Coronavirus vaccines are, by definition, "novel"

[Gary K]

“Explicitly experimental” Dr. Michael Yeadon replied in a recent public social media comment to a colleague in the UK, “All vaccines against the SARS-COV-2 virus are by definition novel. No candidate vaccine has been… in development for more than a few months.” Yeadon then went on to declare, “If any such vaccine is approved for use under any circumstances that are not EXPLICITLY experimental, I believe that recipients are being misled to a criminal extent. This is because there are precisely zero human volunteers for…whom there could possibly be more than a few months past-dose safety information.”


Yeadon is well qualified to make the critique. As he notes in the comment, “I have a degree in Biochemistry & Toxicology & a research based PhD in pharmacology. I have spent 32 years working in pharmaceutical R&D, mostly in new medicines for disorders of lung & skin. I was a VP at Pfizer & CEO…. of a biotech I founded (Ziarco – acquired by Novartis). I’m knowledgeable about new medicine R&D.” He was formerly with Pfizer at a very senior level.

This is a very good article on vaccine development and how any humans taking it are guinea pigs.

What’s Not Being Said About Pfizer Coronavirus Vaccine

Bill Gates is actively financing and promoting new untested vaccines supposed to keep us at least somewhat safe from a ghastly death from the novel coronavirus and supposedly allow us to resume somewhat “normal” lives. The Pharma giant Pfizer has now

www.williamengdahl.com

 

[chair]

The scientist you quoted has some credentials- no question about it. He is also wrong on many points- no doubt about that either.
He predicted that the virus would spread very slowly now (since many people are immune). That is not what is happening.

See here as well:

Coronavirus pandemic is not ‘effectively over’ as op-ed claims

A former Pfizer employee’s inflammatory claims denying global data are gaining traction on social media this week as the pharmaceutical company seeks FDA authorization to distribute its coronavirus vaccine.

apnews.com

 

[Gary K]

The scientist you quoted has some credentials- no question about it. He is also wrong on many points- no doubt about that either.
He predicted that the virus would spread very slowly now (since many people are immune). That is not what is happening.

See here as well:

Coronavirus pandemic is not ‘effectively over’ as op-ed claims

A former Pfizer employee’s inflammatory claims denying global data are gaining traction on social media this week as the pharmaceutical company seeks FDA authorization to distribute its coronavirus vaccine.

apnews.com

So even though the AP flat out lied to you about animal testing, which was not done at all, let alone for "many months", you're still going to quote them as a reliable source. ***shakes head in disbelief*** Seems to me you'll quote anyone no matter what how often they lie to you as long as they say what you want to hear.

"Waves" of infections, which very possibly aren't infections at all as the PCR test only tests for fragments of viruses, can be manufactured by doing nothing more than playing with the cycle threshold of the tests. To create a wave trough all that needs to be done is lower the cycle threshold and then increase the cycle threshold to create a wave peak. Do that a few times and you have multiple "waves" of "infections" that are nothing but fraudulent.

The PCR test has ten points of failure. Some of them are fatal failures. https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/

 

[chair]

Animal testing was done. Where do you get your information?

PCR testing of course has some false positives. Though not as many as you might think:

How accurate are the laboratory tests used to diagnose COVID-19?

April 29: How accurate is the test to diagnose COVID-19? What are the odds of getting a false positive? Could the test tell me I’m infected when I’m not?

medical.mit.edu

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/which-test-is-best-for-covid-19-2020081020734

But leave that aside- Why are so many people in the hospital these days? Why are so many dying? It's all a figment of our imagination? Fake news?

 

[Gary K]

Animal testing was done. Where do you get your information?

PCR testing of course has some false positives. Though not as many as you might think:

How accurate are the laboratory tests used to diagnose COVID-19?

April 29: How accurate is the test to diagnose COVID-19? What are the odds of getting a false positive? Could the test tell me I’m infected when I’m not?

medical.mit.edu

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/which-test-is-best-for-covid-19-2020081020734

But leave that aside- Why are so many people in the hospital these days? Why are so many dying? It's all a figment of our imagination? Fake news?

Fake news. The US, including increases in suicide and drug overdoses, has no more of an increase in total deaths than in years previous. 2019 had an increase in total deaths over 2018 of .9%, and 2020 had an increase in total deaths over 2019 of .9% too. Counting the increases in suicides and drug overdoses the entire excess death over 2019 is 61,000+ deaths. And the increase in suicide and drug overdoses is well over the 61,000 number. That's from the CDC's own numbers.

And by the way, the PCR test is not a diagnositic test. It can only search for virus fragments. That's the way it was designed to operate. It doesn't test the entire coronavirus from end to end.


During all previous attempts at creating a vaccine for a corona virus over the last 30 years they have failed at the animal testing stage. The side effects of the vaccines were so severe they were crippling and killing the animals after a few months. So the pharma companies got the governments to suspend animal testing, and just use humans as guinea pigs.

I've posted links to you that show that no animal testing was done. Here is my post to you about it.

https://www.theologyonline.com/thre...plot-to-limit-our-freedom.55186/#post-1780094