perhaps if joe 'dies' or is deemed medically unfit, they pin the cocaine on Kamala, making way for the ringer.
it's an online platform, requiring a Chinese made device to access through either Alphabets Android, or Apple's iOS via an NSA/CIA partnered network, with a web address registered with ICANN which is controlled by the UN.
Add in the Chinese made wifi router, and switching and routing (cisco, etc) and database (oracle =C_A) network if using home internet.
apotheosis of a freemason
https://voiceforscienceandsolidarity.substack.com/p/the-covid-19-mass-vaccination-program
The Covid-19 mass vaccination program violated all principles of Science and the Hippocratic Oath….
As a scientist with over 30 years of professional experience in virology, immunology, and vaccines, I prioritize truth and directness in my approach.
I would therefore like to express my concerns regarding the infection-prevention measures and mass vaccination program recommended by the WHO during this pandemic, which I believe lack scientific rationale and should be considered a significant blunder in the history of medicine, public health, and vaccine science.
The WHO ignored the limitations of their recommendations for preventing transmission of a virus that can easily spread in the absence of symptoms. While measures like lockdowns, social distancing, and mask-wearing may initially have saved lives, they have hindered the population from developing herd immunity, leading to the highly problematic propagation of more infectious variants. Instead, PH authorities should have focused on protecting vulnerable individuals from exposure to a high viral load, for instance by avoiding concentrations in nursing homes or improving hygienic conditions in areas with poor sanitation.
While the mass vaccination program initially did save lives, it did not prevent viral transmission as the antibodies (Abs) induced by the C-19 vaccines could not protect from viral infection and shedding. As the mass vaccination campaigns were conducted in the midst of a pandemic, they predictably led to the selection of more infectious immune escape variants that managed to overcome the suboptimal vaccine-induced immunity and therefore spectacularly increased in prevalence. These variants are now posing a global health threat.
In contrast to natural infection, the C-19 vaccines do not activate killing of virus-infected cells by innate immune cells. As a result, vaccinated subjects could solely rely on vaccine-induced anti-spike antibodies for protection. Although the C-19 vaccines largely protect from severe C- 19 disease, they do not prevent viral infection and transmission, allowing the virus to escape from the vaccine-induced antibodies and cause vaccine breakthrough infections (VBTIs). Since the advent of Omicron, these VBTIs have now triggered a self-fueling cascade of viral immune escape and turned a natural pandemic into an ever-evolving immune escape pandemic, instead of driving the virus into endemicity.
Nevertheless, influential scientific experts who even published that the virus could escape from the immune pressure exerted by vaccine-induced Abs relentlessly supported the concept of conducting mass vaccination campaigns during the pandemic.
Although molecular epidemiologists have unambiguously shown that the selected mutations converge to specific spike protein domains that are under population-level immune pressure, none of them is willing to attribute this immune pressure to the C-19 vaccines targeting the very spike protein.
Although the hospitalization and mortality rates are now much lower than those observed during the pre-Omicron era, more infectious variants continue to spread. This is prompting concerns about the emergence of immune escape variants with enhanced virulence that could compromise protection against severe C-19 disease. Are we witnessing a kind of silence before the storm? And why has the WHO been urging countries across the globe to prepare for new surges or for a new pandemic with an even deadlier potential?
p1
Because the virus continuously escaped from the immune response induced in highly vaccinated populations, there was a need for WHO and national PH agencies to change definitions of vaccine, immunity, herd immunity and ‘being vaccinated’, all of this to make vaccinated people believe that the C-19 vaccines were still highly efficacious amid the presence of immune escape variants. For much too long, PH experts have willfully ignored that natural immunity in the unvaccinated can acquire sterilizing capacity and that the unvaccinated are therefore not a breeding ground for more infectious immune escape variants.
In conclusion, large-scale infection-prevention measures and mass vaccination campaigns, as recommended by the WHO, cannot effectively control pandemics caused by acute, self-limiting viral infections like corona or influenza virus. Instead, they prevent the population from developing herd immunity and perpetuate the pandemic. This situation should be considered a dangerous gain-of-function experiment, impacting humanity.
While it is not for me to decide whether the WHO's recommendations constitute a crime against humanity, I am deeply concerned about the scientific integrity of these recommendations. They are an insult to independent scientists, who have been advocating for an open and scientifically-driven dialogue but have instead been unduly silenced, ridiculed, or even censored. The reckless implementation of WHO’s recommendations by national health authorities and lawmakers and propagandized by the mainstream media and scientifically illiterate factcheckers has been a slap in the face of all citizens who’ve been coerced into taking the risky jab.
2 of 2
FTC Digs Deeper into Pfizer’s $43B Buyout of Seagen
https://www.biospace.com/article/ftc-digs-deeper-into-pfizer-s-43b-buyout-of-seagen/
FTC Digs Deeper into Pfizer’s $43B Buyout of Seagen
Pictured: FTC sign above a doorway/iStock, Gromit702
Pictured: FTC sign above a doorway/iStock, Gromit702
The Federal Trade Commission has requested additional information on Pfizer’s proposed acquisition of Seagen, the cancer-focused biotech revealed in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing posted Friday.
In the SEC document, Seagen disclosed that the FTC’s request will further extend the waiting period, as mandated by the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Acts of 1976, by 30 days after both Pfizer and Seagen have turned over the additional information.
The companies still expect to close the deal this year or in early 2024, subject to regulatory approvals. Pfizer and Seagen have also sought approval for the planned acquisition from the European Commission.
Rumors of a Seagen buyout first started circulating in June 2022, when the company reportedly entered into talks with Merck. The negotiation progressed to advanced stages a month later, with Merck proposing a payout of at least $200 per share, which would have made the acquisition worth $40 billion.
However, by August 2022, Seagen’s talks with Merck had reached a stalemate as both companies failed to agree on a deal price.
The deal with Merck eventually fizzled out and in February 2023 news that Pfizer was courting Seagen surfaced. The companies confirmed the rumors a month later, announcing that the Washington-based biotech agreed to a purchase price of $229 per share or $43 billion, making it one of the biggest deals ever in biotech.
In June 2023, Seagen announced in an SEC filing that Pfizer withdrew its initial application with the FTC, but refiled a similar document later the same day.
Regulators have recently increased scrutiny on high-value deals. In May 2023, the FTC filed a lawsuit that sought to block the planned $28 billion merger between Amgen and rare disease leader Horizon Therapeutics.
The regulator’s chief concern is that Amgen might offer “cross-market bundles or bundled rebates” and leverage its blockbuster assets to win better formulary placements for Horizon’s Tepezza (teprotumumab-trbw) and Krystexxa (pegloticase).
Holly Vedova, director of the FTC Bureau of Competition also said in a statement released alongside the lawsuit that “rampant consolidation” in the industry has emboldened pharmaceuticals companies to jack up drug prices and keep generic competitors out of the market, which in turn makes affordable medicines less accessible to patients.
Amgen has called the FTC’s bundling concerns “entirely speculative” and earlier this month the two companies filed a counter suit against the regulator, claiming that its blockage of the acquisition is unconstitutional.
Tristan Manalac is an independent science writer based in metro Manila, Philippines. He can be reached at tristan@tristanmanalac.com or tristan.manalac@biospace.com.
more sauce
Pfizer’s $43 Billion Seagen Takeover Faces EU Investigation
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/pfizer-s-43-billion-seagen-takeover-faces-eu-investigation/ar-AA1dTnQ9
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/06/09/fact-check-false-claims-stem-80-000-page-pfizer-release/9664481002/
Fact check: False claims about Pfizer vaccine stem from company's release of 80,000 pages of documents
The claim: 80,000 pages of Pfizer data show the vaccine has a 12% efficacy rate, harms fetuses
As the spring saw another surge of coronavirus cases across the country, healthcare officials are urging people to get vaccinated. But some social media posts are spreading false claims that the Pfizer vaccine is both ineffective and dangerous.
"Pfizer data released today. 80,000 pages. Pfizer knew vaccine harmed the fetus in pregnant women, and that the vaccine was not 95% effective," reads an Instagram post shared May 4. "Pfizer data shows it having a 12% efficacy rate."
These claims were made two days after more than 80,000 pages of Pfizer COVID data was made public. The data was released as part of an ongoing Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, according to Abigail Capobianco, a spokesperson for the Food and Drug Administration
The post generated over 4,000 likes in less than a week – but has since apparently been deleted. Similar claims have amassed hundreds of interactions on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
But the claim is wrong on multiple fronts.
USA TODAY could not verify whether the claimed 12% efficacy rate was in the 80,000 pages Pfizer released. None of the social media claims have provided documentation showing that figure. But multiple experts told USA TODAY the claims about the vaccine's low efficacy rate stem from misinterpretations of Pfizer's 2020 phase three clinical trial.
The trial actually showed an efficacy rate of 95%. Extensive Pfizer research studies on the efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine do not validate the 12% figure in the claim either.
It is also unclear from which document the claim about the vaccine harming fetuses originates. But multiple studies and CDC reports show the Pfizer vaccine is safe for fetuses.
p1
USA TODAY reached out to the social media users who shared the claim for comment.
12% calculation of efficacy rate based on misinterpretation of data
It's not clear where the 12% efficacy rate comes from, since both the FDA and Pfizer declined to comment on whether it was in the release. But experts told USA TODAY the incorrect figure is based on a misinterpretation of data in a 2020 Pfizer clinical trial.
The most recent version of this claim stems from an April 3 Substack article published by investigative reporter Sonia Elijah with the headline, "Was Pfizer's 95% vaccine efficacy fraudulent all along?," according to Jeffrey Morris, the director of the Division of Biostatistics at the University of Pennsylvania.
In the article, Elijah references a 53-page December 2020 Pfizer FDA briefing, which was released to the public one week before the advisory committee meeting on December 10 of that year, Morris said. It is not part of the recent Pfizer document release.
The phase three trial in the briefing involved close to 38,000 participants who were separated into two groups: half who received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine and half who received a placebo.
Out of this group, 3,410 people, 1,594 in the vaccine group and 1,816 in the placebo group–were suspected of having COVID but were unconfirmed, meaning the participants had symptoms after they had received the injections, but did not have a positive PCR test, Morris said.
One hundred sixty-two participants in the placebo group and 8 participants from the vaccine group tested positive for COVID-19 after the injections.
The vaccine efficacy rate, calculated by dividing only the participants who tested positive for the virus in both groups, came out to be 95%. Elijah claimed that the real vaccine efficacy rate should have been 12%, basing her calculation off participants in the suspected but unconfirmed group.
The 12% claim later became a viral take, according to Morris.
But her interpretation of the data is wrong since she included people who had symptoms of COVID-19 but not the virus itself, Dr. Howard Forman, a professor of public health policy, management and economics at Yale University, told USA TODAY.
"She has shown that the vaccine seems to have very low efficacy for non-COVID illness, which is precisely what we would expect," Forman said. "The vaccine does not work against a non-COVID cough. Or a non-COVID headache."
The suspected but unconfirmed cases should not be figured into the vaccine efficacy data analysis, Forman said.
USA TODAY reached out to Elijah for comment.
Pfizer vaccine is effective against COVID-19
Numerous peer review studies and real-world examples have shown the effectiveness of the Pfizer vaccine, according to Dr. Amesh Adalja, infectious disease specialist at Johns Hopkins University.
In a 2021 study, researchers found that Pfizer vaccine efficacy against Covid-19 was 91.3% among trial participants 12 years and older "without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection" through a period of six months.
Another study published that same year found that the Pfizer vaccine was more than 90% effective at preventing COVID-19 in children ages 5-11.
p2
Research has also shown that the vaccine's protection against the virus wanes over time and should be complemented with a booster. A 2022 study found that patients who only received two shots of the Pfizer vaccine were limited in their protection against the Omicron variant compared to those who received three shots.
The risk arising from not getting the vaccine is much greater than being vaccinated, Scott Pauley, a spokesperson for the CDC, previously told USA TODAY. A 2021 CDC report found that people were five times more likely to have COVID-19 if they were unvaccinated and had prior infection.
Vaccines are safe for fetuses
It is unclear where the claim about the vaccine harming fetuses originates. But to date, the FDA and CDC have not identified any safety concerns about harm or harm to fetuses following administration of any of the COVID-19 vaccines, said Capobianco, the FDA spokesperson.
A 2021 CDC report found that receiving the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy was not associated with increased risk for preterm birth or small-for-gestational-age at birth.
Fact check: No evidence Pfizer, Moderna COVID-19 vaccines cause miscarriage
A CDC report published in 2022 also found that patients who have received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine and are pregnant may help "prevent COVID-19 hospitalization among infants" less than six months old.
There are pregnancy complications women can face if they are exposed to COVID-19, such as "delivering a preterm (earlier than 37 weeks) or stillborn infant," according to the CDC.
“COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for people who are pregnant, breastfeeding, trying to get pregnant now or might become pregnant in the future,” reads the agency's website.
Our rating: False
Based on our research, we rate FALSE the claim that 80,000 pages of Pfizer data show the vaccine has a 12% efficacy rate.
USA TODAY could not verify whether the 12% figure was in the 80,000 pages Pfizer released May 2. But experts said the 12% figure stems from an incorrect interpretation of a 2020 Pfizer clinical trial document.
The actual efficacy rate of the vaccine in the trial showed it was 95%. No research studies validate the 12% efficacy rate of the Pfizer vaccine. Multiple studies also show that the Pfizer vaccine is safe for fetuses.
Our fact-check sources:
Kit Longley, May 6, Email exchange with USA TODAY
Jeffrey Morris, May 6, Phone interview with USA TODAY
Amesh Adalja, May 6, Phone interview with USA TODAY
Howard Forman, May 6, Phone interview with USA TODAY
Abigail Capobianco, May 6, Email exchange with USA TODAY
COVID-19 Data Science, accessed May 6, Do the recent 80k pages of Pfizer documents released really show vaccine efficacy was only 12%?
ABC10, Nov. 19, 2021, FDA says 55 years to process request for extensive vaccine data under Freedom of Information Act
NBC5 Chicago, May 7, As New Omicron Subvariant Spreads, Here Are the Symptoms to Watch For
Food and Drug Administration, Dec. 10, 2020, Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee Meeting
USA TODAY, Nov. 10. 2021, Fact check: Fabricated story that Pfizer CEO was arrested for COVID-19 vaccine fraud
Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency, accessed May 9, Pfizer's documents
New England Journal Medicine, Dec. 10, 2020, Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine
New England Journal, Sept. 15, 2021, Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine through 6 Months
New England Journal, Nov. 9, 2021, Evaluation of the BNT162b2 Covid-19 Vaccine in Children 5 to 11 Years of Age
USA TODAY, Dec. 2, 2021, Fact check: COVID-19 vaccines safe for children, not linked to deaths
Science, Jan. 18, Neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron by BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine–elicited human sera
Yale Medicine, Feb. 24, 2021, Comparing the COVID-19 Vaccines: How Are They Different?
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Jan. 7, Receipt of COVID-19 Vaccine During Pregnancy and Preterm or Small-for-Gestational-Age at Birth — Eight Integrated Health Care Organizations, United States, December 15, 2020–July 22, 2021
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Feb. 18, Effectiveness of Maternal Vaccination with mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine During Pregnancy Against COVID-19–Associated Hospitalization in Infants Aged <6 Months — 17 States, July 2021–January 2022
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, March 3, Pregnant and Recently Pregnant People
3 of 3
that meme decribes VIRUS behavior
"Colonization by SARS-CoV-2 not synonymous with infection, screening study highlights"
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210713/Colonization-by-SARS-CoV-2-not-synonymous-with-infection-screening-study-highlights.aspx
Yes.
Who funded the expedition of converso Cristobal Colon aka Chirstopher Columbus? The Crown of Spain in 1492.
What else did the Crown of Spain do in 1492?
https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2013/03/alhambra-decree-521-years-later/
The Alhambra Decree. To some, that name means nothing. Perhaps it is better known by its other name: The Edict of Expulsion. It was in the city of Granada, in the spring of 1492 that the Catholic Monarchs, Isabelle of Castile and Ferdinand of Aragon, decided to banish the Jews from Spain.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/christopher-columbus
https://www.cnn.com/2012/05/20/opinion/garcia-columbus-jewish/index.html
https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/56515/do-columbus-letters-reveal-that-he-was-a-marrano
https://cnnespanol.cnn.com/2012/05/19/opinion-fue-cristobal-colon-un-judio-en-secreto/
https://mundosud.com/2016/10/08/la-palabra-marrano-cristobal-colon-los-judios-perseguidos-en-espana/
https://www.israel365news.com/314771/christopher-columbus-jew-led-belief-prophet-isaiah/
https://www.timesofisrael.com/christopher-columbus-the-hidden-jew/
>There is a snake on her
trips