Manufacturers must reveal crucial information about how COVID vaccine works
January 22, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Previous articles mentioned the possibility that the makers of COVID-19 vaccines, the FDA, the CDC, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) may be covering up information indicating that the COVID-19 vaccines could be much more harmful than initially reported. New information — and a lack of published information — discovered after a more thorough review of the publications of the FDA, the CDC, Moderna, the NIH, and Pfizer-BioNTech suggests that significant information that may be used to predict obvious potential short-term and long-term risks from the COVID-19 vaccines is being covered up.
Before getting to that information, it is necessary to report on yet another major falsehood propagated by the CDC. Several commentators have mentioned the possibility that the CDC is falsely overstating COVID-19 death counts in attempt to scare and coerce Americans into accepting lockdowns or receiving vaccines; that topic, while still relevant, is not going to be completely discussed here.
A similar major falsehood from the CDC was recently discovered. In a presentation to clinicians on the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, the CDC states the following:
Like all vaccines, COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have been rigorously tested for safety before being authorized for use in the United States. (Slide 4)
It is a major false statement. The COVID-19 vaccines have not been “rigorously tested” for safety; even the FDA tacitly admits this. For instance, the FDA writes that “pregnancy outcomes are otherwise unknown at this time” — which means, obviously, that safety of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy is unknown (pages 42–43). If “pregnancy outcomes are unknown” even after the COVID-19 vaccines were authorized, then the vaccines are not “rigorously tested for safety before being authorized for use in the United States” as the CDC falsely mentions. It is a drastically false overstatement by the CDC; it is a complete fabrication, so to speak, of the amount of safety testing of COVID-19 vaccines before they were authorized for use in the U.S.
And while it cannot be completely elaborated on, compare the two false statements for a moment: overstatement of the number of COVID-19 deaths versus falsely claiming that “COVID-19 vaccines are rigorously tested for safety,” an overstatement of the amount of safety testing. One of the statements — that “COVID-19 vaccines are rigorously tested for safety” — can be easily proven to be false, while completely fabricated COVID-19 death counts cannot be easily proven. But both involve falsely significant overstatements of numbers and potentially complete fabrications. It is another indicator of the possibility that the CDC may deliberately overstate and fabricate COVID-19 death counts as a method to scare or coerce Americans.
As stated at the outset, though, there is more to suggest that the CDC, the FDA, Pfizer-BioNTech, and Moderna/the NIH are covering up significant information used to predict potentially obvious severe and life-threatening harms caused by the COVID-19 vaccines, which may not be discovered for several years after receiving them.
An overly broad discussion with less technical language of how the COVID-19 vaccines reportedly work is necessary here. Both COVID-19 vaccines currently authorized (but not FDA-approved) for use in the U.S. are sometimes called “mRNA vaccines.” The COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are injected into human muscle (“intramuscularly”). After the COVID-19 vaccines are injected into human muscles, the substances in the vaccine move from the muscle, spread to different locations, and enter human cells.
Here is where major information about the COVID-19 vaccines that may predict obvious risks is apparently being covered up: the FDA, the CDC, Moderna/the NIH, and Pfizer-BioNTech are not reporting exactly which human cells the mRNA vaccine goes into. For example, the mRNA vaccine could go into brain, spinal cord, liver, kidney, heart, lung, or stem cells, or other human cells, but this fact is apparently either being disregarded or covered up.
This is important because after the mRNA vaccine goes into the human cells, the human cells then make a protein that the cells do not normally make. The protein is found in the SARS-CoV-2 virus and is forced onto the surface of the human cells. So if the mRNA vaccines enter multiple human cells (like brain, heart, liver, kidney, etc.), the protein will then apparently be made and then forced onto those human cells.
The person’s immune system then may attack the brain (or heart, liver, spinal cord, kidney, etc.) cells that have the new protein on their surface. This attack on the human cells may cause predictable damage to the human body that may not be discovered for some time, potentially years, after the COVID-19 vaccine is received. Thus, the information, which is basic for most, if not all, drugs and biological products used for treatment or prevention of diseases, should be known and published prior to widespread use of, in this case, the COVID-19 vaccines. (Other harms, like cancer, are also a concern that will not be discussed in this article.)
This information — which human cells the currently authorized COVID-19 vaccines enter — should be known by now but is not being reported. It is essential to “informed consent” for those who receive COVID-19 vaccines, and it is also essential information for clinicians who advise patients. Peer-reviewed articles by both Moderna/the NIH and Pfizer-BioNTech appear to disregard discussing this extremely important information, and so do the main FDA documents discussing emergency use authorization.
Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, BNT162b2 (30 µg), encodes a P2 mutant S (P2 S) and is formulated in LNPs [lipid nanoparticles]. Encapsulation into LNPs enables transfection of the RNA into host cells after intramuscular (IM) injection…After injection, the LNPs are taken up by the cells, and the RNA is released into the cytosol. In the cytosol, the RNA is translated to the encoded viral protein. The P2 S antigen incorporates into cellular membranes and induces an adaptive immune response. (p. 11)
The technical language can be ignored; the text is emphasized because Pfizer-BioNTech does not describe which “host cells” the RNA is “transfected” into or “taken up by.” This is a big deal. The Moderna document discusses the same topic in this way (emphasis added):
The mRNA-1273 vaccine is delivered via intramuscular injection, and mRNA is subsequently delivered into cells, primarily antigen presenting cells at the injection site and draining lymph nodes. After delivery, the mRNA utilizes the cell’s translational machinery to produce the spike protein, which after proper assembly and processing is trafficked to the cell membrane for display to the immune system. (p. 19)
Here is where a potential cover-up may be found: the document says the mRNA is “delivered into” “primarily antigen presenting cells” rather than only antigen presenting cells. The word “primarily” seems to imply that Moderna and the NIH know that the mRNA is “delivered into” other human cells in addition to antigen presenting cells. Moderna and the NIH conveniently disregard describing all of the human cells the mRNA vaccine is delivered into.
Studies in animals after intramuscular injection of similar substances used in the COVID-19 vaccines have demonstrated “systemic spread” of the substances after being detected in the liver. And substances similar to those used in the COVID-19 vaccines, which are sometimes technically referred to as “solid lipid nanoparticles,” can cross into the brain. One study that used those substances to specifically target the brain cells “demonstrated an accumulation of these brain-targeted nanoparticles to other body organs (e.g., liver, heart, lungs, etc.),” suggesting that the use of lipid nanoparticles may result in harm to other organs.
Indeed, the information — which human cells and tissues the COVID-19 vaccines enter or are localized in — is basic for determining the short-term and long-term safety of COVID-19 vaccines. It is sometimes referred to broadly as “clinical pharmacology” and should be eventually required for labeling of FDA-approved drugs and biological products. “Emergency use authorization” by the FDA (rather than FDA approval) may be a way to disregard publishing such vital information which may have a negative effect on the CDC’s and other public health officials’ plans to vaccinate Americans.
Because products that use similar technologies injected into human muscle have been shown to be spread throughout the body, one may reasonably wonder if the COVID-19 vaccines act similarly. And if the COVID-19 vaccines do indeed enter brain, spinal cord, heart, kidney, liver, or other organ tissues, one could predict obvious serious risks that may not be discovered until several years later, after millions of people have already received the COVID-19 vaccine.
And that raises another question: COVID-19 vaccine developers were given limited liability immunity; but “[i]mmunity from liability under the PREP Act is not available for death or serious physical injury caused by willful misconduct”. Again, a complete description of which human cells the COVID-19 vaccines enter is very significant information because it can be used to predict serious injury or death which may only be discovered years after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine; disregarding that information would seem to be “an act or failure to act that is taken ... in disregard of a known or obvious risk that is so great as to make it highly probable that the harm will outweigh the benefit.” If the vaccine-developers and the U.S. federal government are covering up that information, one may wonder if the definition of “death or serious injury caused by willful misconduct” would be met.
The FDA, the CDC, Moderna and the NIH, and Pfizer-BioNTech have not clearly discussed exactly which human cells and tissues the COVID-19 vaccines enter or are delivered to. Such information is basic, essential for determining both short-term and long-term safety, and is often determined early in development of substances. Is the silence on this essential pharmacology information an indication of a cover-up of potentially known or predictable serious harms that may not be detected until it is too late for many people?