• ‘Bombshell’ Study Of Pfizer COVID Vaccine Suggests Some People Got Highly Dangerous Shots, Others Got A Placebo

    ‘Bombshell’ Study Of Pfizer COVID Vaccine Suggests Some People Got Highly Dangerous Shots, Others Got A Placebo

    Please Follow us on GabMindsTelegramRumbleGab TVGETTRTruth SocialTwitter 

    Danish scientists uncovered compelling evidence that a significant percentage of the batches of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine distributed in the EU likely consisted of placebos — and the non-placebo batches demonstrated higher-than-normal severe adverse events in recipients, prompting the researchers to call for further investigation.

    By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.

    Danish scientists uncovered compelling evidence that a significant percentage of the batches of the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine distributed in the EU likely consisted of placebos — and the non-placebo batches demonstrated higher-than-normal severe adverse events in recipients.

    The scientists published their study in March, as a letter submitted to the European Journal of Clinical Investigation. BNT162b2 is the vaccine granted Emergency Use Authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and other authorities.

    The study initially did not attract attention, but recent media reports brought it to light.

    Journalist Kim Iversen, who on Wednesday reported on the study on “The Kim Iversen Show,” called it an “absolute bombshell of a story.”

    Iversen cited as her source an article in The Daily Sceptic, also published Wednesday, by five German scientists who have publicly questioned the safety of the vaccines.

    The Danish researchers looked at Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines administered in Denmark between December 2020 and January 2022 and found that batches of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine could neatly be divided into three groups.

    Two of the three groups demonstrated higher-than-normal percentages of severe adverse events in recipients. However, for the third group of batches, a total of zero adverse events were reported.

    The researchers also examined data indicating which batches were inspected and tested by regulators and discovered that almost none of the batches from the third group — associated with no severe adverse events — had been inspected.

    According to Iversen, the findings suggest that “many of the batches of the Pfizer vaccine administered to the public — up to 30% — were placebos. And even worse, the evidence points to regulators knowing about it and willingly administering them.”

    The study’s authors wrote:

    “The observed variation in SAE [severe adverse event] rates and seriousness between BTN162b2 vaccine batches in this nationwide study was contrary to the expected homogenous rate and distribution of SAEs between batches.

    “In conclusion, the results suggest the existence of a batch-dependent safety signal for the BNT162b2 vaccine, and more studies are warranted to explore this preliminary observation and its consequences.”

    Iversen said these results mean “either they were actively experimenting on the public or they were covering up for the fact that the vaccines came with numerous side effects.”

    ‘This is how placebos would look’

    The German scientists first discussed the results of the Danish study last week on a German online talk show, Punkt.Preradovic, hosted by journalist Milena Preradovic.

    According to The Daily Sceptic, they analyzed how “the batches used in Denmark, which are represented by the points in the graph, essentially break down into three groups.”

    suspected adverse events chart

    One set of batches, referred to as the “green batches,” accounting for over 60% of the overall sample demonstrated “a moderate or moderately-high level of adverse events associated with them.”

    Specifically, one severe adverse event was reported per approximately 400 doses in this batch — much higher than the rate of severe adverse events reported for the influenza vaccine.

    Another set of batches, referred to as the “blue batches,” was “associated with an extraordinarily high level of adverse events” — with a rate of reported severe adverse events of 1 in 10 doses, accounting for nearly 50% of the vaccine-related deaths in the sample.

    Some batches within the “blue” group had an even higher rate of severe adverse events: up to 1 in every 6 doses.

    However, the “blue batches” were administered the least in Denmark, representing less than 5% of the total number of doses in the sample. This led the scientists to note that “these especially bad batches may perhaps have been quietly pulled from the market by public health authorities.”

    The third set of batches, referred to as the “yellow batches,” represented approximately 30% of the total number of doses administered in the sample, but were “associated with literally zero suspected adverse events.”

    Gerald Dyker, Ph.D., professor of organic chemistry at Ruhr University in Bochum, Germany, and a member of the team of five German scientists calling attention to the Danish study, suggested that “malicious” observers might conclude “this is how placebos would look.”

    “Why would a certain group have absolutely no side effects?” Iversen said. “These scientists said the only time you get that is in the control group. That’s the group that was given the placebo.”

    ‘The regulators knew’

    The Daily Sceptic reported that when the German researchers compared the batch numbers with publicly available data on the vaccine batches, “They made the startling discovery that almost none of the harmless batches, unlike the very-bad and not-so-bad batches, appear to have been subject to any quality-control testing at all.”

    “What they uncovered through public information … was that some of them were tested and some of them were not,” Iversen said, noting that every single batch in the “blue” group and almost all batches in the “green” group were tested by regulators and were then “rolled out to the public.”

    However, when it came to the “yellow” batches, Iversen said the researchers found that all but one were not tested by the regulator.

    Dyker told Preradovic, “This would support the initial suspicion that they are maybe in fact something like placebos,” a point further emphasized by Iversen, who said:

    “How could this possibly be? What are the chances that the group that got no side effects whatsoever, that looks like a placebo, that looks like saline solution, what are the chances that none of them would have been tested except one, when all the others were tested in the other groups, practically all of them? The chances are next to nothing.”

    “Do you know what that showcases right there? That right there shows the regulators knew. They knew they didn’t need to test the saline solution. It would have been a waste of their time, so they didn’t.

    “And they released it to the public, and that was 30% of the doses, and they were placebo and they knew they were placebo. That’s what that looks like.”

    Observing that many more doses were given from the “blue” and “green” groups, Iversen suggested several possible reasons for this, including that the researchers believe when regulators saw the high percentage of severe adverse events in those two groups, “they quietly pulled” those batches from the market “without telling anybody.”

    In reference to the “blue” group, which demonstrated an extraordinarily high percentage of severe adverse events, Iversen said, “It’s possible that this was a different formulation and they rolled it out there as they were experimenting on people.”

    She said it could be that it was “an intentional batch and that they were experimenting on the people, giving them this extra dose of something that had something different in it,” she added, “because it looks like if they were giving people placebos, that they were experimenting on people.”

    “The only other thing that’s possible is that they were covering up for the massive number of side effects,” Iversen said, adding that there was an “outrageous number of side effects, and the only way to mitigate it and to keep the public calm [was] to give them a placebo. That way, the overall rate of side effects will be way lower.”

    Iversen noted that Denmark has a reporting system for severe adverse events similar to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in the U.S.

    VAERS has historically been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.

    She said that in such voluntary reporting systems, most people who experience adverse events never report their injuries. “You have to take that into consideration, because that actually skews the numbers lower than higher.”

    Suggesting that “This maybe was going on pretty much everywhere the Pfizer vaccines were being administered,” Iversen called for an investigation to be launched in the U.S.:

    “This obviously needs to be investigated, and we would like to see this investigated here in the United States as well.

    “Were they doing this and where were they doing this? Did they notify people that they potentially were getting a placebo? … Were the people aware that they were in a clinical trial essentially? That’s what that is. That is a test, you are a test subject … and they were collecting data.

    “This is criminal.”

    Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., based in Athens, Greece, is a senior reporter for The Defender and part of the rotation of hosts for CHD.TV's "Good Morning CHD."

    “© [Article Date] Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

    SHARE THIS ARTICLE
    Subscribe
    Notify of
    guest

    0 Comments
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
  • Copyright © 2023 The Connecticut Centinal
    magnifier