The Real Reason They Want to Give COVID Jabs to Kids. “Vaccine Makers Want Zero Liability”

“The reason they did 16 is because 16- and 17-year-olds are still on the children’s vaccination schedule. And then the manufacturer gets full liability protection.”

This article has been cross-posted from globalresearch.ca

Original article written by Dr. Joseph Mercola and Alix Mayer
on Mercola 9 January 2022

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The reason our children are being targeted by COVID mandates is because vaccine makers want to get the shots onto the childhood vaccination schedule.

Once a vaccine is added to the childhood schedule, the vaccine maker is shielded from financial liability for injuries, unless the manufacturer knows about vaccine safety issues and withholds that information

Products must satisfy four criteria in order to get emergency use authorization:

    1. There must be an emergency;
    2. a vaccine must be at least 30% to 50% effective;
    3. the known and potential benefits of the product must outweigh the known and potential risks of the product;
    4. and there can be no adequate, approved and available alternative treatments (drugs or vaccines). Unless all four criteria are met, EUA cannot be granted or maintained

According to a U.S. federal court decision, the Pfizer shot and BioNTech’s Comirnaty are not interchangeable

Comirnaty is not fully approved and licensed. It’s only “ready for approval.” Comirnaty is licensed to be manufactured, introduced into state commerce and marketed, but it’s not licensed to be given to anyone, and it’s not yet available in the United States. They’re waiting for it to be added to the childhood vaccination schedule, to get the liability shield

*


In this interview, Alix Mayer explains why our children are being so aggressively targeted for the COVID-19 injection even though they’re not at risk of serious SARS-CoV-2 infection, and clarifies the status of Comirnaty.

Mayer, board president of Children’s Health Defense — California Chapter, is herself vaccine injured; not from the COVID jab, but from a series of vaccines she received 20 years ago. (Incidentally, Mayer grew up in the Oscar Mayer family in the 5th generation descended from the original Oscar Mayer, a German immigrant who started as a butcher boy. Despite Mayer’s vaccine injury, her family does not share her views on vaccine safety issues.)

Mayer graduated from Duke University with a BA and from Northwestern University with an MBA in finance and management strategy. She worked for Apple in the mid-1990s. When she was 29, Apple promoted her to acting manager of worldwide customer research.

In preparation for a family trip to Bali, her doctor recommended getting six vaccines: hepatitis A vaccine, hepatitis B vaccine, diphtheria, tetanus, polio and oral typhoid, which she did. Eventually, 13 years later, she finally realized it was these shots that triggered her health problems.

“They gave me brain damage and total disability,” she says. “I spent three years in my early 30s being 80% housebound, and I really I didn’t know if I was ever going to get better.

I went through a whole bunch of diagnoses: lupus, chronic fatigue syndrome, Lyme disease. Ultimately, none of those made sense and none of the treatments made me any better, until we put the pieces together and figured out that I was actually vaccine injured.

It’s literally just a cause and effect. If you look back at my history and lay out my vaccine schedule, you can see that my health declined two weeks after I got the vaccines.

I had encephalitis and encephalopathy … digestive issues, hypersomnia — sleeping 16 hours a day — flu-like symptoms, a 24/7 migraine, joint pain. I really had no life at all in my early 30s until I went on a gluten-free diet. That started my health recovery.

I then became an award-winning medical journalist with a bunch of different blogs, and then a health consultant. In 2018, I retired from all that and joined Children’s Health Defense.”

The COVID Jab Tragedy

While many vaccines have a questionable safety profile, especially when combined, data from the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) suggest there’s never been a vaccine as dangerous as the experimental mRNA gene transfer injections for COVID.

What’s more, while lack of transparency and accountability has been a chronic problem within the vaccine industry, the obvious hazards associated with vaccines are really being highlighted by the COVID jabs.

Many now know of someone who has been injured by the COVID jab, and most were injured so shortly after the shot that it’s hard to deny a correlation. The staggering number of injuries reported among adults who have received the COVID shot in turn highlights the insanity of rolling it out to young children.

According to Mayer, the reason they’re trying to mandate the COVID shot for children is to evade liability for injuries, because once a vaccine is on the childhood vaccination schedule, vaccine makers have immunity against lawsuits for injuries.

Vaccine Makers Want Zero Liability

The COVID shots currently have legal immunity against liability because they’re still under emergency use authorization (EUA). If you think BioNTech’s Comirnaty has been fully licensed, you’d be mistaken. Mayer explains:

“I put together a slide deck about Emergency Use Authorization (which you can see in the video interview above) because there is so much confusion over this and what’s really going on. Once you understand the genesis of EUA and the standards they have to meet in order to keep these products on the market, then you understand the behaviors [we’re now seeing].

They’re falling all over themselves to protect the EUAs for these products and also introduce other very confusing kinds of approval to get away with stuff. So, let me just start to clarify it right now.

This presentation is all about these three strangleholds that the vaccine makers and our government are never going to let go of … These are the things they’re guarding with their lives.

First of all, they need to guard the emergency … so they cannot have any early treatments. Those cannot exist. They’re also going for full liability protection, and children will be used as pawns to get them full liability protection.

Vaccine makers love EUA products because they have this huge liability shield. If you’re injured by an EUA vaccine, you can’t sue the manufacturer, you can’t sue the person who gave it to you, you can’t sue the institution where you got the shot.

You have to go through something called the CICP, the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program, where they’ll only cover unpaid medical expenses, and probably only for pharmaceuticals and lost wages.

Now, if you’re vaccine injured, let me tell you right now, you are not going to be using pharmaceuticals because they do not work for vaccine injury. They will make you sicker. You’ll be on two dozen pharmaceuticals before you know it and you’re going to be sick from those. They do not work. The only thing that’s going to get you better if you’re vaccine injured is natural treatments …

That’s the kind of treatment you’re going to need, and that’s not even covered, even if you were to get compensation. Everybody I know with chronic illness, whether it’s a child or an adult who has chronic fatigue syndrome, vaccine injury, Lyme disease, they’re paying $50,000 out of pocket per year.

If you can’t work and you have to pay for your treatment out of pocket, I don’t know how you ever get by. People suffer like crazy, they lose homes, they go into bankruptcy.”

Since its inception, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), which pays for injuries caused by vaccines on the childhood vaccination schedule, has paid out about one-third of claims. It’s a long, arduous process that oftentimes takes years and in the end rarely provides adequate compensation.

“If you do end up getting compensation … they don’t pay it out in one lump sum, they pay it out year by year, and they pretty much hope that whoever is injured is actually going to die of their injuries before they get compensated.

That’s been said to me a bunch of times by people who’ve been through this horrible process. Now, the CICP has only compensated 3% of claims. And so far, there have been no approvals for [compensation] for COVID shot injuries,” Mayer says. [Editor’s note: The first COVID case was recently determined “eligible” for compensation, but the case has not yet been adjudicated.1]

Stages of Liability: EUA

In her slide show, Mayer reviews each of the stages of product liability, and whether the mRNA shots can be mandated. As mentioned, vaccine makers have no liability as long as their product is under EUA, as the product is investigational.

“Investigational is a synonym for experimental,” Mayer says. “And the word experimental ties it directly into the Nuremberg Code, which says that we cannot be experimented on [without consent]. We always have the right to accept or refuse a medical treatment.

[The Nuremberg Code] is not a law, but it’s a code under which the whole world is supposed to be operating by. And it is actually codified into some local and federal laws as well … So, what everybody needs to know is that coercion and duress are considered de facto mandates and illegal. De facto means that it’s basically the same as an outright mandate.

It’s illegal medical segregation, medical apartheid [because that is a form of coercion or duress.] So, if you go to a restaurant and they demand your vaccine passport, only let you eat outside, and they might not let you use the bathroom, that’s medical segregation.

That is illegal and I do not support businesses that do that and you shouldn’t either. Any access privileges that are different between the vaccinated and unvaccinated are illegal, and any visual indication of vaccine status like a sticker or a bracelet … that’s also illegal because that creates segregation and medical apartheid, [since they are all forms of coercion or duress.]”

Importantly, mass violation of the law does not make something legal.

“If we all drove 100 miles an hour on Interstate 80, would we watch the speed limit signs suddenly changed to 100 miles per hour? No, it’s not going to happen. Mass violation of the law has never made anything legal. And just because schools and businesses and our government are mandating these shots, it doesn’t make it legal. It’s all illegal …

Now, they know full well that it’s illegal to mandate these [COVID shots]. President Biden knows it’s illegal. But what they’re counting on is that the court cases overturning their illegal mandates will take a while, and in that interim, people are going to be scared enough to get the shots. And unfortunately, it’s worked.”

Stages of Liability: Full Licensure and Childhood Scheduling

The next stage is full licensure (FDA approval). Once a product is fully licensed, the company becomes liable for injuries. At that point, the product can be legally mandated. Of course, knowing how dangerous the COVID shots are, no manufacturer wants to be financially liable for injuries. They’d be sued out of business.

This is the holy grail if you’re a manufacturer of a COVID vaccine right now. You want it to be fully licensed, but not put on the market until you get it on the children’s schedule. ~ Alix Mayer

To get immunity against liability again, the vaccine manufacturers need to get their product onto the childhood vaccination schedule. This will also allow government to mandate the shots. As noted by Mayer:

“This is the holy grail if you’re a vaccine manufacturer of a COVID vaccine right now. You want it to be fully licensed, but not put it on the market until you get it on the children’s schedule.”

DOJ Redefines Medical ‘Consequence’

In Doe v. Rumsfeld,2 the court held that service members could refuse an EUA product without punitive consequences such as dishonorable discharge or other punishments. Therefore, there were no consequences to refusing an EUA product, other than the natural consequence of possibly getting the disease.

However, in July 2021, the U.S. Department of Justice attempted to redefine the term “consequences” just for the COVID shot, to suggest that punitive consequences, like job loss or being separated from your working or learning location, are legal when a person refuses an EUA vaccine.

“But this type of consequence, a punitive consequence, has never been adjudicated,” Mayer says. “That’s not in any law. This is just an opinion from the DOJ. And it absolutely means nothing, except it came from our DOJ, so people give it a lot of authority.

They also stated twice — and this is so hard to understand because it’s just beyond reason — that the right to accept or refuse an EUA product is ‘purely informational.’

Literally, you can read that you could die by taking it, but it’s purely informational. You cannot act on it. That’s what the DOJ says. Again, it’s not adjudicated, so it doesn’t mean anything. It’s an opinion. It holds no legal weight at all. So, as we said before, these mandates are starting to be overturned.”

Four Standards for EUA

There are four standards that must be fulfilled for an EUA. If any of these criteria are not met, EUA cannot be granted or maintained. First, the secretary of Health and Human Services has to declare and maintain a state of emergency. If the emergency were to go away, all EUA products would have to come off the market. And that doesn’t just mean vaccines. It also includes the PCR tests and even surgical masks.

The second standard is evidence of effectiveness. Historically, vaccines had to show a 70% or greater effectiveness, as measured by a fourfold increase in antibody levels, in order to qualify. For an EUA vaccine, the efficacy threshold is only 30% to 50%. In another departure from prior vaccine approvals, the COVID vaccine clinical trials relied on the RT-PCR test, not antibodies, to demonstrate effectiveness in the small “challenge phase” of the trials.

Now, you probably heard that the Pfizer shot was 95% effective when it first rolled out, but that was relative risk reduction, not absolute risk reduction. Confounding these two parameters is a common strategy used to make a product sound far better than it actually is. The absolute risk reduction for Pfizer’s shot was just 0.84%.3

For example, if a study divided people into two groups of 1,000 and two people in the group who didn’t get a fictional vaccine got infected, while only one in the vaccinated group got infected, the relative risk reduction would be reported as 100%. In terms of absolute risk reduction, the fictional vaccine only prevented 1 in 1,000 from getting the infection — a very poor absolute risk reduction.

The take-home message here is that even though the minimal threshold for effectiveness is ludicrously low, in terms of absolute risk reduction, these shots still don’t measure up. Within six months, even the relative risk reduction bottoms out at zero. What’s more, there’s evidence that the clinical trials were manipulated as well.

“I remember an analysis very early in lockdowns [that showed] if you added back all the probable cases of COVID to the clinical trial [data], the effectiveness went from 90% to between 19% and 29%,”4 Mayer says.

The third standard is that the known and potential benefits of the product must outweigh the known and potential risks of the product. In the case of COVID shots, there’s overwhelming evidence showing they do more harm than good.

The fourth and last standard that must be met is there can be no adequate, approved and available alternative treatments (drugs or vaccines). “This is why hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin were quashed,” Mayer says. This is also another reason Comirnaty is not treated as a fully approved product in the U.S., because if it were, then all the other COVID shots that are under EUA would have to be removed from the market.

“This is a four-legged stool,” Mayer says. “If any one of these legs goes away, you have to take your EUA products off the market … by law. I put [state of] emergency and [treatment] alternatives in red, because those are two of the things that they have a stranglehold on; those are things they are guarding like crazy.

This means that every variant that comes out, they have to make it sound super scary to keep the emergency going. So, the variants serve a purpose. You have to think about these variants in the context of this crime, where they have to keep the emergency going to keep their products on the market.

You would think this emergency would stop maybe when we get to herd immunity, maybe if we get 90% vaccination uptake, maybe COVID is just going to go away, like smallpox did in the early 1900s [even though] only 5% of people were vaccinated. [But it won’t] go away [until] the shots get full approval and the manufacturers get a full liability shield.”

Comirnaty’s Quasi Approval

With regard to Comirnaty, is it or is it not fully approved and licensed? The answer is more complex than a simple yes or no. Mayer explains:

“Comirnaty’s quasi approval is just for BioNTech. It doesn’t have to do with Pfizer, and this is why I’m doing this presentation because I’m going to explain what’s going on with that.

This is the race to get liability protection. Remember, that’s the other stranglehold that they want. They really want to get this liability protection. Once the COVID shots are fully approved, the manufacturer has full liability.

There’s all this confusion about Comirnaty. Was it fully approved? Is it on the market? Is it interchangeable with the Pfizer shot? And does it make the COVID shot mandate legal? It’s all the same answer. No, no, no, no.

The FDA issued an intentionally confusing biological license application approval for Comirnaty. It was an unprecedented approval to both license the Comirnaty shot, saying it’s ‘interchangeable’ with the Pfizer shot. But they also said it’s ‘legally distinct.’

In that same approval, they retain the vaccine’s liability shield by designating it EUA as well. They want it to be fully approved, but they want the liability protection, so they did this BS dual approval.

So, [Comirnaty] is licensed to be manufactured, introduced into state commerce and marketed, but it’s not licensed to be given to anyone, and it’s not available in the United States. It’s available in the U.K., New Zealand and other places, but it is not available in the United States because they’re really scared of liability.

Now, are you ready for this one? The BLA actually states that Comirnaty is only ‘ready for approval.’5 It doesn’t say it’s approved anywhere in the document. And they buried this language in a pediatric section to confuse people even more.

Here’s what they said; ‘We’re deferring submission of your pediatric studies for ages younger than 16. For this application, because this product is ready for approval for use in individuals 16 years of age and older, as pediatric studies for younger ages have not been completed.’

Why did they do this? Sixteen is a very important number. You would think the age break would be 18. That’s a very typical age break for everything else that we do in this country. Why 16?

The reason they did 16 is because 16- and 17-year-olds are still on the children’s vaccination schedule. And then the manufacturer gets full liability protection. That’s why this is ready to be approved for 16 and up, not 18 and up.”

Comirnaty Is Not Fully Licensed

This confusion is clearly intentional. On the one hand, the FDA claims Comirnaty is interchangeable with the Pfizer shot, yet it’s also legally distinct. Courts have had to weigh in on the matter, and a federal judge recently rejected the DoD claim that the two shots are interchangeable. They’re not interchangeable. That means Comirnaty vaccine is still EUA. It doesn’t have full approval and it’s not on the market.

“Military members involved in lawsuits are challenging the military’s COVID vaccine mandate. They filed an amended complaint seeking a new injunction after the judge last month rejected the assertion that the Pfizer COVID shot and BioNTech’s Comirnaty are interchangeable. So, we’re still hammering on this legally, but a court has ruled that they’re not interchangeable.

[Editor’s note: This information is accurate at the time of the interview, but legal challenges are ongoing and courts may issue new rulings. December 22, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court announced6 it has slated January 7, 2022, to hear arguments challenging Biden’s vaccine and testing mandates.]

So, how do we know that Comirnaty is not being treated as fully approved? First, the approval states you have the right to accept or refuse the product. That means it’s an EUA. Second, it’s not available in the U.S. because Comirnaty doesn’t have liability protection. Third, if it were available, it’s an alternative [treatment] and all other EUA shots would have to come off the market.

No. 4, the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) would have to recommend it for ages 16 to 18 and the CDC would have added it to the children’s recommended schedule. That’s how we know it’s not fully approved and on the market.

Here is the label for Comirnaty. It says it’s emergency use authorization. It doesn’t say it’s fully approved, because it’s not. But look at the safety information they are recognizing: Myocarditis and pericarditis have occurred in some people who’ve received the vaccine, more commonly in males under 40 years of age than among females and older males.

So, this is saying that young men are getting heart inflammation. And what we know from all the anecdotal reports is 300 athletes have died or collapsed on the field, and children in schools have died of heart attacks. That’s what’s going on here.

And the reason they have to declare this is because they know it. They know it’s happening. And the only way they can be sued is if they know there’s a problem with their vaccine and they don’t declare it. So, they declare it here, in very mild language as if it’s not that big of a deal, but it’s a very big deal. Young people are dying [from the shots] who have a 99.9973% chance of recovering from COVID …

The holy grail is to get the shot on the CDC recommended schedule for children, because then it gets full liability protection according to the 1986 Act. This is why they’re going after our children when they have a 99.9973% recovery rate …

Every medical intervention is a risk benefit equation, and it doesn’t calculate for kids at all. They should never be getting COVID shots. The shots don’t prevent transmission. They don’t prevent cases. They don’t prevent hospitalization or death.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Notes

1 Reuters October 19, 2021

2 Biotech Law December 22, 2003

3 Maryannedemasi.com November 11, 2021

4 The BMJ Opinion

5 FDA BioNTech BLA Approval

6 USA Today December 22, 2021

NOTE FROM EXPANDING AWARENESS RELATIONS:

How egregious that the big pharmaceutical companies are trying to use children as a liability shield to protect their criminal organization. Even worse, however, are the governments/politicians and health officials/institutions that are letting them. No amount of “contracts” should ever protect criminal activity, which is what we’re seeing right now in what is quite possibly the largest racketeering scandal in the history of humankind.

(And in my opinion, this isn’t even covering the ACTUAL REAL reason that they want to vaccinate children so much. This is only the watered-down, “scientific”, realistic version…)

Any documents/legal dealings (keyword here: LEGAL – although, what does that matter when corrupt enterprises are able to re-define terms according to their purpose?) and NDA’s should automatically become null and void if there is fraudulent activity happening.

However, when those “in charge” are allowed to investigate themselves, they, of course, end up finding no wrong-doing. And when there are multiple conflicts of interest, all for the purpose of financial bribery and protecting each other, there needs to be effective systems in place to address this obvious malfeasance.

It would seem, the “law” (and even us, everyday/ordinary people) literally needs to take matters into its own hands, and stop catering to enforcing illegal mandates and nonsensical “policies”. When will they go after the REAL criminals, instead of innocent civilians who are simply trying to defend not only their rights and freedoms, but everyone else’s as well? Including law enforcement?

We all need to pick our side in history. Let’s hope we’re picking the right one.

Are the Vaccines Being Systematically Distributed to Cause Large Amounts of Deaths in the U.S.? | Professional Data Analysts Think It May

“This is a worldwide experiment. It’s intentional.”

Dr. Jane Ruby shares with Stew Peters and their viewers the shocking implication that the vaccines being sent out may be distributed to certain countries by a specific design; to initiate large numbers of disabilities outside of the U.S., and large amounts of death within the U.S.

At least according to the data being compiled of the certain batch/lot numbers that are contributing to the highest amount of vaccine adverse reactions.

This data was assessed by a team that includes:

Mike Yeadon – Ex Head of Respiratory Research at Pfizer UK

Alexandra Latypova – researcher – analyst – Biotech CEO

Craig Paardekooper – researcher – computer programmer – author

Jessica Rose – researcher – analyst – government consultant

Walter Wagner – consultant on pharma compliance and legal affairs

Source: howbad.info/background

For clarity reasons, I want to add that the howbad.info website does state that they gathered all of their information from the U.S. VAERS database. So one would have to consider that this may not take into account many of the adverse events of vaccines that are being distributed to other foreign-speaking countries (China, Germany, Israel, Russia, Africa, etc., etc., etc.)

It is not specifically clear from this interview where the outside-of-the-US data is coming from. It could have been from the hackers that Dr. Jane Ruby mentioned, or specifically from the US VAERS database; but again, it is not verified. When there is further information, I will try and update this post with the new findings.

Please keep all of this in mind and keep a discerning eye out through all of the research presented. Using critical thinking and asking additional questions should always be approached when coming across new data.

Many thanks to all of those involved for their continued research and investigation into these incredibly important matters, and the groups/individuals involved for helping to share and spread these messages.

Full transcript below. Some embellishment has been added for emphasis.

Stew Peters: “Well Happy New Year and welcome back to the Stew Peters Show. We hope that all of you had a great Christmas season with your families, despite the best efforts of Tony Fauci and the Biden junta to make it a miserable time. But that’s what sets us apart from them. We can feel real love and real joy.

Still, it’s a dangerous world out there, and the enemies of the American people will be just as committed to destroying us in 2022, as they were in ’21. And that means more masking, more restrictions, more vaccine mandates.

Dr. Jane Ruby joins us for her first segment of the year. She says that she has the receipts to prove that vaccine toxicity varies by batch, which we’ve covered before, but now it’s possible to find out if the shot that you’re being pressured to take is from one of these tainted, and deadly, batches.”

Dr. Jane Ruby: “Yes, Happy New Year’s, Stew.

Um, sorry to start out with such bad news. But what we’ve learned is, after I spent 3 hours in an interview with these analysts who have actually taken the previous work of toxicity in lot numbers to a whole new level, what they’re telling us is that this is a worldwide human experiment, it’s intentional, and there’s a subplot to this. That there is an attack on the American people.

What they basically told me is that all 3 companies: Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson&Johnson, which is essentially Janssen, are testing; they’re actively testing. And it’s worse than what we thought. Because there’s evidence that these companies are intentionally deploying toxic batches.

They’ve also identified what they call “supertoxic” batches. And they’ve released these lot numbers. And I felt it was like an emergency to get this to the American people, and the people of the world.

I want to show you what they found, on – in terms of most dangerous lots. And when we’re done with this segment, I urge everyone to go to howbad.info, where you can check the lots, and you can know which lots are deadly and dangerous, uh, before – if you’re thinking or on the fence of getting any of these bioweapon injections.

When you look at the first column here for Pfizer, I want you to know that the most deadly, dangerous lot will begin with EW. E like Edward, W like winning. EW. Second to that is F like Frank, A like apple. And then F like Frank, C like Charlie. Sorry I don’t know the military terms for that.”

Credited to: howbad.info/Stew Peters Show

Dr. Jane Ruby (cont. @2:28): The most harmful lot for children, under this EW, FA, FC, was something identified; the whole lot number is EW01A2 [editor’s note: could not verify this specific lot id in the howbad.info website] But you could go to howbad.info and look up… the company, and put your lot number in.

For under Pfizer for adults, the most toxic, deadly batches begin with E like Edward, N like Nancy. And then second to that is E like Edward, R like Robert.

Under Moderna, they found under for all ages, adults and – I don’t believe they have a young child authorization yet, but their toxic, deadly batches end in 20A – Alpha. They’re supertoxic.

Under Moderna, have, in the middle section, they got very clever. Uh, Pfizer coded their lot numbers – all companies coded their lot numbers, with – so that they would know where the most toxic batches are. And I’m going to share with you why that’s important in a little bit. But Moderna took it a step further with a little cleverness, because they embedded their code, for their most toxic amount, either in dose or, or chemical composition, under the letters – in the middle of that lot number, J, K like kite, L like love, M like Mary.

The analysts were a team that included the well-known Dr. Michael Yeadon, Craig Paardekooper, from Africa, a woman named Alexandra Latypova, who’s in California, our well-known Jessica Rose, that we’ve interviewed on the Stew Peters Show before, and another analyst named Walter Wagner.

Look. This EW lot for children, anything that starts with EW, is responsible for almost – watch this – all adverse events in children, all ER visits, all hospitalizations, all life-threatening events, disabilities, and all deaths. This is serious.

And here’s the kicker, Stew. All of these deadly lots that we’re going to show you, are already in circulation, remembering that there could be up to 1.5 million doses per lot. This quantification is set by each company. And the way they know that, is because they have looked at the companies and they’ve gotten into their systems to see how the companies have laid this out.

They made the assertion, Stew, that – and this was shocking – that what these companies are doing is they’re exporting disability as defined by the VAERs system itself, out to Europe. Ex-USA. And what they’re doing is they’re, they’re exporting, if you will, death – more death, more lethal doses, in the United States.

Now let me, let me share with everyone, there’s another chart I want to show you with a scatter plot. It’s called Pfizer batches. And when Pfizer batches, their batch codes, rather, were arranged alpha-numerically, along the X-axis, the following patterns emerged. And you can see these dots, these vertical dots, represent batch numbers. And again, there’s that EW. You can see the green stack of dots. Those are children’s doses. Even though the company claims that the amount is less than the adult dose, supposedly, we have no idea what’s in there.”

Credited to: howbad.info/Stew Peters Show

Dr. Jane Ruby (cont. @5:54): “They are actively testing… – Stew, I’m gonna tell you something. They are conducting what we call lethal dose studies.

Now in pharmaceutical drug development, lethal dose studies looks at how much you need to cause death. And obviously, we – they’re not done in humans. In people. They’re always done in animals, although they’ve slowed down in recent years because people have become concerned, even though they’re rats and mice, lower forms, they’ve become concerned about the cruelty to animals. But they’re never done in people.

And what’s happening here, is they are, basically, from the analysis, these analysts tell us that these 3 companies are actively – RIGHT NOW – conducting lethal dose studies.

Let me explain lethal dose. They take the highest amount of chemical, in terms of dosage and composition. And what they do is, they determine, the leth- what lethal amount to test half the population. It’s one of the means to assess acute toxicity prior to going into human studies. Um, and like I said, it has been largely fazed out. They are – they are conducting it without informed consent, it’s against all ethical and regulatory rules. In other words, we believe these companies are just proceeding with impunity, because there is nothing stopping them.

I want to also show people something. Before we get to a little bit of a larger look at the lot numbers and what’s happening, and how these analysts are so sure that this is not by randomization; this is not by chance. I want to take a look at the parts of a Moderna batch – code.

I mentioned earlier that Moderna got a little more complex and clever. Remember, these companies, we now know, are actually embedding into their lots, a code to tell them which doses, which lots, are toxic, which ones are causing disabilities, and what types of disabilities. I mean, this is absolutely outrageous.

When you look at the parts of the Moderna batch code, you see here this number. It’s 011, the letter L like love, 20A. 20A. As we mentioned before, in the first chart I showed, is the most lethal, that, you know, is the most lethal batch of lot codes in the Moderna program right now. And remember, all of these numbers I’m going to show you, are from the middle of November up until as late as December 16, of just a couple of weeks ago.

So when you look at this numbers, 011L20A, what you’re looking at in the 011, is the temporal batch order. So how it’s being developed over time, and deployed by the company. The L is the concentration – it determines, it tells the company the toxicity and number of adverse reactions. And then the 20A is qualitative. It’s the ingredient. In either 20A, which was the most highly toxic of their batch lots, or 21A came up as well.

So this is their clever scheme to – this is not a matter of, you know, throwing this out. You know. We’re going to try this new technology and we’re getting, with impunity, we’re going to see what the safety issues come- The reason they’re not concerned about safety issues is because this is an a priori design. This is designed ahead of time to send out toxic batches and then to gather their information.

I – so anyway, let’s move on to – there’s just so much information that I learned from these analysts. They told me – “

Stew Peters: “And how did these – how did these analysts know that these are coming from Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson&Johnson?”

Dr. Jane Ruby: “Because, first of all, they, they told me that they were informed by professional hackers, that this is big news – nobody else has broken this. That these professional hackers got into Pfizer, and Moderna systems, and they were able to verify the lots.

Dr. Paardekooper has a list of all the Moderna batches deployed so far. And Moderna also has a web tool – this’ll probably disappear after the Stew Peters Show airs, it has a web tool for checking the expiration dates for batches. And these computer guys hacked Moderna’s website, and got the entire list of Moderna batches with a full list of batch codes. And they did the same for Pfizer.

I just want to make something really clear. This exporting death to the USA and exporting disability to EU, what they found was that the Mo- for example, in the Moderna analysis, there were 10 times the death rate in the United States, than in the EU, and in the Moderna group, there were 10 times more disabilities in the EU group, compared with the USA.

So this, this is – all 3 companies are using their lot numbers to label… they’re looking – and when a researcher does an a priori study, they’re testing concentrations. Remember I told you it was a dose finding study? But this dose finding range is much higher than just testing, you know, a therapeutic group of range to find out what works. This is lethal dose testing at its finest.

And we’re gonna talk about this more, Stew, I know we’re limited on time, but it was really important. It’s what’s most important is that before you let your child get in line for these bioweapon shots, if you don’t believe anything we’ve said, at least ask them for the lot number and if it starts with EW or EN.

Just before we close out, there’s a list I want to show you of batch codes with highlights. These batch codes are in a perfect mathematical series, Stew. And what this tells us is, if it was random, you see these highlighted EN lot numbers? These are all thousands, 2 or 3 thousand deaths and disabilities per these batches, but look at how it drops. It drops immediately down to 37, 25, 23. The subsequent batch numbers.”

Credited to: howbad.info/Stew Peters Show

Dr. Jane Ruby (cont. @12:05): If this was random, it would not just drop off so sharply like that. You’re going to hear more from these analysts, you’re going to hear more and more – But you are empowered now to look up if you’ve had one of these shots, you can look up your lot number… Please don’t take anymore of this. This is not going to stop.

Stew Peters: “Yeah. There’s just absolutely no reason why anybody should have their kid in line to take these bioweapons. But before knowing what we know now, you subjected yourself or your young ones to these injections, and you want to know, now you have these lot numbers, which you can find at stewpeters.tv.

You’re right, I am out of time, I gotta go. Dr. Jane Ruby, thank you so much. Happy New Year. And, I mean, this is unbelievable. [Dr. Jane Ruby: “Thank you. We’ll continue.”] So yeah. This is going to go away though. This search function’s going to go away.

And thanks to these hackers, as well, [Dr. Jane Ruby: “Yes. Bravo.”] and for your time in investigating and being inside of that meeting. Dr. Jane Ruby, thank you so much. God bless you.” [Dr. Jane Ruby: “Thank you Stew.”]

Fact checking is extremely important. I want to reiterate not to take everything at face value; no matter what you read, where you read it from, or who you hear it from. And to be clear, do not rely on “fact checking” websites to give you accurate information either. These are just as likely, (if not even more likely…), to feed false information and false debunking accounts to manipulate the reader. Please take everything into consideration before adhering to a certain narrative – and always keep your mind open to other possibilities.

Fair use disclaimer: Some of the links from this article are provided from different sources/sites to give the reader extra information and cite the sources, but does not necessarily mean that I endorse the contents of the site itself. Additionally, I have tried to provide links to the contents that I used from other sites as an educational and/or entertainment means only; if you feel that any information deserves further citation or request to be clarified, please let me know through the contact page.

Featured image by hakan german from Pixabay

Don’t Vaccinate Kids: Urgent Message from Doctors’ Summit

Speakers at the Summit included Doctors: Peter McCullough, Robert Malone, Paul Alexander, Tara Gesling, Pierre Kory, Ryan Cole and more.

This article has been cross-posted from globalresearch.ca
Original article written by Mary Beth Pfeiffer / TrialSiteNews (November 8, 2021)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Leading experts on flawed U.S. COVID policy issued an urgent warning at a summit Saturday: Young children will be harmed in an ill-advised rush to vaccinate a population with very little chance of severe infection from the virus.

“The real risk for healthy kids is about zero — it does appear to be lower than the flu,” said Dr. Robert Maloneinventor of the mRNA technology on which the vaccine is based. Inoculating 28 million children 5 to 11 years old, Malone told attendees of the Florida Summit on Covid, could lead to “a thousand or more excess deaths.”

“That’s a thousand kids,” he told the audience of 800 doctors, nurses and advocates. “It’s a thousand kids too many.”

In addition to other pressing COVID issues, the summit addressed three central questions about childhood vaccination. Do young children need vaccination against COVID? Are the vaccinations safe? Are unvaccinated children a threat to adults? On each, they found the government’s near-universal vaccination policy wanton and unsupported.

“Children don’t get severely ill. Children don’t die from this infection,” said Paul Alexander, a clinical epidemiologist and former senior advisor on pandemic policy in U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “We’ve been fed a lot of misleading information.”

Though harshly criticized for keeping schools open, “Sweden had not a single death of a child from COVID,” said Dr. Richard Urso, a Texas ophthalmologist citing published data.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control counts 576 U.S. children under 18 who succumbed to COVID from Jan. 1, 2020 to Nov. 3, 2021, among 60,811 who died in that period. But the CDC figures offer no perspective on whether another illness or COVID caused the deaths. In a study of 48,000 COVID-infected children under 18, no deaths were reported among those without comorbidities like leukemia or obesity. In other words, healthy kids did not die, suggesting vaccines are not needed for them.

‘Willful blindness’

With the risk of serious illness low, panelists said the potential toll of vaccinating was unacceptably high, pointing to thousands of officially downplayed but real side effects and deaths. The risks to children include – but aren’t limited to – serious inflammation of the heart called myocarditis, which has been reported at three to six times the expected rate in vaccinated adolescents. A CDC study reported 14 vaccine-related deaths and 849 serious reactions in children 12 to 17 years old.

“There will be children lost with the vax — far more than ever happened with COVID,” said Dr. Peter McCullough, a widely published cardiologist and leading voice on a rational pandemic response. Doctors are guilty of “willful blindness” to vaccine hazards, he said, having “bought into this…dream that this vax if both safe and effective. It is shattering their dreams that it is not sufficiently safe.”

The summit met just after the Pfizer vaccine was recommended by the CDC and as rollout began in pharmacies and clinics.

In Florida, where debate on vaccine mandates is vigorous, summit organizers see child vaccination as a line not to be crossed in a state that could set an example for the nation. They hope to stop the expanded vaccine program with an executive order by Gov. Ron DeSantis or legislation in an upcoming emergency session called to address vaccine mandates.

“We need to pull out all the stops,” Dr. John Littell, an Ocala physician who spearheaded the summit, told me. “We’ve only begun to fight for our children.”

With virtually universal media support, pressure is intense to vaccinate the pint-sized.  On Twitter, the Muppet character Big Bird told of doing his duty for the public good. “I got the COVID-19 vaccine today!” he tweeted on the day of the summit. “My wing is feeling a little sore, but it’ll give my body an extra protective boost that keeps me and others healthy.”

Pfizer video, meantime, widely shared on social media, showed “superhero” boys and girls, in capes, masks and wings, celebrating vaccination. Mouthing words written by a pharmaceutical giant, they praised other kids who took the needle for their “courage,” willingness to “try new things” and “helping the whole entire world.” Another video, of 13-year-old Madeline De Garay injured after vaccination during a trial, tells quite a different story but, sponsors say, was rejected for airing as a television ad.

‘One and done’

The six-hour summit included a premier lineup of COVID doctors who, based on treatment experience and available science, also raised two other urgent concerns:

The effective suppression of physician freedom to treat early COVID with ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, fluvoxamine and other drugs that could keep patients out of hospitals and save lives.

The protective value of having had COVID, which offers immune benefits that panelists said exceed – and forego the need for — vaccination.

“Natural immunity is robust; it’s complete; it’s durable,” Dr. McCullough told the group. “If it was possible to get it again, it would’ve happened hundreds of millions of times. It’s one and done.” Just 100 or so cases have been reported in the literature, he said, but there is confusion over whether they were actually second infections.

“With COVID, you develop immunity to 50 or so proteins” that spur production of antibodies, Malone said in his talk. “With the vaccine, you develop immunity to one structural protein,” namely the spike protein. “It’s a huge difference.”

“Don’t let them tell you that recovered-from-COVID does not lead to long-lasting immunity,” Dr. Ryan Cole, an Idaho pathologist, told the group, pitting a report on 106 science articles in favor of infection-acquired immunity against a single CDC “pretend paper” saying vaccines offer more protection.

The implications of natural immunity are enormous. The CDC estimates that 120 million Americans – a third of the population — have had COVID. If their immunity was recognized, that would dramatically reduce the lucrative market for vaccines and boosters – what many panelists believe motivates the rush to jab. More than 200 million Americans will have been infected after the Delta wave, McCullough estimates, broadening that population greatly.

Physicians at the summit left room for some to be vaccinated, including people whose compromised health puts them at risk for severe illness. Malone supports vaccination for high-risk groups, though he told me, “That may change as additional data become available.”

As it stands, however, the vast majority of Americans would be vaccinated under government recommendations that, if mandated by workplaces, schools and municipal governments, leave few exceptions.

‘Unmitigated corruption’

While the urgency of vaccinations took center stage, the failure to treat people at the first sign of COVID – and its immense consequences — was cited as the product of a corrupt, Pharma-controlled system and government.

In a stirring talk, Pierre Kory, president of Frontline Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance and a voice for early treatment, pointed to a litany of methods that science journals, media and government have used to effectively deny care with inexpensive “repurposed” drugs like ivermectin.

Among them: Refusal to publish pro-treatment scientific papers and retraction, under pressure, of others. Insistence on pricey randomized control trials while not funding them. A double standard that has Merck’s expensive molnupiravir poised to become a prime outpatient drug, based on one pharma-sponsored trial, while tossing aside dozens of studies favoring ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine and other potential treatments. Rejection of the clinical experience of hundreds of doctors who have seen early treatment drugs keep people out of hospitals and coffins.

Having had “a front-row seat on the war on ivermectin,” Kory described in two words the reason for the monumental failure to treat COVID: “Regulatory capture.” In short, the alphabet agencies – NIH, CDC, FDA – aren’t making the decisions.

“It’s well described that all of those agencies are literally run by Pharma,” he said. “If you want to keep your job, you let the leaders do what they do.” This has led, he said, to unmitigated and repeated acts of corruption, which are hurting public health.”

‘Get sicker’

While Kory has strongly supported ivermectin – and several doctors in the audience said they had great success with it – he and others said there are other perhaps two dozen compounds that could help early. Nonetheless, public health leaders are silent on recommending any. Among them: aspirin, budesonide, colchicine, curcumin, melatonin, nitazoxanide, quercetin, zinc and vitamins C and D. Even a highly favorable trial on fluvoxamine has failed to earn the government’s endorsement.

“They tell you to go home and get sicker and come back and see us when you’re really sick and your body’s damaged,” Malone said. “Ask yourself, ‘does this make sense?’”

At the same time, speakers dismissed the unsupported contention that unvaccinated children are a threat to adults — who even when vaccinated can themselves get and spread COVID. “Children are not superspreaders,” said Urso. Further, said Malone, “It’s not the kids responsibility to protect the elders.”

It is, however, the responsibility of public health agencies to live up to protecting the public. Instead, said Dr. Bruce Boros, owner of three urgent care centers in the Florida Keys, they thwart doctors at every turn.

“We’re getting the shit kicked out of us, there’s nowhere to go,” he told me.

“The CEOs and administrators of hospitals are threatening us. You’re going to be fired. You must walk in lockstep with our standard of care.”

After recounting harrowing experiences in New York City ICUs early in the pandemic, a critical care physician, Dr. Mollie James, concluded with this: “Doctors must not be blocked from prescribing life-saving medicine in the hospital. Doctors must not be blocked from giving life-saving treatment outpatient.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Mary Beth Pfeiffer is an investigative journalist and author of two books; she has written more than 20 articles on early treatment of COVID since March of 2020. Follow her on Twitter: @marybethpf

Featured image is from TrialSiteNews