FDA's VRBPAC advisory committee meets Tuesday, October 26 to advise FDA on the authorization of Pfizer's COVID vaccine for children between 5 and 12 years old.
One week later, On November 2-3, the CDC's advisory ACIP committee will meet to approve a rollout of the vaccine for this age grooup.
We anticipate that plenty of false information (both in the raw data and in its interpretation) will be presented to each committee, as happened at previous meetings.
While I felt gobsmacked when I first watched the committee being presented with such a load of bad, skewed data and critical but missing information--thinking, how can you even begin to untangle all the BS being presented here to justify a crime against millions--this time we are better prepared. We are going to go after the briefers and the committee members for their misconduct in real time.
Children's Health Defense is serving all the committee members and major FDA staff with a packet of accurate information on the vaccines in children. We are furthermore telling them how they have been fooled, and are likely to be fooled again. We have provided them with the tools to dispute the FDA and Pfizer staffers who both negate vaccine risks, and paint a fancifully exaggerated picture of vaccine benefits.
We have explained that this decision affects 28 million American children and many millions more outside the US, whose governments adopt FDA policies in their home countries.
We have explained to them that we are poised to file suit against them for willful misconduct as appropriate if they recklessly endanger our children for little benefit.
I will be live-blogging the VRBPAC meeting starting at 8:30 am ET, and will be laser-focused on any lies and misinformation that are being presented--for it will be the evidence needed to go after those who are knowingly damaging our children with experimental gene therapy products, and utilizing improper regulatory processes to do so. I will do my best to unmask the charade as it happens.
The link for my live blog is here: https://live.
The link to the FDA meeting alone is here: https://fda.yorkcast.com/webcast/Play/6ff3dee6ad834af8954fa9eb08a2e0911d
"gene therapy"
ReplyDeleteJust wanted to note that this descriptor is a misnomer. There is absolutely NO THERAPEUTIC VALUE to these injections, so calling them therapy - of any sort - is misleading. It leads one to assume that their impact is positive, a good thing, helpful.
Please, call them something other than " ___ therapy."
Well, that was a done deal. These meetings are Kabuki Theatre. Now watch CA and NY mandate the jabs for school children. If my children were still of school age I would be homeschooling them.
ReplyDeletethank you, dr nass. i look forward to reading your running commentary here with greater clarity. am sure they will provide an important historical record. please take care of yourself. this must have been exhausting. you are the real public servant and should run the cdc. lynn
ReplyDeleteThank you for sharing your thoughts about the testimony. It is tedious work. But, it does help more people to stay informed,
ReplyDeleteThe vaccine was approved for emergency use so that it would be available to the very small number of children who are at risk of hospitalization from Covid. Everyone present knew that is not how it will be used.
While there was discussion about the children with existing antibodies who are unlikely to benefit from the vaccine, there didn’t appear to be any effort made to identify or rule out dangers of giving the vaccine to children with current antibodies or children with a concurrent infection.
I may have missed it, but I didn’t hear that the vaccine prevented any deaths or hospitalizations in the 5-11 age group in the trials.
Why give an approval for a vaccine against “old” strain? Can’t we give our kids a better vaccine that at least targets the strains that are currently circulating?
Disturbing.
ReplyDeleteActually, there is a good reason to call them gene therapy products. That is wat their mfrs called them. FDA has stricter rules for regulating gene therapy products than vaccines, but preferred to call them vaccines and not apply the proper standards.
ReplyDeleteThen can we please put "therapy" in quote marks? It is patently absurd to call these things therapeutic - any of them (AZ and J&J included).
ReplyDeleteStill, I get your point about calling a thing by its proper name wrt regulations. If only they'd been regulated as "gene therapy" products.