Today’s Tribune gave a ton of ink and a new hundreds (incompetently edited) words to one Dr. Wendy Hasson, medical director at Randall Children's Hospital's pediatric intensive care unit. It floated at the top of the Trib’s web page under the headline…
Pediatric ICU doctor: Vaccinate kids under 5 for COVID-19
The writer, Max Egener, who did not disclose his background in virology, led the piece with the usual boo-hoo that routinely kicks off media discussions of the Killer Virus…
…kids infected with COVID-19 have been among the sickest kids she has ever cared for, she said.
That's part of why it was a moment of long-anticipated relief for Hasson when federal and state officials authorized COVID-19 vaccines for children aged 6 months through 4 years old within the last few days.
It also was a moment of relief because Hasson is a mother of a 3-year-old son and a two-month-old daughter.
So, before we launch into the deep weeds of facts, as opposed to what a hardened medical researcher would diss as “anecdotal” trash, let’s contemplate this blasé quote from Dr. Eric Rubin, member of the FDA advisory panel that approved the toddler-jabs. (He’s also a Harvard professor and editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine)…
“We’re never going to learn about how safe this vaccine is unless we start giving it. That’s just the way it goes. That’s how we found out about rare complications of other vaccines like the rotavirus vaccine. And I do think we should vote to approve it.”
Which is just one way of noting that writer Egener never bothered to talk to anyone else who might not share Dr. Hasson’s “relief” that she can now jab her kids. And that her “relief” (and a Tribune puff-pice) will sell other parents on the jabs for kids—most notably the dead-enders who lead their little tykes around in their cute little cloth masks (which are giving their kids doses of rebreathed CO2 that would fail OSHA’s air-quality standards).
Experiment away! Let us know what you find out a few years down the road.
There’s a payoff in reading Mr. Egener’s story: it will give you a graduate-level course in journalistic tap-dancing. It kicks off in the story’s second graf…
…kids infected with COVID-19 have been among the sickest kids she has ever cared for, she said.
…without bothering to ask: how many kids? How many died? Did they die at, say, rates of mortality for kids with leukemia?
Mr. Egener skims past…
In Oregon, less than 1% of kids 9 and under have been hospitalized, according to the Oregon Health Authority…
…no hard numbers from the OHA—par for the course—whereupon Egener hands it back to Dr. Hasson…
"This virus does affect kids, it affects previously healthy kids and it can affect them severely," she said. "Even though it's uncommon when that happens, when it does happen it's not only disruptive but it's devastating. It's really scary for both the kids and their families."
Note the precise medical terms,”severely,” “disruptive,” “devastating,” and (best of all) “really scary.” Does she talk this way on Grand Rounds?
We’ll give her the “scary” part, given that the governor, the Oregon Health Authority, and local media have been pumping out the run for-the-hills propaganda for two years.
But not to worry!
The benefits of vaccinating young children against COVID-19 far outweigh the potential consequences of not doing so, Hasson said.
True? Let’s give that a moment’s thought.
First, let’s turn to a newly-released report from an international group of seven MD’s and PhD’s (check their credentials; they’re not fringe folk), titled…
Serious adverse events of special interest following mRNA vaccination in randomized trials.
It was written in typical medicalese—no use of mush-words such as “really scary”—but the results were, well…really scary.
The researchers parsed records of “serious adverse effects” reported after the Moderna and Pfizer vaxxes got their “emergency use authorizations,” with a particular focus on well-known issues such as…
In July 2021, the FDA reported detecting four potential adverse events of interest: pulmonary embolism, acute myocardial infarction, immune thrombocytopenia, and disseminated intravascular coagulation following Pfizer’s vaccine based on medical claims data in older Americans. Three of these four serious adverse event types would be categorized as coagulation disorders…. which showed the largest absolute increase in the vaccine group in both the Pfizer and Moderna trials. FDA stated it would further investigate the findings but at the time of our writing has not issued an update.
Similarly, spontaneous-reporting systems have registered serious adverse reactions including anaphylaxis (all COVID-19 vaccines), thrombocytopenia syndrome among premenopausal females (Janssen vaccine), and myocarditis and pericarditis among younger males (Pfizer and Moderna vaccines).
Short version: FDA wasn’t “interested” in following up on widespread reports of heart inflammation, clotting, reproductive disorders…or, really, anything.
And so the researchers came to this conclusion…
The excess risk of serious adverse events found in our study points to the need for formal harm-benefit analyses, particularly those that are stratified according to risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes such as hospitalization or death.
If you have been following the Covid saga, you’ll know that children have a teensy bit more than a zero percent chance of dying from Covid, especially with the latest (and luckiest) variant, our new friend Omicron.
This doesn’t impress Dr. Hasson, who states flatly that…
The benefits of vaccinating young children against COVID-19 far outweigh the potential consequences of not doing so, Hasson said.
Anyone disagree? Not in Mr. Egener’s world. But consider this recent headline
But we’re in Portland and we don’t read this trash.
There are other scientists who think it’s time to pause and do some thinking, particularly when it is not known what the long-term effects on young hearts, reproductive organs, blood vessels and who knows what other organs the mRNA vaccines might affect.
Already, many European nations have switched from the Moderna mRNA jabs to the Pfizer shots for anyone under 30, given the side effects, particularly heart-inflammation. It’s mindless that both use the same technology, which might say more about Pfizer’s well-known lobbying efforts than the data.
But a recent paper published by the Japanese Society of Internal Medicine doesn’t let Pfizer off the hook either. Running under the headline…
Pericarditis with Increased Vascular Permeability after COVID-19 Vaccination
…it concluded that…
These findings suggest that increased vascular permeability triggered by COVID-19 vaccination may play an important role in cardiovascular adverse reactions.
The key word here (and in other studies) is “permeability,” which means that the dose of vaccine is reaching organs far beyond where it was injected.
Thus we have this latest study from Isreal…
Covid-19 vaccination BNT162b2 temporarily impairs semen concentration and total motile count among semen donors
The study took pains to say that…
Long-term prognosis remains good.
…although the study was anything but “long term;” and that a hard-eyed reading of stats buried in the paper’s end-notes by one of the pandemic’s leading journalists, Alex Berenson, noted that…
…the crucial chart… shows that “total motile count”—the number of sperm in the ejaculated semen—plunged 22 percent three to five months after the second shot (T2) and barely recovered during the final count (T3), when it was still 19 percent below the pre-shot level.
As the evidence piles up—and works its way toward Dr. Hasson’s in-box—the question arises: What’s causing those escalating numbers of side-effects?
Let us now turn to French researcher, Marc Girardot, whose Substack offers a fascinating, logical, well-reasoned, and truly scary theory.
Start with the reason (which almost no one thinks about) why the jab goes into your shoulder.
That’s because an mRNA vaccine consists of billions of sub-microscopic nanoparticles which (hopefully) invade the shoulder’s muscle cells, hijacking the cells to manufacture a specific Covid “spike” protein which the body’s immune system promptly attacks.
Most people kinda-sorta know this; Pfizer, Moderna and our media have spelled this out—relentlessly.
What they haven’t talked about is this:
What happens to the hijacked cells?
And here’s Girardot’s idea:
the vast majority of vaccine nanoparticles end up in the circulatory system. We know that from the Pfizer documents.…
the vast majority of cells penetrated by vaccine elements will thus be endothelial cells covering the lining of our blood vessels, simply because the particles are largely trapped in the circulatory system.
all the transfected cells will inevitably be destroyed by the immune system targeting the spike protein or bits of mRNA, expressed outside these hacked cells.
For the record, one has to remember that these technologies were adapted from anti-cancer technologies with the very purpose of stimulating T-cells and destroying tumour cells. So, it should not come as a surprise.
Let’s go back to the overworked pharmacist at the chain drugstore.
….when the vaccine is well injected into the muscle, as it trickles slowly into the blood, the muscle acts as an Intravenous saline bag, progressively diffusing throughout the body the vaccine nanoparticles.
But what happens if the needle hits a blood vessel and billions of nanoparticles are circulated—rapidly, in huge numbers, in a “bolus”—throughout the body.
Any cells they manage to hijack will be destroyed.
Any cells. Anywhere.
So where do the rogue microcapsules of RNA typically wind up?
The Scandinavian Journal of Immunology recently published a letter to the editor that asked that question…
Biodistribution studies are fundamental to determine in which tissues and organs an injected compound travels and accumulates. To the author's knowledge, up to now, such evaluation has not been carried out on humans for any of the emergency use approved COVID-19 vaccines.
One study offered a finding—and a hint why its sponsor didn’t follow up…
…a pharmacokinetic study performed by Pfizer for the Japanese regulatory agency shows that the [nanoparticles] display an off-target distribution on rodents, accumulating in organs such as the spleen, liver, pituitary gland, thyroid, ovaries and in other tissues. Similarly, the results of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) assessment reports show an off-target distribution of the LNPs used by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna, in the liver and other organs of rodents.
But, hey! Not to worry, says Dr. Hasson…
It's important to know that COVID-19 vaccines don't leave any materials in people's bodies long-term and they don't alter any genetic material in cells, she said.
Dr. Shurjo K. Sen, Ph.D., Program Director, Division of Genome Sciences of the National Human Genome Research Institute might beg to differ…
I often think of RNA as being the less well-known cousin of DNA, particularly for people outside the field of biology or genomics. But really, when you think about it, RNA, in so many ways, is the actual functional form of nucleic acids that really the body uses to do the business of, you know, constructing cells or responding to immune challenges, of carrying amino acids from one part of the cell to the other, that quite often I feel that RNA doesn't get the respect it deserves.
Nor does writer Egener halt Dr. Hasson to ask: How could any “long term effects” show up if the vaccine has only been around for, at most, two years?
And then…
Noting that many children under 5 have already been infected with COVID-19, she said that people shouldn't rely on natural immunity. "The immune response you get from infection is not long-lasting."
Let’s check with Berenson again…
Two doses of Covid vaccines offer no protection against Omicron infection and may even increase the risk of infection within months, according to a new paper in the New England Journal of Medicine.
In contrast, people previously infected with earlier coronavirus variants had a 50 percent lower risk of Omicron infection. That protection remained steady even more than a year after the initial infection.
It always comes down to the standard fallback mantra, courtesy of your medical experts at the Trib…
With the unpredictability of the virus and new variants still appearing, the safest thing people can do is to be vaccinated, she added.
Sorry to add: the virus that the mRNA vaccines were developed to fight is now long, long gone. Anyone who reads about the vaccines knows that they are “leaky,” and “non-sterilizing” and that “breakthrough” cases and re-infections are growing, as even the OHA admits deep within its web site…
But who needs facts when something “scary” is available?
Data from placebo group was lost, so the FDA says "I guess it will have to come from real-world effectiveness". Oh well. No data - no big deal. Watch the video here:
https://rumble.com/v1a6lxs-whoopsie-the-fda-green-lighted-the-moderna-jab-for-babies-after-losing-the-.html
Agree. The data behind vaccination of the very young is weak. [http://medrxiv.org/lookup/doi/10.1101/2022.02.25.22271454]. All they have been able to demonstrate is the induction of antibodies. No survival benefit data. In fact the study is incredibly poorly done, with massive dropout to the last timepoint [https://www.fda.gov/media/159195/download]. You are correct that the vaccines were developed against a strain of SARS-CoV2 that is not in circulation now. The omicron variants have the E484K/Q and L452R mutations which greatly lessens the benefit of humoral immunity. Clinical trials also show that vaccination against the BA.1 and BA.2 variants are short-lived. Very soon, BA.4 and BA.5 will be dominant. In fact, people have revealed that mutations are occurring so fast, the clinical trials are impractical now, and Pfizer is now resorting to what Fauci calls "alternate pathways of decision making". [https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/weird-that-the-i-believe-the-sciencetm]. Then there's the conflict of interest of the panel approving the vaccines not disclosing royalties they receive (due to a Bayh-Dole act loophole [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/rand-paul-confronts-covid-infected-fauci-royalty-payments]).
For those who haven't read it yet, check this out:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9062939/