MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘side effects’

Remember how health authorities said serious vaccine side effects always will be seen fast?

Posted by M. C. on January 18, 2022

Turns out that’s not true… as Pfizer (and its veterinarian chief executive) should know better than anyone.

Scientists would discover that the vaccine caused some cows to produce “alloantibodies.” The immune system make antibodies to attack foreign invaders in the body, but alloantibodies attack our own red blood cells instead.

These alloantibodies did not attack red blood cells in the dams – the mother cows – but when the calves received them through colostrum they caused terrible damage.

https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/remember-how-health-authorities-said

Alex Berenson

In 2010, German scientists found that a Pfizer veterinary vaccine to reduce diarrhea in cows caused a fatal bleeding disease in their calves.

Even after pressure from Germany caused Pfizer to stop selling the vaccine there, the company kept selling it elsewhere. A top Pfizer official told British farmers it was safe to use and that “other factors” were likely involved.

A month later, Pfizer stopped selling the vaccine. European regulators later found it caused a 1-in-6000 risk of the bleeding disease. “For a prophylactic measure such as vaccination this figure was considered unacceptable for a potentially fatal disorder,” the regulators found.

The risk of Covid-vaccine induced myocarditis – which can be fatal – in young men is now estimated at somewhere between 1 in 2000 and 1 in 3000.

Apparently the rules are stricter for cows.

SOURCE: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/referral/pregsure-bvd-article-78-referral-annexes-i-ii_en.pdf

Six weeks after the final dose is plenty of time to discover serious vaccine side effects. Two months is more than adequate. Three is unnecessary.

Both before and after the mRNA Covid vaccines were authorized in 2020, regulators, politicians, and the media insisted on this point. Long-term safety data were not necessary for authorization – because vaccine side effects happen and are caught fast.

According to the Centers for Disease Control: Side effects generally happen within six weeks of receiving a vaccine dose…

SOURCE: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/expect/after.html

Thus the Food and Drug Administration was actually being conservative when it told Pfizer and Moderna to follow at least half the people who had received the second mRNA dose in their clinical trials for 60 days, vaccine advocates said. At an online conference in October 2020, Dr. Peter Marks, the agency’s top vaccine regulator, said he believed two months was a reasonable standard given the severity of the pandemic and the rarity of long-term vaccine side effects.

That standard meant that fewer than 20,000 people who received mRNA vaccines would be tracked for two months or more – for vaccines that have now been given more than one billion people worldwide.

Dr. Marks of the FDA (from his basement), explaining his views on the amount of time required to be sure a vaccine is safe after its dosing is completed:

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Vaccine Makers Destroy Covid Vaccine Safety Studies – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on April 21, 2021

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/04/joseph-mercola/vaccine-makers-destroy-covid-vaccine-safety-studies/

By Joseph Mercola

Mercola.com

While reports of side effects from COVID-19 gene therapies, including life-threatening effects and deaths, continue to climb at breakneck speed,1 a one-sided narrative of safety and effectiveness permeates mainstream media and medical news.

These “vaccines” are so safe and so effective, according to this narrative, that keeping control groups intact for long-term study and comparison of outcomes is now being derided as “unethical,” despite the fact that there is absolutely no non-fraudulent data to support their perverse assertions. Truly, what we’re watching is the active destruction of basic medical science in a surreal dystopian nightmare.

Vaccine Makers to Ditch Control Groups

Consider this report in JAMA by Rita Rubin, senior writer for JAMA medical news and perspectives, for example.2 According to Rubin, the launch of “two highly efficacious” COVID-19 vaccines has “spurred debate about the ethics, let alone the feasibility, of continuing or launching blinded, placebo-controlled trials …”

Rubin recounts how Moderna representatives told a Food and Drug Administration advisory panel that rather than letting thousands of vaccine doses to go to waste, they planned to offer them to trial participants who had received placebo.

Pfizer representatives made a similar announcement to the advisory panel. According to a news analysis published in The BMJ,3 the FDA and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are both onboard with this plan, as is the World Health Organization.4

In the JAMA report by Rubin, Moncref Slaoui, Ph.D., chief scientific adviser for Operation Warp Speed, is quoted saying he thinks “it’s very important that we unblind the trial at once and offer the placebo group vaccines” because trial participants “should be rewarded” for their participation.

All of these statements violate the very basics of what a safety trial needs, which is a control group against which you can compare the effects of the drug or vaccine in question over the long term. I find it inconceivable that unblinding is even a consideration at this point, seeing how the core studies have not even concluded yet. The only purpose of this unblinding is to conceal the fraud that these vaccines are safe.

None of the COVID-19 vaccines currently on the market are actually licensed. They only have emergency use authorization — which, incidentally, also forbids them from being mandated, although this is being widely and conveniently ignored — as trials are still ongoing.

At the earliest, they may be licensed two years from now, at the completion of the follow-up studies.5 This is why those in the military are allowed to refuse it, and refuse they have. Among Marines, the refusal rate is nearly 40%.6

So, before the initial studies are even completed, vaccine makers and regulatory agencies are now deciding to forgo long-term safety evaluations altogether by giving placebo recipients the real McCoy, and so-called bioethicists are actually supporting this madness. As reported in The BMJ:7

“Although the FDA has granted the vaccines emergency use authorization, to get full license approval two years of follow-up data are needed. The data are now likely to be scanty and less reliable given that the trials are effectively being unblinded.”

Hypocrisy Abounds

It’s ironic in the extreme, because vaccine mandates are being justified on the premise that the benefit to the community supersedes the risk of individual harm. In other words, it’s OK if some people are harmed by the vaccine because the overall benefit to society is more important.

Yet here they’re saying that participants in the control groups are being harmed by not getting the vaccine, so therefore vaccine makers have an obligation to give it to them before the long-term studies are completed. This is the complete opposite argument used for mandatory vaccination.

If we are to accept the “greater good” justification for vaccination, then people who agree to participate in a study, and end up getting a placebo, need to roll the dice and potentially sacrifice their health “for the greater good.” Here, the greater good is the study itself, the results of which are of crucial importance for public health decisions.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

5 Ways Americans Could Be “Encouraged” to Get a Covid Vaccine

Posted by M. C. on December 7, 2020

It’s likely to be a much different approach than a SWAT team breaching your house in the middle of the night, holding down your family members, and stabbing them with syringes. If a widespread push is made to get people to take this vaccine, it will likely be a case of making life difficult for those who opt-out and more pleasant for those who opt-in.

https://www.theorganicprepper.com/covid-vaccine/

by Daisy Luther

As Pfizer and Moderna both rush a vaccine to market to fight the Covid-19 virus, will promises of returning to “normal” be enough to persuade people to take the quickly developed injection?

This article isn’t about persuading you one way or the other about whether you should be vaccinated. That is a matter for you, your family, and your physician to discuss. It’s about the opinions of Americans, the legalities of mandating cooperation, what we know about the vaccine, and the tactics that could be used to “encourage” your cooperation.

It’s expected that the new coronavirus vaccines will be approved any day now. Each vaccine is said to require two shots to confer immunity to the virus. Pfizer requires two doses three weeks apart, and Moderna requires two doses four weeks apart.

About half of Americans are eager to be vaccinated.

According to a poll conducted by Pew Research, 51% of American adults would immediately get a vaccine if it were available. That, of course, means that nearly half of all American adults aren’t convinced this is something that they want to do right now. This number has decreased from the first time the poll was taken. Back in May, 72% of American adults were on board with rolling up their sleeves as soon as possible.

Of course, this poll assumes that people will have a choice whether or not to be inoculated.

While half of the people surveyed want the injection, the other half do not. And that’s where the controversy lies – should we have a choice what medical treatments we undergo? Dr. Ron Paul spoke to The Huffington Post back in 2008 and said something as meaningful today as it was a dozen years ago.

“If we accept this notion that the federal government is going to dictate what we can put into our bodies, then it leads to the next step: that the government is going to regulate everything that is supposedly good for us. That’s where they are. They have an FDA that won’t allow somebody who’s dying to use an experimental drug which might speed up the process of finding out which drugs are good and which drugs are bad and the federal government comes in and dictates that they want complete control over vitamins and nutritional products and I just think the whole principal of government telling us what we can take in or not take in is just a dangerous position to take… it’s related to the drug industry because they’d like to control all of this.” (source)

Here are some of the immediate side effects.

Yasir Batalvi, a 24-year-old from Boston, volunteered to get the vaccine and received the two doses after signing a 22-page consent form. He shared his experience with CNN:

“The actual injection felt, at first, just like a flu shot, which is basically just a little pinch in the side of your arm,” Batalvi said. “Once I left the hospital, that evening, the stiffness got a little bit worse. It was definitely manageable, but you kind of don’t really feel like moving your arm too far above your shoulder. But the side effects are pretty localized. I mean, it’s just in the muscle in your arm. And that’s about it. It doesn’t really affect anything else and you feel fine.”

That was after the first dose. But the second dose was different.

“I actually had some pretty significant symptoms after I got the second dose. Once I got the second dose, I was fine while I was in the hospital. But that evening was rough. I mean, I developed a low-grade fever, and fatigue and chills,” Batalvi said. He said he was out for that day and evening, but he “felt ready to go by the next morning.”He said he called the study doctors to let them know about his symptoms. They weren’t alarmed and told him he shouldn’t be either.Feeling under the weather does not mean that you got Covid-19 from the vaccine — in fact, experts say having this kind of reaction shows that your body is responding the way it should, and it should not deter anyone from getting vaccinated or going back for their second dose. (source)

Doctors have urged the CDC to be transparent about the fact that the side effects of the vaccine are “not a walk in the park.”

Dr. Sandra Fryhofer of the American Medical Association said both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccines require two doses at varying intervals. As a practicing physician, she said she worries whether her patients will come back for a second dose because of the potentially unpleasant side effects they may experience after the first shot.

“We really need to make patients aware that this is not going to be a walk in the park,” Fryhofer said during a virtual meeting with the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, an outside group of medical experts that advise the CDC. She is also a liaison to the committee. “They are going to know they had a vaccine. They are probably not going to feel wonderful. But they’ve got to come back for that second dose…

…One North Carolina woman in the Moderna study who is in her 50s said she didn’t experience a fever but suffered a bad migraine that left her drained for a day and unable to focus. She said she woke up the next day feeling better after taking Excedrin but added that Moderna may need to tell people to take a day off after a second dose.

“If this proves to work, people are going to have to toughen up,” she said. “The first dose is no big deal. And then the second dose will definitely put you down for the day for sure. … You will need to take a day off after the second dose.” (source)

These are the immediate side effects but only time will tell if there are long-term side effects.

Does the United States intend to mandate the vaccine?

Joe Biden has said that the vaccine will not be made mandatory on a federal level. The thing is, these decisions are usually made on a state level.

Some government officials are already talking about mandating the vaccine. Virginia State Health Commissioner, Dr. Norman Oliver, is all for mandatory Covid vaccinations.

State Health Commissioner Dr. Norman Oliver told 8News on Friday that he plans to mandate coronavirus vaccinations for Virginians once one is made available to the public.

Virginia state law gives the Commissioner of Health the authority to mandate immediate immunizations during a public health crisis if a vaccine is available. Health officials say an immunization could be released as early as 2021.

Dr. Oliver says that, as long as he is still the Health Commissioner, he intends to mandate the coronavirus vaccine…

…Oliver believes that, in the case of COVID-19, public health takes precedent over choice. He said herd immunity is the state’s best defense to stop the spread. (source)

Despite his health commissioner’s enthusiasm, Virginia Governor Ralph Northam has said he is not planning to mandate the vaccine at this time.

The Virginia health commissioner is not alone in his desire to mandate the vaccination. The New York State Bar has also recommended it be mandatory for residents of the state.

All this being said, there doesn’t seem to be a direct plan to pass laws making people take the vaccine.

Can the government actually make people take a vaccine?

Actually, yes.

But there is legislative precedent dating back to a U.S. Supreme Court case in 1905 called Jacobson v. Massachusetts that allows the government to mandate vaccinations.

In that case, the Supreme Court said that states have under their police powers, which is under the Constitution, the authority to enact reasonable regulations as necessary to protect public health, public safety, and the common good. Vaccination mandates constitute exactly that kind of permissible state action to protect the public’s health. Even though it’s 115 years old, this continues to be the benchmark case on the state’s power to mandate vaccination.

In response to the argument about this individual liberty interest, the court said that sometimes individual interests might have to yield to state laws that endeavor to protect the health of everybody—the “common good.” The court said: “The rights of the individual may at times, under the pressure of great dangers, be subjected to such restraint to be enforced by reasonable regulations as the safety of the general public may demand.”

So, yes: Once COVID vaccines are available, states could elect to require that people who live within that state be vaccinated. (source)

Despite this law being in place, mandating the vaccine will probably not be the first method used by the government.

Will Americans be forced or persuaded?

So what happens during a pandemic when there’s a vaccine that people are hesitant to take? Will we be forcibly immunized against our will?

It’s likely to be a much different approach than a SWAT team breaching your house in the middle of the night, holding down your family members, and stabbing them with syringes. If a widespread push is made to get people to take this vaccine, it will likely be a case of making life difficult for those who opt-out and more pleasant for those who opt-in.

People are desperate to resume some kind of normalcy, which will certainly be part of the campaign for vaccination. As we move into the second round of lockdowns, folks just want to have holidays with their families. Millions have been pushed into poverty. Mental health issues abound from the months of isolation. It’s difficult to connect with others and people want to resume their lives.

And if that’s not enough to persuade them to roll up their sleeve for an injection, following are some of the possibilities that have been mentioned to “encourage” Americans to take the vaccine when it becomes available.

Your kids may have to take it to go to school.

Most states already require that children be vaccinated against polio, diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis, measles, rumps, and rubella, chickenpox, and hepatitis B unless they hold an exemption that is valid in that state. Exemptions are generally related to medical issues, religious beliefs, or personal philosophy.

It’s likely that a mandatory Covid vaccine for children to attend school would vary from state to state.  Children have generally not become very ill with this particular virus and have seemed less likely than adults to contract it. (There have, of course, been some exceptions.) To some, that would indicate children did not need to undergo the risk of taking yet another vaccine. Dr. Christine Turley, M.D., Pediatrics Specialist and vice-chair of research at Atrium Health Levine Children’s Hospital believes it could be beneficial.

However, school-bound children could spread the virus to parents, grandparents, and others with underlying health conditions. Vaccinating children could eliminate one major source of coronavirus spread, possibly increasing the effectiveness of herd immunity (source)

And even if your kids are attending school via Zoom, it may not exempt them. I spoke to one parent whose children are engaged in distance learning in Massachusetts. Although they will not be setting foot on school property, they are still required to have proof that they are up to date on all required vaccinations.

Employers could insist that employees be vaccinated.

You could potentially lose your job if you refuse to take a vaccine that your employer has deemed mandatory. Legal and public health expert Joanne Rosen, a senior lecturer in Health Policy and Management and the Center for Law and the Public’s Health, spoke about the topic of mandatory vaccinations with Public Health On Call podcast host Stephanie Desmon.

An employer has to have a “reasonable basis.” If you worked in retail, I’m not sure a corporate entity could require that. They may want you to and recommend it, but it wouldn’t be reasonably related to the requirements of their job.

But in sectors in which the employees are themselves at greater risk of contracting vaccine-preventable illnesses or who work with populations that are especially vulnerable if they do get sick, like hospital workers, health care workers, and people who work in [long-term care] facilities, employers have required that their staff be vaccinated against the flu each year.

Another thing that states could do, short of a requirement across the board that everybody be vaccinated, is they could begin with a mandate that focuses on those sectors—people who are themselves at greater risk or who work in proximity with vulnerable populations. We don’t want the employees themselves getting sick and being a bridge, or “vector,” to infecting others who are vulnerable. People may object, but some more targeted form of vaccine mandate may make sense and also be possible. (source)

Dorit Reiss, a law professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, told TODAY there were a few exceptions:

Employees who are part of a union may be exempt from the vaccine requirement.

Anti-discrimination laws also provide some limits. If you can’t get the vaccine for medical reasons, that could be a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which would require an employer to accommodate you. That could mean requiring you to wear a mask on the job or have limited contact with other people, Reiss said.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 may protect people who have a religious objection to a vaccine. An employer would have to make a reasonable accommodation as long as it’s not too costly for the business.

These laws apply only to companies with 15 or more employees, so smaller businesses are exempt.

“We think about employers as this huge, amorphous thing, but under the law, they’re also private entities with rights, especially if it’s a small mom and pop shop,” Reiss noted. (source)

Consider how some workplaces require all employees to receive a flu shot – the Covid vaccine could be enforced in a similar manner. Health care workers and those involved in education are most likely to be the first to face such requirements.

Businesses could require patrons to show proof of vaccination.

Even if a state or federal mandate is not in place, privately owned businesses could potentially require patrons to show proof of vaccination before they receive service.

Can airlines, restaurants, stores and stadiums make the vaccine a condition of doing business with you?

Yes, within the anti-discrimination laws mentioned above.

“They can decide to refuse service to you for pretty much any reason,” Reiss said, pointing out a policy most shoppers are already familiar with: no shirt, no shoes, no service.

People who are covered by anti-discrimination laws can’t just demand a business let them do whatever they want. The company just has to give you a reasonable accommodation, so a store might refuse you entry but offer curbside pick-up of groceries. (source)

Private businesses can set their own policies. Ticketmaster, the purveyor of tickets for concerts, plays, and just about any public event, has already “been working on a framework for post-pandemic fan safety” that would use their phones to confirm whether they’ve been vaccinated or had a negative test within the past couple of days. Billboard reports:

Here’s how it would work, if approved: After purchasing a ticket for a concert, fans would need to verify that they have already been vaccinated (which would provide approximately one year of COVID-19 protection) or test negative for coronavirus approximately 24 to 72 hours prior to the concert. The length of coverage a test would provide would be governed by regional health authorities — if attendees of a Friday night concert had to be tested 48 hours in advance, most could start the testing process the day before the event. If it was a 24-hour window,  most people would likely be tested the same day of the event at a lab or a health clinic.

Once the test was complete, the fan would instruct the lab to deliver the results to their health pass company, like CLEAR or IBM. If the tests were negative, or the fan was vaccinated, the health pass company would verify the attendee’s COVID-19 status to Ticketmaster, which would then issue the fan the credentials needed to access the event. If a fan tested positive or didn’t take a test to verify their status, they would not be granted access to the event. There are still many details to work out, but the goal of the program is for fans to take care of vaccines and testing prior to the concert and not show up hoping to be tested onsite.

Ticketmaster would not store or have access to fans’ medical records and would only receive verification of whether a fan is cleared to attend an event on a given date. (source)

This isn’t a definite plan but the fact that it’s in the works means the idea could spread to sporting events, shopping centers, movie theaters, or any other venue in which people are in close proximity with one another.

Your eligibility for a $1500 stimulus check could depend on it.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Lockdowns Kill, Exhibit Z – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on August 22, 2020

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/08/thomas-woods/lockdowns-kill-exhibit-z/

By

From the Tom Woods Letter:

The side effects of the lockdowns keep getting harder to ignore.

Dr. Brian Stauffer is head of cardiology at Denver Health. He and his colleagues wanted to figure out why the number of people arriving at the hospital suffering from cardiac arrest had plummeted in recent months.

Surely, dear reader, you know where this is going.

According to the Colorado Sun:

Looking at data on ambulance calls in Denver, they found that, while overall calls for service went down during the stay-at-home period, the number of people dying from cardiac arrests at home shot up.

Stauffer’s team found that cardiac arrests at home in Denver more than doubled in the two weeks after the statewide stay-at-home order was issued compared with historical averages. Even compared with more recent data, the weekly average of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests jumped to 46 during those two weeks, versus 26 or 27 in the three months prior.

Stauffer and his colleagues found that the number of people in Denver who died of cardiac arrests at home in the two weeks following the statewide stay-at-home order was greater than the total number of people who died of COVID-19 in the city during that time.

Oh, but “listen to the science,” everybody!

According to the “listen to the science” crowd, “science” demands lockdowns. Apart from the zero connection between lockdowns and health outcomes, the bigger issue is this: “science” doesn’t tell you how you should decide between pouring all resources into COVID-19 while leaving horrific wreckage — including massive loss of life — everywhere else.

It is rank superstition to think “the science” could possibly — or is even intended to — answer a question like this.

Science can inform our decision-making, naturally, but it obviously can’t tell us what we should value or how we should prioritize our various goals.

Not to mention: these days “the science” seems to be all about pretending there are no trade-offs, no competing goals.

Yesterday I wrote to you about the schools, and the day before that about the massive spike in suicidal ideation among the youth.

The wreckage keeps piling up, and our leaders obviously have no idea what the endgame is.

What else can we do after all this fact-free nonsense except live, and ignore these people as much as we can?

If that sounds good to you, join me in my community of normal people, for learning and camaraderie:

http://www.SupportingListeners.com

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »