"How do we know the COVID vaccine won’t have long-term side-effects?"

Lies and misinformation my media and government told me.

The Australian government funded, “active” vaccine safety system: AusVaxSafety still has it’s page up called:

“How do we know the COVID vaccine won’t have long-term side-effects?”

It first appeared in The Conversation AU on Feb 24th 2021.

Looking back, it’s hard to find anything they got right in this article:

https://ausvaxsafety.org.au/how-do-we-know-covid-vaccine-wont-have-long-term-side-effects

For starters, “How do we know the COVID vaccine won’t have long-term side-effects?” is a manipulative nonsense.

They couldn’t “know” anything about the "long-term” side-effects because the gene jabs had not been around long enough to have any long-term data.

In the original trials used to get the EUA for mRNA jabs they were meant to follow the participants for 2 years but this did not happen:

The Pfizer and Moderna trials are expected to follow participants for two years. Within weeks of the emergency authorization, however, the sponsors began a process of unblinding all participants who elected to be unblinded. In addition, those who received placebo were offered the vaccine. These self-selection processes may have introduced nonrandom differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated participants, thus rendering the post-authorization data less reliable. Therefore, to preserve randomization, we used the interim datasets that were the basis for emergency authorization in December 2020, approximately 4 months after trials commenced.

From the Fraiman paper published in Vaccine 2022 Sep 22:

They found that even before the unblinding and injecting of mRNA into the control groups, when looking at the Brighton Collaboration, pre-defined serious AESI’s (adverse events of special interest) the mRNA jab patients had a combined excess rate of AESI’s of 12.5 in 10,000 or (1 in 800).

The spin in the article in The Conversation, reposted on the AusVaxSafety site was that “serious side-effects are very, very rare” and were transient or minor:

In fact, most side-effects occur within the first one or two days. And most of these are minor, such as pain at the injection site, fatigue or fever — which are signs your immune system is building a response against the thing you’ve been vaccinated against.

What the Fraiman paper found in the original randomised trial data were not “minor” or necessarily transient. Here is how the trials defined a Serious adverse event:

The definition of a serious adverse event (SAE) was provided in each trial’s study protocol and included in the supplemental material of the trial’s publication. Pfizer and Moderna used nearly identical definitions, consistent with regulatory expectations. An SAE was defined as an adverse event that results in any of the following conditions: death; life-threatening at the time of the event; inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; persistent or significant disability/incapacity; a congenital anomaly/birth defect; medically important event, based on medical judgment.

So serious adverse events in the trials were neither “minor” nor “very, very rare.”

They argued that about 4 months after the trials had commenced, they “knew” the shot was safe because 200 million people had received it. The article asserts:

Given the sheer number of vaccines administered to date, common, uncommon and rare side-effects would have been detected by now. What’s more, we’ve been testing these vaccines in clinical trials since mid-2020, and both the Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines have shown excellent safety results.

This gives us confidence the vaccines that’ll be used around Australia are safe

The paper by Fraiman at al, in Vaccine, suggests that pharmacovigilance has been a farce from the very beginning. At a rate of 1 in 800 serious adverse events of special interest, by the time in Dec 2020 that 200 million had received at least one dose …. The vaccine safety “authorities” had already failed to notice about 250,000 serious adverse events.

Also of interest is the claims regarding the mRNA shots being a new technology. Here they say:

“mRNA (or “messenger” RNA) is found in all living cells. mRNA is a message that tells cells how to make proteins that trigger the immune response inside the body.”

True, but the same cannot be said of synthetic, modified nucleotides that are contained in the gene jabs. These have never existed within living cells prior to these experiments. Being synthetic, and modified, these Frankenstein-mRNA are a totally different beast to endogenous mRNA with different risks and properties.

Here, the spin includes:

mRNA is not the same as DNA (your genes), and it cannot combine with our DNA to change our genetic code. mRNA vaccines do not affect or interact with DNA in any way. So we can be assured there’ll be no long-term DNA-altering effects from these vaccines.

This is another worrying misdirection. It appears, they have never heard of reverse-transcriptase, or LINE 1:

They also appear unaware of the sequence insertions at the S1/S2 boundary of Spike (S) protein that constitutes a functional nuclear localisation signal (NLS) motif “PRRARSV” and the ability of S mRNA’s ability to translocate to the nucleus, the S mRNA colocalizing with S protein:

They claim;

Australia has a robust system for this ongoing monitoring. The system was established to detect any unexpected side-effects from vaccines (if they occur) and ensure they’re investigated promptly. This type of monitoring is standard practise in Australia for vaccines. The data about COVID-19 vaccination collected in these surveillance systems will be published weekly on the TGA website. This should reassure Australians that if there’s a new serious side-effect, we will know about it, communicate it, and act on it quickly.

The “act on it quickly” is followed by a discussion of “vaccine withdrawal” after introduction to the general population, described as a “very rare event.”

Let’s look at the examples of vaccine withdrawal from the past.

So the Swine Flu vaccine in 1976 was withdrawn after finding a serious adverse event rate of 1 per 100,000 vaccinees.

Rotashield, Rotavirus vaccine was withdrawn with 1 to 2 serious events per 10,000.

The COVID jab trial is found to have a rate of 1 in 800 serious events and rather than withdrawing the injection, the government continues to actively promote the toxic and useless shot.

Here is Dr John Campbell making the same point in his unique style:

The article "How do we know the COVID vaccine won’t have long-term side-effects?" makes the claim that:

all In fact, most side-effects occur within the first one or two days. And most of these are minor, such as pain at the injection site, fatigue or fever

It uses phrases like this as a rationalisation for NOT LOOKING for longterm harms.

When you include the deliberate decision to unblind the study shortly after EUA approval, and injecting the control group (which has the effect of destroying the ability to make any easy surveillance of long-term harms), the claims of the article, parroted by media and government supported agencies like AusVaxSafety particularly hollow, and are in fact, down right misleading.

Please subscribe and become a supporter.

Being a freedom fighter and drug safety advocate/ whistle blower takes a lot of time and expense. How about encouraging me? Who know’s where it wiill lead?

You can use this link ( pick number of coffee’s as a one off or recurring support):

buymeacoff.ee/LkRNpg8ydW