USA CN Third party re publication 12/9/24
COVID
‘Truth Is Becoming More Obvious’: Author of New Peer-reviewed Study Calls for Moratorium on COVID mRNA Vaccines
Based on incomplete data, “serious safety concerns,” and potential long-term risks, the authors of a new peer-reviewed study recommend “at minimum” a moratorium on Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccines.
Listen to this article
A new peer-reviewed study calling for a moratorium on mRNA COVID-19 vaccines adds to a growing chorus of voices demanding that public health officials hit the pause button on the shots until definitive safety studies are performed.
The study, published in the winter 2024 edition of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, analyzed COVID-19 vaccine and booster data from Pfizer and BioNTech. The authors concluded that “at minimum,” health officials should institute a moratorium on the shots.
Based on incomplete data, “serious safety concerns,” and potential long-term risks, the authors recommend a moratorium on Pfizer/BioNTech’s COVID-19 modRNA (modified RNA) vaccines, according to epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher, administrator of the McCullough Foundation, who analyzed the study in a Substack post.
The foundation’s founder, Dr. Peter McCullough, was one of the study’s authors.
According to the study, the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 shot is a gene therapy “misclassified as a traditional vaccine.” The study also highlighted a lack of toxicology and carcinogenicity testing, deficient clinical trials, regulatory oversight failures and safety concerns relating to the spike protein and lipid nanoparticles in the shots.
“Early on in the pandemic, we and other scientific bodies had been calling upon the government agencies to halt the mRNA shots. Every time, we were ignored. As more evidence is being accumulated, the truth is becoming more obvious,” said Philip R. Oldfield, Ph.D., lead author of the study.
The latest call for a moratorium adds to the list of scientists and organizations that have supported halting the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines — including Florida’s surgeon general, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Doctors for COVID Ethics, Americans for Health Freedom and the World Council for Health.
In October, Idaho’s health board voted to stop offering COVID-19 vaccines at its 30 clinics because of safety concerns. Also that month, the Slovak government issued a report proposing a ban on “dangerous” mRNA vaccines.
Another study, published Nov. 29 in Cell Host & Microbe, found that the persistent presence of spike protein at the blood-brain barrier may lead to significant neurological damage — although this study also claims that the vaccine reduces the presence of spike protein in the body.
Hulscher told The Defender:
“Spike protein is a highly toxic substance that causes damage to all organ systems. We can connect spike protein to vaccine-related deaths and serious adverse events as it’s been directly found in the brain, adrenal glands, heart and blood of injured and deceased individuals.”
Dr. Angus Dalgleish, professor of oncology at St George’s, University of London, told The Defender that either of the two new studies is enough to justify the immediate withdrawal of mRNA vaccines for non-lethal viruses.”
“Both studies confirm what we know about the increasing number of people who seem to progress to severe neurological diseases and rapid dementia after the shots,” Dalgleish said.
Christof Plothe, D.O., a member of the World Council for Health’s steering committee, told The Defender the studies are a “very important summary of major aspects pointing at the scientifically and morally unacceptable flaws of the continuation of a gene therapy experiment for three-quarters of humanity.”
to noon ET Wednesday, Dec. 4
Public health agencies ‘chose not to’ pay attention to vaccine risks
The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons study found that COVID-19 shots never should have been classified as vaccines.
“The COVID-19 modRNA vaccines are not classified as gene therapy products, whereas an mRNA vaccine against a non-infectious disease such as cancer is not classified as a mRNA vaccine, but as a gene therapy product,” the study noted.
According to the study, this distinction is significant because of the different regulatory requirements for vaccines compared to gene therapy products
“It is a regulatory requirement for manufacturers of a gene therapy product to
determine the structure, concentration, and biodistribution of the protein … However, that was not the case for Pfizer-BioNTech’s BNT162b2 [COVID-19 vaccine], as it was misclassified as a traditional vaccine,” the study said.
The study also noted deficiencies during clinical trials. According to Hulscher, the trials “failed to measure critical factors like the amount and variability of spike protein produced in individuals.” He said placebo groups in initial trials were unblinded early, “undermining the integrity of long-term safety and efficacy data.”
The study also noted the “high mortality rate” of 1,223 deaths in the three months after the introduction of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 shot, in addition to thousands of patients who were classified as “unknown” or who had not recovered as of the time of Pfizer-BioNTech’s initial post-marketing report.
According to the study:
“Such a high mortality rate following medical intervention would have resulted in having any other medicinal product taken off the market immediately. Therefore, the question must be asked: Why were the modRNA vaccines allowed to remain in use?”
Pfizer also “did not conduct genotoxicity or carcinogenicity studies, despite the potential for the spike protein and LNPs [lipid nanoparticles] to cause harm,” Hulscher wrote.
“Although BNT162b2 might not [be] expected to have genotoxic or carcinogenic potential, the encoded spike protein that is produced does,” the study noted. “Therefore, these studies should have been performed. They were not.”
The study also noted that Pfizer-BioNTech performed toxicological studies using “Wister Han” rats — describing this as an “unusual” approach.
“The standard procedure for toxicology studies is to use two species (one rodent and one non-rodent species); in this case, the second species would have been Macaques primates,” the study said, adding that Wister Han rats do not have a similar physiological profile to humans.
“Rats in the wild are associated with at least 55 different pathogens that can pass onto humans; SARS-CoV-2 is not one of them,” the study noted.
Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist at Children’s Health Defense, said he found it “fascinating” that rats were used in toxicity studies for the vaccine. “The main function of the vaccine is to produce spike proteins and these spike proteins do not bind to a rat’s ACE2 receptor,” he said.
The study also highlighted failures by regulatory agencies, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
“By February 2021, both Pfizer/BioNTech and the FDA were already aware that the product carried significant hazards. Vaccine-related adverse effects were being documented in VAERS” — the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System — the study said.
Oldfield attributed legacy media’s downplaying of the vaccine’s side effects to social and institutional pressure. “Public health agencies could have adopted good scientific practice and issued a regulatory document that was scientifically sound. But they chose not to.”
Hulscher told The Defender, “There are 19,104 COVID-19 vaccine-related deaths in the United States reported to VAERS.” By comparison, “In the past, the Rotashield vaccine was removed from the market after only 15 cases of intussusception.” He blamed “widespread regulatory capture” for public health agencies’ inaction.
“The point to take from here is that the mechanisms for these effects are now known,” Oldfield said. “Therefore, they are not ‘potential’ adverse events — they’re real. Bear in mind we still don’t know the long-term effects of these mRNA vaccines.”
A key focus of the study was the distribution of spike proteins and LNPs throughout the body following vaccination. On Substack, Hulscher wrote: “Pfizer’s own biodistribution data showed lipid nanoparticles [and] modRNA were widely distributed throughout the body, including the liver, spleen, ovaries, and adrenal glands.”
Plothe said that after three years, we still “don’t know the quantity of the production of toxic spike proteins in our bodies via this gene therapy. But even more worrying is the fact that we don’t know how long our bodies produce them or, even worse if they will ever stop after the program of production is installed in our genes.”
Hulscher said the liability shield vaccine manufacturers have disincentivized them from reporting such findings. He said they “ignored these massive safety concerns, partly because they enjoy liability protection.”
This article was funded by critical thinkers like you.
The Defender is 100% reader-supported. No corporate sponsors. No paywalls. Our writers and editors rely on you to fund stories like this that mainstream media won’t write.
‘There should be a moratorium on all mRNA injections’
The Cell Host & Microbe study focused on the neurological damage caused by the spike protein. In a summary of the study published on Substack, Hulscher said the authors “concluded that persistent Spike protein at the brain borders may contribute to lasting neurological sequelae of COVID-19.”
“Injection of spike protein alone was sufficient to induce neuroinflammation … anxiety-like behavior, and exacerbated outcomes in mouse models of stroke and traumatic brain injury,” that study found.
Brian Hooker, Ph.D., CHD’s chief scientific officer, told The Defender this finding “is especially notable” as neuroinflammatory processes are associated with many neurodevelopmental and neurological disorders in both children and adults.
“This begs the question as to why developing fetuses are exposed to spike protein prenatally through multiple maternal COVID-19 shots and also explains the presence of an autism-like phenotype in the offspring in rat studies,” Hooker said.
However, the study’s authors also claimed that COVID-19 vaccines reduced the presence of spike protein in the body. “Vaccination reduced but did not eliminate spike protein accumulation after infection in mice,” they wrote.
Other scientists questioned these claims. According to Hooker, “Given the fact that individuals get multiple shots and boosters that lead to spike protein production for as long as six months or longer, there is a much higher opportunity for spike protein accumulation in the brain than in these inadequate studies.”
Kevin McKernan, founder of Medicinal Genomics, is the first scientist who identified SV40 DNA contaminants in the mRNA vaccines. He told The Defender, “You have to always take the vaccination statements in these papers with skepticism.”
Noting that the mice used in this study received a dose of vaccine 160 times higher than the average human dose, McKernan said, “If the tables were reversed and this paper tried to claim the vaccine made this worse, they would not get away with such poorly supported leaps from their data.”
Hooker noted that humans also are asked to receive multiple booster doses of the COVID-19 vaccines, which leads to “a much higher opportunity for spike protein accumulation in the brain than in these inadequate studies.”
According to Hulscher, the original preprint of this study did not include any conclusions that vaccination reduces the presence of spike protein.
“This biased vaccination section was likely only added to pass the peer-review process,” Hulscher said. “It doesn’t make logical sense that the injection of mRNA encoding large amounts of neurotoxic spike protein offers any benefits.”
“Since all mRNA ‘vaccines’ hijack cells from various organ systems to produce toxic foreign antigens, they will likely have similarly disastrous safety profiles. Thus, there should be a moratorium on all mRNA injections,” Hulscher added.
Get The Defender delivered to your inbox. No paywall. No ads. Just the uncensored news.
