January 22, 2021
The Comirnaty Deluge?
And once again I shall disturb you from the comfort of the conviction that the “authorities” know what they are doing and that they act only in your interest and for your good, and I shall come with another question:
And what if the “authorities”, all the “authorities” in the world, are mistaken?
What if the Comirnaty vaccine, in clinical trials until December 2023 — according to the manufacturer Pfizer — is not effective? Or what if it is actually harmful?
These questions are inevitable… and they are vital!
In fact, however small the possibility that the Comirnaty vaccine should be harmful, the risk assumed by the “authorities” is far too great, for we are witnessing a recklessness bordering on suicide… at the level of the species.
For while the possibility of the vaccine’s ineffectiveness would amount to a gigantic planetary “swindle”, a fraud of epic dimensions, the harmfulness of the vaccine — a hypothesis which subsists, however insignificant — would have as its effect a pestilence, a plague that could bring about, if not indeed the extinction of the species, at least a reduction of the population worthy of a flood of biblical dimensions.
And behold, such questions are beginning to appear in the mainstream press as well (in France, not here):
“Does the Pfizer vaccine increase the risk of contamination and of death from Covid19?
This may be feared from the recent course of the epidemic in the countries at present most vaccinated, according to the data supplied by the WHO.
The course in Israel since vaccination
The media crown Israel the champion of the anti-covid fight through the Pfizer vaccine [1]. An excellent operation for Pfizer, which obtained a 40% price increase for this priority granted to Israel. Since 20 December, in 24 days, more than 20% of Israelis (two million people) have been vaccinated.
But since that date, according to the WHO figures, the daily number of contaminations and deaths attributed to Covid19 has exploded. Thus daily contaminations went from 1,886 cases on 21 December to 8,094 on 10 January.
And daily mortality went from 18 on 20 December to 53 on 10 January.
gd02.png
These data led the government to extend the country’s third lockdown for an indefinite period.
The course in Great Britain since vaccination
Great Britain is the second country in the vaccination race, which began on 4 December with the vaccine developed by Pfizer and BioNTech.
Since that date, the number of daily contaminations has exploded from 14,898 on 4 December to 68,063 on 9 January 2021.
gd03.jpg
Unfortunately, so too has Covid19 mortality, which after a rise of nearly 300% (414 on 4 December to 1,564 on 14 January) exceeds by 27% that observed in March–April 2020 (maximum peak 1,224 on 22 April 2020).
gd04.jpg
These considerable and simultaneous rises in the daily incidence of contamination and of deaths after vaccination are very worrying and confirm that the marketing authorisations for the vaccines were premature.
The course in unvaccinated France during this period
In France, both the number of new cases and the number of daily deaths have remained stable during this period, and at a far lower level (per million) than in the countries that are champions of vaccination.
gd05.jpg
We are therefore surprised at the differences in the course of the Covid19 epidemic between the countries that are first in the vaccination race and France, which is slower at vaccinating.
Since the large-scale administration of the Pfizer vaccine, the number of daily infections and deaths has risen sharply in Israel and Great Britain, while among the mighty Gauls the epidemic has slowly declined.
This praise of slowness reminds us that there are no safe medicines or vaccines and that, paradoxically, they may increase the severity of the disease they are meant to combat.
This was observed with the supposed anti-cancer vaccines (the anti-hepatitis B vaccines that were supposed to prevent liver cancer [2] and the anti-papillomavirus vaccines supposedly against cancer of the cervix [3]), and more recently with the health scandal of the dengue vaccine in the Philippines, which led to several hundred deaths and to a cascade of studies now under way.
The lessons of the Dengvaxia disaster have not been learnt, and they endanger the victims of the present frenzied propaganda, those who are vaccinated against Covid19.
Neither pro- nor anti-vaccine, but firmly opposed for the moment to the generalisation of an insufficiently evaluated vaccine
Contrary to what the fact-checkers linked to the pharmaceutical industry assert, I am not against vaccination. I am pro-vaccine when a vaccine is effective, safe and prevents serious diseases. I am against a vaccine when it is useless, as in the case of diseases transmitted only by water (poliomyelitis, typhoid, cholera) in countries with public hygiene that have drinking water and waste treatment. I am against a vaccine when it has not been properly studied and evaluated: the dengue vaccine (which caused hundreds of deaths in the Philippines), the Gardasil vaccine (which paradoxically increases the risk of cancer of the cervix).
The indication of any treatment or vaccine must rest on an evaluation of the benefit/risk ratio.
No individual benefit can be expected from vaccinating those under 65 against covid, since the disease is milder in them than influenza; therefore this population can hope for nothing from the anti-covid vaccines, except complications.
And the societal argument — “we get vaccinated in order to protect the others” — is likewise irrelevant, since it is far from demonstrated that the vaccine is capable of preventing or slowing viral transmission.
At the present state of knowledge, the vaccination of elderly persons with risk factors (the population in which an effective and safe vaccine might be useful) has not been properly evaluated, since the studies refuse to include this population at risk.
Therefore the precautionary principle justifies not vaccinating them systematically, so long as there is not a sufficient quantity of transparent data confirming the efficacy and the absence of toxicity in a real population.
The Norwegian alert
Norway has just issued an alert on 15 January after the observation of 23 deaths possibly linked to the Pfizer vaccine [4] [5], in elderly persons in nursing homes. Of these deaths, 13 were autopsied, the results suggesting that the frequent adverse reactions may have contributed to serious reactions in frail elderly persons. According to the Norwegian Institute of Public Health: “For the frailest people, even relatively mild side effects can have serious consequences. For those who in any case have a very short life expectancy, the benefits of the vaccine may be marginal or irrelevant”, and the National Institute of Public Health has modified the guidance on vaccination against the coronavirus, adding new advice of caution regarding the vaccination of frail elderly persons.
Peter Doshi [6] had warned in November that we should “wait until we have complete data from the trials”, since the industry’s announcements of victory are imprecise and incomplete. He also recalled that the trials did not study the only relevant criterion, mortality [7], but only the number of cases based on often false tests: “the world has staked everything on vaccines to provide a solution to the pandemic, but the trials are not designed to demonstrate that they will.”
In conclusion, the government should be congratulated on its slowness in generalising anti-covid vaccination. The present results of the Pfizer vaccine in the Israeli and British populations do indeed raise fears of a vaccine health catastrophe in those countries, and the Norwegian alert increases the concern.
Let us thank in advance the French volunteers who are to be vaccinated: they will constitute the guinea pigs of the phase 3 study which the laboratory did not take the time to carry out before marketing. Thanks to them and to the risks they are taking, in a few months we shall be able to have a better idea of the advantages and disadvantages in real people.”
The French original here: https://www.francesoir.fr/opinions-tribunes/le-vaccin-pfizer-augmente-t-il-le-risque-de-contamination-et-de-mort-par-covid19
See the post on FacebookThe Facebook archive keeps no permanent addresses for posts. The link above is rebuilt from the identifier of the attached photograph, and some posts are no longer public — Facebook has deleted, restricted or moved them — so it may answer “This page isn’t available”. If that happens, search for the post by its text on the author’s page.
Comments
Have your say. Comments appear once approved.