Egregious Medical Tyranny Holds Patient Hostage in a Hospital and Refuses Her Preferred Medical Treatment – Patient DIES Under Their Protocol

Veronica Wolski was denied specific treatment – AND denied the freedom to leave the hospital.

A tragic unfolding of events has occurred surrounding Veronica Wolski, a freedom activist who has largely expressed her views against masks, vaccines and vaccine mandates.

After falling ill and being sent to the AMITA Health Resurrection Medical Center in Chicago, Illinois, Veronica Wolski was denied her choice in care and was also denied being released of her own free will to a medical team that was already lined up to take care of her illness and her wishes. She passed away on Sunday, September 13, 2021 – allegedly from pneumonia; after weeks of being denied release and denied her preferred treatment of Ivermectin.

The Resurrection Medical Center not only imposed a medical tyranny and abuse of power in withholding preferred medical treatment, but also exercised an egregious amount of authoritative control by preventing the patient from denying their protocol. This is basically like saying if you had cancer, out of all of the available treatments you have at your disposal, but you get admitted to a certain hospital, they are “allowed” to do only their protocol treatment on you, regardless if that is what you want or not. And not letting you leave and instead making you undergo their experiment procedure.

This outrageous misconduct and malfeasance was nothing less than keeping her a prisoner and demanding that she use their protocol, or else.

And as we can see, being forced to use their protocol ended up in a harrowing and heartbreaking ordeal, not only for Veronica Wolski and her loved ones, but also for the individuals vouching for her rights and freedom.

The below videos show two advocates who were trying to stand up to the medical tyranny that undoubtedly led to the death of Veronica Wolski.

Thank you to the Stew Peters Show and Dr. Lee Vliet and Attorney Nancy Ross for bringing this to our attention. Who knows how many others were subjected to this abuse, and ended up dying alone in the hospital while the establishment enforced their unsafe and disturbing “treatment” on unwilling patients.

Killed by Tyranny – Veronica Wolski’s Doctor Speaks Out

Transcript provided below. Some embellishment has been added for emphasis:

Stew Peters: “Well, Americans are witnessing the unthinkable in our hospitals and our healthcare systems around the country as patients seem to be held hostage by doctors driven by a political machine, rather than the upholding of an oath.

Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet MD is president and CEO of the Public Charity Truth for Health Foundation, which can be found at truthforhealth.org and an independent practicing physician actively treating COVID patients and providing educational programs for patients. Community health groups and health professionals.

Dr. Vliet was assisting in the efforts to save the life of Veronica Wolski in Chicago who passed away without ever being provided the treatment she or her advocates were requesting. And Dr. Vliet joins us now.

Thank you so much for being here, we really appreciate it.”

Dr. Lee Vliet: “Thank you, Stew. I’m honored to be able to help in getting the horror out to the public of what happened to Veronica Wolski, in Resurrection Hospital in Chicago last weekend.

Our team was requested by the attorneys to be involved, beginning on Wednesday afternoon. On Thursday afternoon we had a medical care team with critical care, ICU doctor, independent critical care nurses, nurses on the ground willing to coordinate her medical care in the setting, delivery capability for high flow oxygen, IV fluids, medications. Everything she was being denied in the hospital, our team had ready by Friday.

And at every turn, I was personally involved in helping the patient’s power of attorney. Our team was involved and our attorneys were also involved trying to help the patient’s power of attorney, whom you’ll meet later, who was a warrior for Veronica, help her get the patient released from the prison of this hospital, which it had become.

Veronica, I heard, I was conferenced in on a conversation that took place, I heard it, Veronica was asking to be released today. And she was denied, she was pressured into intubation, she refused it; I heard her myself and she asked for the treatment that her power of attorney was fighting heroically. I heard the doctors deny it.

Every single step that the patient requested, that the power of attorney requested, was violated in her legal rights to request treatment. She was denied release even though the power of attorney made it clear she was being released home to hospice, and the patient knew she might die at home, she asked to die in freedom. Not as a prisoner.

And, quite frankly, I heard the doctor brow-beating the patient’s power of attorney on Sunday afternoon saying, “Well, we can’t get hospice here. And that’s not our process, and that’s not what we do.” And I happen to know medically for a fact that what she was telling the power of attorney was not factually correct.

Therefore, in my opinion medically, they willfully denied treatment to this patient. And then the power of attorney learned that afternoon when she finally got into the hospital to see her, that standing outside her door, that they had taken away the IV fluids. And medically, we all know that if you deprive a patient of IV fluids who’s already dehydrated, which her laboratory data showed, then they’re going to go down quickly, no matter how high flow the oxygen is. You can’t deliver it if there’s inadequate fluid volume in the blood stream.

And they had not treated a rising white count bacterial pneumonia – I mean they – the oversight and the negligence medically, was staggering. I have never in my career seen anything as egregious as what our team, our whole team, was witness to from Thursday through Sunday in this situation. And ironically, we were also brought in on other hospital situations in other states, in the same time frame. The same talking points were being used with the patients; the same denial of the patient’s power of attorney access to the patient.

In fact, at one hospital, in Arizona, the patient’s power of attorney was escorted out of the hospital in handcuffs! This medical tyranny has got to stop, and Truth for Health Foundation is fighting that battle. We have a medical censorship defense fund to help doctors like Dr. McCullough and others who have been sued for speaking out. We will defend patients and their families, and their rights to have their power of attorney request honored. And, we know, our team was guiding the resources on the ground in Illinois to set up an entire mobile unit to take care of this patient. And she was denied leaving the hospital under bogus descriptions from the team there.

Stew Peters: “This – this is horrific; what you’re describing. And I – I’m sorry but, with TV and radio, I’ve got part breaks that I’m coming up against right now. Truthforhealth.org is your website. I encourage everybody to go visit that.

Dr. Vliet, thank you so much for being here – I gotta go. Uh, we really appreciate you coming forward and I hope to have you back soon. Thank you so much. God bless you.”

Dr. Lee Vliet: “Thank you.”

EXCLUSIVE! Veronica Wolski’s Power of Attorney Speaks Out After Tyrannical Killing

Transcript provided below. Some embellishment has been added for emphasis:

Stew Peters: “Well, an extremely emotional week in Chicago left us saying goodbye to Veronica Wolski; best known for her signage over the Kennedy Expressway on the People’s Bridge. 

Wolski became the center of controversy when she was denied the medical treatment being requested by her power of attorney, Nancy Ross, who joins us now.

Nancy, I know that it’s been a really emotional couple of weeks, specifically the last 24 hours, so I want to thank you for coming here to talk with us today. We know that you didn’t have to do that.”

POA Nancy Ross: “Thank you, Stew, very much. And thank you to your audience and all those really around the world who have been fighting for Veronica. Veronica always said, “Never be silent.” You know, “Never quit. Never give up.” And she fought to the very end. 

She had a prescription for Ivermectin at home. She’d been requesting to the hospital if she could bring that. My understanding is that was denied.

But I’ll back up. First she became sick, she thought she had a sinus infection, she tested positive for COVID, went home, and two days later had shortness of breath. And went into the hospital. Very quickly she was put on high levels of oxygen, was my understanding. And they began Remdesivir.

She called me, she told me she didn’t want the medicine: “I don’t want this. I want them out.” I have multiple texts from her saying, “Get me out of here.” / “Get me home.” / “Bring me oxygen.” / “Get medical transport. Take me out.”

I didn’t know what was going on. I tried to contact family and friends, and was assured that they were following frontline protocols, and that she would be getting some of the treatment she really wanted. It was all very confusing, very disturbing.

I finally told her, “I’m coming to Chicago. And I’ll help however I can.” She asked me then to be her POA so we can arrange to have after care for her to get her out and to get her after care. And there were so many roadblocks, over the next 10 days. It was, um, it was very difficult.

And um, security escorted me out of the building multiple times. After I’d been invited in. After day 2 they told me I was no longer allowed in the hospital, period. I asked what policy I violated, what had I done wrong? I was there to advocate for her. We sent a demand letter to the hospital with 17 different demands, and we were really trying to work with them. But it was clear that Veronica was being denied some treatments; even some food and nutrition that we had to beg for, over many many days.

Stew Peters: “It seems like she was denied… every human right that we’re inherently promised as Americans. Why – did they ever give you an answer on why you were not allowed to be there advocating for her?

Nancy Ross: “They told me after the 2nd day, that Veronica’s of sound mind. Everyone always assured me; and she is a warrior, as everyone knows, for truth and justice and freedom. She knows – she knows her rights. She was advising them on what, you know, she thought could work best for her, and pleading with them. They said she can speak for herself. That I didn’t need to be there and that further conversations would be with her.

Now I understand, you know, my rights at the time were to help her. I’d called for a patient conference for multiple days. Finally after 4 days, I walked in and they had maybe 8 representatives from the hospital system there to speak with me. And some of our, just even basic concerns just were not, were not met.

And we had private duty nurses who were available to go in and just be caretakers; just to sit with her in isolation. You know, as you know, many COVID patients, you know, they are, they’re isolated. And after 10 days, and certainly after 20 days, we felt like it’s time for her to stop being secluded. And at minimum, she needed loved ones, family, friends, and nurses who could at least just care for her. And be with her. Hold her hand, and try to advocate for her. But that was denied as well.”

Stew Peters: “I just can’t wrap my head around any of this. It – it’s – this is happening in America.

And if the justification for removing you was that Veronica Wolski could speak for herself, then why was it that her demands, her requests that she was speaking for herself, were not honored? And fell on deaf ears? And she didn’t – she was denied the right to try. She was denied the ability to make freedom choices after her own health!

I mean – I don’t, I don’t understand how they can get away – this is criminal! This is absolutely criminal. By every sense of the word.”

Nancy Ross: “On day 2, when I was there, so she would’ve been in the hospital at that point, I believe well over a week, I was able to meet with a very kind infectious disease doctor overseeing her care. And he agreed to prescribe the Ivermectin. Again, even though she had a prescription at home from a different doctor, he agreed to prescribe it in the hospital.

We were, thrilled. We thought we had an – a real advocate there.

And then hours later he was overruled by the AMITA system, who said they are following NIH protocols. And an ethics committee met; we demanded an ethics committee conference. They met without us. We didn’t have a chance to present what we believe was some solid case study.

There also had been a court ruling, in nearby Elmhurst, where a hospital was ordered to give a patient their Ivermectin. My understanding is, that patient came out of a coma after 20 days and is home now playing with her grandkids. Veronica knew this. And she knew that there was hope, and that was denied. She also wanted to be transferred; she wanted to come home on hospice. They told her, oxygen needs were so high she couldn’t leave the hospital. But we felt we had found medical transport to meet her oxygen needs; we had a team ready to care for her. And it seems it was blocked at every turn.”

Stew Peters: “Forgive my ignorance on this, but isn’t there such a thing as AMA – “against medical advice” – that a patient is always afforded the right to just leave? To walk out? I mean, they’re not in jail. She’s not being held in custody. She hasn’t been charged with a crime. And certainly nurses and doctors are not law enforcement. But it seems that they have this unilateral, unchecked authority over patients once they come in and are determined to be “COVID” patients.”

Nancy Ross: “Right. We were told she wouldn’t have oxygen – or may not have oxygen to walk out. I said, “Well, we would have it.” And, by the end, they said, no – no medical transport company, no one will take her, because her – she was so unstable at that point. The needs were so dire.”

Stew Peters: “But you had somebody that would take her. Correct?”

Nancy Ross: “We had, we had an ambulance that said they had the needs that she required. And they said they needed authorization from the hospital, to release her. And we also had a nurse practitioner who was prescribing medications to her, ready on the outside, and many doctors, lawyers. I was blessed to have, just a really incredible team around me. Because I’m – I’m not a medical expert. I’m her friend; I’ve been friends with her for, for some time, and she, you know, she asked for help. I just – I’ve never – I’m just speechless. I’m so sorry.”

Stew Peters: “So you had a hospice – you had an ambulance, rather, that was prepared and ready to take her; you had a practitioner that was prescribing the medications that Veronica Wolski was requesting. All that needed to happen was for authorization from the hospital for her to be released to that equipped ambulance – who said that they were capable of caring for her, and that authorization never came.”

Nancy Ross: “It did not. They said, “We just don’t release her to anybody. We need to know who’s the name of this hospice company? Who is it? Who is it?”

And I did not give the name. I said, “I need to know the proper procedures at the hospital. Who do I talk to for her release?” And, the end of the conversation, it was, “They’re not in till Monday morning at 9.” I said, “She may not make it, till Monday.” And she didn’t. Um, I just have so many questions.”

Stew Peters: “And when you get answers to those questions, would you please come back? Because – [Nancy Ross: “Absolutely.”] – millions of people have the same questions, and demand answers, on – “

Nancy Ross: “They do. If I could help at all, Stew, some – we have very kind people have reached out and said, you know, maybe this will work. You know, initially, when they inform you of the risk of certain medication, like Ivermectin, which, by the way, is issued to other patients at AMITA, for other conditions. It’s just not… um, it’s just not part of their protocol for COVID. It’s not banned. It’s just not part of their protocol. Okay? So when they present you with the risk, you say, “I now have informed consent, thank you very much, I demand to try this. I demand this medication.” Then give them a window. Maybe just 48 hours.

If you want to try budesonide, just 48 hours, to open up my lungs so I can breathe. Waive responsibility to the hospital for that medication, if you have to. You know, not everyone can get lawyers and doctors involved when you’re fighting for your life. But go through those steps. I mean, if you have to go to court. And then I was told you can fire your attending physician. Tell them you want to fire your attending physician in the ICU and have that person replaced immediately, until you can find someone who will listen to you.

Now, this isn’t “wild west” medications we’re talking about. These are, you know, these are some basic things that have shown – have proven results, is my understanding, to help heal COVID patients. And heal them much more quickly than a ventilator.”

Stew Peters: “Yeah. So proven that they have earned a Nobel Prize for saving human life. [Nancy Ross: “Exactly. Exactly.”] Uh, and they are FDA approved. Unlike the Remdesivir, that is part of the NIH protocol, which we think we know why that is happening as well. Horrific.

Really appreciate your courage and for you, as emotional as it must be pulling yourself together in order to come here and answer some of these basic questions. And we hope to hear more from you as you get answers to the many questions that you no doubt have.”

Nancy Ross: “Thank you Stew. And God bless all those who are fighting and all those families who are affected. We’re praying for you and Veronica did not die in vain.”

Stew Peters: “God bless you, Nancy. And no, she did not. Her voice will be heard. Thank you so much.”

I want to expand a little bit on Nancy Ross’s recommendations when in a hospital for an illness; specifically for “COVID”. Their protocols are in place by a deliberate design. From the very same corrupt government/medical/health agencies overseeing the vaccination efforts. As was the struggle that Veronica Wolski and her advocates went through, although there was a doctor who was willing to prescribe the Ivermectin medication, he was ultimately overruled by the health administrators.

This is the bottom line that needs to be addressed when seeking medical care. Veronica was also demanding to use Ivermectin, but it fell on deaf ears. Perhaps a better alternative would be to steer clear of all government funded/public hospitals and seek independent/private physicians with an honest reputation instead if possible; who will actually honor their patient’s wishes. And/or investigate online physicians who will fill out prescriptions and search for pharmacies that will fill them. I would suggest doing this sooner rather than later, so you or your loved one can better be prepared in case of a sudden illness.

Lastly, those who have advocated for the use of Remdesivir and ventilators, you have blood on your hands. There is no better description for the pain and damage you have caused. From the NIH/CDC/FDA/government officials who have approved this protocol (many of who I surmise know exactly what they are doing), to the influencers and social media peddlers/fact-checkers, to the physicians and attendants who have initiated it. 

Anyone who has died using this “treatment” is under the blame of the healthcare system and the government. Likewise, anyone who has suffered ill effects and/or deaths from the incredibly coerced COVID injections have the same groups responsible, along with the pharmaceutical companies.

If you are a doctor, nurse, healthcare worker/administrator, etc. who is just now learning (or have known) about the egregious and heartbreaking tyranny that has led to numerous complications and deaths of hundreds, if not hundreds of thousands of lives due to the illogical and deplorable “rules and guidelines” of these – for lack of a better (yet still politically correct) description – corrupt industries, this is your chance to do the right thing, and refuse to participate.

My heart goes out to these ladies who had to watch as the person they were trying to advocate for fell under the grips of the medical tyrannical authorities who basically imprisoned the patient within their walls and murdered her with their unsafe/dangerous protocols.

My heart also goes out to anyone who has lost loved ones amidst these strange, unethical circumstances. I urge anyone who works within these medical fields to fully contemplate on your choices, and put your life in these people’s shoes. What if the person being held against their will in the hospital was your mother, your father, your child, grandparent, husband, wife…? What if you were held against your own will and denied medical treatment that could have saved your life? Suffering alone and isolated, away from your friends and family, and at the mercy of people “just following orders”?

Is your job worth it? Worth tarnishing your own soul and compassion for fellow human beings that you would be willing to watch them die in the hospital bed? Or will you finally rise up and be brave and realize you don’t want any involvement of these heinous crimes?

Thank you so much to everyone who is speaking out against these malpractices and unbelievably cruel dictatorships. Your bravery and integrity in coming forward shines a light on the steps that we need to take in order to preserve our rights, lives and freedom.

God bless.

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 KoalaParkLaundromat from Pixabay

More LIES and CONtradictions About COVID and the Vaccines | How Does Anyone Still Believe the Narrative?

We have been lied to numerous times by top officials. When will the rest of the world wake up?

A video that has gone viral in the last few days exposes medical “authorities” proposing underhanded tactics and straight up lies and fear-mongering attempts in order to push vaccines onto more of the public.

There have been many attempts at deceiving the public regarding the COVID/vaccine narrative, or just flat-out conflicting information that doesn’t make any sense when actually thinking about the statements.

The below sections take a look at just a small few of them, starting with the video mentioned above:

1. Novant Health administrator suggesting to deliberately scare/manipulate people into getting the vaccine:

Some embellishment is added for emphasis. Some words were undetermined due to unclear audio:

Carolyn Fisher: ” – the dashboard on how it’s set up myself, as far as how we get information out to the community on meaningful numbers – we set on a weekly basis. So that’s on our website, and we’ve been sharing that through social channels as well. Particularly those graphics that show the number of patients and how’s the percentage of them that are unvaccinated – percentage of unvaccinated people in the ICU, and the percentage of deaths. And the numbers. So those are numbers that we put out as far as, we don’t get into details of floor – Those other numbers are certainly out there.”

Mary Kathryn Rudyk: “I guess my feeling at this point in time is, maybe we need to be completely, a little bit more scary for the public. Then there’s another […], that I completely agree, there are many people still hospitalized that we’re considering post-COVID. But we’re not counting in those numbers. So how do we include those post-COVID people, in the numbers of patients we have in the hospital?”

Carolyn Fisher: “So is that all the people who have been in a hospital since the beginning of COVID?”

Mary Kathryn Rudyk: “Well, or those that are still in, and that’s something that I can take to someone else. But, I think those are important numbers, of patients that are still in the hospital, that are off the COVID floor, but still occupying the hospital for a variety of reasons.”

Shelbourn Stevens: “Carolyn, we call those – I’m sorry – we’re calling those “recovered” now; if you look at the […] dashboard, they’re listed as “recovered”. But I do think it – from our standpoint, we would still consider them a COVID patient, cause they’re still healing.”

Mary Kathryn Rudyk: “Yep. So I think that that needs to be highlighted as well. Because once they’re off isolation and drop from the COVID numbers, that’s exactly right.”

Shelbourn Stevens: “Carolyn, we can talk offline, and how we run that up, to marketing.”

Mary Kathryn Rudyk: “Right. So I was going to say that I think we have to be more blunt, we have to be more forceful, we have to say something coming out, ‘You know, you don’t get vaccinated, you know you’re going to die.’ I mean, let’s just, let’s just be really blunt to these people.”

There’s a lot to unravel in this brief discussion, but it all boils down to this: Mary Kathryn Rudyk suggests inundating the public with FEAR that COVID is such a deadly disease and that if you don’t get vaccinated, ‘you’re going to die’; yet in the very same discussion, acknowledges that there are many people who have recovered from COVID and are sometimes referred to as “post-COVID”.

Then if one wants to further expand upon this discussion, alleging that Rudyk is announcing this to also try and benefit the healthcare workers so that they are not overwhelmed with COVID-infected (or COVID-recovered) patients, I would have to bring up the point that there have been prophylactic treatments available to help prevent one from going to the hospital, yet these treatments are being SUPPRESSED from the public and denounced all around the healthcare industry and mainstream media/social media platforms.

If it’s about our health, then why are approved, well-known, beneficial, effective treatments being taken away from public use and ridiculed, and even in some cases, outlawed?

Maybe it’s because… it’s not about our health?

2. American Medical Association trains their healthcare members to label “hospitalization rates” as “deaths”

Another health organization that has been caught directly trying to lie and manipulate the public has been exposed by what they are training their associates to say in order to either sugar-coat certain terminology, or by outright blatant fear-mongering attempts in order to produce the results they want. (i.e. more and more people getting vaccinated)

At first, I couldn’t believe this was really real, until I checked it out for myself; and indeed, it is all stated there, right on the pdf of their website.

This information was first brought to my attention through the Stew Peters Show with Dr. Bryan Ardis. The video describing some of the incredibly outrageous deceptive tactics the AMA teaches members of its organization can be watched below:

A couple of screenshots are provided, with a link from the web archive:

Screenshot taken on September 14, 2021 from
[ https://www.ama-assn.org/system/files/2021-02/covid-19-vaccine-guide-english.pdf / pg. 9]
Web Archive version: COVID-19 Vaccine Guide

Instead of “Operation warp speed” – say “Standard process”
Instead of “Government” – say “Public health agencies”
Instead of “Hospitilization rates” – say “Deaths”

There is also the eerie, cult-like mentality that the AMA endorses their members to propagate on social media platforms and during interviews. A small portion of that has been captured in the below screenshot:

Screenshot taken on September 14, 2021 from
[ https://www.ama-assn.org/system/files/2021-02/covid-19-vaccine-guide-english.pdf / pg. 2]
Web Archive version: COVID-19 Vaccine Guide

– “I will get vaccinated as soon as it is available, as will my family. #TrustScience #COVID19”

– “I trust the scientific process and the rigorous peer review for the coronavirus vaccines. #TrustScience #COVID19”

– “I trust a vaccine endorsed by scientists, career public health professionals, my doctor, and the mainstream medical community. #TrustScience”

The egregious step to label “hospitalization rates” as “deaths” aside, which is insane as it is, I couldn’t help but get chills when reading the indoctrination-like proclamations of the social template content.

That is exactly what these industries and agencies want: blind trust to those in “authoritative” positions.

3. Israeli Health Minister caught on hot-mic: “there is no medical or epidemiological justification for the COVID passport, it is only intended to pressure the unvaccinated to vaccinate.”

I don’t expect the tweet to last long (perhaps I’ll be proven wrong), so I have provided a screenshot of the snippet in question:

Source: twitter | @disclose.tv

I can’t personally verify the translation since I don’t speak the language, but the following excerpts come from the following source: Caught on hot mic, Israeli health minister says ‘green pass’ not based on epidemiology

“Imposing “green pass” rules on certain venues is needed only to pressure members of the public to get vaccinated, and not for medical reasons, Israeli Health Minister Nitzan Horowitz said on Sunday, ahead of the weekly Cabinet meeting.

Horowitz was caught on a hot mic telling this to Interior Minister Ayelet Shaked, who was also unaware that the conversation was being taped and would be broadcast on Channel 12 News.

In response to Shaked’s suggestion that the “green pass” could be removed as a requirement for outdoor seating at restaurants, Horowitz said: “For swimming pools, too, not just in restaurants.”

“Epidemiologically, it’s true,” said Horowitz, adding, “The thing is, I’m telling you, our problem is people who don’t get vaccinated. We need [to influence] them a bit; otherwise, we won’t get out of this [pandemic situation].”

Here is another resource for further consideration:

Source: twitter | @EdladYaniv

Text translated using: Hebrew to English translation

“And now the unbelievable video is that it is exactly the opposite of what The Minister of Health told The High Court:

Health Minister Nitzan Horwitz explains to Sarah Ayelet Shaked that in some places the green giver is not necessary and is only to pressure Israelis to get vaccinated.

And this is exactly the opposite of what the Health Minister told The Begach “that the green tag is net health considerations.”

And this is Chairman Meretz.”

More lies, more influencing, more pressure, more threats, more deception.

When will the world wake up?

4. Vaccines and vaccine passports are only valid for 6 months. After that – you need more vaccines.

Again highlighting Israeli’s Health Minister, Dr. Horowitz, who has admitted that the vaccines are not about one’s health, is implementing the following protocols for their country – another under-handed tactic that is being used to trick the public into more unnecessary vaccines.

“Israel’s vaccine passport QR-code system, Green Pass, will now expire six months after the second injection is received, making a third, and possibly fourth, booster shot effectively mandatory to continue participation in Israel’s mainstream society.

On Aug. 29, Israeli health officials announced at a press conference that effective Oct. 1, fully vaccinated Green Pass validation status would expire six months after the second dose is received, according to news website Arutz Sheva.”

Additionally, citizens returning from overseas travel who have accepted a third injection will be required to quarantine for only 24 hours after arrival. Those who only have two doses are no longer considered fully vaccinated and will be sequestered for 7 days.

On Aug. 24, Haaretz reported Health Minister Nitan Horowitz as saying in comments given on Channel 13 Television, “This is simply because, in terms of its effectiveness, the vaccine is valid only for a period of five or six months.”

“After about half a year, you have to get a third dose. Otherwise, the vaccine loses its power.”

– Source: Israel Vaccine Passport Now Expires After Six Months, Boosters Required

So according to Israeli’s Health Minister, the vaccine is only beneficial for up to 6 months. After that, you will have to get another. And then, after those 6 months are up, then what? Another? And then another? And another? 2 per year COVID shots, in addition to the yearly flu shot? Do I have that correct?

(And do I need to mention Pfizer’s new venture in supplying – out of the goodness of their hearts, I’m sure – a two-pill-a-day regiment to combat COVID symptoms? Of course it’s about our health and not lining their pockets to make them richer. Of course. Because it’s not like we already have a cheap alternative at treating our symptoms that is curiously being continuously suppressed in the news all to steer our focus on their new, more costly product. That would just be ridiculous…)

5. FDA’s own admission: “While the vaccine may not prevent infection, symptoms or transmission of the virus from person to person – “

The FDA has been caught red-handed removing this particular portion from their Frequently Asked Questions webpage.

On August 31, 2021, I took a screenshot of the following information from the FDA’s own website, under the question:

Q: What safety information did FDA evaluate to authorize the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine for emergency use and approve Comirnaty?

Here was their response, as of August 23, 2021:

As you can see, I had to retrieve this information from the wayback machine because strangely enough, on September 1st, 2021 – the very next day after I was able to screenshot this data, the FDA removed this portion from their site.

[https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-frequently-asked-questions] – (content as of September 14, 2021 shows the latest current update as September 1, 2021]

What could have occurred, within 7 days of their “current content”, to decide to remove this very telling statement? Did new data suggesting that the vaccines do prevent infections, symptoms and transmissions suddenly come out within that very brief time period? Or, more likely, they realized that this statement does not reflect the worldwide pressure to get everyone vaccinated?

Speaking of, even the “president” of the United States is conflicted on if the vaccines work or not.

6. Joe Biden: “The bottom line – we’re going to protect vaccinated workers from unvaccinated coworkers.”

“My job as president is to protect all Americans.

So tonight I’m announcing that the Department of Labor is developing an emergency rule to require all employers with 100 or more employees, that together employ over 80 million workers, to ensure their workforces are fully vaccinated or show a negative test at least once a week.

Some of the biggest companies are already requiring this: United Airlines, Disney, Tyson’s Foods – and even Fox News.

The bottom line – we’re going to protect vaccinated workers from unvaccinated coworkers.”

Source: twitter | @POTUS

Um… isn’t the whole point of getting the vaccine to protect oneself from the “virus”, and in the same vein, the unvaccinated? Why does the vaccinated need protection from the unvaccinated? They are supposedly already protected BECAUSE of the vaccine.

At least, that’s what we were always told from the CDC, FDA, government officials, medical/health authorities, etc. At least, until they decided to flip-flop on their assessment and change their definitions. And at least until new “variants” popped out. … And until they misled the public by removing pertinent information from their own websites. And until… well, you get the point. (maybe)

Then we have Joe Biden’s VP also chiming in with her two cents:

“By vaccinating the unvaccinated, increasing our testing and masking, and protecting the vaccinated, we can end this pandemic. That’s exactly what we are committed to doing.”

Source: twitter | @KamalaHarris

The actual bottom line, they are basically admitting that the vaccine doesn’t work. They’ve already admitted they don’t know how long the vaccines last. Dr. Horowitz mentions no longer than 5-6 months. But for all we know, the vaccines “last” 3 days, if they even work at all. How long have you, personally, gone without COVID (or even the flu/common cold) before and after the vaccine? (If you chose to get one?)

After over 20 months, I’ve gotten sick one time that only lasted 4 days, and even then my symptoms were extremely mild. No flu, no runny nose, just a slight sore throat that went away after 4 days. Meanwhile, I’ve had friends get sick shortly RIGHT AFTER the injection. But, you know, they would’ve been considered “unvaccinated” at that point still…

Which brings me to:

7. “Unvaccinated are filling the hospitals!”

Really…? Hm… well, when you consider who they (CDC/FDA/health agencies) consider as “unvaccinated”, it’s no wonder.

Did you know, anyone who is not considered “fully vaccinated” – meaning, 14 days after their second dose, if it’s a two-dose regiment, or 14 days after a single dose if it’s a single-dose only regiment, is considered either a “partially vaccinated” or an “unvaccinated” person, depending on the honesty of the hospitals to report them?

Trust the Science? CDC Counts People Who Died Within 14 Days of Jab as “Unvaccinated”

To put that more clearly, if you get the second vaccine, and get “COVID” (sick/heart attack/myocarditis/blood clots/flu/etc.) 13 days after the shot, YOU CAN STILL BE CONSIDERED AN UNVACCINATED INDIVIDUAL.

Which goes without saying, but if you are experiencing side effects or illnesses a day or two after the first vaccine – they consider you an unvaccinated person. To think of it a different way, by the time you get the first Pfizer shot (and if you’re diligent in getting the second shot 3 weeks from the first), it will take you 35 days before they consider you a fully vaccinated person. For Moderna, that would be 42 days, again assuming you were diligent in getting your second shot right on time.

So if you get sick at any time during this time period and have to be admitted, the hospitals are allowed to write you up as an unvaccinated/partially vaccinated person.

Another interesting thing to consider, if you did get injected, the hospitals do not have to test you unless you present SEVERE symptoms of “COVID”. So this, obviously, is left up to the specific hospital to determine what is “severe” to them. If you have the flu, tossing and turning, throwing up, shivering, crying in pain, etc. – “Well, it’s not severe enough. It’s obviously not COVID. We don’t have to test them.”

Think this might have something to do with the COVID numbers showing more favorably to the vaccinated cases?

Not to mention that even if the vaccinated individual does get tested, the PCR tests were recommended to use a lower set of cycles for them. …Hm, I’m sure that wouldn’t have anything to do with returning a negative result; thus again, making it seem like the vaccines are working.

But I’m sure the hospital system isn’t that corrupt, right? There’s no way they’d be involved in such deliberate manipulation and misconduct, right? Even though these are all protocols that come from the CDC and other government health agencies…? Surely they just care about our well-being even though there have been studies that prove that in the majority of people natural immunity is by-far superior than shady, no long-term data vaccines, right?

Covid-19 natural immunity compared to vaccine-induced immunity: The definitive summary

“They can’t be lying. They wouldn’t do that. They were just mistaken, is all. They’re following the science. It’s science – science changes, you know. No, no, I’m sure that the government and health/pharma industries that are making a lot of money right now due to side effects from… well, not from the vaccines, obviously – it has to be from something else – I’m sure that they care about us far more than my idiot family members who I’ve lived with for all my life and who have raised me and bought me presents and clothed and fed me.

I mean, just look at everything the government and health agencies and other large corporations has offered me for injecting myself with an experimental vaccine! Beer, donuts, McDonald’s, sports and concert tickets, pizza, marijuana, cash – You all are silly if you don’t think the government wants what’s best for us.

‘Lying’…. pfft.”

So… yeah… I’m just going to direct you back up to number 1, again.

I realize how I may sound on this post. It’s not my intention to sound condescending, and I apologize if that’s how I come off. But in certain times, like what’s going on around us today, if it sounds harsh, maybe it needs to be.

When looking at the situation around us, I find it hard to comprehend that there are still people that believe the official narrative even after everything that’s been presented to us. It almost feels as if the events going on around us are deliberately conceived and obviously created to induce as much unbelievable situations to see how people will respond to it. Perhaps like a test to see how much the governments can get away with and still have people believe them. Sadly, a large group have had the wool pulled over their eyes, and simply go along with the establishment without even thinking about it.

Actually, now that I think about it, maybe this really is their goal. It not only helps them along with their corrupt endeavors, whatever that should be, but it also is a means to employ as many people who still believe their narrative to help them achieve it.

What do you think? Are you thinking? Do you know people who are just following along, without a second thought? Or even worse, indulging in a self-righteous attitude that they’re right and everyone else who doesn’t simply follow this narrative is wrong? Ignoring all of the obvious signs that this is just an agenda set to vaccinate everyone, leading up to controlling every aspect of our lives?

This is happening. The government and health officials continue lying because people still fall for it. If you’re reading this, chances are you already know about the deception and lies that we’re being told to continue forcing this unnecessary vaccine on all of us. I’d say it’s very rare for a person who has already bought into the narrative to read a post exposing the corporations on their lies and manipulation. And if that person does read a post similar to this one, will they contemplate on the information within, or automatically dismiss it as a crazy “conspiracy theory”?

There are truths out there for you. But you need to be willing to accept it.

"It's easier to fool people, than to convince them they have been fooled."
- quote often attributed to Mark Twain

I love you all. Even the ones who haven’t woken up to the scam or who simply don’t believe it. And I know it’s weird to say, but I even love the ones perpetrating the scam. They need it the most. There is something twisted and broken within them, and I literally pray for their soul. I hope in the near future, all of us will realize the actions we’re doing to others, and rise up and grow in truth and compassion, instead of remaining in this state of division.

God bless.

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 mohamed Hassan from Pixabay [slightly modified]

Get an Earful

Are “COVID Variants” Named After 5G Towers/Networks? | Delta, Kappa, Lambda, Mu… - The theories of "COVID" and 5G being connected rages on.
Are These Findings the Death Blow for Vaccine Passports? - "COVID shots do not prevent infection or spread of the virus"
Egregious Medical Tyranny Holds Patient Hostage in a Hospital and Refuses Her Preferred Medical Treatment – Patient DIES Under Their Protocol - Veronica Wolski was denied specific treatment - AND denied the freedom to leave the hospital.
More LIES and CONtradictions About COVID and the Vaccines | How Does Anyone Still Believe the Narrative? - We have been lied to numerous times by top officials. When will the rest of the world wake up?
W.H.O. / Governments Working in Collusion with Big Pharma? | A Necessary Look Back at the Swine Flu Pandemic - STEPPING BACK IN TIME: Another attempt to vaccinate the whole world.
Jerm Warfare Interview with Dr. Zelenko: “These “vaccines”, which I call ‘poison death shots’ “ - "The only reason you'd vaccinate your child is if you believe in child sacrifice."
Scandal Behind the FDA “Fake Approval” of Pfizer Jab - Corruption and collusions behind the Pfizer/FDA "vaccine" efforts.

Pfizer-BioNTech/COMIRNATY Vaccine Is Still Under “STUDY” Runs to be Completed at Different Intervals Between 2022-2026

” – known serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis”

In addition to the many debates and conflicts surrounding the “approval” of the Pfizer/BioNTech/Comirnaty vaccine, there is interesting information to glean from the documents involved surrounding this controversy.

The below documents, some from the FDA’s own website, sheds further light into what seems to be a product still in its experimental/study phase. Some of the revelations are chilling, and doesn’t quite give the reassurance that an “approved” drug of this magnitude is more beneficial to us than what it is purported to be saving us from.

Screenshot of the FDA NEWS RELEASE: FDA Approves First COVID-19 Vaccine
taken on August 31, 2021
[ https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine ]
Content current as of August 23, 2021

Selected quotes in gray text boxes are from the above document:

“Specifically, in the FDA’s review for approval, the agency analyzed effectiveness data from approximately 20,000 vaccine and 20,000 placebo recipients ages 16 and older who did not have evidence of the COVID-19 virus infection within a week of receiving the second dose. The safety of Comirnaty was evaluated in approximately 22,000 people who received the vaccine and 22,000 people who received a placebo 16 years of age and older.

Based on results from the clinical trial, the vaccine was 91% effective in preventing COVID-19 disease.

More than half of the clinical trial participants were followed for safety outcomes for at least four months after the second dose. Overall, approximately 12,000 recipients have been followed for at least 6 months.

The most commonly reported side effects by those clinical trial participants who received Comirnaty were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site, fatigue, headache, muscle or joint pain, chills, and fever. The vaccine is effective in preventing COVID-19 and potentially serious outcomes including hospitalization and death.”

There are a couple of notes to take away from this document. In the above quote, it doesn’t quite specify how long the clinical trial lasted. Only that more than half of the clinical trial participants were followed for safety outcomes for 4 months after the second dose. It also states that 12,000 of the recipients were followed for at least 6 months.

Both of these numbers (4 and 6) are incredibly low quantities when taking into account pregnant women who are at the beginning of their pregnancy. The length of the clinical trial does not take into account the full 9 months needed to determine a healthy pregnancy, nor does it allow for any time to safely assess the development of the baby once born.

The data in this document also does not include differences between those of the placebo group compared to that of the “vaccine” group. In addition, if we are to only take the 12,000 participants into account, which from the wording of the document seems to allude that these are the recipients of the vaccine, that would still leave 10,000 participants unaccounted for. Just from the amount of vaccine recipients (22,000), this is 45% of their study that the data does not reflect. If we are to include the 22,000 of the participants who received the placebo, the data that was not tracked would rise to 72%.

There is also the challenge of how they determined that the vaccine actually prevented COVID. Were these recipients exposed to someone with COVID or were deliberately inoculated with the disease to see if they would get infected? Many people, myself included, have gone on for more than a year without developing COVID, or at least “COVID symptoms”. Since this data only involved a 4-6 month trial period, how many of us (vaccinated, placebo, or otherwise) can say that we have not contracted COVID during this time-frame either? Is this implying that unless you’re vaccinated, you will most likely get COVID every 4-6 months?

Another consideration to take into account are the many testimonies from well-respected and renowned doctors/scientists/virologists who are adamant in their assessment that these vaccines are unnecessary and instead further harms the immune system rather than help it.

In the same regard, those who are unvaccinated will obviously then not contract any of the possible side effects that are listed in this document as well as the many adverse events that are reported to VAERS. Which leaves one to wonder if the benefits really outweigh the risks of the COVID vaccines.

There is also the slight alteration on a different page of the FDA website that gives further clarification as to the efficacy of the COVID vaccines – which does not reflect that of what many people are influenced to believe:

Under the heading:

Q: What safety information did FDA evaluate to authorize the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine for emergency use and approve Comirnaty?

Screenshot of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Frequently Asked Questions
taken on August 31, 2021
[ https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-frequently-asked-questions ]
Content Current as of August 23, 2021

UPDATE on September 6, 2021: Since the FDA website decided to remove this particular section from their FAQ (as of 9/1/2021), here is a screenshot taken from the web archive showing its existence:

“While the vaccine may not prevent infection, symptoms or transmission of the virus from person to person – “

This seems to be the heart of the matter, and although it continues with, “it is effective in preventing hospitalization and death.” it is in direct conflict with what we were led to believe this whole time. Most of the mainstream media, big tech platforms, health agencies, etc. have insisted that vaccines are needed to stop transmission of the virus and to protect those around us. However, this one simple statement defies everything that people were coerced into believing.

And with the last part of the sentence concluding that it prevents hospitalization and death, which even that is debatable when looking at the scope of the situation, it leaves one to wonder why this would not be an option for people to decide to take that risk on their own account. When comparing data of young individuals as well and their extremely low risk of hospitalization and death in the COVID setting, there ARE acknowledged threats when they are injected with the vaccine.

“Additionally, the FDA conducted a rigorous evaluation of the post-authorization safety surveillance data pertaining to myocarditis and pericarditis following administration of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine and has determined that the data demonstrate increased risks, particularly within the seven days following the second dose. The observed risk is higher among males under 40 years of age compared to females and older males. The observed risk is highest in males 12 through 17 years of age. Available data from short-term follow-up suggest that most individuals have had resolution of symptoms. However, some individuals required intensive care support. Information is not yet available about potential long-term health outcomes. The Comirnaty Prescribing Information includes a warning about these risks.”

The FDA is also acknowledging that there are higher risks involved with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine and myocarditis and pericarditis, especially in males aged 12-17, and up to age 40.

“Information is not yet available about potential long-term health outcomes.”

“In addition, the FDA is requiring the company to conduct postmarketing studies to further assess the risks of myocarditis and pericarditis following vaccination with Comirnaty. These studies will include an evaluation of long-term outcomes among individuals who develop myocarditis following vaccination with Comirnaty. In addition, although not FDA requirements, the company has committed to additional post-marketing safety studies, including conducting a pregnancy registry study to evaluate pregnancy and infant outcomes after receipt of Comirnaty during pregnancy.”

The document is also stating that the possibility of myocarditis and pericarditis is an accepted issue and will continue to be monitored after the marketing of the Comirnaty vaccine.

And in a rather blunt admission, FDA states on their own website that Comirnaty is not required to evaluate pregnancy and infant outcomes after receipt of Comirnaty during pregnancy. This would explain why the initial trial run was only monitored for 4-6 months. An outline in the BLA (Biologics License Approval) also states that Comirnaty will conduct studies on this group as we see in a later section.

BLA documents state Comirnaty vaccine studies to be conducted for the next several years

Screenshot taken from from the FDA BLA Approval on August 31, 2021
[ https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download ]
Document dated August 23, 2021

Text below is page 5 of the FDA BLA Approval document

Your deferred pediatric studies required under section 505B(a) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) are required postmarketing studies. The status of
these postmarketing studies must be reported according to 21 CFR 601.28 and section
505B(a)(4)(C) of the FDCA. In addition, section 506B of the FDCA and 21 CFR 601.70
require you to report annually on the status of any postmarketing commitments or
required studies or clinical trials.

Label your annual report as an “Annual Status Report of Postmarketing Study
Requirement/Commitments”
and submit it to the FDA each year within 60 calendar
days of the anniversary date of this letter until all Requirements and Commitments
subject to the reporting requirements under section 506B of the FDCA are released or
fulfilled. These required studies are listed below:

1. Deferred pediatric Study C4591001 to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of
COMIRNATY in children 12 years through 15 years of age.

Final Protocol Submission: October 7, 2020

Study Completion: May 31, 2023

Final Report Submission: October 31, 2023

2. Deferred pediatric Study C4591007 to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of
COMIRNATY in infants and children 6 months to <12 years of age.

Final Protocol Submission: February 8, 2021

Study Completion: November 30, 2023

Final Report Submission: May 31, 2024

3. Deferred pediatric Study C4591023 to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of
COMIRNATY in infants <6 months of age.

Final Protocol Submission: January 31, 2022

Study Completion: July 31, 2024

Final Report Submission: October 31, 2024

Submit the protocols to your IND 19736, with a cross-reference letter to this BLA STN
BL 125742 explaining that these protocols were submitted to the IND. Please refer to
the PMR sequential number for each study/clinical trial and the submission number as
shown in this letter.

Submit final study reports to this BLA STN BL 125742. In order for your PREA PMRs to
be considered fulfilled, you must submit and receive approval of an efficacy or a labeling supplement. For administrative purposes, all submissions related to these required
pediatric postmarketing studies must be clearly designated as:

• Required Pediatric Assessment(s)

As the document states, the completion study of Comirnaty postmarketing (after approval) is not due until May 31, 2023 / Novermber 20, 2023 / July 31, 2024 respective of older to lower age groups. There is also another important acronym to consider, which is the IND, which stands for Investigational New Drug.

With this knowledge in hand, it’s important to note that the clinical trial run was monitored for 4-6 months after the second dose on around 55% of the recipients, while the actual “approved” drug still in its investigational/study stages is set to be monitored for 2-3 years. This is a sizeable difference in the amount of time to determine safety and efficacy, especially when considering the many events already reported to VAERS. And according to the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Frequently Asked Questions page from the FDA website:

Screenshot taken from the FDA Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Frequently Asked Questions
on August 31, 2021
[ https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-frequently-asked-questions ]
Content current as of August 23, 2021

Q: Are vaccine providers required to report side effects?
A: Providers administering Comirnaty or Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine must report to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and to Pfizer the following information associated with the vaccine of which they become aware:
  • Vaccine administration errors whether or not associated with an adverse event
  • Serious adverse events (irrespective of attribution to vaccination)
  • Cases of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome
  • Cases of COVID-19 that result in hospitalization or death

Acknowledged myocarditis and pericarditis issues being studied on children

” – known serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis”

Screenshot taken from from the FDA BLA Approval on August 31, 2021
[ https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download ]
Document dated August 23, 2021

Text in the gray box below are from pages 6-8 of the FDA BLA Approval documents
[ https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download ]

We have determined that an analysis of spontaneous postmarketing adverse events
reported under section 505(k)(1) of the FDCA will not be sufficient to assess known
serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis and identify an unexpected serious risk of
subclinical myocarditis.

Furthermore, the pharmacovigilance system that FDA is required to maintain under
section 505(k)(3) of the FDCA is not sufficient to assess these serious risks.

Therefore, based on appropriate scientific data, we have determined that you are
required to conduct the following studies:

4. Study C4591009, entitled “A Non-Interventional Post-Approval Safety Study of
the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine in the United States,” to evaluate
the occurrence of myocarditis and pericarditis following administration of
COMIRNATY.

We acknowledge the timetable you submitted on August 21, 2021, which states
that you will conduct this study according to the following schedule:

Final Protocol Submission: August 31, 2021

Monitoring Report Submission: October 31, 2022

Interim Report Submission: October 31, 2023

Study Completion: June 30, 2025

Final Report Submission: October 31, 2025

5. Study C4591021, entitled “Post Conditional Approval Active Surveillance Study
Among Individuals in Europe Receiving the Pfizer-BioNTech Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccine,” to evaluate the occurrence of myocarditis
and pericarditis following administration of COMIRNATY.

We acknowledge the timetable you submitted on August 21, 2021, which states
that you will conduct this study according to the following schedule:

Final Protocol Submission: August 11, 2021

Progress Report Submission: September 30, 2021

Interim Report 1 Submission: March 31, 2022

Interim Report 2 Submission: September 30, 2022

Interim Report 3 Submission: March 31, 2023

Interim Report 4 Submission: September 30, 2023

Interim Report 5 Submission: March 31, 2024

Study Completion: March 31, 2024

Final Report Submission: September 30, 2024

6. Study C4591021 substudy to describe the natural history of myocarditis and
pericarditis following administration of COMIRNATY.

We acknowledge the timetable you submitted on August 21, 2021, which states
that you will conduct this study according to the following schedule:

Final Protocol Submission: January 31, 2022

Study Completion: March 31, 2024

Final Report Submission: September 30, 2024

7. Study C4591036, a prospective cohort study with at least 5 years of follow-up for
potential long-term sequelae of myocarditis after vaccination (in collaboration
with Pediatric Heart Network).

We acknowledge the timetable you submitted on August 21, 2021, which states
that you will conduct this study according to the following schedule:

Final Protocol Submission: November 30, 2021

Study Completion: December 31, 2026

Final Report Submission: May 31, 2027

8. Study C4591007 substudy to prospectively assess the incidence of subclinical
myocarditis following administration of the second dose of COMIRNATY in a
subset of participants 5 through 15 years of age.

We acknowledge the timetable you submitted on August 21, 2021, which states
that you will conduct this assessment according to the following schedule:

Final Protocol Submission: September 30, 2021

Study Completion: November 30, 2023

Final Report Submission: May 31, 2024

9. Study C4591031 substudy to prospectively assess the incidence of subclinical
myocarditis following administration of a third dose of COMIRNATY in a subset of
participants 16 to 30 years of age.

We acknowledge the timetable you submitted on August 21, 2021, which states
that you will conduct this study according to the following schedule:

Final Protocol Submission: November 30, 2021

Study Completion: June 30, 2022

Final Report Submission: December 31, 2022

It is interesting that the timing to be considered for approval of these vaccines was only a 4-6 month timeframe, however, known dangers/risks, identified as “serious”, are still allowed to be approved and to be studied for 2+ years.

The document also recognizes that myocarditis and pericarditis is enough of a concern to happen after administration of the Comirnaty vaccine, since it mentions several studies just for this specific adverse event, and to continue to assess these reports.

In addition to all of the substudies to be conducted, there is a study to be initiated on a select group of participants to administer a third dose of the Comirnaty vaccine.

All of this information leads credence to the fact that even though the Comirnaty vaccine has “officially been approved” by the FDA, it is still in the investigational stages and being experimented upon on the public. And it goes without saying, but if myocarditis and pericarditis (on top of other reported side effects) are serious risks especially in children (“The observed risk is highest in males 12 through 17 years of age.”), then for this known risk to be offered to infants/toddlers defies any ethically moral boundaries and is in direct violations of the Nuremberg Code.

The next section also provides further evidence that there have been NO studies in the safety/efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty vaccine on pregnant women.

Pregnancy/Births were not studied during the initial Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty trial runs

Another snippet from the FDA Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Frequently Asked Questions website page, states the following:

Screenshot taken from the FDA Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Frequently Asked Questions
on August 31, 2021
[ https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-frequently-asked-questions ]
Content current as of August 23, 2021

Q: Can pregnant or breastfeeding women receive the Comirnaty or Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine?

A: While there have been no specific studies in these groups, there is no contraindication to receipt of the vaccine for pregnant or breastfeeding women. Pregnant or breastfeeding women should discuss potential benefits and risks of vaccination with their healthcare provider.

The acknowledgement above seems to indicate that the FDA and Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty company have side-stepped this particular group in their vaccine studies, and have left it up to the healthcare provider to determine whether or not to administer this vaccine to pregnant women or women who are breastfeeding. This alone should be enough of a statement that there is no sufficient/professional data to analyze if the Comirnaty is safe during pregnancies/breastfeeding stages.

And if one were to consider the VAERS reporting system, in which the Pfizer-BioNTech company is required to report to, there have been numerous conditions of miscarriages/stillbirths/complications during pregnancy after administration of the COVID vaccine. While it is difficult to determine if these complications were a direct result of the vaccine, it is up to the scientific/healthcare community to investigate these cases in a thorough, unbiased and uninfluenced manner.

Another extremely alarming section of the FDA BLA Approval documents shows the following trial to be monitored in pregnant women:

Screenshot taken from from the FDA BLA Approval on August 31, 2021
[ https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download ]
Document dated August 23, 2021

Text in the gray box below are from pages 9-10 of the FDA BLA Approval documents
[ https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download ]
POSTMARKETING COMMITMENTS SUBJECT TO REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
UNDER SECTION 506B

We acknowledge your written commitments as described in your letter of August 21, 2021 as outlined below:

10. Study C4591022, entitled “Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Exposure during
Pregnancy: A Non-Interventional Post-Approval Safety Study of Pregnancy and
Infant Outcomes in the Organization of Teratology Information Specialists
(OTIS)/MotherToBaby Pregnancy Registry.”

Final Protocol Submission: July 1, 2021

Study Completion: June 30, 2025

Final Report Submission: December 31, 2025

There are a couple of key takeaways in this section that are of incredible importance. One major term to focus on is the word “NON-INTERVENTIONAL“.

According to What is a Non Interventional Study?, “In general, a non interventional study (NIS) (also called a non interventional trial) is where a patient takes regular medicine, prescribed according to the label. In an NIS, the researcher sets out to exert as little influence as possible on the patient’s condition while studying a medicine’s “…effectiveness, safety and tolerability under real life conditions” (Mishra & Vora, 2010).”

The article also reiterates multiple times that “non-interventional” studies are observational studies – the researchers are not to interfere with the dosages in any way but to prescribe them exactly as listed on the label. It also seems to imply that even if severe side effects show up, they are to still carry through with the “medicinal product” in that patient as prescribed. Another insinuation that one can make is that in order to not interfere with the study, it is not recommended to prescribe treatments that may help alleviate potential side effects. The term “tolerability” is implying to keep the patient going through the side effects in order to continue to study the long-term effects of the investigational new drug.

However, with the inclusion of “real life conditions”, it doesn’t indicate whether the patient can seek out physicians to investigate what is causing the side effects in their system and engage in therapeutic treatments to alleviate these effects. If a study is to be conducted in real life conditions, then it is to be expected that patients will seek treatments on their own while the researcher is only required to observe the patient to see how the alternative treatments interact with the drug/symptoms.

The same article goes on to state that the UK/EU have different definitions of what “non-interventional” means. “Aronson (2004) states… “the term ‘non-interventional’ in the Directive doesn’t mean non-interventional (i.e. non-interference) at all; it refers to an intervention with a licensed medicinal product.”

There is controversy and conflicts in this statement as another article, Interventional or Non-Interventional? Analyzing the Differences Between Clinical Studies Using Medicines in the European Union points out:

“Although defined in DIR 2001/20/EC, non-interventional studies are outside its scope. Due to the lack of harmonized regulation, some studies designed to be non‑interventional may be considered clinical trials by EU authorities. The two blinded studies described in Table 4 (see PDF) were considered clinical trials in the EU for planning on collection of data to support the marketing authorization application of experimental IMPs, despite no IMP being given and normal clinical practice being kept during the study period. Sponsors are thus advised to consult with authorities when planning studies under these conditions and/or whenever the objectives or design may raise questions.”

Further in the article, it states the following, which again, is not reassuring considering the policies/guidelines/mandates that authorities have been engaging in in order to mandate these investigational new drugs (COVID vaccines) onto the public:

“There is no centralized submission procedure for non-interventional studies with the exception of non-interventional PASSs, imposed as an obligation by an EU competent authority.{9} Because non-interventional studies do not have harmonized legislation, some Member States require submissions to regulatory authorities, while others do not. It is therefore important that sponsors are familiar with the regulatory framework of target EU Member States, and that they consult with local competent authorities and ethics committees (ECs) when justified.”

It’s sad to have to point this out, but the quote does specify “competent” authorities. And even the inclusion of “ethics committees” is not comforting seeing as how one of the leading figures in ethics study is Christine Grady, Chief of the Department of Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, and wife of Anthony Fauci – Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Chief Medical Advisor to the president, and who is also a large spokesperson for the experimental injections.

The other takeaway from section 10 of the FDA BLA documents is the term “TERATOLOGY“.

Definition of teratology
: the study of malformations or serious deviations from the normal type in developing organisms
merriam-webster/teratology

Teratology, branch of the biological sciences dealing with the causes, development, description, and classification of congenital malformations in plants and animals and with the experimental production, in some instances, of these malformations. Congenital malformations arise from interruption in the early development of the organism. Malformations in human infants, for example, may occur because the infant’s genotype contains mutant genes or includes an abnormal number of chromosomes; they also may occur if early in pregnancy the mother has had German measles (rubella), has taken some injurious drug, or has been exposed to an injurious dosage of radiation. Experimental studies suggest similar types of factors can cause malformations in animals and plants.”
britannica/teratology

Now when you combine the terms “non-interventional” and “teratology” together, it is suggesting that the ongoing studies (that were not conducted to begin with even in a clinical trial setting, as per the FDA’s own response) on pregnant women with Comirnaty and on the developing baby, will be monitored with as little intervention as possible and is mostly to be observed for malformations/genetic defects/miscarriages/etc.

In other words, safety and efficacy were never studied in this particular group, and neither was it studied in infants. It has also not been studied for long-term analysis, as the 4-6 month trial runs proves. The current “approval” it is undergoing now is an authorized experiment on the human population that is posing incredibly unnecessary risks when considering the many effective treatments that are already available to combat respiratory illnesses. And the insistent assertiveness to push this “investigational new drug” onto babies/children who are at extremely low risk for this illness is a disastrous decision from those in an “authoritative” position and should be investigated for malfeasance and misconduct.

This is also not the first time that government agencies/health industries/etc. have conducted experiments on the public.

The Tuskegee/Syphilis experiment was initiated onto a selection of African American men between 1932-1972. The study was only stopped (allegedly) after a publication was released on Associated Press in 1972 about the immorally unethical experiments being conducted on this group:

“Of about 600 Alabama black men who originally took part in the study, 200 or so were allowed to suffer the disease and its side effects without treatment, even after penicillin was discovered as a cure for syphilis. Treatment then probably could have saved or helped many of the experiment participants, PHS officials say.”AP WAS THERE: Black men untreated in Tuskegee Syphilis Study

This study seems to echo the sentiments we see going on with the coronavirus situation, in which only one type of drug is being promoted (the COVID vaccines) while suppression of other treatments that have been proven to work (such as Ivermectin) has been denounced by the very same government/health/medical fields that have conducted these experimental studies.

A study that involved the CDC/FDA’s approval, this time on Black and Latino babies, was conducted in the early 1990’s and involved the measles vaccine:

“1990: CDC Inoculated Black and Latino Babies with an Unlicensed Measles Vaccine
A covert clinical trial by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and Kaiser Permanente inoculated Black and Latino babies with an experimental measles vaccine without informing parents the vaccine was experimental. More than 1500 six-month old black and Hispanic babies in Los Angeles are given the deadly “experimental” measles vaccine that had never been licensed for use in the United States; a vaccine that had been tested in African and Mexican babies resulting in high death rates. The parents were never informed and they never gave their consent. The CDC harmed babies, violated federal law, and trampled on parental rights with impunity.”
1990 FDA Issued a Waiver From Consent; Covert CDC Experimental Vaccine Test on Black / Latino Babies

It’s interesting that the measles vaccine experiment identifies Kaiser Permanente specifically, because as we see in another section of the FDA BLA Approval for Comirnaty, it seems as if Kaiser Permanente makes another appearance in the role of human experimentation:

Text in the gray box below is from page 10 of the FDA BLA Approval documents
[ https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download ]

13. Study C4591014, entitled “Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 BNT162b2 Vaccine
Effectiveness Study – Kaiser Permanente Southern California.”

Final Protocol Submission: March 22, 2021

Study Completion: December 31, 2022

Final Report Submission: June 30, 2023

It would seem that the approval by the FDA of these IND drugs (Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty vaccine) is a way for the government/health agencies to skirt away from liability by stating that since the vaccines are no longer “experimental” by their definition, and that they are FDA “approved”, it is no longer required to gain informed consent of these drugs. In addition, as to the technicality of their terms and protocols, there are a multitude of ways to interpret their “informed consent” rules, which officials can then bend or define in any way that best reflects the use of their study/drug.

[ https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/informed-consent#exceptions ]

Also keeping in mind how long it was determined before the “health agencies” granted approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty vaccine – (4-6 months) – it would be conclusive to state that the vaccines have NOT sufficiently been studied in young children or pregnant women (or even the rest of the age groups because of the short amount of time the clinical trial study was conducted in), and the subsequent approval of this vaccine is to continue this research on the population who is exceedingly being pressured into taking this investigational new drug.

There is also the matter of the many adverse events that have been reported since the inoculation of these injections, that have largely gone unheeded within the health/medical institutions that are endorsing this drug. Other than the widely acknowledged myocarditis and pericarditis, most common in young males, which is still being studied and allowed to persist onto the public.

So again, taking into account the collusion of the government/health/medical/research fields to conduct experiments on the public, it would be necessary to reflect upon these agencies for additional breaches upon human rights, consent, and ethical behavior.

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 Ahmad Ardity from Pixabay