalites or not of the Vaccine Mandates i.e. were they based upon sound Medical data or not? The forcing of these papers is probably one of the most significant steps forward towards a return to bodily autonomy and choice, since Covid began.
Explain away your answer makes no sense to me...Uteri? It's one of the most endearing features here that one could say the moon is round and get a herd of people howling that it is not..So sweet!
I think you are getting banned/reported because of the nasty/sarcastic tone your posts take. If you start out by being argumentative/insulting people you are going to assume to appear to be coming from a place ill intent, you know. I just read your other post; I find it hard to believe your supposed credentials. You appear to be nothing more than another internet troll. Not sure how someone with a chronic disease is "fit and healthy", let alone some of your other contradictory remarks.
I do thank you for bringing these papers to our attention. It's not unheard of for Big Business to lie, as well as be in collusion with government officials. It's why we had to make various laws regarding kickbacks and coverups and whatnot. But please, stop with the insults.
Re: the comment about uteri, please see recent Texas laws affecting women's body autonomy. If you don't understand something someone said, attempting to insult the person who said it doesn't inspire confidence. Just ask for clarification, please.
Surely the original posting was neither nasty, sarcastic, argumentative or insulting...Why are you so hostile to debate? The Pfizer papers, a forced legal release, are as important as he says.
As an Oncologist tend to go "no comment" here...Other doctors here advised me to never even mention my trade...I feel one's disease trajectory remains private property...Suffice to say I'm fit and well, but have been through the mill somewhat..I have nothing but praise for all who have dealt with me, I'm not a passive patient, and cannot believe how well the NHS as I have seen it has functioned under duress....I'm under two Professors and six consultants and have twice oscillated into the "Death Zone"
Anyway that's it from me ...I've said what I wished to say and no doubt when I return next week will either have been banned, censored or whatever...But my views are based upon sound reproducible evidence. The Pfizer papers are beginning to filter through into the Mass media and if side effect number 1 is true then there will be much debate to put it mildly. Always follow the money
Link removed by Admin in view of Paula’s warning post below citing it as a ‘malicious webpage’.
WARNING Bladerunner, when I tried to open the link you gave above, I got the following message .
"Malicious Site Blocked! You attempted to access ######### This webpage is a known malicious webpage. It is highly recommended that you do NOT visit this page.
Visit Norton to learn more about phishing and internet security."
Paula
P.S. I have now edited my post above, to remove my reference to the dangerous link.
What these papers show, and will continue to show, is that Pfizer knew the mRNA "vaccines" were neither "Safe." nor "Effective," and have very likely caused MUCH more harm that the virus has. Are you on VA Disability? If you got cancer or CLL from the Navy, you should be able to get that. My CLL is from an Army base that became an EPA Superfund site due to toxic chemicals carelessly dumped into the groundwater.
BUT - these papers also indicate that many millions of people WILL suffer from these "Adverse Effects" for the remainder of their lives - they will NOT have the option to return to the normalcy you so casually refer to - in fact, too many have already died FROM the "vaccine." Many more, sadly, will be unable to have children.
Do you have any reputable references supporting your assertions in your last paragraph?
With respect to adverse event and death reports, please acquaint yourself with how VAERS (and similar systems elsewhere) are correctly used and incorrectly abused here:
Just keep watching the data coming out. Evidently, you take on face value the totally voluntary VAERS system - which is run by the CDC, who are now showing more and more egg on their faces?BTW, since you brought them up, did you also believe the reports from Henry Ford Hospital System reported in the Detroit News, back in July 2020, that Hydroxychloroquine - even when administered upon hospitalization, instead of at first sign of symptoms - cut the fatality rate about in half? The same people that have been telling us how great the "vaccines" are worked very hard to suppress any good news about HCQ and Ivermectin that apparently could have saved many lives, had it not been suppressed. (Could some people have been more interested in the profits?)But make your own (hopefully, INFORMED) decision - I'm only against forcing an experimental drug on poorly-informed people.
Yes, I'm well aware of the Hydroxychloroquine trial results from Henry Ford, which couldn't be replicated elsewhere. That just goes to show the dangers retrospective observational studies and the importance of independent verification. "It was not randomized. It was not double blind."respectfulinsolence.com/202...
"Antivaxxers" is a term of abuse here... Laudable Critical Thinking against the herd anywhere else. We worry about you lot shedding vaccine, whilst you have so little faith in your vaccine you shun the unvaccinated...Ludicrous!
You are on a hiding to nowhere here...Just sit quiet for a year and not a soul will agree these vaccines were appropriately rolled out and targeted. The death rates from myocarditis alone can not be suppressed much longer
You sound really informed and highly educated. What are your credentials.?What are your trusted sources? A true netspert to be sure. Show us the light brother. C’mon man! Check the Kool-aid.
I suggest you look and find your own sources that YOU trust. There are so many in the business of running down information they (or someone) disagrees with, either for money (yes, do follow the money) for fame, or simply to justify their own personal decisions, that you WILL likely find a naysayer for every bit of information. But the data being released from FDA/Pfizer is interesting, and does represent their work. - and you can see that some are already trying to label it "disinformation." You might try to find and read the recent release of the list of "Adverse Effects;" it's difficult to read, in the version released so far, but other versions will become available. While "Neil" might answer that the reason that list is printed in tiny type, single spaced, with no margins, and minimal punctuation, was to save paper, that doesn't pass the smell test - they wanted to make it hard to read. (Neil, save your arguments.)Again, I am not an anti-vaxxer, I'm against forced vaccination, with an experimental vaccine - and to those who would argue otherwise - exactly what do you think that that "E" in the "EUA" authorization means ... exactly?
I have a real problem with people with little scientific background doing their own research and questioning those that have spent considerable time and mental energy to understand science and the scientific method professionally. A man has got to know his limitations and if you haven’t spent the time walking the walk I think your “opinions “ should be taken for what they are worth. Cred is paramount. Peer reviewed studies are pretty standard. Anecdotal conspiracy not so much. Just sayin!
Just sayin' - Just how truthful do you believe our current government is? They are blaming gas price increases on Putin, when the increases began long before Putin surrounded Ukraine. Just this week, US government officials have said we didn't have bioweapons labs in Ukraine, then the next day, we did, then the next day, we didn't. They promised that lockdowns, masks and distancing would stop the spread of COVID - but it didn't, and now the CDC admits that. They promised the "vaccines" would "Stop the spread;" clearly, they didn't. I'm having trouble finding any truth in our government; am I alone? You may say that the "Medical" world is different - is that why the CDC, FDA, and WHO get so much of their money from private sources - that they then owe favors to? Are you aware that the 2nd largest funding source to the WHO - behind only Uncle Sugar, is the Gates Foundation? Do you think Bill Gates has any influence with the WHO?
Clearly, though, there are those here who WILL jump all over me for expressing my opinions - but I came here for information on dealing with my CLL. I expect each adult person to do their own research and make their own opinions on dealing with COVID and/or the "vaccines," but someone else brought up the subject of COVID and "vaccines," and I responded - and got attacked. Hopefully, the government doesn't decide to get involved in CLL, because they would surely muddy up the waters. And, no, I don't claim to be a doctor or geneticist, just a retired engineer - with a broad familiarity with the physical sciences, and a strong BS meter.
And, Neil, if you don't find 20,444 deaths to be significant, I feel sorry for those close to you. I consider a vaccine to no longer be experimental when it no longer depends upon an EUA release authorization - that's what the "E" means. Yes, there IS an approved version, Comirnaty, but it has never been made available in the USA - that was a subject under discussion in a US Senate hearing, where Senator Rand Paul, a medical doctor, accused the FDA representative of "Bait and Switch." Frankly, I found Dr. Robert Malone, the developer of mRNA technology, to be MUCH more informative and believable about the "vaccines" than, say, Rochelle Walensky or Tony Fauci.
The significance of deaths recorded in VAERS depends on whether they were causally related to a previous vaccination or would have happened independently. Please take the time to understand how to use VAERS as it is intended.
I am afraid you are confusing doing your own research with deciding whose opinions you find compelling. This can lead to some disturbing conclusions. You seem to have trust issues and choose to go down some pretty dark rabbit holes.
And I would reply that your investigations are shallow. Have you never heard of "Agency Capture?" Many of those governmental agencies, that you have so much faith in, that were originally legislated into existence with the best of intentions, now receive a significant to major portion of their operating funding from the very industries they were supposed to regulate - agencies like the FDA, CDC, and NIH, for example, places where you place so much faith in their veracity, are really somewhat controlled by some of the companies they "regulate." But if it makes you feel "safer" to trust them implicitly, then enjoy the warm feeling that gives you - and the others here like you. I remain skeptical.Oh, and you might want to look up data reported by the DMED - that's the Department of Defense's equivalent to VAERS - without the political influence. Or not.
You are still coming across as hostile/sneering, and have not provided links to some of the statements you have stated as "facts" which we have asked for. I am as skeptical of the intent of big business & government as the next person. But you won't change my mind by insulting me/implying I am an idiot. If I haven't seen a study, don't make an insulting blanket statement like "my studies are shallow". That's not how you educate others. Or sway them to your thinking. But I am beginning to think that you don't actually want to have a discussion, I am beginning to think you just want to sow discord. If the latter is the case, please stop. If it's the former, let's see some data links for your statements like we asked. But the snarky/hostile/accusatory tone is unwarranted & unwelcome. If you can't have a civil discussion, please just go away.
NIH and the CDC are taxpayer funded. The CDC gets application fees to help fund a timely independent approval process in addition to its majority taxpayer funding. Does that process open the door to bias? Possibly but not probably in my opinion. The real problem with our system of government at present isn’t the integrity of our taxpayer funded institutions. It’s the role that the money of special interests play in our elections. I hope your BS meter chimed loudly when the Citizens United decision told us corporations are people and allowed them to back candidates with their pocketbooks. And why are lobbyists allowed to write legislation and bribe politicians? The money needs to be removed from our electoral process. Politicians spend half their time raising money and are then subsequently beholden to those interests that support them. That’s the problem. Take the money out and government will function immensely better. Maybe we can agree on that much.
I'm beginning to think you are more thoughtful than some of the people who objected to my comments. Still, the FDA gets 45% of it's money from business, not taxpayers - per USA Today: (usatoday.com/story/news/fac... That's more than just a little bit, and do you not think that buys a lot of influence? (I would have said - "Probably.") Wasn't there a time when you thought that the Petrochemical business had too much influence with their regulators? Same deal, unless you think magically that the pharmalcogical business is more upright (less greedy) than the Oil business? (Have you seen how many billionaires the COVID vaccines have made?)Yeah, money DOES corrupt our politics, too. You don't like Citizens United? I thought worse of the $400,000,000+ that Jack Dorsey - by himself - put into paying to get election rules - illegally - changed in swing states, and the billions of free media support given by social and mainstream media to sway the last election; but you may think that was just fine.
But I came here to learn about CLL, not to argue politics, or discuss the greed of various industries and how they use money to corrupt the agencies that supposedly regulate them. Fortunately, it doesn't seem that has affected the CLL area, yet. But it is foolish to blindly trust our government or our media, which some here seem to do.
I think we have identified a common enemy. Money and its influence on processes. I see the main problem with it buying influence through politicians and lobbyists and you see that problem rooted in the deep state. We both agree disinformation is another problem. That’s why it’s so important to know and trust where your information is originating. I feel our trusted sources are vastly different from our conversation. Some trust The NY Times and others Fox News. I feel truly objective conversation is extremely difficult in these days of extreme political polarization. That being said all are welcome here and I believe we do truly care for each other as we face our common problem and it’s relationship to our mortality. We are all in this together and I wish you peace and health. Tony
Churchill is often credited for saying, "Democracy is the worst form of government - except for all the others." One of its drawbacks is the way money can too often be an unseen influencer; in the case of our (perhaps overabundant) regulatory agencies, is that there are insufficient barriers to their getting in bed with the industries they "regulate." Knowing that should make one skeptical - and, too, some of us came up in the era of "Question Authority" being the mantra of the day. But skeptical doesn't mean refusing everything, just looking closer when the risks are higher.
When I was 20, I was stationed on an Army base that later became an EPA Superfund Cleanup site due to lots of industrial chemicals that had been dumped into the soil. The EPA notified local residents, but the DoD didn't notify soldiers, and I didn't learn about this until after I was diagnosed. Several years ago, my WBC started rising slowly and inexplicably - probably a common experience here. Then, suddenly about a year ago, it started shooting up, and was apparently having other side affects. My first Oncologist started me on Allopurinol, but I turned out to be highly allergic to that. With a new Oncologist, I've been on Imbruvica for 4 months, and my WBC has come down a lot - but is still high. I've also had Hyperthyroidism, another effect of those chemicals. I cannot say that having had earlier warning of toxic exposure would have changed the course of my illness - but it might have helped, and would have been easy to accomplish.
With that, and other experiences, yes, I have learned - or been taught - to be skeptical of authority. We are all responsible for ourselves, but some find it easier or more comfortable to turn that responsibility over to "Authorities," and some like throwing rocks at those who don't "fall into line."
That is really a shame. I can understand your frustration. Hang in there with the ibrutinib. I was on it for 5.5 years. It’s a tough drug on most of us. I’d personally ask about switching to acalabrutinib with it’s fewer side effects especially the cardiac ones. I was on Pirtobrutinib for 20 cycles and it was side effect free for me. A really great drug. It’s also a BTK inhibitor but binds differently and is much more targeted. Unfortunately I don’t believe it’s approved yet. I was on a study. I just started my third BTK inhibitor LP-168 this week and hopefully it works for awhile like the others did. Good luck on your journey. We are here for you. Tony
Did your side effects include fatigue & pain in feet and legs? I also have Sciatica to deal with, and it is difficult to decide what is affecting it - I had thought it was all from pressure on the nerve - but I had a short-lived Covid infection six weeks ago, after which I found changes to the "Sciatica" symptoms; I haven't figured that one out yet. I have "B" cell CLL.
Yes CLL is a proliferation of abnormal B cells. I did have muscle aches,palpitations and periodic diarrhea on ibrutinib. It was worse on 420 mg for me and much less and more tolerable on 140 mg.
I have been on 140; I don't have any digestive or diarrhea problems - but hypertension is worse, with a new murmur. Sounds like I need to include my Oncologist in that discussion.
I think arrhythmias and especially atrial fibrillation are common on ibrutinib. Murmurs are usually valvular and I haven’t heard that as a side effect. Hypertension for sure in the majority on ibrutinib. I had to start blood pressure medication after a few years on it. I’d definitely speak with my provider and ask about acalabrutinib.
Anyone questioning the herd mentality is a conspiracy theorist here.. Pity I'm a doctor with a 1st class honours in Immunology, CLL and a Medical set of Degrees, so all this ad hominum stuff is somewhat wasted..I declined the jab then..Now after looking at these papers and the kerfuffle around them I'd refuse it now!
Netspert, if you took the time to look at appendix 1 of the Pfizer document which was publicly released last November, you'll note that it is entitled "List of Adverse Events of Special Interest". If you want vaccination safety to be fully evaluated, you would want that check-list to be exhaustive. I find it quite readable on my smartphone, plus it's sorted alphabetically. Importantly, inclusion of an adverse event (AE) type in that list doesn't mean an incident of that type has been reported, it's just that they are being specifically looked for. Hint, there's no count of reports per AE category in that appendix. They are summarised by category in figure 1 of the report.
Of interest, when do you consider a vaccine no longer experimental?
You'll be defending Pfizer till the cows come home...I sincerely hope you are right, otherwise an awful lot of people are going to get mighty angry and the courts will be swamped with cases for if fraud is proven the indemnity will in my view lapse.
My own view is that the doctors will be targeted first for giving the vaccine in conditions of Negligence, Capacity defect or just plain inappropropriately...They are the easiest target at present...Any vaccine given in good faith to a correctly targeted person is fine by me and should not go to court in my opinion. Look at how much money Canada has just set aside for Vaccine damage cases and you might reconsider your position.
I totally agree with you. I sent a response, but don't see it posted. I think I might not keep using this site because they don't accept any diversity of opinion. I am hoping to find a more suitable site.
I don't see your response either, so perhaps you'd like to repeat it? Did you see your reply appear? Sometimes the automatic submission process can fail.
With regard to this community not accepting "any diversity of opinion", by all means go elsewhere if you consider voicing your opinion is more important than learning about the evidence for how to live best with CLL. We encourage members to share their experiences, but if opinions appear to be counter to the best available evidence, then sharing references is a good way to improve everyone's understanding and advance our learning.
You are extremely knowledgeable and helpful and I appreciate your journey and value your input. I rarely "voice my opinion" and always seek the best possible advise for CLL. I travel to MDA for my treatment for that reason.
Same here, it's an atrocious site for anyone trying to exercise free speech. I told one of my Consultants four weeks ago that I would NOT have the treament he was offering me 6 months ago..He complimented me and said I was right to wait, apparently the drug complex I wanted is now on the NHS!
For a site you view as ‘atrocious’ and clearly have little respect for, you seem to find contributing to it utterly irresistible Bladerunners. This extends to re-badging yourself from ‘Strickland’ to rejoin. However, your baiting, superior style is unmistakable and apart from verbal combat, you seem to want to offer members here very little else (apart from reminding us how clever and accomplished you are). It’s frankly becoming very tedious and upsetting to members here given the number of abuse reports received about your posts.
A year from now you will be as relaxed as I am...This site worries about anyone who dares to think for themselves...I'm surprised they haven't got an algorithm for anyone who darexs to sday they WONT have the vaccine because of myocarditis, myelitis, blood clots etc etc ...
Netspert, please get your facts straight, IDK who is feeding you some mish-mash. Healthcare professionals are required by law to report certain effects to VAERS, with vaccine manufacturers required to report all:
and it is "voluntary" only in the sense that this system was developed because of a desire to find out potentially severe life threatening side effects quicker than the profession traditionally learns about them/they get accepted into the medical database. As such, anyone can report. It's not "run by the CDC", it's co-managed by them with the FDA. It's totally a benefit to us. The only problem is if people don't report; then we don't learn the true adverse effect profile percentages as fast as possible.
Consider the NSAID I referred to in an earlier post that went through trials, and was approved, and started being widely used. It got pulled from the market because it was found to cause fatal aplastic anemia in a small number of people. The number of cases was so small that they didn't show initially during the trials, it only started showing after many many people used it. Due to the widespread target for the drug, that risk wasn't acceptable for widespread, widely used mild pain analgesia. Compared to choramphenicol, an antibiotic which also causes aplastic anemia, and is now used ONLY when others fail. Since clearing a lethal infection is worth the risk of maybe contracting aplastic anemia, it is given ONLY in those cases. Which is where "first do no harm" kind of comes in. Docs look at the risk versus benefit, and make a judgement, they don't refuse to do anything because the treatment might turn out to have a negative effect. Or if it has a statistically significant negative effect. It's an analysis of the options, and a weighing of which is most likely to be in the patients best interest. And anyway, "first do no harm" IS NOT part of the Hippocratic Oath:
Get someone to run the statistics for you, even as time goes on and the side effect profile of the Covid vaccines gets adjusted, the adverse reaction risk compared to large masses of humanity dying and having long term effects of Covid will be worth the overall public good. I certainly would be unhappy if I or a loved one suffer a vaccine adverse reaction or side effect, but I don't want to see another Black Plague type event wipe out most of the people on the planet either. The hospitals wouldn't have been/still are in crises, others denied non-Covid critical treatments, if people got vaccinated instead of filling the hospitals with their non vaccinated Covid-infected bodies.
Many articles have been written showing that Covid is so dissimilar to the Black Death as to be incompatible with logical expression..I've written widely on the subject shall I send a copy to you .?
The article you cited as to "why the papers were released" deals only with the timing of the release. It includes nothing to suggest there is anything wrong with the vaccines. Granted, the FDA should be required to timely release documents under the FOIA, but 450,000 documents takes a lot of manpower (and money) to process. Is that time better spent processing documents or reviewing new drugs?
Personally, I am not interested in reading 450,000 documents looking for clues that there might possibly be something wrong with the Covid vaccine. I would prefer to just get vaccinated and boosted. I imagine the risk of getting Covid is far greater for the members here than any potential issues with the vaccine.
I agree GrumpyFrog. Yes, it's disappointing (particularly for the immunocompromised) that the vaccines don't protect more against the spread of the disease, however it's pretty plain and simple for ALL people that since the vaccines have been available the death rates from Covid have dropped dramatically and the hospitals are not as overwhelmed as they may have been without them. Did all those souls buried in New York, Italy, Spain and so many other countries around the world not count for anything?? Thank goodness that with the power of money and medical minds we have at least something to help lessen the severity of the virus for most and to keep hospital beds available for those who are really in trouble with this illness. We all hope more monoclonal antibody treatments will follow the vaccines - every tool in the toolbox we will be grateful for.
He has a few chips on his shoulder, especially about the non aspiration used by UK of mRNA vaccinations which as he rightly says should be investigated as guidance is to only inject into muscle, & use of VIT D
Having watched John Campbell's video, I was very disappointed with his naivety, which has resulted in his alarmist presentation. I would expect John Campbell would know that the number of Adverse Events and deaths in the report were derived from VAERS and similar reporting systems. You need to compare the number of Adverse Events and deaths that would have occurred during the period covered in the report, during which an estimated 100 million vaccinations were given and determine if those vaccinated experienced more or less Adverse Events and deaths than a matched group who weren't vaccinated. See:
According to Nicholas Wood, an associate professor and immunisation expert at the University of Sydney, such adverse events could "happen to anyone at any time in their life".
"Just because it's been reported and it sits on a Pfizer database does not necessarily mean the vaccine caused it," he told Fact Check.
Simon Foote, the director of the John Curtin School of Medical Research at the Australian National University, added that the report contained "a list of associations, not causations".
"I don't think there is any data in there to be concerned about," he told Fact Check, adding that if the Pfizer vaccine was causing adverse drug reactions it was "doing so at a phenomenally low rate".
"If it was at a high rate, then it would be a concern and the FDA and [Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)] and places like that would be actively investigating it, as they did for the clots with the AstraZeneca vaccine."
The benefits of the Pfizer vaccine "massively" outweighed the possible risks, Professor Foote added.
As AFP Fact Check reported last year, a spokeswoman for Pfizer confirmed that the adverse events and fatalities included in the document came from "unverified" reports, and were among "millions of people vaccinated worldwide" during the reporting period
Unfortunately, a lot of the nonsense is about money and it is difficult to stop in the internet age. The formula is simple, present yourself as a credentialed expert and take a controversial point of view and the money flows. It’s sad but true. Many take these positions in the name of “free speech”. Just look at Joe Rogan. It would be quite interesting to see where John Campbell’s income comes from.
Jeff, I believe Mr. John Campbell may have good motives and he's an excellent communicator, but it concerned me that for a long time he wrote under the name of "Dr John Campbell".
Technically yes, he has a PhD so is a "doctor", but his PhD is in nursing. When a nurse is giving medical advice it is misleading and somewhat deceptive for them to call themselves doctors!
Good I agree and my being a "Dr" of Medicine in 12 countries and flying doctor in four helps me keep a much needed perspective on both the Covid issues and CLL issues. And I still am happy I didn't have the jab...
I agree "Follow the Money" and the money soon will be in Compensation Claims unless something wonderful happens...For me the Jury is still out, so far I'm not jumping up and down over the Pfizer papers but unlike many here I'm actually reading them with the help of a few here. The crucial thing will be if the Insurance Companies take Pfizer on, over Covid vaccine claim events and losses.
This video is very helpful Neil. Thanks for sharing. With over 10,897,818,867 vaccines given worldwide, they've been proven over and over again to have saved many lives. We repeatedly see hospitals report that the unvaccinated are mostly dying from Covid. I don't need 450,000 pages of ancillary research data to tell me what is clearly already working.
Interesting I had diptheria, tetanus, yellow fever, rabies, smallpox, polio oral and sc, etc etc Doesn't it strike anyone here as odd that a fully trained doctor of Medicine with a first class honours degree in Immunology declines the covid jab, doesn't encourage a soul to join him, yet gets their account suspended and censored on CLL HU? Plus all the abuse with zero Admin intervention.
There are many utube videos by health care specialists and scientific researchers that debunk the alarmist and inaccurate information in John Campbell’s videos
There are sites estimating John Campbell's considerable YouTube income, such as this one: starstat.yt/ch/dr-john-camp...
Sadly, of late, John Campbell has come under increasing criticism from subject matter experts for presenting misinformation on controversial COVID-19 issues and then not correcting his errors.
I watched this with a critical eye, wasn't overly impressed, but it's agood start and he gets 10 out of 10 for sincerity, which is more than I can say for many I deal with in my Medico-Legal Practice.
You are entitled to your opinion & to express it. In democratic, law based societies, that is how it works. Equally, everyone else has the same right. Hold that thought. On engaging with the Pfizer papers. You claim medical training. My background is legal, which means applying certain principles to the validity of evidentiary sources. The court order that flowed from an FOIA application means the released documents will "literally include every scrap of paper that was submitted to the FDA for the entirety of the pandemic,”. How ‘useful’ in real terms that proves to be remains to be seen. Reliance on VAERS data IS proven to be problematic, especially when cherry picked. A good example would be reported adverse effects from a clinical trial from a subject on a placebo. It’s been reported that the Pfizer papers include such an incident. To return to my initial point, you are entitled to your opinion. Opinions are not fact. My opinion and it appears a majority here do not agree with you, so I suggest you take your grievances elsewhere. There are other groups that will validate your opinions & make you feel relevant again. Govern yourself accordingly …
Thank goodness the papers were forced...You're entire tone is hostile to someone who merely asked for help reading the papers...I'm quite happy to help him so problem solved. I've also advised him to close his account down here . He can return to his Medico-Legal Practice, ready to deal withCovid Vaccine Damage claims and you can return to whatever you do "My background is legal" sounds fine, so's mine, and I'm quite willing to help and you are anything but...One of my favourite books is "Truth.. The Daughter of Time" a most apt saying for this moment in Time..Pfizer may be shown to be the greatest benefit to Mankind since sliced bread, or they may not...No one particularly here, has a clue what the outcome will be. Speaking in defence of Bladerunners I cannot see why he wastes his time here.
I am glad Bladerunner has found support and sincerely hope he takes your advice. As to anything else, grown adults can respectfully agree to disagree. To that end, I wish you the best, and hope you enjoy the rest of your day.
I think any tone of hostility/upset/anger you are seeing of OUR responses is in response to THIS person starting angry/sneering/dismissive posts. When I am attacked, I try to be calm in response but it doesn't always happen. And when someone misstates or misrepresents my profession (like this person is claiming to be a medico-lego expert, which follows certain evidentiary rules, that they are misstating) I get really angry VERY quickly. Please read their earlier post, as well as this one in its entirety. They aren't "merely asking for help reading the papers". I think there are a few valid questions being asked here, but snarking back at others and putting malicious internet links in their posts isn't going to generate much goodwill.
With reference to your earlier question......I didn't say their initial post was inappropriate. Apologies if it came across that way. I was referring to their snarky response to neurodervish who made a "not so funny" joke regarding the original poster wanting a return to body autonomy, when Texas is patently Not, with their current change in abortion laws. As well as the talk of SCOTUS overturning Roe vs. Wade. The poster then made a snotty comment in response to neurodervish, which was totally uncalled for, and started MY anger towards them, anyway. I was getting interested in the release, and wondering if there is indeed a bunch of data hidden somewhere in there not being reported/commented on that should be. And happy that data is being released, and that people are looking at it to make sure that there is accountability. But the posters hostility to a remark they patently didn't understand, plus their attaching a malicious website link, warrants suspicion I think.
Good Grief! Do you ever give up? Have your jabs and leave others to make up their own minds...I personally consider myself in an unusual position in having CLL and being able to decline the jab, as an Oncologist, my default position would be to suggest the CLL case has the jab, BUT of course the RIGHT jab for CLL as I see it with the current data available and also from the limited range of jabs available in the UK...My own specific choice which I would personally have if needed, is not yet available in the UK..and thereby hangs the tale
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Third Pfizer, No Detectable Spike Antibodies 
New pfizer pill that \"could\" be our answer
An interesting paper on diet and CLL progression 
Paper about immune deficiency in CLL
Combining the Influenza and COVID-19 vaccines.
