This spike inside nucleus has already been reported one year ago! ....
SARS–CoV–2 Spike Impairs DNA Damage Repair and Inhibits V(D)J Recombination In Vitro
Hui Jiang 1,2,* and Ya–Fang Mei 2,*
Don't get your panties bunched, think of it as a refresher for the liers and deniers.
Dr Campbell.
"Omicron is the vaccine that we failed to produce"
Meeting a need.for the intelligent layman
.despite the ivermectin censors etc
TM 5.50 ff
What's in the blood?
For every mistake made for not doing: ten are made for not looking”
(Poster on wall at Otago Medical School circa 1987 - Author unknown)
Live blood analysis has a history longer than vaccination. It is interesting to note that proponents of both were on opposite sides of the “debate”. It was the work of French scientists Antoine Bechamp and Claude Bernard and later that of Professor Günther Enderlein that advanced the use of the microscope and challenged the medical establishment of the day. That challenge has never gone away.
Looking at blood under a microscope would seem like a fairly sensible thing to do given the significant concerns that exist amongst experienced, usually non-medically trained practitioners. Unfortunately, promoting live blood analysis as a useful and complementary modality is akin to questioning vaccine science. Don’t do it. Don’t do either when it comes to that.
In Australia in the early 2000’s Metagenics ran training programmes for general practitioners, naturopaths and other health practitioners. Unfortunately, they stopped providing this training due to increasing compliance costs and the number of practitioners providing live blood analysis has reduced significantly.
However, in late 2022 when questioning the safety and effectiveness of a vaccine that is “safe and effective” it would seem sensible to at least have another look, especially given the increasing rhetoric “there is nothing to see here.” This is of course a medical-centric comment because live blood analysis has been offered continuously for decades and many practitioners are highly experienced in providing and interpreting this investigation.
These practitioners are exceptionally alarmed about the changes and the abnormal structures that have been seen in the blood that are now visible in both vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. These structures were not seen before late 2021 - in anybody. These practitioners are increasingly marginalised from the health care machine. They do not have an effective voice. A bit like the patients that are suffering from clear vaccine related injury. It will be a historical outrage that the vaccine injured patients have been treated so poorly.
Unpublished data from a researcher in Australia has shown rouleaux and or thrombi being present >6 months after the last vaccine dose in >81% of vaccinated samples vs 16% of unvaccinated samples in a blinded analysis (n=314). One reason that this data is unpublished is because of the effort and cost required to gain ethics approval for conducting this study. Ethics approval that the current Covid-19 vaccination programme has not had to obtain.
In a recently published Italian study Cipelli and colleagues noted that more than 94% of 1006 symptomatic patients within 1 month of vaccination with Pfizer or Moderna had significant abnormalities in the blood. Furthermore 12 patients were checked before and after vaccination and showed normal appearances prior to vaccination and similar changes to the the other patients after vaccination.
Similar findings to the patients in this study have been observed in blood of vaccinated patients all around the world. Typically, these take the form of red blood cell stacking, referred to as rouleaux, evidence of metabolic stress and hypercoagulability and abnormal inclusions which includes ribbons, tubular structures and crystals.
We can debate the origin of Covid-19 and the subsequent global response. We can gnash our collective teeth in frustration and angst at our political leaders and public health officials but surely the presence of these abnormalities in the blood indicates a titanic problem and hints, strongly I believe, towards a more sinister agenda. We must look and we must act on what we see.
It will become all too clear in the future, that this was the time to start screening the vaccinated population for injuries, metabolic problems and hypercoagulability.
We can reduce global excess deaths, but first we must look, and we must act on what we see.
The use of live blood analysis is still widespread in France, where there are many independent labs who provide a service at a low and subsidised price. It works two ways, Your doctor can refer you there for tests, or for a slightly higher fee you can walk in and ask for your blood to be tested and the results passed to your doctor. I guess this is the legacy of Bechamp and Bernard's pioneering work. The forensic pathology/bacteriology lab I started my working career in (Laboratory of Pathology and Public Health) was also a continual user of the techniques. But that was 60 years ago.
Vitamin D and l arginine
Scientists Have Found COVID-19's Inside Man, And They Know How To Shut Him Up
COVID-19 is a tricksy beast. As soon as you think you’ve got a handle on it, up pops some new variant, or a previously unheard-of long-term consequence of infection – and with a few noteworthy exceptions, all we’ve been doing for the last couple years is trying to keep up.
But sometimes, the gods of science will throw you a win. A new study, aimed at identifying a more reliable way to combat COVID-19 in the face of virus mutations and unvaccinated patients, has found that a certain protein, known as GRP78, may hold the key to controlling the virus’s replication rates.
“We now have direct evidence,” said research lead Amy S. Lee, a professor of biochemistry and molecular medicine at the Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, in a statement. “GRP78 is a proviral protein that is essential for the virus to replicate.”
We already knew that GRP78 was implicated in the spread of COVID-19: it’s what’s known as a “chaperone protein”, and previous studies have shown it actually helps SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, to invade and infect host cells. If you think of SARS-CoV-2’s infamous spike protein as the “key” which opens host cells’ ACE2 protein “locks”, then GRP78 is basically the guy pointing at the door and yelling, “Over here! This is the one you can get into!”
Regulation of Cytochrome P450 enzyme activity and expression by Nitric Oxide in the context of inflammatory disease
Cytochrome P450-mediated drug interactions in COVID-19 patients: Current findings and possible mechanisms
Calcitriol Inhibits HCV Infection via Blockade of Activation of PPAR and Interference with Endoplasmic Reticulum-Associated Degradation
Dilbert whistleblowing shenanigans rage on:
Medical Journal Calls Out ‘Grossly Inadequate’ FDA Oversight Over COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Trials
Australia-based investigative journalist Maryanne Demasi is at it again on behalf of The BMJ—this time probing the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s oversight of clinical trials. And as is typically the case, Ms. Demasi finds some dirt to report—and this is no exception. Finding the previously Gold Standard regulatory agency’s oversight of clinical trials “grossly inadequate,” according to inputs from a series of experts, Ms. Desai merely raises attention to what TrialSite has been shouting about for much of the pandemic. The BMJ emerges as one of the most honorable medical journals at least in the West. They now report on the FDA scandal. What was once considered a ‘Gold Standard’ regulatory agency unfortunately has become one more than willing to compromise patient safety—a sacrosanct covenant—a core part of the agency’s mission. As TrialSite’s founder recently editorialized in “FDA Regulators: Peter Doshi has a Message for You,” “It’s time for the good people that we know are in government to make the moves to start the great professional reformation needed back toward safe, independent passage” toward where a true regulatory agency needs to be—independent, objective and always considering safety as number one priority.
Remember Brook Jackson? She was the whistleblower working for the contract research organization Ventavia Research Group based in Texas. Hired to oversee “warp speed” clinical trials on behalf of Pfizer, ultimately Ms. Jackson found all sorts of problems involving the manipulation of clinical trial data or, as Demasi states, “falsified data, unblinded patients, and inadequately trained vaccinators who were slow to follow up on adverse events.” Problematic—no? Any clinical trial professional worth one’s salt would have done the same—right? Wrong.
First, while Jackson believed the FDA would take this meaningful information and at least do an inspection, they opted to ignore the whole matter. TrialSite interviewed Ms. Jackson and, along with The BMJ and several other independent news sites, covered the event. This media notified the world when Facebook’s algorithms censored The BMJ’s story about the Pfizer clinical trial whistleblower incident. It was at that point that we here at TrialSite knew that the censorship regime was far more extensive than many assumed.
While the mainstream media and industry folks hinted to the TrialSite network that this would be an isolated case, that was highly unlikely. And thanks to Ms. Desai’s reporting, The BMJ reports they discovered regulatory documents revealing that only 9 out of 152 Pfizer trial sites were actually inspected prior to the mRNA vaccine licensing! What about Moderna? Only 10 out of 99 trial sites involved with the Moderna studies were inspected and only five of the 72 remdesivir sites were inspected, reports Ms. Desai.
How bad is this? Plenty bad. Pharmacist and pharmacologist David Gortler, previously part of the FDA medical review team and appointed as a senior advisor to the FDA commissioner from 2019-2021, went on the record for Ms. Desai:
“The FDA is “endangering public health” as they continue to obfuscate their lack of oversight and investigation into various violations uncovered during the clinical trial inspections that did occur, accounts Desai in The BMJ.
Gortler, now a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center think tank in the nation’s capital, expressed, “The lack of full transparency and data sharing does not allow physicians and other medical scientists to confirm the data independently and make comprehensive risk-benefit assessments.”
Backlog is Dangerous
TrialSite has chronicled case after case of what could be considered some evidence for what’s called “Regulatory Capture,” a term The BMJ editors wouldn’t dare probably allow in such an article.
With mounting site inspection backlog, The BMJ’s investigative journalist network reached out to other experts who express concern that the agency’s oversight of research is “grossly inadequate.” While a former staffer employed at the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations shared concern that the agency didn’t follow up on the Jackson allegations.
The BMJ piece links to some important FDA artifacts, including:
Summary for Basis for Regulatory Action—Comirnaty
Summary for Basis for Regulatory Action—Spikevax
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research: Summary Review
Call to Action: Follow the link to read the entire article by Ms. Desai.
50% of the US population is V-D deficient.... To cheap to recommend...
. To cheap to recommend..
To give you an idea of the really low costs:: https://www.sunday.de/vitamin-…e-plus-k2-mk7-100mcg.html
180 days full dose (5000IU + ug V-k) about 13Euro/$ or about 7 cents/day. ...
Not only is there no money in preventing sickness, there is much more money lost with less people to treat.
To cheap to recommend...
The comments on Dr Campbell's ''VitD video show that there are totalitarian states somewhere..
Of course they are nowhere near me.maybe in the North East of Asia
"
My GP told me to take Vit D 2 years ago. He also told me not to take the shot and gave sound reasons as to why.
Needless to say, he had his medical licence revoked about 6 months later
and is still battling authorities. Many of us still visit him (at his home) as he is a brilliant doctor but we take veggies from our garden, eggs from our chooks etc as payment - ridiculous state of affairs.
My GP lost his hospital privileges, his practice and stepped down from a 23yr Doctors without Borders upper level membership position for the same reason. I had multi-organ failure in 2018, caught COVID before it was even testable November 2019 .. he knew what was 'up' with the new virus. I went home well armed with practical advice to get through c-19 and he can no longer practice in Canada or abroad.
Edit: My point is that even though I am extremely medically challenged due to the previous multi-organ failure, 50+yrs old (Prime candidate for a jabber) he shook his head "No" on the jab, then proceeded to remind me that I am the surviving parent if an 9yr old (at the time, the child is 11 now.). Hard "No" on the jab.
Large Real-World Observational VA Patient Study: Vitamin D Associates with Reduced COVID-19 Risks
does low vitamin d associate with severe covid-19? put another way, could a vitamin d regimen help protect people from sars-cov-2, the virus behind covid? trialsite has tracked this controversial topic from multiple perspectives. according to the national institutes for health (nih) covid-19 treatment guidelines, due to multiple limitations associated with the current body of research “there is insufficient evidence for the panel to recommend either for or against the use of vitamin d for the prevention or treatment of covid-19.” this actually was a step in the direction of neutrality as before, the apex research institute only recommended use for clinical trials. that’s because numerous studies (cohort, clinical trials, and meta-analyses) on the use of this supplement for the prevention or treatment of covid-19 have been published in peer review journals. the nih weighs against recommendation due to the fact that they consider many of the studies not robustly designed (size, lack of randomization, etc.) while there is a lack of standardization of dosage and formulation across the various studies. while the nih acknowledges a number of observational cohort investigations suggesting people with low vitamin d levels face greater covid-19 risk and worse outcomes post infection—such as higher death rates—the nih argues there isn’t clear enough evidence that vitamin d supplementation offers protection against covid-19 or improves outcomes. now, comes the latest study published in nature scientific reports in which investigators report that in the target study population of u.s. veterans, they reveal that vitamins d2 and d3 associate with reductions in covid-19 infection of 28% and 20% respectively [(d3 hazard ratio (hr) = 0.80, [95% ci 0.77, 0.83]), d2 hr = 0.72, [95% ci 0.65, 0.79]]. jason b. gibbons affiliated with johns hopkins university, department of health policy and management, bloomberg school of public health (corresponding author) and study colleagues also report that mortality within a 30-day window of covid-19 infection was also 33% lower with vitamin d3 as well as 25% lower with vitamin d2 (d3 hr = 0.67, [95% ci 0.59, 0.75]; d2 hr = 0.75, [95% ci 0.55, 1.04]). finally, gibbons and team report that once controlling for vitamin d blood levels, those veterans that received higher doses of vitamin d benefited most from supplementation that those cohorts receiving lower dosages
study overvi
a retrospective cohort study, the investigators sought out to determine the association between vitamin d3 and d2 supplementation and covid-19 infection and associated mortality or death rates. this study used a cohort of va patients who received supplementation described in the table below prior to the pandemic (january 1, 2019, to december 31, 2020) and during the pandemic (march 1, 2020, to december 31,2020) as compared to untreated control patients. the cohorts
supplement cohor
descripti
ergocalcifer
vitamin
doxercalcifer
vitamin
oral cholecalcifer
vitamin
calcifedi
vitamin
before estimating, the study team matched treated and controlled patients one-to-one on their propensity for supplementation separately for vitamin d3 and d2. then the team employed the use of cox proportional hazards models to calculate time-to-covid-19 infection and death within 30-days post infection, conditional on supplementation, as reported in nature scientific reports
factoring in other important data attributes, the study team performed subgroup analyses associated with vitamin d3 in a bid to evaluate the followin
treatment heterogeneity by race (black vs. whit
vitamin d level (0–19 ng/ml, 20–39 ng/ml, and 40 + ng/ml of 25-dihydroxycholecalciferol
mean daily and cumulative supplemental dosag
what was the study population
the study team tapped into the veterans administration corporate data warehouse (cdw) electronic health records, making this study based on real-world data in the health system. they identified va patients that had at least one va service or prescription and at least one vitamin d lab test between the dates of january 1, 2019, and december 31, 2020
after applying various exclusion criteria to reduce spillover between associations as an example, the investigators came to a final patient coun
total patient cou
suppleme
220,2
vitamin
34,7
vitamin
407,8
untreated contro
thereafter, they applied one-to-one propensity score matching covering the restricted sample to match vitamin d3 treated and vitamin d2 treated patients to control
what covariates were used to generate propensity scores
the 15 most common indications for vitamin d prescription, patient demographics, patient race, and gender
what’s the total patient count after propensity matchin
199,498 vitamin d3 treated and matched control pairs along with 33,2162 vitamin d treated and matched control pairs
what about the stratified patient cohort
these cohorts were stratified and analyzed based on data elements such as gender, race, and vitamin d serum levels. this is important, for example, as african american patients typically have greater vitamin d deficiency and covid-19 infection rates and could benefit from vitamin d supplementation over whites
other stratified patient breakdown
vitamin d sampl
demograph
# patien
m
359,0
wom
39,9
blac
71,0
whit
283,2
serum lab value breakdow
serum breakdo
# patien
0 and 19 ng/ml
69,0
20–39 ng/m
228,0
40 + ng/
101,8
summary of findin
as summarized previously, the study team reports that vitamin d2 and d3 fills associate with reductions in covid-19 infection of 28% and 20% respectively [(d3 hazard ratio (hr) = 0.80, [95% ci 0.77, 0.83]), d2 hr = 0.72, [95% ci 0.65, 0.79]]. jason b. gibbons affiliated with johns hopkins university, department of health policy and management, bloomberg school of public health (corresponding author) and study colleagues also report that mortality within a 30-day window of covid-19 infection was also 33% lower with vitamin d3 as well as 25% lower with vitamin d2 (d3 hr = 0.67, [95% ci 0.59, 0.75]; d2 hr = 0.75, [95% ci 0.55, 1.04]). finally, gibbons and team report that once controlling for vitamin d blood levels, those veterans that received higher dosages of vitamin d benefited most from supplementation than those cohorts receiving lower dosages
this study has significant limitatio
this observational study’s results will not be given the same evidentiary weight by influential authorities such as the nih due to factors such as residual confounding plus lots of other factors that the study team cannot control for their statistical analysis when looking at covid-19 infection and mortality (e.g., socioeconomic status, obesity, etc. the authors do point out that such concerns “are lessened by the significant associations between low and vitamin d serum levels and higher and cumulative dosages with improved outcomes.
other potential biases include measurement bias, potential to misclassify patients that received vitamin d3 over the counter as controls for example. also, the study may not “generalize to new variants (e.g., delta, omicron).” they also point out that their findings are only associations and that ultimately, randomized controlled trials “are ultimately needed to establish a causal link between vitamin d3 and d2 supplementation and covid-19 infection and death
jason b. gibbons, phd, corresponding au
lead research/investigat
jason b. gibbons, phd johns hopkins university, department of health policy and management, bloomberg school of public health; department of veterans health affairs, center of excellence for suicide preventio
edward c. norton,phd university of michigan, department of economics, department of health management and policy; national bureau of economic researc
jeffrey s. mccullough, phd university of michigan, department of health management and polic
david o. meltzer, md, phd univeristy of chicago, department of medicin
jill lavigne, phd wegman’s school of pharmacy, st. john fisher college; department of veterans health affairs, center of excellence for suicide preventio
virginia c. fiedler, university of illinois at chicago, department of dermatolog
robert d. gibbons, phd university of chicago, department of medicine, department of public health sciences (biostatistics
call to action: the vitamin d studies are accumulating positive signals that proper supplementation is important
references .)yneyhnorthor.””ns.gs36ml93l 67 tswnn
48es71ks15en81entsice:s:.s?.g?.? s.ls60d210d365ntntt:.?e)e)g:.
d3old3old2old2olonts:ew..mff
1sfostatistics)
Call to Action: The vitamin D studies are accumulating positive signals that proper supplementation is important.
References
Association between vitamin D supplementation and COVID-19 infection and mortality
Saudi Arabian Study: 1.1% Hospitalized Due to Severe Adverse Events after 3rd Booster dose of Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine
A study team affiliated with Mohammed Al-Mana College for Medical Sciences in Saudi Arabia conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study in the Eastern Province of that Middle Eastern nation based on the use of a self-administered online survey probing for adverse reactions associated with the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA COVID-19 vaccine called BNT162b2. Targeting persons aged 18 to 72 years of age, the study covered those in the region that needed to receive their booster dose prior to receiving the survey questionnaire. With a population of 4.9 million in the Eastern Province, the study team determined sample size using Raosoft and based total sample size, plus a margin of error of 5%, a 50% response rate, and a 95% confidence interval leading to 450 eligible respondents. Of those, 385 responses were deemed sufficient to keep for the study analysis. Factoring in a drop-out rate of 10%, the final sample size was set at 424.450 eligible respondents who participated in the study during the study period. The study survey questionnaire was based in part on a review of short-term and potential BNT162b2 side effects based on a literature review (e.g., PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar, and other databases). 370 (94.9%) of those receiving the COVID-19 booster dose vaccine (BNT162b2) reported experiencing at least one-side effect. 157 (42.4%) of the vaccine recipients reported one side effect, while at the other extreme, 10 of the participants (2.8%) reported experiencing eight side effects. Importantly, 2.4% of the residents reported they needed to seek out medical attention due to receiving the 3rd booster dose of BNT162b2. Only four residents (1.1%) were admitted to the hospital after experiencing side effects. This media argues that is actually a lot, as we will discuss. Based on a small sample size, they report a 0.81% incident rate of myocarditis.
While the Saudi Arabian researchers argue the study results “support the vaccine’s safety” in addition to offering the medical community important baseline data this media suggests that given A) although at present, mainstream medicine and regulators do not agree, sufficient data exists to potentially determine that the vaccines were accelerated through clinical development with questionable data practices (e.g. Ventavia whistleblower lawsuit), B) vast populations were mandated by government to receive primary series and even boosters in some nations such as Saudi Arabia even though by the summer of 2021, it was clear that the vaccines couldn’t stop viral transmission (raising ethical concerns), and C) the vaccines products were used in a mass vaccination covering hundreds of millions of people, that a 2.4% rate of side effect seeking medical attention, along with 1.1% hospitalization isn’t nearly as safe as the authors contend. Also, despite the small sample---it was scientifically designed—meaning that a 0.81% myocarditis rate could be considered disturbingly high if generalized to a much larger population.
Mandatory Boosters
The Ministry of Health, Saudi Arabia ordered mandatory third booster doses of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine for groups the government deemed “priority,” such as all persons aged 17 and up. Vaccine hesitancy in the nation was common, with many residents of the Kingdom suspecting how fast the vaccine was approved, while others were concerned about the novel nature of the technology, similar to in the West.
Moreover, the Saudi Arabian researchers represented by corresponding author Mohammad Daud Ali from the Mohammed Al-Mana College for Medical Sciences Department of Pharmacy report that few studies investigating the mRNA vaccine actually occurred in Saudi Arabia covering the efficacy of Pfizer booster doses.
While in this study the investigators offered the opportunity to report any possible side effects, the participants only reported on previously reported common side effects. Interestingly, public health statistics in the Kingdom suggest Eastern Province individuals, in fact, reacted differently to the COVID-19 vaccine with variances in reaction rates. Importantly, the Saudi researchers chose not to include a focus on long-term side effects, which means by design, their study precludes the post-COVID-19 vaccine injury.
Reported Side Effects
What kinds of side effects?
The Saudi study reveals that the number of patients with various side effects include the most common being pain, and redness at the site of infection at 88.92%. The team segmented side effects by gender which reveal some deltas. For example, males were more likely to experience pain or redness at injection site (93.1% vs 74.1%, χ2 = 132.76; P=0.001), whereas females were more likely to complain of fatigue (65.4% vs 37.7%, χ2 =19.74; P=0.001). Myocarditis was reported only in 0.81 cases. However, that could be a big number. Over 225 million Americans have been fully vaccinated, for example. 0.81 would represent a lot of cases. That isn’t the case, but we call the number out here.
Side Effects Reported
The study team includes a distribution of COVID-19 vaccine side-effects reported among the respondents according to gender (n =370).
Outcome
Male (n = 289)
Female (n = 81)
Total (n =370)
χ2 (P)
Body pain
83 (28.72)
57 (70.37)
140 (37.84)
4.82 (0.02)
Pain or redness at the site of injection
269 (93.08)
60 (74.07)
329 (88.92)
132.76 (0.001)
Fatigue
109 (37.72)
53 (65.43)
162 (43.78)
19.74 (0.001)
Fever
42 (14.53)
39 (48.15)
81 (21.89)
0.111 (0.74)
Chills
9 (3.11)
19 (23.46)
28 (7.57)
3.57 (0.06)
Headache
22 (7.61)
37 (45.68)
59 (15.95)
3.81 (0.05)
Joint or bone pain
9 (3.11)
18 (22.22)
27 (7.30)
3 (0.08)
Nausea or vomiting
6 (2.08)
14 (17.28)
20 (5.41)
3.2 (0.07)
Muscle pain
9 (3.11)
4 (4.94)
13 (3.51)
0.492 (0.497)†
Delayed menstruation
-
13 (16.05)
13 (16.05)
-
Myocarditis or pericarditis
1 (0.35)
2 (2.47)
3 (0.81)
0.51 (0.122)†
Allergy
2 (0.69)
6 (7.41)
8 (2.16)
0.003 (0.002)†
Swelling at the site of injection
4 (1.38)
1 (1.23)
5 (1.35)
1 (0.062)†
χ2, chi-square test statistic. Significant difference between the two groups (unadjusted P < 0.05). †Fisher's exact test.
Deltas: COVID-19 booster vaccine side effects by characteristic?
The team reports deltas in the quantity of COVID-19 booster dose-vaccine side-effects reported by respondent characteristics (see Table IV). The unmarried experienced more side effects-- respondents (U = 16872; P?= 0.001), those with comorbidities (U = 28600; P?= 0.001), and those with a history of previous COVID-19. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only the presence of comorbidities was associated with an increased risk of side-effects (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 3.434; 95% CI = 1.116, 10.569, P-value=0.031). See Table V.
Conclusion
The study is an important one and totally ignored by the media. The authors report high incidence of side effects (95%) involved with those persons in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia that were required to take the 3rd booster dose of Pfizer’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.
With more side effects in the younger population, most report discomfort, but it goes away. However, the authors designed a study to preclude any data associated with long-term side effects, meaning the post-COVID-19 vaccine injury cannot be identified.
Despite the study author’s declaration that this study result shows the COVID-19 mRNA booster to be safe, this media questions that assumption. 2.4% of the participants needed to seek medical attention due to side effects associated with BNT162b2, while 1.1% required hospitalization. Of course, the incidence is not distributed across all people the same, with various socio-demographic data impacting the population in Saudi Arabia Eastern Province.
Putting things in perspective, about 143 million Americans received a third booster dose of mostly Pfizer but also Moderna. See the link.
With a hospitalization rate of 1.1% that could total 1.4 million persons that were hospitalized due to the mRNA boosters. This is not a claim because it hasn’t been tested. TrialSite estimates post-COVID-19 vaccine injuries in the United States to range from 250,000 to 1.5 million.
TrialSite has reached out to the corresponding author with a series of questions. Any responses will be updated in this article with explanation.
Study Limitations
This study has limitations including the fact that self-administered online questionnaires may include reporting bias. Younger male participants were overrepresented, for example. Check out the source for more details.
About Mohammed Al-Mana College for Medical Sciences
Established in 2003, Mohammed Al-Mana College for Medical Sciences is one of the higher education institutes that are specialized in healthcare education and applied vocational training, located in the Eastern Province, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Known as “MACHS,” this academic medical center was set up to excel to promote the educational process for various health disciplinarians by following up with the most advanced and updated programs to establish a distinctive quality standard for health education and its outcomes. By 2007, a Bachelor of Pharmacy program was established. By 2009, a Bachelor of Nursing and Clinical Laboratory Sciences was launched.
Prevalence of side-effects associated with the booster dose of Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) of COVID-19 Vaccine among vaccinated adults in the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia
UK excess mortality fluctuates between 12..18% currently 15%. So no change so far, what is bad news.¨
As the post above tells:: Boosters are deadly poison. 3% heart damage 1% hospitalization and the press still takes the FM/R/F/B money and shuts mouth.
Deaths registered weekly in England and Wales, provisional - Office for National Statistics
Delaying diabetes I by two years in average at the very low cost of 180'000$....
How can you sell it? Read the mainstream junk newspaper article:: Just fear mongering and using wrong numbers for diabetes I costs.
A kidney problem is not at all related to diabetes I. Only if you don't treat it in a later stage.
Now its becoming tight for the Swiss regulatory authority Swiss Medic which oversees drug safety in Switzerland.
Law suits are underway!
The price of Insulin is a classic example of drug companies profiteering in collusion with the regulatory authorities. For example, it's almost $100 in the USA, can be $80 in Switzerland, and is $8 iin the UK.
