Sign Petition FDA To Investigate Pfizer's Clinical Trial Fraud

Should the FDA investigate Pfizer's clinical trial fraud allegations? Or look the other way?

The Correct Way to Handle the Pandemic

Article from Steve Kirsch on Substack

Vaccines

1. Stop the vaccines now. The current COVID vaccines kill more people than they can possibly save from COVID, even if they were 100% effective so should be taken off the market immediately. For example, the vaccine may kill 117 kids for every kid that is saved from COVID.

2. The liability exemption is now lifted retroactively. Patients who have been harmed by the COVID vaccines can now sue the drug company for damages up to $100M per case of fatality or disability.

3. Every post-vaccination ailment, affliction and death appearing within 4 weeks of vaccination that appears at a rate of 10X or more vs. baseline should be attributed to the vaccine unless and until proven otherwise, by irrefutable evidence, with costs of all diagnostic procedures to be born by the pharmaceutical manufacturer.

4. For future approved vaccines, informed consent provide shall include any and all symptoms that are elevated in VAERS by 10X or more over “baseline” reporting rates.

5. For future approved vaccines, require autopsies for anyone who dies within 2 weeks of getting the vaccine. The autopsy reports should be posted in a public database with Names and other PHI related data redacted

6. Failure to file a VAERS report for anyone who dies within 30 days of COVID vaccination shall be liable to a fine of $100,000 per incident.

Informed consent

If for some reason, we couldn’t stop the vaccine, then everyone should be required to read and sign an informed consent prior to getting vaccinated. Here are some options:

COVID vaccine informed consent form

Family Financial Disclosure Form for Covid-19 Injections

Masks

1. Instruct public health officers to recommend that businesses post signs saying WARNING: face masks are NOT recommended. They have not been shown to stop COVID and mask wearing may be harmful to your health.

Fairness

1. There should be no restrictions whatsoever placed on any person who has recovered from a COVID infection since these people cannot transmit future infections. So any sort of testing requirement shall not apply to these people.

2. Vaccinated and unvaccinated people should be treated the same way since they are equally likely to be infected or spread COVID. So if there is a testing protocol, it must treat vax and unvaxed the same. Same is true for hospitalized patients: there shouldn’t be a separate facility for vaxed vs. unvaxed: they should be treated the same way.

Lockdowns

1. Lockdowns for COVID are now illegal. COVID is endemic. We are all going to get it sooner or later. So let’s just get it over with and move on. Once you are infected, treat with early treatment and now you are unable to transmit any subsequent re-infection to others.

Mandates

1. It shall be illegal to coerce anyone to get any vaccination of any type. That goes for military, employer, school, etc. mandates. Vaccination shall be solely up to the individual. People should never be threatened with termination for not being vaccinated. This is especially silly for a vaccine which is toxic and relatively ineffective.

2. It shall be illegal for any organization to require anyone to wear a mask. Mask wearing should be completely at the option of the wearer. For people who are convinced they work, fine, go wear the mask knowing you will be protected (even though you won’t be).

Inadequately tested drugs

1. Newly approved drugs with less than a 1 year safety record shall be so labelled by the drug manufacturer in a prominent place that the long-term effects of the drug are unknown.

Early treatment

1. Put all early treatment protocols with a 95% or higher hospitalization and/or death reduction in clinical practice in hospitalization on a list of recommended treatments in the NIH COVID treatment guidelines

2. Any drug with at least one positive Phase 3 result (effect size 20% or better) or at least one published systematic-review and meta analysis for use against COVID shall be listed as recommended on the NIH treatment guidelines.

3. Supplements with a 20% effect size or greater in clinical trials shall be listed as recommended.

4. All public health officials shall encourage the public to talk to their doctors about the approved early treatment drug / supplement protocols listed on the NIH website.

5. The public should be encouraged to have on hand drugs for at least one of the early treatment drug / supplement protocol.

6. Doctors shall comply with patient requests for medications to be administered if there is a sound scientific basis for the request and no sound scientific basis for denying the request. Physicians who ignore this are subject to having their license to practice revoked.

Right to medicine

1. Revoke the license of any pharmacist who refuses to fill a prescription for an off-label drug where 1) there is clear scientific evidence of a benefit OR 2) where the medication is prescribed in dosages that have been shown to be safe (e.g., dosages approved for the labelled use). This allows a pharmacist to act as a double-check on a physician’s prescription (e.g., to avoid typos, etc) but keeps the pharmacist from second-guessing the prescription.

Scientific integrity

1. Any publisher who revokes or causes publication delay of a scientific paper without a scientific reason, shall be liable for damages to the author of $100,000 per day.

2. Scientists can, for good cause, publish papers anonymously (the journal will know). This protects research groups from retribution for publishing “unpopular” science such as confirming the Gundry study. See my article about the Gundry study confirmation where the science was suppressed because the authors were afraid of losing grant money.

Social distancing

1. There needs to be clear scientific evidence whether this is effective or not. In general, people should make their own personal choice on this. I wish there was a paper showing the effect on transmission versus distance. 6 feet seems a bit too contrived to make me comfortable it is the “right” number people should pay attention to. Where is the science here????

Hospitals

1. Deliberately mislabeling a death that wasn’t caused by COVID as a COVID death shall be subject to criminal prosecution and a minimum sentence of 10 years in prison.

2. Halt the use of remdesivir for hospitalized patients. It doesn’t work and it is basically killing people.

3. Hospitals shall comply with patient requests for medication if there is a clear rationale for the request and a lack of any data showing that the medication is likely to cause more harm than benefit.

Medical free choice

1. Doctors shall comply with patient requests for FDA approved medications to be administered which are supported by scientific data unless there is a more compelling scientific basis to deny the request.

2. Hospitals who fire healthcare workers for speaking out (whistleblowers) shall be subject to a private right of action to recover 10 years of wages per incident.

Spreading misinformation about masking and COVID vaccines

1. Any doctor who tells a patient that the vaccines are “safe and effective” or that cloth or surgical masks can stop COVID shall be called to show the scientific proof of this and lacking such proof shall his license revoked for spreading medical misinformation that can cause patient harm.

Censorship

1. Any person who is suspended by a social network for communicating truthful scientific data and opinions shall have a private right of action to recover statutory damages of $10,000 per day for ever day the person is suspended.

2. Any person whose social network post (text or video) is not false and misleading but is erroneously labelled false and misleading is entitled to sue the platform for $10,000 per day that the post is mislabeled or removed by the social network.

Accountability

1. Criminal prosecution against FDA, CDC, and NIH leaders who are suppressing the science in favor of the narrative. I can assure you, these people are corrupt. It is obvious to anyone with a brain who looks objectively at the data (such as this brilliant article by Josh Guetzkow, Ph.D. Yet the CDC and FDA cannot find a single safety signal? Give me a break. Nobody in Congress is interested in pursuing.

2. Today, CDC employees like John Su at the CDC, don’t have to answer a single question from the public. Neither do the outside committee members. Instead of a public speaking portion, the public should have the right to ask question of people who are sitting on these committees or make invited presentations. Today we have nothing. None of these people have to answer a single question and even with a million dollar incentive will not sit down for an interview. I wonder what they are so afraid of?

Summary

That’s my list. Not exhaustive, but you get the idea. We need to stop treating this virus like it is radioactive. There are many safe protocols for treating COVID and once recovered, the patient is always better off than if they were vaccinated.

Treating COVID with early treatments of a cocktail of repurposed drugs is the right approach. Vaccination with an unsafe, leaky vaccine in the middle of a pandemic is a recipe for disaster. We need to get off this treadmill ASAP.

Still Loaded With Antibodies 1 Year Later After Covid 19 Infection

SEE OTHER TEST RESULTS BELOW

Why Is Natural Immunity Still Being Ignored By The Corrupt Government & Corporate Media?

Blood test results from Labcorp show an unvaccinated family of four people still have antibodies 1 year later after infection.  Family of people with ages ranging from 12-48 still are loaded with antibodies.  

Can this family get a vaccine mandate exemption?

Our grossly corrupt FDA and Government Advises Against Use of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test Results.  For one reason only?  $MONEY$

Here is the language used by the criminals running the CDC.  All eligible people should be vaccinated, including unvaccinated people who have previously been infected and have detectable antibodies.

Numerous immunologic studies (NO STUDIES LINKED?) have consistently shown that vaccination of individuals who were previously infected enhances their immune response, and growing epidemiologic evidence indicates that vaccination following infection further reduces the risk of subsequent infection, including in the setting of increased circulation of more infectious variants.

CDC Website Shows Possible Myocarditisp Side Effects From Those Previously Infected

Risk of an MIS-like illness or the known risks of COVID-19 vaccination such as the rare risk of myocarditis following COVID-19 vaccination for people who meet the following criteria:

1. Clinical recovery has been achieved, including return to normal cardiac function;
2. It has been ≥90 days since their diagnosis of MIS-C;
3. They are in an area of high or substantial community transmission of SARS-CoV-2, or otherwise have an increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 exposure and transmission; and
4. Onset of MIS-C occurred before any COVID-19 vaccination.

People diagnosed with MIS-C or MIS-A after COVID-19 vaccination

In the rare instance of a person developing MIS-C, MIS-A, or a similar clinical illness after receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine, referral to a specialist in infectious diseases, rheumatology, or cardiology should be considered. Because MIS-C and MIS-A are conditions known to occur with SARS-CoV-2 infection, these individuals should be assessed for laboratory evidence of current or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Healthcare and public health professionals should also consider requesting a consultation from the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment COVIDvax project. In addition, all illnesses consistent with MIS-C or MIS-A occurring in persons who received any COVID-19 vaccine should be reported to VAERS.

FDA today: 42% of children 5-11 have natural immunity

Fact Checking The Fact Checker Lies & Fake News

Full article comments. 

One of the downsides of telling the truth in this environment is that it seems everyone and their brother wants to tear all your arguments to shreds.

I could spend full time just refuting all the hit pieces written about the content I’ve produced. Here’s my fact check of the fact-checkers as a repurposed graphic:

Rather than address every point of every fact check, here is a checklist for things that a thorough fact checker should be able to answer, but can’t or won’t.

Note that this is a quick list I put together in about 30 minutes. There are more, but you get the idea:

1. What is my motivation for suddenly, at age 65, becoming a spreader of misinformation and conspiracy theories? And why did it only happen right after hearing about my friends who had died or been disabled by the COVID vaccines? Do you even know me or have we ever met?

2. Dr. Toby Rogers computed 117 deaths per kid saved in ages 5 to 11? Do you agree with his analysis? 20,000 people read that article and couldn’t find a hole. So where did he go wrong and how can be sure you got it right and he got it wrong?

3. If this is all done out of Kirsch's ego, then how is it that 30 other scientists, statisticians, and doctors all agree with him? Why did all of these people suddenly become conspiracy theorists? What’s their motivation for the fraud and deception?

4. If the vaccines are safe, how come Alex Berenson also thinks the vaccines are unsafe? Is he also a crackpot? Isn’t it unfair just to attack Kirsch? Berenson and Kirsch hardly ever talk, yet came to the same conclusion. What about Del Bigtree? He found the same thing. In fact, Bigtree’s attorney calculated a VAERS URF of 50 well before Kirsch did. So why pick on Kirsch?

5. If the fact checker uses a pseudonym, why can’t you tell us what your name is?  Are you going to tell us who funded you to do the hit piece?

6. Will you debate us in a recorded Zoom call where you can answer all our questions? We are eager to find out how we were fooled by all this data.

7. If the vax is so safe, why are there so many death entries in VAERS this year?

8. If you think there is simply “over-reporting” in VAERS this year, what is your actual evidence of that? All the people we talked to are reporting more events because there are more events happening. In fact, most people report that there are at least 100X more events this year than in previous years. So it seems like VAERS is actually under-reported this year, and not over-reported, don’t you think?

9. There are 5,288 symptoms that haven’t been reported for ANY vaccine in the last 5 years that are being reported for the first time in these vaccines. Why?

10. Why are there more adverse event reports this year than for every vaccine in the last 30 years combined?

11. If the URF isn't 41, what is the true URF and did you calculate it using the CDC-approved methodology like we did? (see The reporting sensitivity of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for anaphylaxis and for Guillain-Barré syndrome).

12. If we got it wrong, then tell us: How many people do you estimate have been killed by the COVID vaccines and how do you know?

13. One of the ways we computed the number of deaths from the vaccine was using an independent polling company. How was that gamed?

14. Why are athletes dropping by a 60X rate after the vax rollout?

15. How did Ernest Ramirez's son die?

16. How do you explain the causes of death of the 14 cases the CDC examined? 5 of them died from cardiac arrest!

17. How does he explain the results of Peter Schirmacher?

18. Why did Taiwan report more deaths from the vaccine than from COVID?

19. Why is the line slope going the wrong way in the Harvard study?

20. How do you explain that the biodistribution showing accumulation in the ovaries correlate with the high numbers of VAERS symptoms for menstrual problems many with huge elevations compared to baseline (previous vaccines).

21. Why are cardiologists reporting highly elevated # of cases of heart disease in kids after the vax rolled out?

22. Why is the cardio testing lab at UCSF now filled with kids 7 to 10 only AFTER the vaccines rolled out for that age range?

23. Why is a top California neurologist needing to report 2,000 VAERS events this year when in the last 11 years she's never need to report a single adverse event?

24. How do we explain the families where 3 relatives, all previously healthy, die within days after the COVID shot?

25. How do we explain Gavin Newsom being diagnosed with GBS within days after his booster? Isn’t it perfectly safe?

26. How did 2 cricket players recently vaccinated drop on the field within 10 minutes of each other? Bad luck?

27. Why does the CDC *REFUSE* to calculate and use the proper URF for VAERS when interpreting the safety data? Pfizer PROVED that VAERS is 5X underreported for myocarditis, and the CDC will not even acknowledge that? John Su is using a URF of 1. That is clearly false and misleading. Why are you not going after him? That is truly evil and corrupt. I’m not the bad guy here. This was in plain sight of the public (Pfizer slide with the Optum data (see my article about this).

28. How come undertakers report a huge increase in business right after the vaccines rolled out?

29. Why aren't the nursing homes disputing Abrien Aguirre's account that there were 10 times as many deaths from the vaccines than from COVID?

30. How come the CDC hasn't ascribed even a single death from the vaccines in light of Schirmacher's study? That’s inexplicable isn’t it?

31. Why are there so many vaccine-injured people that Facebook had to remove groups of 250,000 and more (multiple times).

32. Why aren't the vaccine injured getting any press?

33. Why did YouTube censor Dr. Peter Doshi's testimony? UCSF Professor Aditi Bhargava spoke as well and was censored. Why? Are you speaking out about that?

34. How come Jessica Rose’s myocarditis paper was pulled by the publisher? Are you making a stink about the corruption of science here? Or are you just trying to discredit me?

35. What about Maddie de Garay? Why didn't the FDA, CDC, or Pfizer ever investigate? Why did Janet Woodcock assure me they would and then did nothing? Why didn't they report the truth and stop the trial on the permanent paralysis. Her result aligns PERFECTLY with the mechanism of action of the drug? How can they have eliminated the vax as the cause without ever talking to her? They are supposed to assume it is the vax until they can show otherwise.

36. What about the 5X exclusions (vs placebo group) in the Pfizer trial? That can't be by chance can it?

37. How come there were so few all-cause deaths in the Pfizer study? It was supposed to be a representative group! There should be been around 110 deaths in each group, right?

38. How come Pfizer 6 months study shows more all cause deaths in the treatment group in than in the placebo group? Where is the PROOF that the vaccines are saving lives? Whoops!!!! No proof at all of a single life saved. As a fact checker, why aren’t you calling that out? Instead you are targetting me. Hmmmm.

39. Why were there 4X as many cardiac arrests in the vax group vs. placebo in the Pfizer Phase 3 study (6 month)? Seems pretty high. It wasn’t just bad luck since we see all these athletes in plain sight dropping. So isn’t it more likely than not this is real?

40. Aren’t you concerned that the trials going forward are too underpowered to resolve any of these questions?

41. Wasn’t there gaming in the Pfizer Phase 3 trials on adverse event reporting where people found it difficult/impossible to report AEs.

42. Despite the gaming of the AE reports, aren’t you alarmed at the statistically significant large increase in overall morbidity in all of the COVID vaccine trials (the paper US COVID-19 Vaccines Proven to Cause More Harm than Good… by J. Bart Classen, MD).

43. How come the NIH and WHO did absolutely nothing when the fluvoxamine Phase 3 trial was published in Lancet? They didn't even note it in the guidelines. Did you protest that? Why not? It’s December 2, 2021 and the fluvoxamine recommendation was Last Updated: April 23, 2021. The Lancet article was widely covered by all major media, but the NIH did nothing. How do you explain that? Why aren’t you spending your valuable time focusing on that?

44. How come nobody can cite a SINGLE RCT that shows that masks work against COVID?

45. How come Professor Jeffrey Morris changed the topic whenever we tried to show him that the symptoms in VAERS were dose dependent? (Note: dose dependency is one of the most impressive indicators of causality, but we use all Bradford-Hill criteria to assess causality).

46. Dr. Steven A. Anderson of the FDA is supposed to be monitoring the VAERS data like a hawk. We have people highly qualified to who have spent months analyzing the VAERS data. Why does Dr. Anderson refuse to meet with us?

47. How come the FDA and CDC outside committee members all turned down a $1M research grant just to talk to us for a few hours and answer questions? What are they afraid of?

48. If the CDC and FDA members are independent, why did one of them admit in a private conversation that if they didn’t vote the way the FDA /CDC wanted they would be kicked off the committee like Martin Kulldorff.

49. If the vaccines are so safe, then why did CDC insiders tip off a friend of mine in January not to get the vaccines?

50. If the excess deaths in VAERS was not caused by the vaccine, then what is causing it and why isn’t the CDC investigating? These causes of death were not normal.

51. While it is amusing for people to refer to the Mclachlan VAERS study and argue that all the deaths were normal, that’s simply not what the study said. Shall we go through all 250 cases one by one? The paper said “Despite this, there were only 14% of the cases for which a vaccine reaction could be ruled out as a contributing factor in their death.” So it is interesting that some people can definitively state that the vaccine didn’t cause their death. Are these fact checkers willing to go through the cases one by one with Scott and our team and show us all how we got it wrong?

When you find a “fact check” that addresses those 51 questions, that would be great because I have another 130 questions just like those which I’d love to hear them explain as well.

Debunking Steve Kirsch’s latest claims about covid vaccine deaths

Here is the Medium article. Whoever wrote this “fact check” clearly spent a lot of time putting together his case. Basically, this nameless, faceless person claims that Crawford cherry picked data and that the excess death data doesn’t line up with a deadly vaccine. I just learned about this on Dec 1 at 11pm.

The author says my motivation is ego and fame. Wow. This shows you the quality of his work. Is the author willing to challenge my team in a recorded debate? I seriously doubt it. But I’ve got an open invitation to do just that! Let’s find the truth. We are not afraid of a challenge. Is he? If you are “The Gift of Fire,” then please respond in the comments.

He asks in his title: “What motivates a tech millionaire to fight against covid vaccines?” I’d have a lot more respect for him if was able to get that simple question right. But he can’t even get that one right. Everyone who knows me and works with me will tell you the answer: “Mr. Kirsch just wants to save lives.” I would argue if he can’t get something simple like that out, that we should have a lot less confidence in anything else he says.

So rather than spend our time debunking his debunk, I want to issue a challenge to our anonymous “do gooder.” We’ll address all of your points in your article, if you address all the points above all in a LIVE RECORDED zoom call where we can set the record straight.

How about it?

Healthfeedback fact check

Today, for example, someone sent me this link from the “experts” at healthfeedback.org that fact checked two statements that they claim that I made:

1. "the ovaries get the highest concentration of [lipid nanoparticles from RNA vaccines]. This turns the ovaries into a very large manufacturing plant to turn out toxic spike protein"

2. "FDA experts reveal the Covid-19 Vaccines are killing at least 2 people for every 1 life they save"

The short story is the first statement was taken completely out of context and was referring to a chart that was limited to showing the body parts where we did not expect to see any lipid nanoparticle (LNP) delivered. The second was a quote from The Expose that I never claimed. It was their mistake, not mine.

If we address the “context problem” of the first one and they mistake by The Expose in the second one, we are left with:

1. When we look at areas of the body where we didn’t expect to see the LNPs, the ovaries has the highest accumulation.

2. The VAERS data shows that the vaccines are killing at least 2 people for every life that they might save. It’s not just me that says that. The Walach and Kostoff papers, published in peer reviewed medical journals, say the same thing.

The facts supporting both of these statements are pretty straightforward.