Tag Archives: BioNTech

Did Nathan Templeton Die From mRNA Vaccine SADS?!

Did former Channel 7 Sunrise reporter Nathan Templeton die suddenly from mRNA vaccine SADS?! Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Nathan Templeton Died Suddenly From mRNA Vaccine!

Right after news broke that Nathan Templeton was found dead in a park, some people immediately claimed or suggested the former Channel 7 Sunrise reporter died suddenly from the mRNA vaccine!

William Makis MD : Australia – 44 year old Channel 7 News reporter Nathan Templeton died while on a dog walk.

“On 9 April 2024, Templeton was found dead near Barwon River in Geelong after suffering a medical episode while out walking the dog”

As far as COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine sudden deaths go, walking the dog may not be such a bad way to go. #DiedSuddenly

Recommended : Did Kate Middleton Get Cancer From COVID-19 Vaccine?!

 

No Evidence Nathan Templeton Died Suddenly From mRNA Vaccine!

This appears to be yet another example of fake news created by anti-vaccine activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Nathan Templeton Died From A Medical Episode

On Tuesday afternoon, 9 April 2024, Nathan Templeton (born 9 May 1979) suffered a medical episode while walking his dog in the Zillah Crawcour Park, in the Geelong suburb of Newtown. According to the Victoria Police:

Emergency services were called to a park in Newtown about 2.30pm where the man was located deceased. The death is not being treated as suspicious at this stage.

There is no evidence he died from the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, and unsurprisingly, none of those who made those claims ever provided any evidence to back up their baseless claims.

Even his family did not claim that Nathan Templeton died from any vaccination, stating simply that:

Our hearts are broken for an adoring father and a wonderful friend, who’ll be missed by many.

Nathan Templeton was just one month short of his 45th birthday, and leaves behind his wife, Kate, and two young sons.

Fact #2 : Cause of Death + Autopsy Report Not Revealed Yet

The Victoria Police is preparing a report for the coroner, but stated that “the death is not being treated as suspicious at this stage“.

Until and unless the coroner or his family announces his cause of death, or releases his autopsy report, anyone who claims that Nathan Templeton died suddenly from the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine is likely lying to you.

Recommended : Did Japan Study Prove Vaccinated Blood Is Dangerous?!

Fact #3 : Nathan Templeton Was Suffering From Personal Issues

Although his cause of death has not been determined or revealed, suicide appears to be a possibility. Nathan Templeton was said to be grappling with long-standing personal issues, including depression.

He stopped being on-air for Channel 7 Sunrise since late 2022, and had been working behind-the-scenes instead last year. He has been receiving support for his personal issues, including depression.

Now, that does not mean Nathan Templeton committed suicide. He could easily have died from a cardiac arrest, a heart attack, a stroke – common medical episodes that have been killing people long before COVID-19 vaccines were invented.

Again, we should wait for the autopsy report, and his official cause of death, and not speculate!

Fact #4 : Nathan Templeton Was Vaccinated Almost 3 Years Ago!

From his social media posts, it appears that Nathan Templeton was vaccinated sometime in May 2021. However, it is unknown if he received an mRNA vaccine, as Australia used a mix of COVID-19 vaccines.

In any case, Nathan Templeton would have been fully-vaccinated almost 3 years ago. He cannot possibly be suffering from a vaccine side effect, because they appear within hours or days, not years later!

Mild side effects like injection site pain, fever, muscle ache, headache, lethargy develop within minutes to hours of the vaccination. Anaphylaxis develops within minutes, while other severe adverse reactions like myocarditis and VITT develop within days or weeks.

The spike proteins produced by the COVID-19 vaccines also do not stick around for months. If these spike proteins are permanent (as antivaxxers claim), we would have lifelong immunity.

Your own immune system will identify the spike proteins as foreign, and destroy them within a matter of days, although some may last for up to a few weeks. This is part of how vaccines teach your immune system to identify the enemy and destroy it.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Is Japan going to ban vaccinated blood donation?!

Is Japan proposing to ban vaccinated people from donating their ‘tainted blood’?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Japan Is Going To Ban Vaccinated Blood Donation!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed that Japan is proposing to ban vaccinated people from donating their ‘tainted blood’!

Japan To Ban Vaccinated People From Donating ‘Tainted Blood’

Recommended : Are COVID-19 Vaccinated Blood Transfusions Dangerous?!

 

Truth : Japan Is Not Going To Ban Vaccinated Blood Donation!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Japan Is Not Going To Ban Vaccinated Blood Donation

Let me start by pointing out that Japan has not proposed banning vaccinated people from donating their blood, because it’s apparently ‘tainted’. There was no such announcement by the Japanese government.

If that actually occurred, it would have been reported worldwide. Yet there has been no legitimate news report of such a proposal. That’s because it never happened.

Fact #2 : The People’s Voice Provided No Evidence

Not surprisingly, The People’s Voice article never provided any evidence that Japan is proposing to ban vaccinated people from donating their blood, or that the Japanese government considers the blood of vaccinated people to be dangerous.

Fact #3 : Pre-Print Paper Offers No Actual Evidence

These claims are based on a pre-print paper by Ueda et. al. that has not even undergone the most basic, first step of the scientific review process – peer-review.

It is also a literature review that appears to heavily feature debunked articles like the infamous Spikeopathy paper by Peter Parry et. al., and the equally infamous AESI paper by Joseph Fraiman et. al., as well as papers by Stephanie Seneff and Peter McCullough, amongst other controversial people.

As far as I can tell – the paper provided no actual evidence that COVID-19 vaccinated blood is dangerous, especially when it relies on debunked articles (example | example). Even its title suggests that it was only listing “concerns” and not actual “proof”.

Recommended : Does COVID Vaccinated Blood Clot In Just 3 Minutes?!

Fact #4 : Blood Of Vaccinated People Is Safe For Transfusion

After people baselessly claimed that vaccinated blood is dangerous, the American Red Cross, the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies, and America’s Blood Centers, issued a joint statement to refute those claims:

Amid ongoing misinformation about COVID-19 vaccinations and blood donation, America’s Blood Centers, the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies (AABB), and the American Red Cross reiterate the safety of America’s blood supply and assure the public that vaccines do not pose a risk to patients receiving blood transfusions.

Blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccine approved or authorized for use in the U.S. are safe for transfusion. Similar to other vaccines such as those for measles, mumps or influenza, COVID-19 vaccines are designed to generate an immune response to help protect an individual from illness, but vaccine components themselves do not replicate through blood transfusions or alter a blood recipients’ DNA.

In summary, there is no scientific evidence that demonstrates adverse outcomes from the transfusions of blood products collected from vaccinated donors and, therefore, no medical reason to distinguish or separate blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccination.

On multiple occasions, the Food and Drug Administration has confirmed that there is no evidence to support concerns related to the safety of blood donated by vaccinated individuals.

All Americans, including both blood donors and blood recipients, should feel confident that receiving a blood transfusion is safe. COVID-19 vaccines do not replicate, and all blood donations offer the same life-saving therapeutic benefits, regardless of the vaccination status of the donor.

Recommended : Is Red Cross Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood?!

Fact #5 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Are COVID-19 Vaccinated Blood Transfusions Dangerous?!

Did Japanese researchers warn that COVID-19 vaccinated blood transfusions are dangerous?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : COVID-19 Vaccinated Blood Transfusions Are Dangerous!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The Expose (formerly Daily Expose), which claims that an official study just showed that COVID-19 vaccines cause VAIDS (Vaccine-Induced Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome) in children! Here is an excerpt:

Japanese researchers warn about the risks of blood transfusions from covid vaccinated people

Recommended : Did Japan Study Prove Vaccinated Blood Is Dangerous?!

 

Truth : COVID-19 Vaccinated Blood Transfusions Are Not Dangerous!

This is yet another example of fake news created or promoted by anti-vaccine activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : It’s A Pre-Print Article That Was Not Peer-Reviewed

Let me start by pointing out that the paper (PDF) by Ueda et. al. is a pre-print that has not been peer-reviewed – the first step in any scientific review process!

In other words – no one should draw any conclusion from this paper, when it has not even passed pre-publication peer review, never mind post-publication verification and criticism by other scientists.

Fact #2 : Ueda Et. Al. Is A Narrative Review Paper

I should also point out that the Ueda et. al. paper is just a “narrative review” or a “literature review”, which basically offers an overview of existing research, and its quality would be highly dependent on the research papers it features.

Unfortunately, it appears to feature even debunked articles like the infamous Spikeopathy paper by Peter Parry et. al., and the equally infamous AESI paper by Joseph Fraiman et. al., as well as papers by Stephanie Seneff and Peter McCullough, amongst other controversial people.

Fact #3 : Paper Does Not Prove Vaccinated Blood Transfusion Is Dangerous

As far as I can tell – the paper provided no actual evidence that the transfusion of COVID-19 vaccinated blood is dangerous, especially when it relies on debunked articles (example | example). Even its title suggests that it is only listing “concerns” and not actual “proof”.

The article’s emphasis on the spike protein appears to ignore the fact that vaccine spike proteins are created on cell surfaces and vaccines do not multiply, while COVID-19 infections produce far more spike proteins because the virus multiplies, and those viral particles (and their spike proteins) can freely travel in the blood!

In addition – the spike protein isn’t exclusive to COVID-19, and is a feature of all coronaviruses, including that that cause the common flu! If such spike proteins are toxic, then practically blood from every human being (who has ever had the common flu or other coronavirus infections) would be toxic.

Recommended : Does COVID Vaccinated Blood Clot In Just 3 Minutes?!

Fact #4 : Red Cross Says Vaccinated Blood Safe For Transfusion

After recent claims that blood donors were being rejected or deferred because they were COVID-vaccinated, the American Red Cross responded that it follows FDA regulations and protocols, and that vaccinated blood are safe for transfusions.

Donations from those who have been vaccinated for COVID-19 are safe for transfusion. Similar to other vaccines such as measles, mumps or influenza, the COVID-19 vaccine is designed to generate an immune response to help protect an individual from illness. The vaccine components themselves are not found within the blood stream.

Fact #5 : Blood Of Vaccinated People Is Safe For Transfusion

It isn’t just the Red Cross that claims that the blood of COVID-19 vaccinated people are safe for transfusions. Other organisations like the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies and America’s Blood Centers issued a joint statement with the American Red Cross on this very issue:

Amid ongoing misinformation about COVID-19 vaccinations and blood donation, America’s Blood Centers, the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies (AABB), and the American Red Cross reiterate the safety of America’s blood supply and assure the public that vaccines do not pose a risk to patients receiving blood transfusions.

Blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccine approved or authorized for use in the U.S. are safe for transfusion. Similar to other vaccines such as those for measles, mumps or influenza, COVID-19 vaccines are designed to generate an immune response to help protect an individual from illness, but vaccine components themselves do not replicate through blood transfusions or alter a blood recipients’ DNA.

In summary, there is no scientific evidence that demonstrates adverse outcomes from the transfusions of blood products collected from vaccinated donors and, therefore, no medical reason to distinguish or separate blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccination.

On multiple occasions, the Food and Drug Administration has confirmed that there is no evidence to support concerns related to the safety of blood donated by vaccinated individuals.

All Americans, including both blood donors and blood recipients, should feel confident that receiving a blood transfusion is safe. COVID-19 vaccines do not replicate, and all blood donations offer the same life-saving therapeutic benefits, regardless of the vaccination status of the donor.

Recommended : Is Red Cross Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood?!

Fact #6 : The Expose Is A Notorious Fake News Website

Like Real Raw News and NewsPunch, Daily Expose is a website that capitalises on making shocking but fake or misleading stories to generate page views and money. It was later rebranded as The Expose.

Founded in November 2020 by Jonathan Allen-Walker – a mechanic from Lincolnshire, The Expose / Daily Expose is infamous for publishing COVID-19 and vaccine misinformation.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news or misinformation, so you should NEVER share anything from Daily Expose / The Expose. Here are some of its stories that I personally debunked earlier:

Everything posted by The Expose / Daily Expose must be considered fake news, until proven otherwise.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did CDC redact all 148 pages of its mRNA myocarditis study?!

Did the CDC redact all 148 pages of its MOVING study on myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination?! Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : CDC Redacted All 148 Pages Of mRNA Myocarditis Study!

People are claiming or suggesting that the CDC released its 148-page MOVING vaccine myocarditis study with 100% of its pages redacted!

The Vigilant Fox / Vigilant News : CDC Releases Paper on Myocarditis After COVID Vaccination, and EVERY WORD Is Redacted

“148 pages. The entire thing is redacted. What good does a study do if there’s nothing there?”

There’s obviously something very damning that they’re trying to hide.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr : The level of arrogance and contempt for the public in releasing a 100% redacted document is staggering. The CDC is thumbing their nose at the Freedom of Information Act.

Without transparency, there is no such thing as democracy. When I’m President, the CDC won’t get to decide what the public can see. Everything will be out in the open, and you won’t need a FOIA request to read any taxpayer-funded data.

Recommended : Is Red Cross Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood?!

 

Truth : CDC Did Not Redact Its mRNA Myocarditis Study!

This is yet another example of fake news created or promoted by anti-vaccine activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : It Was CDC Document, Not Study

Let me start by pointing out that the 148-page “study” was not a study, but a document released by the CDC to The Epoch Times after its Freedom of Information Act request for “information about the CDC’s MOVING project”.

Even Zachary Stieber of The Epoch Times, who posted the document (PDF), did not label it as a study. He stated that it was a FOIA-released document on the CDC’s long-term study on myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination:

Seeing some confusion about this document: It’s a CDC document sent to us in response to a Freedom of Information Act request and is fully redacted. The request asked for information about the CDC’s MOVING project.

There is no indication that the documents contained any actual CDC study. So why would anyone claim that this 148-page document was a CDC myocarditis study???

Fact #2 : Document Was Redacted Under (b)(5) Privilege

Whenever a US government agency redacts a document, it has to label the redaction so the recipient has an idea why the information was redacted.

I went through the entire 148-page CDC document, and noticed that they were all redacted under the (b)(5) privilege. The (b)(5) redaction applies only to “inter-agency” or “intra-agency” letters or memorandums that “would not be available by law” to anyone except those that are “in litigation” with the agencies.

Exemption 5, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5), applies to “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters that would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency,” which has been interpreted to incorporate civil litigation privileges.

(A privilege is a legal rule that protects communications within certain relationships from compelled disclosure in a court proceeding.) 

In other words – there is nothing nefarious about the redactions, and they do not conceal any study.

The redacted pages were simply letters or memorandum that would not be made available by law, except to those who have sued the CDC, or the agency / agencies involved in those letters or memorandums.

They may, for example, contain personal information of the study participants, or other confidential information that the CDC is not permitted to release by law, except in cases of litigation.

Recommended : Is FDA Refusing To Release Vaccine Myocarditis Results?!

Fact #3 : CDC Study Was Already Published Publicly!

There is also no indication that the CDC is attempting to cover up the findings of its MOVING (Myocarditis outcomes after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination) study. After all, the CDC already published its initial study in The Lancet, on 21 September 2022more than 1.5 years ago!

Even Zachary Stieber acknowledged that, and provided the same link to the MOVING study in The Lancet. He also pointed out that the CDC told The Epoch Times in January 2024 that it planned to submit another paper with updated findings for peer review.

The CDC plans to submit another paper on updated findings from the project for peer review, a spokesperson told us in January.

To be clear – the CDC published its first study more than 1.5 years ago on the results from its MOVING project on monitoring myocarditis outcomes after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

And when its updated MOVING study paper is peer-reviewed and published, it will also be available for public consumption. What exactly is being covered up here???

Fact #4 : Most mRNA Myocarditis Cases Recovered After 90 Days

According to the CDC study that was published in September 2022, its MOVING project collected data on 519 young people who developed myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

It found that most individuals recovered from myocarditis after 90 days, with normal or back-to-baseline:

  • troponin levels : 91%
  • echocardiograms : 94%
  • electrocardiograms : 77%
  • exercise stress testing : 90%
  • ambulatory rhythm monitoring : 90%

On top of that, the study concluded that “the quality of life measures were comparable to those in pre-pandemic and early pandemic populations of a similar age“.

Recommended : SAFECOVAC : Ultra-Low Myocarditis Risk From Vaccines!

Fact #5 : There Are Many Studies On Post-Vaccination Myocarditis

Claims that the CDC is attempting to hide its data by redacting documents is also not logical, because other organisations and research teams have already published multiple studies on post-vaccination myocarditis and/or pericarditis. For example:

  • Myopericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination and non-COVID-19 vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis (link) by Ryan Ruiyang Ling et. al.
  • Myocarditis and Pericarditis after COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines (PDF) by Public Health Ontario
  • Systematic review and meta-analysis of myocarditis and pericarditis in adolescents following COVID-19 BNT162b2 vaccination (link) by Patrick D.M.C. Katoto et. al.
  • SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and Myocarditis in a Nordic Cohort Study of 23 Million Residents (link) by Øystein Karlstad et. al.
  • Clinical outcomes of myocarditis after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in four Nordic countries: population based cohort study (link) by Anders Busby et. al.

Not only are these studies publicly available, they confirm CDC findings that post-vaccination myocarditis is rare, and most patients recovered within 90 days.

Fact #6 : COVID-19 Myocarditis Is More Common

What anti-vaccine activists may not tell you is that COVID-19 is known to cause myocarditis. In fact, the CDC reported in September 2021 that COVID-19 patients have nearly 16X the risk of developing myocarditis:

During March 2020–January 2021, patients with COVID-19 had nearly 16 times the risk for myocarditis compared with patients who did not have COVID-19, and risk varied by sex and age.

The findings in this report underscore the importance of implementing evidence-based COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination, to reduce the public health impact of COVID-19 and its associated complications.

The risk of dying from COVID-19 myocarditis (13.54% of cases) is also almost 5X higher than non-COVID-19 myocarditis (2.88% of cases), according to a 2022 German study.

If you are worried about dying from myocarditis, well, you should certainly want to avoid getting a COVID-19 infection!

Recommended : Did study find Long COVID patients all received mRNA vaccine?!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Scientists Discover Alien DNA In mRNA Vaccines?!

Did Spanish scientists discover alien DNA in the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Scientists Discovered Alien DNA In mRNA Vaccines!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed or suggested that Spanish scientists discovered alien DNA in the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19!

Scientists Discover ‘Alien DNA’ Hidden in Blood of Vaccinated People

Recommended : Blood Smear Video Proves Vaccinated Have Mutated?!

 

Truth : Scientists Did Not Discover Alien DNA In mRNA Vaccines!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : They Are Old Claims From 2021/2022

Let me start by pointing out that The People’s Voice did not provide any link to shocking study by Ricardo Delgado from Project La Quinta in Spain. However, we know this isn’t new, because the Project La Quinta report only has two reports on the mRNA vaccines.

  • an interim report that Professor Dr. Campra Madrid issued on 28 June 2021, while the final report was issued on 2 November 2021.
  • a report by Ricardo Delgado Martín posted on 14 January 2022.

So why is The People’s Voice promoting a story that appears to be more than 2 years old??? Why didn’t it point out that this is a really old story???

Fact #2 : Reports Said Nothing About Alien DNA / Eggs

The People’s Voice article claimed that Ricardo Delgado and his team found alien DNA hidden in the blood of vaccinated people and/or eggs hatching when the Pfizer mRNA vaccine is placed in a reptile incubator.

That’s utter nonsense, because both reports did not mention anything about alien DNA and/or eggs hatching. They only claimed to have found graphene and/or possible microtechnology in the Pfizer vaccine.

Fact #3 : Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Don’t Contain Alien DNA / Eggs

To be clear – there is no evidence the Pfizer mRNA vaccine contains alien DNA or eggs of any kind, unless they were somehow introduced as contaminants, or sabotage.

In fact, neither Ricardo Delgado Martin, not Professor Dr. Pablo Campra Madrid, found alien DNA in the blood of vaccinated people, or alien or reptilian eggs hatching in the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

They appeared to have only performed optical microscopy of what they claimed were Pfizer mRNA vaccine samples, with or without a Raman spectrometer. Such methods cannot prove the existence of graphene oxide, alien DNA, or alien eggs.

Even Campra Madrid himself acknowledged in his report that the “microscope doesn’t provide conclusive evidence” and that the analysis was based on “a single, limited sample” of unknown origin and traceability.

Recommended : Does COVID Vaccinated Blood Clot In Just 3 Minutes?!

Fact #4 : University of Almería Disavowed Report

The People’s Voice article claimed that “scientists at an elite research unit in Spain” made the discovery. Well, it appears to be only one scientist – Pablo Campra Madrid, a professor of the University of Almería (UAL).

However, Campra Madrid stated that the report was not issued on behalf of the University of Almería (UAL) – in Page 23 of the interim report. Fortunately too, because his university disavowed his report.

On 2 July 2021 – more than 2.5 years ago! – the University of Almería issued a statement on X (formerly Twitter), describing it as an “unofficial report by a university professor about an analysis of a sample of unknown origin with a total lack of traceability“. It also said that it was a “report that this university neither subscribes to nor shares, as the report itself warns.

Fact #5 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did study find Long COVID patients all received mRNA vaccine?!

Did a new study find that Long COVID patients all received the mRNA vaccine for COVID-19?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Study Found Long COVID Patients All Received mRNA Vaccine!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed or suggested that a new study found that Long COVID patients all received the mRNA vaccine for COVID-19!

Official Study Finds All Patients With Long COVID Had Received mRNA Vaccine

Recommended : Do COVID-19 Vaccines Increase Risk Of Long COVID?!

 

Truth : Study Did Not Find Long COVID Patients All Received mRNA Vaccine!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : mRNA Vaccines Were Not Mentioned In Study

Let me start by pointing out that the study in question never even mentioned mRNA vaccines. In fact, the word “mRNA” does not appear in the paper at all!

You can read the paper in full, and look for yourself – Long-COVID Prevalence and Its Association with Health Outcomes in the Post-Vaccine and Antiviral-Availability Era by Ramida Jangnin et. al.

So why would anyone claim that this study showed that all patients with Long COVID received the mRNA vaccine???

Fact #2 : Thailand Used A Mix Of Vaccines

On top of that, Thailand uses a mix of COVID-19 vaccines – a majority of which were the Oxford-AstraZeneca, and CoronaVac vaccines, both of which are not mRNA vaccines.

So it is more likely that not that the majority of patients in that study did not receive the mRNA vaccine.

Fact #3 : It Was An Observational Study By Telephone

I should also point out that it was an observational study. Observational studies like this cannot prove causality. Perhaps that’s why the study authors themselves pointed out that further prospective research is needed to establish any causality.

However, given the observational nature of our study, further prospective research is needed to establish causal relationships, and longitudinal studies are advised to track the evolution of long-COVID symptoms over time. 

To be clear – you cannot use observational studies like this as evidence of causality. This study does not show that COVID-19 vaccines cannot prevent Long COVID. Neither does it show that COVID-19 vaccines increase the risk of Long COVID.

You can read more about this in my earlier fact checking of The Epoch Health’s article on the same study.

Recommended : Majority Of Long COVID Patients Were Vaccinated?!

Fact #4 : Study Did Not Look At Vaccine Effect On Long COVID

I should also point out that this Thai study was not actually designed to look at the effect of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination on Long COVID.

Not only did it not have a control group of unvaccinated people, almost all of its participants received both COVID-19 vaccinations and antiviral treatment!

In fact, the study did not mention whether anyone was unvaccinated. So it is highly likely that all its participants were at least either fully-vaccinated, or had antiviral treatment!

The cohort consisted of 390 participants… Among them, 96.7% (n = 377) were vaccinated, and 98.2% (n = 383) underwent antiviral treatment.

So how do we know if the Long COVID was caused by the COVID-19 infection itself, the COVID-19 vaccines, or the antiviral treatment? We don’t, because this observational study was never designed to elicit such information in the first place!

Fact #5 : Almost All Study Participants Were Vaccinated!

I should stress yet again, that almost all of the participants (94.8%) in this Thai study were fully vaccinated:

  • 40.5% received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, while
  • 54.3% received two doses, and a booster dose.

This is important because such a study would inevitably show that people who were vaccinated can suffer from Long COVID. That doesn’t mean that the vaccines cause Long COVID.

If the same study was conducted on only male patients, it would show that only men had Long COVID. Would that mean that only men get Long COVID? Of course, not. That is only the perception that you may get if the study was conducted on only men.

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

Fact #6 : Studies Do Not Link Long COVID To Vaccines

The People’s Voice article included a list of studies it claimed or suggested show a link between Long COVID and mRNA (or other types of COVID-19) vaccines. That’s not accurate:

The February 2024 report by the CDC did not link Long COVID to vaccination. In fact, the CDC report pointed out that “information about COVID-19 vaccination … is not included in this report“.

The February 2023 study published in the Journal of Medical Virology only looked at levels of spike proteins and viral RNA in COVID-19 patients. It did not mention anything about vaccines, or link Long COVID to vaccination.

The August 2023 study published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases only showed that that the risk of Long COVID was higher with the wild-type SARS-CoV-2, compared to the Alpha, Delta and Omicron variants. It did not show a link between COVID-19 vaccines and Long COVID.

The 2023 study in the European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences only identified viral spike protein in one COVID-19 patient, and vaccine spike protein in two patients after COVID-19 vaccination, out of 81 Long COVID patients. It did not show a link between the Long COVID and vaccination.

The December 2022 study in PLoS One did not conclude that receiving COVID-19 vaccines was a predictor of long COVID, calling it “an observational paradox” and a “collider bias” due to their study only looking at patients who received hospital care. I wrote an extensive article on this earlier, after The Epoch Times (again?!) covered it as “a new study“.

Recommended : Are Vaccinated People Developing Full Blown AIDS?!

Fact #7 : Studies Have Shown Vaccines Reduce Long COVID Risk

Many prior studies, involving millions of people – both vaccinated and unvaccinated, have concluded that COVID-19 vaccines reduce the risk of Long COVID.

A March 2024 study published in The Lancet, involving over 20 million people in the UK, Spain and Estonia, concluded that “vaccination against COVID-19 consistently reduced the risk of long COVID symptoms, which highlights the importance of vaccination to prevent persistent COVID-19 symptoms, particularly in adults“.

A February 2024 study published in Nature Communications, involving 1.1 million patients in Hong Kong, provided “real-world evidence supporting the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in reducing the risk of long-term health consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection and its persistence following infection“.

A March 2023 meta-analysis of 17 different studies on the effects of vaccines on Long COVID concluded that:

The evidence presented herein recommends SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for the prevention of long COVID in breakthrough cases. Furthermore, evidence does not support that SARS-CoV-2 vaccination exacerbates long COVID symptoms. Thus, most patients with long COVID should be vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2.

As you can see – much larger studies have already shown that COVID-19 vaccines not only do not increase the risk of Long COVID, getting vaccinated will actually reduce your risk of getting Long COVID should you get infected.

Hence, it is no surprise that the US CDC has pointed out that “Vaccination offers protection against the prolonged effects of #COVID19“.

Recommended : Did France Pass Law To Jail Opposition To mRNA Vaccines?!

Fact #8 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Does FDA Document Prove COVID Vaccine Shedding Is Real?!

Did an FDA document just prove that COVID-19 vaccine shedding is real?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : FDA Doc Proves COVID Vaccine Shedding Is Real!

People are sharing articles (archive | archive) by Natural News and Infowars, which claimed or suggested that an FDA document just proved that COVID-19 vaccine shedding is real!

Here is an excerpt from those articles. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

PROOF: Documents from FDA, Pfizer show that COVID “vaccine” shedding is REAL

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

Truth : FDA Doc Does Not Prove COVID Vaccine Shedding Is Real!

This is yet another example of anti-vaccine fake news, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : The FDA Document Is From 2015

Let me start by pointing out that the FDA document in question is almost 9 years old, being originally published in August 2015.

In other words –  it was published 4 years before the COVID-19 pandemic, and 5 years before the first COVID-19 vaccines were approved.

Fact #2 : FDA Document Does Not Apply To COVID-19 Vaccines!

The FDA document was an industry guidance paper (PDF) called Design and Analysis of Shedding Studies for Virus or Bacteria-based Gene Therapy and Oncolytic Products.

The title itself is clear – it only refers to “Virus or Bacteria-based Gene Therapy and Oncolytic Products“.

COVID-19 vaccines are not gene therapy (gene modification) products, and they are not oncolytic (cancer killing) products either. So the FDA document does not apply to them!

Fact #3 : Shedding Only Occurs With Live Attenuated Virus Vaccines

Vaccine shedding actually refers to viral shedding, which can only (potentially) occur with live attenuated virus vaccines. Such vaccines alters the virus to make it weakened or even harmless, but still “live”.

There are no COVID-19 vaccines that are based on the live attenuated SARS-CoV-2 virus. Therefore, vaccine shedding cannot possibly occur with any COVID-19 vaccine currently-approved by the WHO.

All currently-approved COVID-19 vaccines are based on other vaccine technologies like inactivated virus (killed virus), viral vector (using a different virus), mRNA (using mRNA instructions), or subunit vaccines (using isolated viral proteins).

To be clear – mRNA vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, highlighted in the Natural News and Infowars articles, do not cause vaccine shedding.

Recommended : Did McDonald’s Lose Toxic Meat Legal Battle With Jamie Oliver?!

Fact #4 : Viruses Multiply, Vaccines Won’t

I should also point out that if the spike protein is so dangerous, then it is even more important to get vaccinated against COVID-19. After all, viruses multiply, while the vaccines won’t!

Even if we simply look at the mRNA vaccines alone, they contain a limited number of mRNA instructions that encode for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The mRNA instructions enter a limited number of cells, which then produce and display those spike proteins on their surfaces, to trigger our immune system.

If you are infected by the actual SARS-CoV-2 virus though, it quickly hijacks your cells to produce millions of copies – each covered with spike proteins, which then infect even more cells, in an ever-expanding chain reaction.

Until your immune system learns to stop and defeat the SARS-CoV-2 virus, it will keep producing millions and millions of viruses that will circulate through your body, delivering those nasty spike proteins everywhere.

So if you are really worried about the spike protein, you should really get vaccinated against COVID-19!

Fact #5 : Natural News Is Known For Fake News

Natural News is a far-right, anti-vaccination conspiracy theory and fake news website that is known for publishing / promoting pseudoscience, disinformation, and far-right extremism.

Writing in the journal Vaccine, Anna Kata identified Natural News as one of numerous websites spreading “irresponsible health information”. According to John Banks, Natural News founder Mike Adams uses “pseudoscience to sell his lies” and is “seen as generally a quack and a shill by science bloggers.”

Dr. David Gorski called Natural News “one of the most wretched hives of scum and quackery on the Internet,” and the most “blatant purveyor of the worst kind of quackery and paranoid anti-physician and anti-medicine conspiracy theories anywhere on the Internet”.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from Natural News.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Cureus Retracts “Peer-Reviewed” COVID-19 Vaccines Paper!

It took them a while, but Cureus finally retracted the controversial “peer-reviewed” article on the lessons learned about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines!

Take a look at the controversial article, and find out what Cureus decided to retract it!

 

Cureus Publishes Controversial COVID-19 Vaccines Paper!

Anti-vaccine activists have been excitedly sharing what they call a “peer-reviewed” paper on the lessons learned about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, while calling for the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to be removed.

The paper in question is called “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” by Mead et. al. which includes anti-vaccine activists like Jessica Rose, Steve Kirsch, and Peter McCullough.

While it is being heralded as something new, the paper appears to be nothing more than a regurgitation of long-debunked claims about mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Unfortunately, it received a patina of legitimacy when it was published in the journal Cureus, with anti-vaccine activists gleefully pointing out that it was a “peer-reviewed” paper.

What many people don’t realise is that Cureus uses “an unusually fast” peer-review process of just “a few days”, and relies heavily on “post-publication peer review”, as its Editor in Chief John R. Adler explained to Retraction Watch in 2015:

Yes, Cureus has an unusually fast review process, which is an important part of the journal’s philosophy. We believe that post publication peer review, a focus of our journal through commenting and our unique SIQ process, is potentially a more powerful way to discern truth.

In other words – the pre-publication peer review appears to be superficial, and Cureus relies on the scientific community to peer-review the papers after publication. All that “post-publication” criticism appear to have resulted in its decision to (finally) retract this controversial article.

Recommended : COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Lessons Learned Fact Check!

 

Cureus Finally Retracts “Peer-Reviewed” COVID-19 Vaccines Paper!

On 19 February 2024, one of the article’s co-authors – Steve Kirsch, revealed (archive) that Cureus has decided to retract the article, citing a number of concerns.

Dear authors, 

I hope this email finds you well. I write regarding your article recently published in Cureus entitled, ‘COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign’.

The list of concerns in the Cureus letter is frankly, too short. In my earlier article, I already listed a number of other concerns with the article:

  • unsubstantiated claims that the COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials were too short
  • unsubstantiated claims that mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 were not proven safe or effective
  • misleading emphasis on absolute risk (AR) versus relative risk (RR) in understanding vaccine efficacy
  • misleading emphasis on unverified adverse events that were reported after vaccination.
  • unsubstantiated claims that 74% of deaths were “judged to have been caused by the COVID-19 mRNA products”

In any case, Cureus officially retracted this “peer-reviewed” article on 26 February 2024, with this statement:

The Editors-in-Chief have retracted this article. Following publication, concerns were raised regarding a number of claims made in this article. Upon further review, the Editors-in-Chief found that the conclusions of this narrative review are considered to be unreliable due to the concerns with the validity of some of the cited references that support the conclusions and a misrepresentation of the cited references and available data.

The authors disagree with this retraction.

One can’t help but wonder if this incident might persuade Cureus to spend a wee bit more time and effort on its peer-review process… or better still, don’t allow such articles to be labelled as “peer-reviewed” until they have at least passed proper, legitimate peer-review.

You can read more about those claims in my fact check article – COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Lessons Learned Fact Check!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Red Cross begins deferring COVID-vaccinated blood donors?!

Did the American Red Cross just begin to defer blood donors who had the COVID-19 vaccine?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Red Cross Begins Deferring COVID-Vaccinated Blood Donors!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed or suggested that the WHO Director-General just order governments to eliminate independent media, before the arrival of Disease X!

American Red Cross Begins Deferring Blood Donors Who Had Covid Vaccine

Recommended : Is Red Cross Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood?!

 

Truth : Red Cross Did Not Begin Deferring COVID-Vaccinated Blood Donors!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Red Cross Deferment Isn’t New

Let me start by pointing out that this deferment by the American Red Cross isn’t new. It actually dates back to at least 28 July 2021 (archive), which is more than 2.5 years ago!

Q: Are individuals who received a COVID-19 vaccine eligible to give blood, platelets and plasma?

A: Yes, you can donate blood after getting a COVID-19 vaccine, as long as you are symptom-free and feeling well at the time of the donation. Please come prepared to share the manufacturer name of the vaccine you received. If you do not know the name of the vaccine manufacturer, we request you wait two weeks to donate after vaccination, out of precaution.

The fact that some people are only realising this now isn’t shocking. What’s shocking is that some people would actually claim that the Red Cross is only “now” asking blood donors if they ever received the COVID-19 vaccine.

Fact #2 : Red Cross Has No Problem With mRNA Vaccines

The People’s Voice article claimed or suggested that the American Red Cross if asking blood donors if “they ever received the Covid mRNA vaccine“. That’s not true.

The American Red Cross only asks that if you received the COVID-19 vaccine to share “the manufacturer name” to determine if you need to “wait two weeks… after vaccination” to donate your blood.

In fact, the American Red Cross specifically pointed out that donors who received mRNA-based vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna do not need to wait to donate their blood.

There is no deferral time for eligible blood donors who are vaccinated with an inactivated or RNA based COVID-19 vaccine manufactured by AstraZeneca, Janssen/J&J, Moderna, Novavax, or Pfizer.

To be clear – the American Red Cross has never said that mRNA vaccines were dangerous, and donors who received it would need to defer giving blood.

Recommended : Is Bill Gates Planning To Kill Billions Using Turbo AIDS?!

Fact #3 : Red Cross Only Wants To Defer Live Attenuated Vaccine

The truth is Red Cross is only asking blood donors who received a “live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine” to wait two weeks before giving blood.

But guess what – no live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine has ever been approved anywhere in the world, as of 21 February 2024!

It appears that the Red Cross initiated this decision as far back as July 2021, out of an abundance of caution – because some donors may be a participant in a clinical trial involving a live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine, and kept it as a forward-looking requirement, when such COVID-19 vaccine is ever approved.

Eligible blood donors who received a live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine or do not know what type of COVID-19 vaccine they received must wait two weeks before giving blood.

Even that deferral isn’t set in stone, as it appears that the Red Cross will still accept blood donations from donors who are “symptom free and feeling well at the time of donation”:

In most cases, there is no deferral time for individuals who received a COVID-19 vaccine as long as they are symptom free and feeling well at the time of donation.

Recommended : Did Autopsies Show COVID-19 Vaccines Caused Deaths?!

Fact #5 : Red Cross Is Helping To Vaccinated People

Interestingly, the American Red Cross points out that while they are not a healthcare provider that administers COVID-19 vaccinations in the United States, its teams are helping to vaccinated US service members overseas!

The Red Cross, as an organization, is not a healthcare provider and is not administering COVID-19 vaccinations in the U.S. However, Red Cross volunteers who are medical professionals may work with local authorities to help give vaccinations if their state licenses permit them to do so. In addition, Red Cross teams are currently helping to vaccinate U.S. service members on bases around the world.

Yet again, it shows that the Red Cross does not have an issue with COVID-19 vaccinations. So why would anyone suggest otherwise???

Fact #6 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did WEF Pass Law To Criminalise Criticism Of mRNA?!

Did the WEF just pass a new law to criminalise criticism of mRNA technology?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : WEF Passed Law To Criminalise Criticism Of mRNA!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed or suggested that France just passed a new law to jail people for opposing mRNA vaccines!

Here is an excerpt of the long and (intentionally?) rambling article. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

WEF Passes New Law To Criminalize Criticism of mRNA

Recommended : Did France Pass Law To Jail Opposition To mRNA Vaccines?!

 

Truth : WEF Did Not Pass Law To Criminalise Criticism Of mRNA!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : WEF Cannot Pass Any Law

Let me just start by pointing out that the World Economic Forum (WEF) cannot pass any law in any country. It is merely an international non-governmental organisation (NGO) that focuses on public-private sector collaboration.

The WEF has no power over world leaders, beyond its lobbying and influencing efforts. The WEF may be an influential lobbying organisation, but it cannot pass laws in any country.

Fact #2 : Only French National Assembly Passed Article 4

The controversial bill that has gotten anti-vaccine activists so riled up is called The Bill To Strengthen The Fight Against Sectarian Excesses And Improve The Support Of Victims. You can read the bill as it was presented to the Senate on 15 November 2023.

What particularly incensed them was Article 4 of that bill, which many are calling “Article Pfizer“. It failed the first vote on Tuesday, 13 February, but passed in the National Assembly with a vote of 116 to 108 on Wednesday, 14 February 2024.

To be clear – Article 4 was not passed by the French government, but by the National Assembly of the French Parliament. The full bill, which is not yet the law, was also passed by the National Assembly, and not the WEF, or the French government.

Fact #3 : WEF Screenshot Is Fake

The cover image used by The People’s Voice article has a screenshot which purportedly shows the World Economic Forum (WEF) posting on X (formerly Twitter) that:

mRNA deniers are dangerous – and must be imprisoned!

That is most definitely a fake screenshot, because there is no such post on X by the World Economic Forum. Yet again, The People’s Voice article provided no evidence that such a post ever existed, or that the WEF just passed a law to criminalise criticism of mRNA technology.

Recommended : Has Canada Begun Euthanising Vaccine-Injured Citizens?!

Fact #4 : French Bill Does Not Involve mRNA Vaccines

Regardless of what one may think of the new French bill or its Article 4, it does not have anything to do with the criticism of mRNA vaccines in France.

To the best of my knowledge – mRNA vaccines were not even mentioned once in the entire bill, or Article 4 itself! In fact, none of those who claimed that mRNA vaccines are involved ever provided any evidence they were mentioned in the bill!

If that’s true, you have to wonder – why do some people claim that the French bill, or its Article 4, would imprison anyone who criticises or refuses to accept mRNA vaccines???

Fact #5 : Article 4 Targets Health Disinformation

As the La Chaîne parlementaire (LCP) explained, Article 4 of the bill made it a crime to incite the “abandonment of care” in France.

Specifically dedicated to therapeutic-type excesses, this Article 4 creates a new crime aimed at punishing “the provocation to abandon or refrain from following medical-therapeutic or prophylactic treatment“, as well as “the provocation to adopt practices presented as having a therapeutic or prophylactic purpose“, when these incentives may be “particularly serious” for physical or mental health.

In other words – Article 4 of this French bill makes it a crime to convince or encourage people not to accept reasonable medical treatment or prophylactic treatments (like vaccines), or to undertake treatments that can cause serious physical or mental harm.

Why would anyone want to continue letting unscrupulous people promote fake cures, or mislead people about proven medical treatments and prophylactics???

Recommended : Does Pfizer CEO aim to cut world population by 50%?

Fact #6 : French Bill Targets Self-Declared “Gurus”

As LCP explained in a separate article, the overall bill targets “sectarian excesses in the digital space and the new gurus 2.0“, pointing out that the COVID-19 pandemic enabled many of these “gurus” to take advantage of social networks to promote sectarian excesses:

The text also stresses that “the health crisis has been an ideal ground for these new sectarian excesses. New forms of “gurus” or self-proclaimed master thinkers act online, taking advantage of the vitality of social networks to federate real communities around them.”

In other words – if the bill passes and becomes law, it only endangers self-proclaimed “gurus” and cults that use social media and the Internet to snare their victims.

There does not seem to be any provision in the law to fine or imprison people in France who criticise mRNA vaccines, or pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer.

Fact #7 : Article 4 Was Amended Before Passage

According to LCP, Article 4 was amended after it first failed to pass, to include these amendments:

  • a crime would not be committed when proof of the free and informed consent of the person is provided”
  • whistleblowers of such crimes would be protected as “the information reported or disclosed by the whistleblower under the conditions provided for in Article 6” of the aforementioned law “does not constitute a provocation

In other words, these gurus would not be guilty of any crime if the people they convince to go against proven medical treatments acknowledge that they provided their free and informed consent.

Recommended : Did Scientists Call For Global mRNA Vaccine Moratorium?!

Fact #8 : French Bill Isn’t Law Yet

While many people claim that the bill or its Article 4 were passed into law, that is simply not true. As of 20 February 2024, this bill, and its Article 4, has not become law in France.

After the amended Article 4 passed on 13 February, the entire bill passed in the National Assembly the next day – on 14 February 2024, with an overwhelming 151 to 73 vote. Even so, that does not make the bill a law yet.

For one thing – that was only the first reading in the National Assembly. The bill now goes to the Senate for its approval or amendments, before returning to the National Assembly for its second reading if there are any amendments.

Only after the final bill is approved by both houses, can it then be sent to the President of France for his signature. Assuming there is no request for a constitutional review, the bill only becomes law once the French President signs it, and the Prime Minister countersigns it, and it is sent to the Journal Officiel for publication.

Fact #9 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Law + CrimeTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did France Pass Law To Jail Opposition To mRNA Vaccines?!

Did France just pass a new law to jail people for opposing mRNA vaccines?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : France Passed Law To Jail Opposition To mRNA Vaccines!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed or suggested that France just passed a new law to jail people for opposing mRNA vaccines!

Here is an excerpt of the long and (intentionally?) rambling article. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

France: Opposition To mRNA Injections Carries Penalty Of Up To 3 Years In Jail

Recommended : Did France Pass “Article Pfizer” Law To Ban mRNA Criticism?!

 

Truth : France Did Not Pass Law To Jail Opposition To mRNA Vaccines!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Only National Assembly Passed Article 4

Let me start by pointing out that the controversial bill that has gotten anti-vaccine activists so riled up is called The Bill To Strengthen The Fight Against Sectarian Excesses And Improve The Support Of Victims. You can read the bill as it was presented to the Senate on 15 November 2023.

What particularly incensed them was Article 4 of that bill, which many are calling “Article Pfizer“. It failed the first vote on Tuesday, 13 February, but passed in the National Assembly with a vote of 116 to 108 on Wednesday, 14 February 2024.

Fact #2 : French Bill Does Not Involve mRNA Vaccines

Regardless of what one may think of the new French bill or its Article 4, it does not have anything to do with the criticism of mRNA vaccines in France.

To the best of my knowledge – mRNA vaccines were not even mentioned once in the entire bill, or Article 4 itself! In fact, none of those who claimed that mRNA vaccines are involved ever provided any evidence they were mentioned in the bill!

If that’s true, you have to wonder – why do some people claim that the French bill, or its Article 4, would imprison anyone who criticises or refuses to accept mRNA vaccines???

Recommended : Does Pfizer CEO aim to cut world population by 50%?

Fact #3 : Article 4 Targets Health Disinformation

As the La Chaîne parlementaire (LCP) explained, Article 4 of the bill made it a crime to incite the “abandonment of care” in France.

Specifically dedicated to therapeutic-type excesses, this Article 4 creates a new crime aimed at punishing “the provocation to abandon or refrain from following medical-therapeutic or prophylactic treatment“, as well as “the provocation to adopt practices presented as having a therapeutic or prophylactic purpose“, when these incentives may be “particularly serious” for physical or mental health.

In other words – Article 4 of this French bill makes it a crime to convince or encourage people not to accept reasonable medical treatment or prophylactic treatments (like vaccines), or to undertake treatments that can cause serious physical or mental harm.

Why would anyone want to continue letting unscrupulous people promote fake cures, or mislead people about proven medical treatments and prophylactics???

Recommended : Did Scientists Call For Global mRNA Vaccine Moratorium?!

Fact #4 : French Bill Targets Self-Declared “Gurus”

As LCP explained in a separate article, the overall bill targets “sectarian excesses in the digital space and the new gurus 2.0“, pointing out that the COVID-19 pandemic enabled many of these “gurus” to take advantage of social networks to promote sectarian excesses:

The text also stresses that “the health crisis has been an ideal ground for these new sectarian excesses. New forms of “gurus” or self-proclaimed master thinkers act online, taking advantage of the vitality of social networks to federate real communities around them.”

In other words – if the bill passes and becomes law, it only endangers self-proclaimed “gurus” and cults that use social media and the Internet to snare their victims.

There does not seem to be any provision in the law to fine or imprison people in France who criticise mRNA vaccines, or pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer.

Fact #5 : Article 4 Was Amended Before Passage

According to LCP, Article 4 was amended after it first failed to pass, to include these amendments:

  • a crime would not be committed when proof of the free and informed consent of the person is provided”
  • whistleblowers of such crimes would be protected as “the information reported or disclosed by the whistleblower under the conditions provided for in Article 6” of the aforementioned law “does not constitute a provocation

In other words, these gurus would not be guilty of any crime if the people they convince to go against proven medical treatments acknowledge that they provided their free and informed consent.

Recommended : Did Pfizer Call mRNA Vaccines Deadliest Drug In History?!

Fact #6 : French Bill Isn’t Law Yet

While many people claim that the bill or its Article 4 were passed into law, that is simply not true. As of 20 February 2024, this bill, and its Article 4, has not become law in France.

After the amended Article 4 passed on 13 February, the entire bill passed in the National Assembly the next day – on 14 February 2024, with an overwhelming 151 to 73 vote. Even so, that does not make the bill a law yet.

For one thing – that was only the first reading in the National Assembly. The bill now goes to the Senate for its approval or amendments, before returning to the National Assembly for its second reading if there are any amendments.

Only after the final bill is approved by both houses, can it then be sent to the President of France for his signature. Assuming there is no request for a constitutional review, the bill only becomes law once the French President signs it, and the Prime Minister countersigns it, and it is sent to the Journal Officiel for publication.

Fact #7 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Law + CrimeTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did COVID vaccines kill 14X more people than they saved?!

Did a study just show that COVID-19 vaccines killed 14x more people than they saved?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : COVID Vaccines Kill 14X More People Than They Saved!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claims that a study just showed that COVID-19 vaccines killed 14x more people than they saved!

Here is an excerpt from the long, and (intentionally?) rambling article. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

Peer-Reviewed Study Finds Covid Vaccines Killed 14x More People Than They Saved

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

Truth : COVID Vaccines Did Not Kill 14X More People Than They Saved!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Study Did Not Show 14X More People Died From Vaccines

Let me just start by pointing out that the study, which is called “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” by Mead et. al. (archive), did not show that the COVID vaccines killed 14X more people than they saved.

Fact #2 : Cureus Relies On Post-Publication Peer Review

The People’s Voice article took great pains to point out that the paper was “peer-reviewed”, probably to suggest that it should be taken seriously. That’s not exactly accurate.

Even though this paper was marked as “peer-reviewed”, the peer review process at Cureus is “unusually fast” at just a few days. That’s because the journal Cureus relies on “post-publication peer review“, as its Editor in Chief John R. Adler explained to Retraction Watch in 2015:

Yes, Cureus has an unusually fast review process, which is an important part of the journal’s philosophy. We believe that post publication peer review, a focus of our journal through commenting and our unique SIQ process, is potentially a more powerful way to discern truth.

In other words – the pre-publication peer review appears to be superficial, and Cureus relies on the scientific community to peer-review the papers after publication.

Even if the paper was properly peer-reviewed by a prestigious journal, that would only be the first step in the scientific review process, which would include replication and verification, as well as criticism by other members of the scientific community.

Recommended : Pfizer Vaccine Causes Autism? Rats Are Not Mini Humans!

Fact #3 : Paper Regurgitates Long-Debunked Claims

The paper in question is a literature review, and was penned by notable anti-vaccine activists like Jessica Rose, Steve Kirsch, and Peter McCullough. You may note that some of the authors are not even scientists or were trained in medicine.

While it is being heralded as something new, the paper appears to be nothing more than a regurgitation of long-debunked claims about mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. It certainly offers no evidence to back up their claim for a vaccine moratorium. Let’s just take a look at a few:

COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trials Were Too Short?!

The paper claimed that no vaccine was permitted for market release without a testing period of at least four years, using the mumps vaccine by Merck as example. That’s not true.

The Mumpsvax (Jeryl Lynn strain) vaccine was developed and approved in a record four years, but its testing did not last four years. The mumps vaccine clinical trial in 1966 (abstract) only lasted 6 months.

This paper gives the results of a large field trial of the vaccine conducted among schoolchildren in North Carolina.

Vaccination was carried out in November 1966, every tenth child receiving a placebo preparation. Serum specimens were obtained at the time of vaccination and 4 weeks later from 556 children representing a cross-section of the total group of participants.

During the 180 days of post-vaccination surveillance, 56 cases of mumps were reported among the study population and 69 cases among non-participants.

There is no requirement by health authorities that testing or assessing any vaccine should last 10 years. The typical vaccine development time of 10-15 years is not a reflection of how much time a clinical trial needs to run, but rather the time it “generally” takes to create a vaccine, gather resources, get approvals, run clinical trials, process the data, file for approval, etc.

COVID-19 vaccines were so quickly developed because scientists all over the world collaborated on the effort, while governments funded their development, and fast-tracked their clinical trials and manufacturing preparations.

The speedy development of COVID-19 vaccines was also enabled by new vaccine platforms using mRNA or DNA technologies, in which genetic information from the new virus only needed to be “plugged in” to produce a new vaccine.

More importantly – the paper provided no evidence that the accelerated development of COVID-19 vaccines has actually resulted in unsafe vaccines.

Recommended : Do COVID-19 Vaccines Cause Long-Term Heart Damage?!

mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Were Not Proven Safe / Effective?

The Mead et. al. paper claimed or suggested that the clinical trials did not show that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were safe or effective because too few people in the unvaccinated (placebo) group died from COVID-19.

Well, not only is that a “misunderstanding” of the clinical trial results (see the next section), many studies have been conducted into the safety and efficacy of the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 since they were deployed.

Those real world studies (example, example, example) consistently showed that the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 are safe and effective.

Low Absolute Risk Shows No Need To Vaccinate?!

The Mead et. al. paper repeats the old trope that the low absolute risk (AR) seen in the mRNA vaccine clinical trials mean there is no need for anyone to get vaccinated. That’s simply not true, and is a (deliberate?) misunderstanding of statistical calculations.

The Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) will “always appear low” because it depends very much on the “event rate”. As the Meedan Health Desk explained:

Let’s say a study enrolled 20,000 patients into the control group and 20,000 in the vaccine group. In that study, 200 people in the control group got sick and 0 people in the vaccine group got sick.

Even though the vaccine efficacy would be a whopping 100%, the ARR would show that vaccines reduce the absolute risk by just 1% (200/20,000= 1%).

For the ARR to increase to 20% in our example study with a vaccine with 100% efficacy, 4,000 of the 20,000 people in the control group would have to get sick (4,000/20,000= 20%).

Hence, the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) is used instead to determine a vaccine’s efficacy, because it tells us how much risk is reduced in the vaccinated group, compared to the unvaccinated control group.

To be clear – the clinical trials and post-vaccination monitoring and studies have clearly shown that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19.

Recommended : Did Norway Study Show mRNA Vaccine Danger In Children?!

mRNA Vaccines Do Not Prevent Transmission?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that the CDC said that “COVID-19 products would stop transmission”, but in the end “COVID-19 mRNA products do not prevent transmission or infection”. Well, that’s not really true.

For one thing – the CDC never said that COVID-19 vaccines would stop transmission. In fact, the CDC article the paper linked to only said that the vaccines appear to reduce (not stop) transmission:

… a growing body of evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccines also reduce asymptomatic infection and transmission.

To be clear – the COVID-19 vaccines were primarily designed to reduce or prevent severe disease and death, which is why transmission for not an endpoint for their clinical trials. It would have been a nice bonus to block transmission completely, but partially reducing transmission is not too bad.

mRNA Vaccines Have A Lot Of AESIs?!

The Mead et. al. paper warns us about the many Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) reported after COVID-19 vaccinations. The problem is – those AESI are not actual vaccine side effects!

The AESI list for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for example has 9 pages of 1,291 adverse events, but that is not a list of the mRNA vaccine side effects. It is a list of “adverse events” that Pfizer must look for during the post-vaccination monitoring period. Not only are these “adverse events” not specific to the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, they include:

  • diseases like Herpes, MERS, Varicella, and other “communicable disease”,
  • exposure to SARS-CoV-2,
  • manufacturing and lab test issues, and even…
  • product availability and supply issues!

Needless to say – those adverse events are not vaccine side effects, or are any indication of vaccine performance or safety in any way.

Recommended : Do COVID-19 Vaccines Increase Risk Of Long COVID?!

Lots Of Deaths + Hospitalisation Were Reported?!

The Mead et. al. paper also claimed that two large drug safety reporting systems in the US and Europe have over 7.8 million reports of adverse events, with “death, hospitalisations, and life-threatening reactions”. It is probably referring to VAERS and EudraVigilance.

The thing is – VAERS / Yellow Card / EudraVigilance data are all unverified, and may contain duplicated information. That’s why they are all prefaced with warnings like:

  • they may contain duplicated information and/or reports
  • the reported event may be caused by an illness, like a COVID-19 infection for example,
  • the reported event may be caused by a different drug taken by the patient at the same time
  • they have not been assessed by health authorities to ascertain if it’s even “biologically plausible”

In addition, open systems like VAERS, or the UK Yellow Card system, are very susceptible to abuse because they allow anyone from anywhere to post anything they want, without evidence or verification.

Anti-vaccination activists can, for example, key in unlimited numbers of adverse reaction reports, even if they never received a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine!

Autopsy Reports Show Deaths Caused By Vaccines?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that “autopsy studies” showed that 74% of deaths were “judged to have been caused by the COVID-19 mRNA products”.

The problem is – the study it referred to was a preprint by one of its own authors – Peter McCullough, that was removed by The Lancet for violating its “screening criteria”.

This preprint has been removed by Preprints with The Lancet because the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology. Preprints with The Lancet reserves the right to remove a paper that has been posted if we determine that it has violated our screening criteria.

Not only was that study just a “review” of autopsy reports, many of the cases had other far more likely causes of death.

Recommended : Did mRNA Vaccines Trigger Severe Nerve Damage?!

mRNA Vaccines Are Contaminated By DNA?!

The paper suggested that the mRNA vaccines are contaminated with DNA “orders of magnitude higher than the EMA’s limit”.

The truth is – residual DNA is found in all biological products manufactured using cells, and has not shown any health risk after being studied for many decades.

In any case, the amount of residual DNA in mRNA vaccines were found to be far below regulatory limits.

Pfizer Vaccine Has DNA From SV40 Virus That Causes Cancer?!

The paper also warned about the Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter found in samples of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine. Why? Because it warns – the SV40 virus “induces lymphomas, brain tumors, and other malignancies in laboratory animals”.

First of all – after decades of studies, there is still no conclusive evidence that the SV40 virus can cause cancers in humans. However, out of an abundance of caution, the SV40 virus is considered to potentially cause cancer in humans.

In any case, the SV40 promoter is a DNA sequence that is often used to manufacture mRNA, and is not dangerous. It certainly poses no cancer risk, because the part of the SV40 that can potentially cause cancer – the T-antigen, is not present in the SV40 promoter, or the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Bill Gates Just Admit To Committing Planetary Genocide?!

Did Bill Gates just admit to committing planetary genocide in an interview with USA Today?!

Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Bill Gates Just Admits To Committing Planetary Genocide!

People are sharing a video clip on X (formerly Twitter), while claiming or suggesting that Bill Gates just admitted to committing planetary genocide in an interview with USA Today!

Liz Churchill : “We just need to mess around with all of the Nano-lipid Particles to make more vaccines”. -Bill Gates admitting to committing Planetary Genocide.

Arrest this Monster.

Recommended : Is Bill Gates Planning To Kill Billions Using Turbo AIDS?!

 

Truth : Bill Gates Did Not Admit To Committing Planetary Genocide!

This is yet another example of fake news created / shared by anti-vaccine activists, or conspiracy theorists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : USA Today Video Is Over Two Years Old!

Let me start by pointing out that the USA Today interview that people are sharing isn’t new. Heck, it’s more than two years old!

USA Today published that interview on 27 January 2021, with the title – Bill Gates predicts mRNA will be a game changer for vaccines over next 5 years.

Fact #2 : Bill Gates Did Not Admit To Committing Genocide

Bill Gates is, no doubt, a very popular bogeyman for conspiracy theorists and anti-vaccine activists. But this claim is just silly, and makes them look like absolute idiots.

The USA Today video does not show Bill Gates admitting to committing genocide of any kind, neither the planetary variety or just the local stuff. Anyone can see that.

Those making these claims that “Bill Gates admitting to committing Planetary Genocide” offered no evidence to back them up. The video is actually proof that Bill Gates did no such thing.

In the interview, Bill Gates was predicting the mRNA vaccine platform’s potential to treat or eradicate many other diseases. At no point in time did he ever admit to committing genocide… of any kind.

Recommended : Will Microsoft Disable Your Computer If You Share Fake News?!

Fact #3 : mRNA Vaccines Proven Safe + Effective

Tens of billions of doses of mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 have been administered worldwide over the last 3 years, and have been proven in multiple studies to be safe and effective. Here are just some examples:

In fact, the very fact that the world has been able to reopen completely after the COVID-19 pandemic is a testament to the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines, which include mRNA vaccines from Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna.

Fact #4 : This Is Just Fake News About Bill Gates

This is ultimately just more fake news being created / spread about Bill Gates. Here are some other recent examples:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | ScienceTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Scientists Call For Global mRNA Vaccine Moratorium?!

Did scientists call for a global moratorium on the mRNA vaccine, after finding high rates of serious post-injection injuries?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Scientists Call For mRNA Vaccine Moratorium!

The Children’s Health Defense (CHD) activist group, which is chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., just posted an article claiming that scientists have called for a global moratorium on the mRNA vaccine, after finding high rates of serious post-injection injuries!

Here is an excerpt from the CHD article (archive) with my emphasis in bold.

Scientists Call for Global Moratorium on mRNA Vaccines, Immediate Removal From Childhood Schedule

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

Scientists Call For mRNA Vaccine Moratorium : My Fact Check

The CHD story appears to suggest that scientists are calling for a global moratorium on the mRNA vaccine because it’s dangerous. However, it’s really more like the same bunch of anti-vaccine activists repeating long-debunked claims about the mRNA vaccine, and calling (yet again) for a moratorium.

Here are the reasons why the vast majority of scientists and health authorities are ignoring them, and why you too should ignore their repeated calls for an mRNA vaccine moratorium:

Fact #1 : Cureus Relies On Post-Publication Peer Review

The Children’s Health Defense (CHD) article repeatedly points out that the paper was “peer-reviewed”, probably to suggest that it should be taken seriously. That’s not exactly accurate.

Even though this paper was marked as “peer-reviewed”, the peer review process at Cureus is “unusually fast” at just a few days. That’s because the journal Cureus relies on “post-publication peer review“, as its Editor in Chief John R. Adler explained to Retraction Watch in 2015:

Yes, Cureus has an unusually fast review process, which is an important part of the journal’s philosophy. We believe that post publication peer review, a focus of our journal through commenting and our unique SIQ process, is potentially a more powerful way to discern truth.

In other words – the pre-publication peer review appears to be superficial, and Cureus relies on the scientific community to peer-review the papers after publication.

Fact #2 : It Regurgitates Long-Debunked Claims

The paper in question is a literature review called “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” by Mead et. al. (archive), which includes anti-vaccine activists like Jessica Rose, Steve Kirsch, and Peter McCullough.

While it is being heralded as something new, the paper appears to be nothing more than a regurgitation of long-debunked claims about mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. It certainly offers no evidence to back up their claim for a vaccine moratorium. Let’s just take a look at a few:

COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trials Were Too Short?!

The paper claimed that no vaccine was permitted for market release without a testing period of at least four years, using the mumps vaccine by Merck as example. That’s not true.

The Mumpsvax (Jeryl Lynn strain) vaccine was developed and approved in a record four years, but its testing did not last four years. The mumps vaccine clinical trial in 1966 (abstract) only lasted 6 months.

This paper gives the results of a large field trial of the vaccine conducted among schoolchildren in North Carolina.

Vaccination was carried out in November 1966, every tenth child receiving a placebo preparation. Serum specimens were obtained at the time of vaccination and 4 weeks later from 556 children representing a cross-section of the total group of participants.

During the 180 days of post-vaccination surveillance, 56 cases of mumps were reported among the study population and 69 cases among non-participants.

There is no requirement by health authorities that testing or assessing any vaccine should last 10 years. The typical vaccine development time of 10-15 years is not a reflection of how much time a clinical trial needs to run, but rather the time it “generally” takes to create a vaccine, gather resources, get approvals, run clinical trials, process the data, file for approval, etc.

COVID-19 vaccines were so quickly developed because scientists all over the world collaborated on the effort, while governments funded their development, and fast-tracked their clinical trials and manufacturing preparations.

The speedy development of COVID-19 vaccines was also enabled by new vaccine platforms using mRNA or DNA technologies, in which genetic information from the new virus only needed to be “plugged in” to produce a new vaccine.

More importantly – the paper provided no evidence that the accelerated development of COVID-19 vaccines has actually resulted in unsafe vaccines.

Recommended : Pfizer Vaccine Causes Autism? Rats Are Not Mini Humans!

mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Were Not Proven Safe / Effective?

The Mead et. al. paper claimed or suggested that the clinical trials did not show that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were safe or effective because too few people in the unvaccinated (placebo) group died from COVID-19.

Well, not only is that a “misunderstanding” of the clinical trial results (see the next section), many studies have been conducted into the safety and efficacy of the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 since they were deployed.

Those real world studies (example, example, example) consistently showed that the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 are safe and effective.

Low Absolute Risk Shows No Need To Vaccinate?!

The Mead et. al. paper repeats the old trope that the low absolute risk (AR) seen in the mRNA vaccine clinical trials mean there is no need for anyone to get vaccinated. That’s simply not true, and is a (deliberate?) misunderstanding of statistical calculations.

The Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) will “always appear low” because it depends very much on the “event rate”. As the Meedan Health Desk explained:

Let’s say a study enrolled 20,000 patients into the control group and 20,000 in the vaccine group. In that study, 200 people in the control group got sick and 0 people in the vaccine group got sick.

Even though the vaccine efficacy would be a whopping 100%, the ARR would show that vaccines reduce the absolute risk by just 1% (200/20,000= 1%).

For the ARR to increase to 20% in our example study with a vaccine with 100% efficacy, 4,000 of the 20,000 people in the control group would have to get sick (4,000/20,000= 20%).

Hence, the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) is used instead to determine a vaccine’s efficacy, because it tells us how much risk is reduced in the vaccinated group, compared to the unvaccinated control group.

To be clear – the clinical trials and post-vaccination monitoring and studies have clearly shown that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19.

Recommended : Did Norway Study Show mRNA Vaccine Danger In Children?!

mRNA Vaccines Do Not Prevent Transmission?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that the CDC said that “COVID-19 products would stop transmission”, but in the end “COVID-19 mRNA products do not prevent transmission or infection”. Well, that’s not really true.

For one thing – the CDC never said that COVID-19 vaccines would stop transmission. In fact, the CDC article the paper linked to only said that the vaccines appear to reduce (not stop) transmission:

… a growing body of evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccines also reduce asymptomatic infection and transmission.

To be clear – the COVID-19 vaccines were primarily designed to reduce or prevent severe disease and death, which is why transmission for not an endpoint for their clinical trials. It would have been a nice bonus to block transmission completely, but partially reducing transmission is not too bad.

mRNA Vaccines Have A Lot Of AESIs?!

The Mead et. al. paper warns us about the many Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) reported after COVID-19 vaccinations. The problem is – those AESI are not actual vaccine side effects!

The AESI list for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for example has 9 pages of 1,291 adverse events, but that is not a list of the mRNA vaccine side effects. It is a list of “adverse events” that Pfizer must look for during the post-vaccination monitoring period. Not only are these “adverse events” not specific to the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, they include:

  • diseases like Herpes, MERS, Varicella, and other “communicable disease”,
  • exposure to SARS-CoV-2,
  • manufacturing and lab test issues, and even…
  • product availability and supply issues!

Needless to say – those adverse events are not vaccine side effects, or are any indication of vaccine performance or safety in any way.

Recommended : Do COVID-19 Vaccines Increase Risk Of Long COVID?!

Lots Of Deaths + Hospitalisation Were Reported?!

The Mead et. al. paper also claimed that two large drug safety reporting systems in the US and Europe have over 7.8 million reports of adverse events, with “death, hospitalisations, and life-threatening reactions”. It is probably referring to VAERS and EudraVigilance.

The thing is – VAERS / Yellow Card / EudraVigilance data are all unverified, and may contain duplicated information. That’s why they are all prefaced with warnings like:

  • they may contain duplicated information and/or reports
  • the reported event may be caused by an illness, like a COVID-19 infection for example,
  • the reported event may be caused by a different drug taken by the patient at the same time
  • they have not been assessed by health authorities to ascertain if it’s even “biologically plausible”

In addition, open systems like VAERS, or the UK Yellow Card system, are very susceptible to abuse because they allow anyone from anywhere to post anything they want, without evidence or verification.

Anti-vaccination activists can, for example, key in unlimited numbers of adverse reaction reports, even if they never received a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine!

Autopsy Reports Show Deaths Caused By Vaccines?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that “autopsy studies” showed that 74% of deaths were “judged to have been caused by the COVID-19 mRNA products”.

The problem is – the study it referred to was a preprint by one of its own authors – Peter McCullough, that was removed by The Lancet for violating its “screening criteria”.

This preprint has been removed by Preprints with The Lancet because the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology. Preprints with The Lancet reserves the right to remove a paper that has been posted if we determine that it has violated our screening criteria.

Not only was that study just a “review” of autopsy reports, many of the cases had other far more likely causes of death.

Recommended : Did mRNA Vaccines Trigger Severe Nerve Damage?!

mRNA Vaccines Are Contaminated By DNA?!

The paper suggested that the mRNA vaccines are contaminated with DNA “orders of magnitude higher than the EMA’s limit”.

The truth is – residual DNA is found in all biological products manufactured using cells, and has not shown any health risk after being studied for many decades.

In any case, the amount of residual DNA in mRNA vaccines were found to be far below regulatory limits.

Pfizer Vaccine Has DNA From SV40 Virus That Causes Cancer?!

The paper also warned about the Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter found in samples of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine. Why? Because it warns – the SV40 virus “induces lymphomas, brain tumors, and other malignancies in laboratory animals”.

First of all – after decades of studies, there is still no conclusive evidence that the SV40 virus can cause cancers in humans. However, out of an abundance of caution, the SV40 virus is considered to potentially cause cancer in humans.

In any case, the SV40 promoter is a DNA sequence that is often used to manufacture mRNA, and is not dangerous. It certainly poses no cancer risk, because the part of the SV40 that can potentially cause cancer – the T-antigen, is not present in the SV40 promoter, or the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Bill Gates Invested In BioNTech Because COVID Was Coming?!

Did Bill Gates invest in BioNTech two months before COVID-19 was announced, because he was forewarned, or planned the pandemic?!

Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Bill Gates Invested In BioNTech Because COVID Was Coming!

People are sharing a post on X (formerly Twitter) by PeterSweden (archive), which appears to suggest that Bill Gates invested in BioNTech because COVID-19 was coming. Here is an excerpt:

I recently discovered something very weird. Bill Gates invested a whopping $55 MILLION in BioNTech that made the Pfizer mRNA injection. You will never believe the date that this happened…

This led some people to conclude or suggest that Bill Gates must have been forewarned, or even planned the pandemic himself! For example:

Thunder26 : It’s not a coincidence. It was all planned People who pulled the strings made a fortune out of this “pandemic”

Recommended : Is Bill Gates Planning To Kill Billions Using Turbo AIDS?!

 

Truth : Bill Gates Did Not Invest In BioNTech Because COVID Was Coming!

Let’s take a look at those claims, and find out what the facts really are…

Fact #1 : Investment Was Made By Gates Foundation

Let me start by pointing out that Bill Gates did not invest $55 million in BioNTech. It was the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF). You know, the world’s second largest charitable foundation?

While Bill Gates may be its most public face, the BMGF is governed by a board of trustees, with a CEO and five independent experts, and advised by a Scientific Advisory Committee.

Fact #2 : Agreement Was Signed In August 2019

Both BioNTech and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation announced the investment (here and here) on 4 September 2019. However, the investment agreement between the two parties was signed 5 days earlier, on 30 August 2019, as filed with the SEC.

This may seem like a small point, but a mistake here, a mistake there, and you end up with complete bollocks.

I should also point out that such large investments would have taken weeks, if not months, for both parties to negotiate, and their lawyers and boards to vet and approve.

Fact #3 : Investment Was Limited To HIV + TB Vaccines

The BioNTech press release made it clear that the BMGF investment was a partnership to “develop preclinical vaccine and immunotherapy candidates” for HIV and tuberculosis.

This was not mere PR. There was actually a legal agreement between the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and BioNTech SE, restricting what the funds can be used for.

This agreement on the “Strategic Relationship between the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and BioNTech SE“, which was also filed with the SEC on 30 August 2019, clearly stated that BioNTech will complete work packages on the Initial HIV SOW (Scope of Work) and the Initial TB Project SOW.

It also stated that “Additional Projects will not be funded by the Foundation Investment except in the limited circumstances following a determination that it is futile to continue with a workplan as set forth in the TB Project Statement of Work or HIV Project Statement of Work.

In other words – the $55 million BMGF investment was limited to the development of HIV and TV vaccines and immunotherapies.

Recommended : Is Bill Gates Facing Life Behind Bars For Child Rape?!

Fact #4 : $55 Million Is Chump Change For BMGF

As the world’s second-largest charitable foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation hold some $69 billion worth of assets. On top of that, it has given away some 7 billion dollars to fight disease and poverty.

In short – a $55 million investment is chump change. If Bill Gates was forewarned about COVID-19, and somehow knew that BioNTech’s mRNA vaccine technology would be a winner in the upcoming pandemic, he would have invested BILLIONS, not just a paltry $55 million.

Imagine if Bill Gates invested $10 billion into BioNTech, instead of just $55 million. The BMGF would be $100 billion richer, not just 0.55 billion richer. Ah, what a lousy businessman!

Fact #5 : BMGF To Grant Additional $45 Million

The BioNTech press release pointed that the total funding could reach $100 million, but oddly enough – the viral post failed to point that out. Why?

Possibly, that’s because the investment agreement stated that if BioNTech achieved its HIV and tuberculosis project milestones, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation would provide additional grants of up to $45 million!

Now, if the BMGF only invested in BioNTech to make money, why would it provide $45 million in grants when it can simply purchase $110 million of equity at one go?

Imagine if Bill Gates invested $110 million into BioNTech instead of just $55 million, he would have earned $1.1 billion, instead of “just $550 million” as claimed by the viral post. Ah, you silly, silly man…

Recommended : Was Bill Gates Destroyed In ABC News Interview?!

Fact #6 : China Only Revealed COVID-19 In December 2019

Finally, the viral post claimed that we first heard about the novel coronavirus that would be known as SARS-CoV-2 in November 2019. That’s not true.

While later reports suggested that SARS-CoV-2 was circulating in Wuhan in October and November, the public was only made aware of the new coronavirus on the very last day of 2019.

On 30 December 2019, the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission sent a hard-copy of guidelines on fighting “a possible outbreak of infectious pneumonia” to its affiliate institutions. It was only on 31 December that the Commission publicly announced the pneumonia outbreak in Wuhan, which was picked up by the WHO office in China and international news media.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | ScienceTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Can Foreign DNA In mRNA Vaccines Change Our DNA?!

Can foreign DNA enter our cells through mRNA vaccines, and change our DNA and humanity forever?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Foreign DNA In mRNA Vaccines Can Change Our DNA!

People are sharing a video clip of Tucker Carlson interviewing Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, which claims or suggestions that foreign DNA can enter our cells through the mRNA vaccines and change our DNA and humanity forever!

Tucker Carlson : Could foreign DNA enter your cells through the mRNA COVID vax and change your DNA — and humanity itself — forever? Sounds nutty. It’s not. “Absolutely that could happen,” says Dr. Joseph Ladapo, the surgeon general of Florida. A shocking conversation.

Recommended : Can Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Change Our DNA?!

 

Truth : Foreign DNA In mRNA Vaccines Cannot Change Our DNA!

Let’s take a closer look at these claims about foreign DNA fragments in mRNA vaccines changing our DNA, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : Ladapo Claims Were Refuted By FDA Earlier

First, I should point out that Joseph Ladapo’s claims about foreign DNA fragments changing our DNA have already been refuted by the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) on 14 December 2023 (PDF).

Here’s a quick summary of what Dr. Peter Marks, Director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research replied to Ladapo’s claims:

  1. After a “thorough assessment of the entire manufacturing process, FDA is confident in the quality, safety, and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines“.
  2. No safety concerns regarding “residual DNA” were identified after over a billion doses of mRNA vaccines being administered.
  3. Animal studies using the mRNA vaccine with residual DNA demonstrated “no evidence for genotoxicity from the vaccine“.
  4. Pharmacovigilance data from hundreds of millions of vaccinated people also showed “no evidence” of genotoxicity from the mRNA vaccines.
  5. Reproductive toxicology studies to test the possible integration of residual DNA fragments in reproductive cells found “no concerns” with the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

As you can see, the FDA had already addressed Ladapo’s claims about testing the mRNA vaccines for DNA integration.

The FDA reply (PDF) was also succinct – just two pages long, and did not divert to irrelevant topics like “what time the sun sets in China” or “their third cousin’s Bar Mitzvah” as Ladapo claims in the Tucker Carlson interview.

So the question you should be asking is – why is Joseph Ladapo still flogging these claims, when the FDA has clearly stated that tests were conducted on mRNA vaccines, and have shown them to be safe and effective, and that they do not pose any DNA integration (genotoxicity) risks?

Recommended : Are mRNA Vaccines Contaminated With SV40 DNA?!

Fact #2 : FDA Guidelines Were For DNA Vaccines

In the Tucker Carlson interview, Ladapo claimed or suggested that the FDA did not mention its own guidance on DNA contamination. That’s not true.

The FDA letter to Ladapo (PDF) actually addressed his claims, pointing out that the guidance (PDF) only applied to DNA vaccines, not mRNA vaccines. Even the name clearly states that the guidance was meant for DNA vaccines.

In your letter, you raise questions, citing to the 2007 Guidance for Industry: Considerations for Plasmid DNA Vaccines for Infectious Disease Indications. This guidance was developed for DNA vaccines themselves, not for DNA as a contaminant in other vaccines, and is not applicable to the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

DNA vaccines work by introducing a DNA sequence into the cell nucleus, so DNA contamination would be a real concern. In contrast, mRNA vaccines do not enter the cell nucleus, so DNA contamination isn’t a real concern.

It is unknown if Ladapo understands the difference between DNA and mRNA vaccines. But it’s clear that the FDA already informed him that the guidance he quoted was not relevant.

It’s like a bit like quoting the manual for a motorcycle as “evidence” that his diesel truck only needs two wheels, instead of four. So why does he still persist in mentioning the FDA guidance?

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

Fact #3 : Smaller Fragments Are Harder To Filter

Ladapo claims that there are billions to hundreds of billions of foreign DNA fragments in each dose of the mRNA vaccine. That sounds scary, doesn’t it? The truth is – it’s really a red herring.

The DNA fragments in mRNA vaccines are produced as a result of its manufacturing process using a DNA template. After the DNA template creates the mRNA vaccine, DNAse is used to break down the residual DNA into tiny fragments.

Focusing on the number of these DNA fragments is also wrong, as you want the DNAse enzyme to really do a good job and cut up the residual DNA into tiny pieces. Naturally, the more you cut DNA up into smaller fragments, you get more (but smaller) fragments. It is consequently harder to filter these smaller fragments out, but the smaller they are, the less likely they are biologically active.

Think of residual DNA as parts of the mRNA factory that was dismantled once the vaccine was manufactured. If you chop it up real good, you get nothing more than small pieces of scrap metal. Sure, the disposal team may have left a couple of bolts and screws lying on the floor, but can they be used to recreate the factory? No.

Fact #4 : mRNA Vaccines Meet DNA Fragment Limit

Instead of focusing on the “number” of DNA fragments, it makes much more sense to focus on the “total weight” of residual DNA, and the “size” of those fragments.

Currently, the WHO and US FDA guidelines recommend that residual DNA in vaccines and other biological products should not exceed 10 nanograms (ng) per purified dose, and the DNA fragments should be no greater than 200 bp in length.

Even that limit appears to be out of an abundance of caution, as studies have not shown any actual danger from residual DNA, as they are tiny fragments.

In its December 2023 reply (PDF), the FDA actually pointed out to Ladapo that the amount of residual DNA fragments was less than 1/1000 the amount of mRNA in each vaccine dose.

The specification for the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines for residual DNA following DNAse treatment results in the presence of DNA fragments at a quantity that is less than three orders of magnitude lower than the quantity of the RNA dose by weight.

This has been determined (and continues to be determined during production of lots) with a validated quantitative PCR assay.

Recommended : New Study Proves Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer?!

Fact #5 : DNA Fragments Can’t Integrate With Our Genome

The presence of residual DNA fragments does not mean that they will integrate into our genome. For one thing – these are DNA fragments that have been broken down by the DNase enzyme.

These DNA fragments can only enter the cell nucleus if there is an enzyme called integrase, is not present in any COVID-19 vaccine. So they simply cannot enter the cell nucleus, never mind integrate with DNA.

On top of that, the mRNA vaccines are injected into the muscle, whose cells are “post-mitotic”, which means they are no longer able to change.

Fact #6 : Viruses Integrate With Cell DNA

Viruses like SARS-CoV-2 and HIV-1 (diagram below) integrate their genes with the host cell DNA, to hijack the cell and use it to produce copies of itself.

You can see how a typical RNA virus would infect a host cell, convert its RNA into DNA which is moved into the cell nucleus using the integrase enzyme.

Recommended : Did New Study Show Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Autism?!

HIV-1 virus cell infection, credit : Günther Witzany

Once inside, the viral DNA integrates with the host cell DNA, which gets transcribed into instructions for the cell to produce copies of the virus.

This is the same way how the SARS-CoV-2 virus infects our cells, to produce copies of itself to infect even more cells.

If you are truly worried about anything modifying your cell’s DNA, you should try to avoid viral infections like COVID-19. Better still – vaccinate yourself, and get protected against COVID-19!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Do DNA Fragments In mRNA Vaccines Cause Cancer?!

Are DNA fragments in mRNA vaccines dangerous, and can they cause cancer?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : DNA Fragments In mRNA Vaccines Can Cause Cancer!

People are sharing video clips and articles about Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo calling for a halt to mRNA vaccines as they can possibly cause cancer.

Circulating on WhatsApp, with Fox 35 video clip attached : Florida Surgeon General calls for halt to COVID-19 vaccine, citing possible cancer risks

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

No Evidence DNA Fragments In mRNA Vaccines Cause Cancer!

Let’s take a closer look at these claims about DNA fragments in mRNA vaccines causing cancer, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : Claims Were Made By Joseph Ladapo

First, I should point out that these videos and articles are based on a 3 January 2024 bulletin sent by the Florida Department of Health, in which its Surgeon General Joseph A. Ladapo called for a halt in the use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines over concerns that they could cause cancer.

The Surgeon General outlined concerns regarding nucleic acid contaminants in the approved Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, particularly in the presence of lipid nanoparticle complexes, and Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter/enhancer DNA. Lipid nanoparticles are an efficient vehicle for delivery of the mRNA in the COVID-19 vaccines into human cells and may therefore be an equally efficient vehicle for delivering contaminant DNA into human cells. The presence of SV40 promoter/enhancer DNA may also pose a unique and heightened risk of DNA integration into human cells.

Fact #2 : SV40 Promoter Does Not Cause Cancer

Many people are attempting to link the SV40 promoter to the Simian Virus 40, which was suspected to potentially cause cancer in humans after it was found to have contaminated some polio vaccines manufactured from 1955 to 1963.

Decades later, there is still no conclusive evidence that the SV40 virus can cause cancers in humans. However, out of an abundance of caution, the SV40 virus is considered to potentially cause cancer in humans.

Even so, the SV40 promoter is just a DNA fragment from the SV40 virus, that is now used as a genetic tool. It is similar to how botulinum toxin is a treatment derived from the bacteria, Clostridium botulinum. The SV40 promoter itself cannot cause cancer, because it does not include the SV40 virus portion that can potentially cause cancer – the T-antigen.

It’s just the volume knob that drives high level expression of anything put under its control, which in this case is just an antibiotic resistance marker.

The fear about the SV40 sequences is total nonsense. The vaccine is not going to cause cancer. There is no cancer causing gene in the vaccine.

– Phillip Buckhaults, director of the Cancer Genetics Lab at the University of South Carolina

Recommended : Are mRNA Vaccines Contaminated With SV40 DNA?!

Fact #3 : DNA Fragments Not Limited To mRNA Vaccines

So many articles have been written about the residual DNA fragments in mRNA vaccines that one may think that it’s exclusive to the mRNA vaccine technology. That’s not true.

Residual DNA fragments are found in all vaccines and biological products manufactured in any kind of biological cell. The risk of residual DNA has also been investigated for about 60 years now.

To be clear – residual DNA isn’t new or exclusive to mRNA vaccine technology. It is a byproduct of using biological cells to produce biological products.

Fact #4 : DNA Fragments Shown To Be Harmless

In the beginning, some studies raised potential safety issues with residual DNA. So, the FDA set an upper limit of just 10 picograms of residual DNA per medicinal dose in 1985.

In 1986, a WHO study group looked into new cell substrates that are being used to produce biological products, and concluded that the risk is negligible when the amount of residual DNA is 100 picograms per dose.

Then 10 years later – the WHO Expert Committee on Biological Standardization (ECBS) increased the limit to 10 nanograms (ng) per purified dose, albeit not for microbial, diploid, or primary cell cultures.

In 1997, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) said that further data of DNA from continuous mammalian cell lines showed that it poses even less risk than previously thought.

Currently, the WHO and US FDA guidelines recommend that residual DNA in vaccines and other biological products should not exceed 10 nanograms (ng) per purified dose, and the DNA fragments should be no greater than 200 bp in length.

Even that limit appears to be out of an abundance of caution, as studies have not shown any actual danger from residual DNA, as they are tiny fragments.

Recommended : New Study Proves Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer?!

Fact #5 : DNA Fragments Can’t Integrate With Our Genome

The presence of residual DNA fragments does not mean that they will integrate into our genome. For one thing – these are DNA fragments that have been broken down by the DNase enzyme.

Think of them as parts of a factory which were used to build the mRNA vaccine, but dismantled once the vaccine has been manufactured. Sure, the disposal team may have left a couple of bolts and screws lying on the floor, but can they be used to recreate the factory? No.

In addition, these DNA fragments can only enter the cell nucleus if there is an enzyme called integrase, is not present in any COVID-19 vaccine. So they simply cannot enter the cell nucleus, never mind integrate with DNA.

On top of that, the mRNA vaccines are injected into the muscle, whose cells are “post-mitotic”, which means they are no longer able to change.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Protect yourself and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19 and other preventable diseases!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did mRNA Vaccine Creator Develop Bell’s Palsy?!

Did mRNA vaccine creator, Ozlem Tureci, just develop Bell’s palsy after getting vaccinated against COVID-19?! Find out what the facts really are!

Updated @ 2024-01-12 : Added more information on Bell’s palsy and Justin Bieber
Originally posted @ 2024-01-11

 

Claim : mRNA Vaccine Creator Has Bell’s Palsy!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch) and The Daily Sceptic (archive), claiming or suggesting that the co-creator of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine creator, Ozlem Tureci, is suffering from Bell’s palsy after getting vaccinated against COVID-19.

The People’s Voice even alleges in its article that there was a media blackout. Here’s an excerpt:

mRNA Vaccine Creator Has Developed Full-Blown Facial Paralysis – Media Blackout

Here is an excerpt from The Daily Sceptic. Please skip to the next section for the facts.

BioNTech-Pfizer Vaccine Creator Obviously Suffers From Bell’s Palsy – But No One Talks About It

Recommended : Were COVID-19 Vaccines Recalled After 40K Deaths?!

BioNTech founders – Uğur Şahin and Özlem Türeci

 

No Evidence mRNA Vaccine Creator Has Bell’s Palsy!

This appears to be yet another example of FAKE NEWS, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Bell’s Palsy Not Commonly Seen With COVID-19 Vaccines

Bell’s palsy is not commonly seen with COVID-19 vaccines. In fact, it is not even officially listed as a COVID-19 vaccine side effect.

Studies (example) have shown that the post-vaccination incidence of Bell’s palsy is about the same as that of the baseline incidence.

  • Baseline : 25 cases per 100,000 population per year
  • Post-vaccination : 25.3 cases per 100,000 population per year

When people point out that four people in the Pfizer clinical trial developed Bell’s palsy, they conveniently leave out the fact that with the large sample size, roughly four people were expected to develop Bell’s palsy even without vaccination. So the incidence of Bell’s palsy in the Pfizer clinical trial was within normal incidence.

Fact #2 : Ozlem Tureci Does Not Appear To Have Bell’s Palsy!

Frankly, it is a terrible idea to remotely diagnose any medical condition. But as far as I can see, Dr. Ozlem Tureci does not appear to have Bell’s palsy.

Bell’s palsy presents as the sudden muscle weakness or paralysis on one side of the face. If Ozlem has Bell’s palsy, she won’t just have a drooping eyelid. She will have facial paralysis on the left side of her face – the left side of her mouth would also droop with a loss of the nasolabial fold, and she would not be able to close her eyes.

If you watch the videos which show her with a drooping eyelid, you can see that she’s speaking normally, and the corner of her mouth isn’t drooping to the left. There is also a visible nasolabial fold on the left side. All indications that she does not have Bell’s palsy.

Instead, Ozlem Tureci just appears to have ptosis – the drooping of her left eyelid. This is common in older people.

Fact #3 : Ozlem Had Drooping Eyelid Before mRNA Vaccine Approval

Dr. Ozlem Tureci was seen sporting a ptosis before the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine for COVID-19 was ever approved for use in December 2020.

When The New York Times published its story on Dr. Özlem and her partner-husband, Dr. Uğur Şahin, on 10 November 2020, the marquee photo showed her with a pronounced ptosis – drooping of her left eyelid.

Yet, you can clearly see that her mouth was not drooping on the left side, and she still had a prominent nasolabial fold on the left side of her face.

Recommended : Did COVID-19 Vaccines Cause 17 Million Deaths?!

Fact #4 : Ozlem Had Drooping Eyelid As Early As 2016

Just in case you are wondering if she might have secretly tested the BioNTech mRNA vaccine on herself, she already had that ptosis more than 3 years before the COVID-19 pandemic started, and more than 4 years before the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine was approved.

On 29 August 2016, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper published a video on Dr. Özlem Türeci and Dr. Uğur Şahin developing customised cancer treatments.

In that video, you can clearly see that Dr. Ozlem already had a visible ptosis. But again, she was able to speak clearly, her mouth did not droop on the left side, and she had a visible nasolabial fold on the left.

Fact #5 : Bell’s Palsy Is Temporary

While the symptoms of Bell’s palsy are similar to that of a stroke, it isn’t a serious condition. Neither is it debilitating as some have suggested or claimed.

Bell’s palsy is also temporary – most people recover within 3 weeks, even without treatment. A small percentage will take 3-6 months to recover. Patients are generally treated with corticosteroids to speed recovery.

Even if Dr. Ozlem had Bell’s palsy at any point in time, it would have resolved by itself or with treatment, within a few months. As she appears to have a drooping left eyelid for at least 7.5 years now, her ptosis is most definitely not from Bell’s palsy.

Fact #6 : Justin Bieber Did Not Have Bell’s Palsy

Some people appear to be (intentionally?) conflating Ramsay Hunt Syndrome with Bell’s palsy. They have suggested or claimed that Justin Bieber was another victim of Bell’s palsy from COVID-19 vaccination. That’s simply not true.

Justin Bieber had Ramsay Hunt Syndrome, not Bell’s palsy. On top of that, he explained in June 2022 that his facial paralysis was caused by a viral infection.

I have this syndrome called Ramsay Hunt syndrome and it is from this virus that attacks the nerve in my ear and my facial nerves and has caused my face to have paralysis.

As you can see this eye is not blinking. I can’t smile on this side of my face; this nostril will not move. So there’s full paralysis on this side of my face.

Recommended : Did Justin Bieber Get Facial Paralysis From COVID Vaccine?!

Fact #7 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Publishing Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should NEVER share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

The Daily Sceptic is also known for publishing misinformation. You should never share anything they post, until you have verified them to be true and accurate.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | ScienceTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did mRNA Vaccines Trigger Severe Nerve Damage?!

Was the mRNA vaccines just shown to trigger severe nerve damage, including multiple sclerosis?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : mRNA Vaccines Trigger Severe Nerve Damage!

The Children’s Health Defense (CHD) activist group, which is chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., just posted an article suggesting that Brazilian researchers uncovered two cases of serious nerve damage in patients who received mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

This was what was posted on the CHD page on X (formerly Twitter):

Children’s Health Defense : 🚨 COVID vaccine triggers nerve damage, MS

Brazilian researchers have uncovered two cases of serious nerve damage in patients who received mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

Here is an excerpt from the CHD article (archive). Please feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

COVID vaccine triggers nerve damage, MS

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

No Evidence mRNA Vaccines Trigger Nerve Damage!

Let’s take a closer look at the various claims in the article, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : It Was A Case Presentation

Let me start by pointing out that the Brazilian paper in question was a case presentation submitted to Neuroimmunology Reports, called Multiple Sclerosis and Optic Neuritis triggered by COVID-19 mRNA by Moretti, Fabiani, et. al.

You can read it in full here.

Fact #2 : Paper Did Not Conclude mRNA Vaccines Cause Nerve Damage

If you read the conclusion, you will note that the authors never actually concluded that mRNA vaccines causes nerve damage. The authors only pointed out that such cases should be reported, and that “more studies are still needed”. Here is the relevant quote from the paper, with my emphasis underlined.

Diseases or symptoms triggered or linked to this new vaccine technology must be reported and studied, contributing to worldwide databases.

More studies are still needed on the association between neurological complications and the vaccine against COVID-19. Long-term monitoring is needed if the vaccine can cause or trigger neurological disorders.

Fact #3 : Paper Says Vaccine Benefits Outweigh The Risks

Anyone who reads the conclusion will also realise that the authors actually pointed out that the benefits of vaccinating against COVID-19 outweigh the risks. On top of that, they said that no neurological condition is an absolute contraindication for vaccinating against COVID-19.

Overall, the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of neurological complications, and, to date, no neurological condition is an absolute contraindication for vaccination against COVID-19.

Recommended : SAFECOVAC: Vaccine Myocarditis Risk Less Than 1 In Million!

Fact #4 : AstraZeneca Vaccine Is A Virus Vector Vaccine

With all due respect to the authors, the editors and the peer-reviewers, I should point out that the first case report does not involve any mRNA vaccine.

The first case involved the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, which is a virus vector vaccine. It is not an mRNA vaccine.

ChAdOx1 was not the vaccine’s name either. Rather, ChAdOx1 was the name of the modified chimpanzee adenovirus the Oxford-AstraZeneca used as its vector.

Fact #5 : First Patient Already Had Multiple Sclerosis

What may not be obvious, but was mentioned in the paper, was that the first patient – who received the AstraZeneca vaccine, already had multiple sclerosis (MS).

The authors pointed out that she already met the 2017 McDonald’s criteria for multiple sclerosis. That meant that this patient had prior MRI-detected lesions, or oligoclonal bans in the spinal fluid, or prior clinical symptoms of MS.

This is because a key requirement for the diagnosis of MS is Dissemination In Time (DIT) – there must be evidence of damage, at different times, and to different parts, of the central nervous system (source).

In fact, the authors pointed out that the COVID-19 vaccination only triggered the symptoms, but did not actually cause multiple sclerosis. Here’s the relevant quote, with my emphasis underlined.

The female patient met the McDonald’s (2017) criteria for multiple sclerosis, and the vaccine only triggered the symptoms.

I should point out that multiple sclerosis patients often suffer such relapses of symptoms that are triggered by anything from viral infections to stress. Certain vaccinations involving live viruses or bacteria can also trigger a relapse.

Since the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine (Vaxzevria) uses a modified chimpanzee virus, it is plausible that it may trigger symptoms in multiple sclerosis patients.

Recommended : mRNA Vaccines Created Spike Protein In Human Heart?!

Fact #6 : Multiple Sclerosis Can Cause Optic Neuritis

The second patient in the Brazilian case presentation developed optic neuritis – inflammation of the optic nerve. Optic neuritis is most commonly seen in multiple sclerosis patients.

Even though this 8 year-old boy is not known to have multiple sclerosis, the authors noted that a brain MRI showed three small acute hypertension lesions in his brain. Such brain lesions developing in multiple places over time (Dissemination in Time, DIT) are highly suggestive of multiple sclerosis, as per the McDonald criteria.

In other words – it is possible that this patient may also have multiple sclerosis that may not have been previously diagnosed, whose symptoms was triggered by the vaccine – just like in the first case.

Fact #7 : COVID-19 Infection Can Cause Optic Neuritis

I should also point out that past COVID-19 infections can cause optic neuritis. In fact, this January 2022 case study published in the Indian Journal of Ophthalmology detailed three patients who developed optic neuritis weeks or months after recovering from mild COVID-19 infections.

The authors noted that in those three patients, demyelinating lesions were identified in two cases, while the third case was found with serum anti-myelin antibodies.

  • Patient 1 suddenly lost vision in his left eye two weeks after recovering from mild COVID-19.
  • Patient 2 lost vision in his left eye six months after recovering from mild COVID-19.
  • Patient 3 lost vision in his left eye twice, two weeks after recovering from mild COVID-19, and then again four weeks later.

All three patients recovered their vision, but as you can see – COVID-19 infections can potentially cause optic neuritis long after recovery. It is plausible that the second patient in the Brazilian case presentation may have had a prior COVID-19 infection (before his vaccination).

That is why we cannot draw conclusions from any of these case reports / presentations. They all need to be investigated to determine their actual cause.

Recommended : COVID-19 Vaccines Estimated To Cause 17 Million Deaths?!

Fact #8 : Both Patients Recovered

It is also important to note that neither patients mentioned in this Brazilian case presentation died.

The first patient recovered partially after treatment with methylprednisolone, and was discharged with the treatment of dimethyl fumarate.

The second patient was also treated with methylprednisolone, and experienced a complete recovery, with no further treatment.

Methylprednisolone is often used in symptomatic attacks of multiple sclerosis. Dimethyl fumarate is also a treatment of multiple sclerosis.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Why Study Didn’t Prove Pfizer Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer!

Did a new Belgian study just prove that the Pfizer mRNA vaccine causes turbo cancer?! Take a look at the claim, and find out what the facts really are!

Updated @ 2023-11-30 : Updated info, and corrected some minor mistakes, thanks to Dr. David Gorski from RespectfulInsolence
Updated @ 2023-08-20 : Updated info, and corrected some minor mistakes.

Originally posted @ 2023-07-09

 

Claim : New Study Proves Pfizer Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer!

People are sharing a new Belgian study published in Frontiers in Oncology, which they claim proves that the Pfizer mRNA vaccine causes turbo cancer! Here is an example posted by the Died Suddenly account on X (formerly Twitter):

🚨TurboCancer: New Study proves Pfizer mRNA induced turbo cancer

In a new Belgian study by Sander Eens et al. they injected 14 mice with 2 Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.

Recommended : Died Suddenly : Anti-Vaccination Movie Lies Exposed!

 

Truth : Study Did Not Prove Pfizer Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer!

This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS created / promoted by anti-vaccination activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Frontiers Was Labelled As Predatory Publisher

First, I think it is important to note that Frontiers Media – the publisher of Frontiers in Oncology, was labelled by Predatory Reports as a predatory publisher in this damning report on March 2023.

This is important to know as predatory publishers are more interested in maximising profits over the quality of the papers they publish. Predatory publishers tend to minimise or eliminate reviews to publish a lot of articles, because they are paid for each article that is published.

Frontiers launched its first journal, Frontiers in Neuroscience, in 2008; since then, it has started more than 50 journals — together harboring more than 400 specialty sections — covering everything from physics and chemistry to computer science and social sciences.

In 2021, Frontiers published over 85,000 articles. An increase of 77% compared to 48,000 in 2020. To date, Frontiers has published more than 280,000 articles and author fees for most types of articles are $1900.

A 13-page manifesto published on 8 May by 31 Frontiers chief editors alleges that Frontiers not only allows authors to “pick their preferred associate editor“, Frontiers staff can even override editorial decisions!

Frontiers staff interfere with editorial decisions, for instance by moving manuscripts from one editor to another to accelerate review, inviting authors to write a commentary without the knowledge of editors, and sometimes “deliberately overriding” editorial decisions.

Recommended : Is Pfizer Vaccine Responsible For Leprosy Cases?!

Fact #2 : Norway Rates Frontiers As “Not Academic”

Since 2018, Frontiers Media has been rated as “level 0” in the Norwegian Scientific Index by the National Publication Committee of Norway, indicating that the publisher is “not academic“.

Fact #3 : It Was A Case Report, Not A Study

Now, the reputation of its publisher aside, let’s take a look at the actual Belgian study that people say proves that the Pfizer mRNA vaccine causes turbo cancer.

First, let’s start with the fact that it was NOT even a study. It was a “case report” published in Frontiers in Oncology on 1 May 2023.

This was even stated in its title, with my emphasis in bold : B-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma following intravenous BNT162b2 mRNA booster in a BALB/c mouse: A case report.

Fact #4 : There Was No Booster Vaccination

The case study confusingly states that the mice were given “booster vaccination”, but from what I can tell – only two doses of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine were given – at 6 weeks and 8 weeks into the experiment.

The Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine is a two-dose mRNA vaccine, taken 21 days apart. The second dose is part of its primary vaccine dose, and is not a booster dose. Only the third and fourth doses are considered “booster vaccinations”.

Recommended : Did CDC Say COVID Vaccines Cause AIDS + Cancer?!

Fact #5 : They Injected Vaccine At Much Higher Doses

To conduct their experiments, the Belgians purchased 28 BALB/c mice, and began their experiment at 12 weeks old of age, which would roughly correspond to a human teenager – 17 years of age.

They split the groups into two – half (n=14) receiving the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, and half (n=14) given normal saline injections (control group). However, it does not appear that the mice were given the appropriate dosage of the Pfizer vaccine.

Human adults and teenagers will receive 30 μg of the Pfizer vaccine in each dose. Given that teenagers have an average weight of 65 kg and a BALB/c mouse weighs about 27 grams, each mice should have received only 0.0125 μg – 1/2400th of the human dose.

Instead, the mice were injected with 6 μg of the Pfizer vaccine – equivalent to 14,400 μg in human dosage, or 480 vaccine doses in one shot.

At the end of this experiment, the mice received 12 μg of the Pfizer vaccine – equivalent to 28,800 μg in human dosage, or 960 vaccine doses in two injections.

Fact #6 : They Injected Vaccine At Large Intervals

Instead of adjusting the vaccine interval to match mice age, they gave the second dose two weeks later – corresponding to about 5.5 human years.

In other words, the mice were given two extremely massive Pfizer vaccine doses at approximately 17 years of human-age, and 22.5 years of human-age.

While the large interval may not matter as much as the massive doses used, it would likely have skewed the experiment results somewhat in human equivalency.

Recommended : Did US FDA Just Ban Pfizer + Moderna Vaccines?!

Fact #6 : They Injected Pfizer Vaccine Wrongly

The Pfizer COMIRNATY vaccine is meant to be injected intramuscularly (IM – into the muscle) – commonly into the deltoid muscle of the upper arm. This site was chosen because muscle tissue have a ready pool of dendritic cells that can take up the antigens and spread them to the T and B cells in the lymph nodes.

However, in the Belgian experiment, the Pfizer vaccine was bizarrely injected intravenously (IV – into the vein) – into the tail vein of the mice. The authors admitted this as much in their discussion:

[T]he BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine was administered intravenously and not via the designed intramuscular route of delivery.

Their reasoning was that accidental intravenous injection have occurred, and the IM injection was said to “initiate an adaptive immune response in the lymph nodes”.

Accidents may well have occurred during human vaccinations, but their choice to inject the mice intravenously was no accident. It’s like crash testing a car with the test dummies not wearing a seatbelt because some drivers were reportedly not wearing them, and then saying – look at how terribly unsafe this car is!

And if they believe that the mRNA vaccine would end up in the blood via the lymph nodes even with IM injections, then why bother with the IV injection?

The Pfizer vaccine was never meant to be injected intravenously. Not only is it less effective (bypassing the lymph nodes), and more vulnerable to destruction and degradation, intravenous injection can cause more side effects including inflammation.

Recommended : Did FDA Admit Pfizer Vaccine Causes Blood Clots?!

Fact #7 : Lymphomas Occur Naturally In BALB/c Mice 

Finally, it is important to point out that BALB/c mice are popular in cancer research because they are more susceptible to carcinogenesis, and can spontaneously (naturally) develop lymphomas.

This study, for example, shows that most of the lymphomas that spontaneously developed in BALB/C mice are of the B-cell type – similar to what was seen in the Belgian experiment.

Considering that only one mice (out of 28) developed B-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma, that would fall within this “baseline” of spontaneously occurring B-cell lymphomas in BALB/c mice.

Hence, the case report does not prove, or even suggest, that the Pfizer mRNA vaccine causes or predisposes to B-cell lymphomas in mice, never mind humans.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

2023 COVID-19 Vaccines Have “A Lot Of Red Flags”?!

Should you listen to Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo who claimed that the 2023 COVID-19 vaccines have “a lot of red flags”?!

Find out what he said, and what the facts really are!

 

Claim : 2023 COVID-19 Vaccines Have “A Lot Of Red Flags”

Days before the FDA approved the updated 2023 COVID-19 vaccines that the CDC later recommended for everyone 6 years and older, Florida’s Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo went on a rant.

During a “Mandate Freedom” press conference with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis on September 7, 2023, Ladapo criticised the 2023 COVID-19 vaccines, claiming that there are “a lot of red flags”.

There’s a new vaccine that’s coming around the corner, a new mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, and there’s essentially no evidence for it.

There’s been no clinical trial done in human beings showing that it benefits people. There’s been no clinical trial showing that it is a safe product for people — and not only that, but then there are a lot of red flags.

So something that you don’t hear much about, but we’ll be talking more about is that there are multiple studies now from around the world – Brazil, I think Australia, United States, that show that over time, these vaccines, these mRNA COVID-19 products actually increase your chances of contracting COVID-19.

That’s not normal, and unfortunately, you are going to have people who are going to get on television and try to explain why you should be comfortable with that, you should be comfortable with taking a product that ultimately, like its predecessors, increases your chance of contracting something.

Recommended : Died Suddenly : Anti-Vaccination Movie Lies Exposed!

 

No Evidence 2023 COVID-19 Vaccines Have “A Lot Of Red Flags”

Let’s take a look at the claims Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo made at the “Mandate Freedom” press conference, and see what the facts really are…

Fact #1 : Joseph Ladapo Was Appointed By Ron DeSantis

First, I think it is important to note that most US states do not have a surgeon general. State surgeon generals are a recent “invention”, with only five states creating this position:

  • Pennsylvania : 1996
  • Michigan : 2003
  • Arkansas and Florida : 2007
  • California : 2019

Even so, Michigan has not filled its Surgeon General post since 2010. All other US states and territories do not their own state surgeon generals, and rely on the US Surgeon General, who is currently Vivek Murthy.

Joseph Abiodun Ladapo was appointed to the post of Florida Surgeon General by Florida governor Ron DeSantis on September 21, 2021, following his op-eds promoting unproven COVID-19 treatments like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, questioning the safety of vaccines, and opposing lockdowns and mask mandates.

At that time, he claimed that these opinions were based on his “experience in treating COVID-19 patients at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). However, UCLA staff roster do not show him treating any COVID-19 patients. Several of his colleagues also stated that Ladapo had never treated any COVID-19 patient.

Fact #2 : Ladapo’s Advice Are Often Controversial

After he was appointed as Florida Surgeon General, Joseph Ladapo’s first move was to repeal quarantine requirements for schoolchildren exposed to COVID-19.

He also recommended that children in Florida should not be vaccinated against COVID-19, making Florida the first state to contradict COVID-19 vaccine guidelines by the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Ladapo also suggested that men aged 18 to 39 should not be vaccinated, claiming high cases of cardiac-related deaths for those who took the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines – a claim that was rejected by many medical professionals.

In a sign that his views were possibly disgraceful, the UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine removed Ladapo’s name and biography from its websites.

In January 2023, the Faculty Council of the University of Florida College of Medicine said that Ladapo’s recommendation was based on “careless and contentious research practice” and might have violated the university policies on research integrity.

On March 10, 2023, the CDC and the FDA publicly rebuked Joseph Ladapo (PDF download) for claiming that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines cause widespread adverse events.

Recommended : New Study Proves Pfizer Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer?!

Fact #3 : Ladapo Comments Were Made Before Vaccine Approval

Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo made those comments on 7 September – four days before the US FDA approved the updated 2023 vaccines, and five days before the CDC recommended their use in people 6 months and older.

So how did Ladapo know that these updated 2023 COVID-19 vaccines have “a lot of red flags” days before the FDA and the CDC announced their findings?

Fact #4 : Ladapo Did Not Offer Any Evidence

Even more troubling – Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo did not offer any evidence to back up his claim that the updated 2023 COVID-19 vaccines have “a lot of red flags”.

What exactly are those red flags? He didn’t say.

Fact #5 : Ladapo Asked People To “Feel” Instead

Instead of providing evidence that the updated 2023 COVID-19 vaccines are dangerous, Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo asked people to “feel” instead.

Listen inside to what makes sense, what feels right, you know, what feels like truth. What has that feeling, and that resonance of truth. That clarity of truth, like we all know it when we feel it inside.

Ladapo also explained that some people are more able to “feel” the truth, because they are more advanced in their “spiritual journeys”.

Some of us know it more readily than others, and it’s because we are all in different points in our spiritual journeys”. 

To be clear – that’s not what they teach in medical school. Doctors are not taught to “feel” what is right, or what is wrong, for their patients.

Doctors are trained to examine patients, and use a variety of investigative tools like x-ray, ECG, MRI, ultrasound, etc. to come to a diagnosis. Then they prescribe a treatment based on the research conducted by other doctors and scientists.

Whether they are religious (or spiritual) or not, should not be a factor in the diagnosis or treatment of any patient.

Recommended : 2023-2024 COVID-19 Vaccines : What You Need To Know!

Fact #6 : COVID-19 Vaccines Are Safe + Effective

The truth is – COVID-19 vaccines have been proven to be safe and effective. And we know this because not only have they passed large Phase 3 clinical trials, billions of doses have been administered worldwide in the past 2.5 years.

Thanks to the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines in preventing hospitalisation and death from the SARS-CoV-2 virus, hospitals are no longer filled with people gasping for breath. In fact, the world has successfully reopened, thanks to the COVID-19 vaccines.

COVID-19 vaccines do not make it easier for people to get infected. It only appears that way because many people are now vaccinated. If 90% of the world is vaccinated, then it is only natural that 90% of infected people have been vaccinated.

I should also point out that the COVID-19 vaccines were designed to prevent death and severe disease. They are not force fields that block you from being infected, so fully-vaccinated people will still get infected.

However, because the COVID-19 vaccines have trained your own immune system to fight against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, you are more likely to suffer a mild disease, or even remain asymptomatic.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

2023-2024 COVID-19 Vaccines : What You Need To Know!

The FDA just approved two new 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccines, which the CDC is now recommending for everyone 6 months and older!

Here is what you need to know about these new COVID-19 vaccines for 2023-2024!

 

FDA Approves Two 2023-2024 COVID-19 Vaccines!

On September 11, 2023, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved updated COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna for 2023-2024.

In tandem, the US FDA also removed authorisation for the previous Pfizer and Moderna Bivalent vaccine in the United States.

FDA Takes Action on Updated mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines to Better Protect Against Currently Circulating Variants

You may not notice but the FDA is not calling these vaccines a “booster dose”. Instead, both vaccines are considered as “updated vaccines” that will better target the currently circulating SARS-CoV-2 virus variants.

Both 2023-2024 updated vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna are based on the same mRNA vaccine technology as their original and bivalent vaccines. But the updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccines no longer targets the original, ancestral SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Instead, they both target the XBB.1.5 variant, which was dominant when these vaccines were developed. Even though the XBB.1.5 variant is no longer the dominant variant, the FDA has determined that it is similar enough to most prevailing variants to offer good cross-protection.

As before, these updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccines are designed to prevent death and severe disease, and not avoid mild disease or symptomatic infections.

The FDA is still reviewing a third updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccine from Novavax. The Novavax COVID-19 vaccine does not use mRNA, and is based on a synthetic spike protein with an adjuvant instead.

Recommended : New Study Proves Pfizer Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer?!

 

CDC Recommends 2023-2024 COVID-19 Vaccines!

On Tuesday, September 12, 2023, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) officially recommended that everyone 6 months and older get the updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccines that were just approved by the US FDA.

CDC Recommends Updated COVID-19 Vaccine for Fall/Winter Virus Season

CDC recommends everyone 6 months and older get an updated COVID-19 vaccine to protect against the potentially serious outcomes of COVID-19 illness this fall and winter. Updated COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna will be available later this week.

Vaccination remains the best protection against COVID-19-related hospitalization and death. Vaccination also reduces your chance of suffering the effects of Long COVID, which can develop during or following acute infection and last for an extended duration.  If you have not received a COVID-19 vaccine in the past 2 months, get an updated COVID-19 vaccine to protect yourself this fall and winter.

The virus that causes COVID-19 is always changing, and protection from COVID-19 vaccines declines over time. Receiving an updated COVID-19 vaccine can restore protection and provide enhanced protection against the variants currently responsible for most infections and hospitalizations in the United States.

Last season, those who received a 2022-2023 COVID-19 vaccine saw greater protection against illness and hospitalization than those who did not receive a 2022-2023 vaccine.  To date, hundreds of millions of people have safely received a COVID-19 vaccine under the most intense safety monitoring in U.S. history.

This recommendation came after the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) was presented with new data which showed that the highest rates of hospitalisation and deaths from COVID-19 were for the very old – adults over 75, and the very young – infants younger than 6 months.

Recommended : Did Bill Gates Develop mRNA Vaccine Patches For The Poor?!

 

CDC Recommendations For 2023-2024 COVID-19 Vaccines

CDC just released its recommendations for who should get the 2023-2024 updated COVID-19 vaccines:

Everyone 6 Years And Older

The CDC recommends that everyone 6 years and older should get one dose of the updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccine from Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna, regardless of whether they received any original COVID-19 vaccine in the past or not.

People 65 Years And Older

People who are 65 years and older may get one additional dose of the updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccine from Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna, four or more months after receiving the first dose.

Immunocompromised People

People who are moderately or severely-immunocompromised may get one additional dose of the updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccine from Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna, two or more months after receiving the first dose.

Unvaccinated Children 6 Months To 4 Years (Pfizer)

The CDC is recommending three doses of the updated Pfizer-BioNTech 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccines:

  • First dose of the 2023-2024 Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine
  • Second dose : 3-8 weeks after first dose
  • Third dose : at least 8 weeks after second dose

Vaccinated Children 6 Months To 4 Years (Pfizer)

The CDC is recommending that children who received the original Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccine should receive these updated doses:

  • 3 doses of the original vaccine : get one updated Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine dose
  • 2 doses of the original vaccine : get one updated Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine dose
  • 1 dose of the original vaccine : get two updated Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine doses
  • 2 doses of the original vaccine + bivalent booster : no need for updated vaccine

Unvaccinated 5 Year Old Children (Pfizer)

The CDC is recommending that unvaccinated 5 year-old children should receive one dose of the updated 2023-2024 Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

Vaccinated 5 Year Old Children (Pfizer)

The CDC is recommending that 5 year-old children who received the original Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccine should receive one dose of the updated vaccine:

  • 1 or more doses of the original vaccine : get one updated Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine dose

Unvaccinated Children 6 Months To 5 Years (Moderna)

The CDC is recommending two doses of the updated Moderna 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccines:

  • First dose of the 2023-2024 Moderna COVID-19 vaccine
  • Second dose : 4-8 weeks after first dose

Vaccinated Children 6 Months To 5 Years (Moderna)

The CDC is recommending that children who received the original Moderna COVID-19 vaccine should receive these updated doses:

  • 2 doses of the original vaccine : get one updated Moderna vaccine dose
  • 1 dose of the original vaccine : get two updated Moderna vaccine doses
  • 2 doses of the original vaccine + bivalent booster : no need for updated vaccine

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Business | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Bill Gates Demand mRNA Vaccine For Livestock?!

Did Bill Gates demand that Australia force its farmers to inject their livestock with the mRNA vaccine?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Bill Gates Demanded mRNA Vaccine Mandate For Livestock!

People are sharing a Twitter post by Jamie McIntyre – the founder of Australian National Review, which claims that Australia is forcing farmers to inject their livestock with the mRNA vaccine after Bill Gates demanded it.

BREAKING: Australia has announced plans for mass injections of mRNA vaccines into livestock.

I suggest farmers hold out as long as they can as beef etc that isn’t injected will become very valuable. The Government intends forcing it

Recommended : Were COVID-19 Vaccines Recalled After 40K Deaths?!

 

Truth : Bill Gates Did Not Demand mRNA Vaccine Mandate For Livestock!

This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS created and/or promoted by anti-vaccination activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Australia Has No mRNA Vaccine Plan For Livestock

The Australian government never announced any mRNA vaccination plan for livestock. There is also no mRNA vaccine mandate for livestock in Australia.

Jamie McIntyre certainly did not provide any evidence to back his claim that the Australian government announced a mass mRNA vaccination campaign for livestock.

Fact #2 : Livestock Are Not Being Given mRNA Vaccine

I should also point out that no mRNA vaccine has been developed for livestock anywhere in the world, never mind approved for mass vaccination.

Until such an mRNA vaccine is developed and tested, it cannot be approved, and there can be no mass vaccination of livestock.

Fact #3 : MLA Is Funding mRNA Vaccine Project

In May 2023, Meat & Livestock Australia – an independent company based in Sydney, announced that it was funding a project to produce and test mRNA vaccines to target a lumpy skin disease (LSD), our other exotic disease outbreaks.

This initiative does not have anything to do with Bill Gates. It is certainly not a requirement in Australia.

This project will develop a mRNA vaccine pipeline initially for LSD, but potentially for other emergency diseases. This will enable capacity for rapid mass production of a vaccine for LSD in the event of an outbreak.

No LSD vaccines are registered for use in Australia yet. While some killed vaccines exist overseas, the path to registration in Australia for traditionally-produced is longer than that of an mRNA vaccine.

Fact #4 : MLA mRNA Vaccine Has Not Been Approved

The MLA Program Manager for Animal Wellbeing, Michael Laurence, also pointed out that the LSD vaccine is currently undergoing tests until the end of the year. In other words – it has not yet been approved!

The LSD vaccine construct is now being tested for efficacy in animals. By the end of this year, we will know if this vaccine will work in ruminants

Recommended : Did four SIA pilots die suddenly from vaccine in May?!

Fact #5 : No Evidence Bill Gates Demanded mRNA Vaccine Mandate

Bill Gates visited Australia in January 2023, meeting with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to discuss climate change, energy, and global health issues.

However, Bill Gates was more interested in preparing for the next pandemic, and fighting AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, than promoting non-existent mRNA livestock vaccines.

Mr Gates praised the prime minister for his “great partnership” on international health issues including the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.

“As you say, the preparedness for the next pandemic is still a discussion that hasn’t been figured out,” he said. “Malaria in the long run, we want to do the same thing we’re doing with polio, which is eradicated regionally, and then eradicated all over the world.”

There is ZERO EVIDENCE that Bill Gates demanded any kind of mRNA vaccine mandate, whether for human beings or livestock.

Fact #6 : mRNA Vaccines Are Not Designed To Kill

The viral message suggests that the mRNA vaccines are designed to kill livestock, so farmers are forced to sell their land to “Globalist entities”.

That’s ridiculous, because any vaccine that proves to be deadly in any of its different trials would never be approved for use in people, or livestock.

Current mRNA vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, which are only meant for human use, have proven to be safe and effective for the vast majority of people who received them.

Fact #7 : No Evidence mRNA Vaccines Cause Infertility

Billions of mRNA vaccine doses have been administered to humans worldwide in the last 2.5 years, and they have never been shown to cause infertility.

Therefore, there is no reason to believe that mRNA vaccines for livestock would cause infertility, if they are ever developed.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Health | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Was Pfizer Just Fined $2.3 Billion For Vaccine Fraud?!

Was Pfizer just fined $2.3 billion for the COVID-19 vaccine fraud?!

Take a look at the viral video, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Pfizer Was Just Fined $2.3 Billion For Vaccine Fraud!

People are sharing a video clip on WhatsApp, TikTok, Twitter, and other social media platforms, claiming that Pfizer was just fined $2.3 billion for the COVID-19 vaccine fraud!

Pfizer Vaccine Manufacturer Has Agreed To Pay 2.3 Billion Dollars

Justice Department Announces Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement in Its History
Pfizer to Pay $2.3 Billion for Fraudulent Marketing

The video shows Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli saying:

Pfizer has agreed to pay $2.3 billion, the largest health care fraud settlement in the Department of Justice.

Within that $2.3 billion is a criminal fine of $1.195 billion which makes it the largest criminal fine in history.

Today’s landmark settlement is an example of the Department of Justice’s ongoing and intensive efforts to protect the American public and recover funds for the federal treasury and the public from those who seek to earn a profit from fraud.

It shows one of the many ways that the federal government, in partnership with our state and local allies, can help the American public at a time when budgets are tight, and healthcare costs are increasing.

Recommended : Why International COVID Summit III Criticised Vaccine!

 

Truth : Pfizer Was Not Fined $2.3 Billion For Vaccine Fraud!

This appears to be yet another example of FAKE NEWS circulating on WhatsApp and social media platforms like TikTok and Twitter, and here are the reasons why!

Fact #1 : Pfizer Fraud Settlement Occurred In 2009

First, let me just point out that Pfizer did indeed agree to pay $2.3 billion – the largest healthcare fraud settlement in the history of the US Department of Justice.

However, that did not happen recently. The historic fraud settlement (official announcement) happened on September 2, 2009 – more than 13.5 years ago! Needless to say – this occurred long before the COVID-19 vaccines were invented.

Thomas Perrelli, who appeared in the viral video, stepped down as associate attorney general in 2012 – more than 11 years ago.

Fact #2 : Pfizer Fraud Settlement Had Nothing To Do With Vaccines

The 2009 Pfizer fraud settlement not only had nothing to do with COVID-19 vaccines (which were invented 11 years later!), it also had nothing to do with any kind of vaccine!

In that case, Pfizer pleaded guilty to illegally promoting four drugs :

  • Bextra : an anti-inflammatory drug
  • Geodon : an anti-psychotic drug
  • Zyvox : an antibiotic, and
  • Lyrica : an anti-epileptic drug

Fact #3 : Pfizer Then Was Under Jeff Kindler

At the time of the 2009 fraud case, Pfizer was under the leadership of Jeff Kindler, who was elected as Chief Executive Officer on July 28, 2006, and also as Chairman later that year. Jeff Kindler retired in December 2010.

The current Pfizer CEO is Albert Bourla, who ascended to the post on January 1, 2019 – more than 9 years after the historic fraud case, and Jeff Kindler’s retirement. Regardless of what Pfizer may have done in 2009, the current CEO is two administrations past that.

Recommended : Was Pfizer CEO found guilty of vaccine misinformation?!

Fact #4 : Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Was Created By BioNTech

The COMIRNATY COVID-19 vaccine was not developed by Pfizer, but by the German biotechnology company, BioNTech.

As it is a small company, BioNTech partnered with Pfizer to carry out clinical trials, logistics and manufacturing of its mRNA COVID-19, then known by its development name, BNT162b2.

To be clear – BioNTech is not a Pfizer subsidiary, or beholden to Pfizer. It became a public-listed company on the NASDAQ on 10 October 2019 – just before the COVID-19 pandemic started.

Fact #5 : Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Has Been Proven Safe + Effective

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine underwent a large clinical trial, and was proven safe and effective before it received it received its Emergency Use Authorisation. Then, after months of post-marketing safety monitoring, the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine received its full FDA approval on August 23, 2021.

Several billion doses of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine have already been administered worldwide. In the United States alone, about 367 million doses of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine have been administer up to April 26, 2023.

In the past 2.5 years, health authorities worldwide have monitored the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine for safety issues, and identified rare side effects like anaphylaxis and myocarditis. But otherwise, the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine continues to be regarded as safe and effective.

Fact #6 : This Is Just Anti-Vaccine Fake News

Anti-vaccination proponents are not interested in your health, which is why they keep spreading misinformation about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines. Here are some other examples I recently fact checked:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | ScienceTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did US Intentionally Release COVID Virus In Wuhan?!

Did the US government intentionally release the COVID-19 virus in Wuhan, to trigger a global pandemic so that people will accept vaccines?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : US Intentionally Released COVID Virus In Wuhan!

People are sharing an article by The Standard newspaper in Hong Kong, in which David Martin claimed that the US government intentionally released the COVID-19 virus in Wuhan, to trigger a global pandemic so that people will accept vaccines!

The article is being shared not only by anti-vaccination activists and conspiracy theorists, but also pro-CCP netizens and the Chinese 50 Cent Army (wumao, 五毛) as “evidence” that the COVID-19 pandemic was caused by the United States, and not China.

Here is an excerpt from the article. It’s long, so feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

US ‘intentionally released Covid virus in Wuhan’ EU summit told

The Covid-19 coronavirus was “intentionally released” by the United States in Wuhan, China, with the target to trigger a global pandemic to raise public acceptance of vaccines, a US businessman specializing in patent auditing said.

David Martin, the founding chairman of M Cam asset management company, said at an International Covid Summit organized by the European Parliament in Brussels earlier this month that the US was responsible for the making of both coronaviruses causing the outbreaks of severe acute respiratory syndrome – or SARS – in 2003 and the Covid-19 pandemic in the past three years.

Recommended : Why International COVID Summit III Criticised Vaccine!

 

Truth : US Did Not Release COVID-19 Virus In Wuhan!

This appears to be yet another example of FAKE NEWS circulating on WhatsApp and social media platforms like TikTok and Twitter, and here are the reasons why!

Fact #1 : International COVID Summit III Was Not Organised By EU Parliament

The article wrongly states that the International COVID Summit III was organised by the European Parliament.

As I explained in my previous article, the International COVID Summit III was not an official EU Parliament event. It appears to be a private conference organised by COVID-19 conspiracy theorists and anti-vaccination activists.

Held in the Anna Lindh room of the European Parliament, it was not an official EU or European Parliament event, and only 5 MEPs attended as “co-hosting members” of the event.

In other words – the speakers at this event was only “testifying” to the few attendees in the room, and to the event’s livestream, not to the European Parliament.

You can read all about the ICS3 in my earlier article, Why International COVID Summit III Criticised Vaccine!

Fact #2 : This Was The First International COVID Summit

The article also wrongly called it the “third edition of the summit”. The first International COVID Summit, and International COVID Summit 2 do not appear to exist!

What actually existed were the Global COVID-19 Summit, and the 2nd Global COVID-19 Summit, but they are both completely unrelated to this International COVID Summit III. Those were official events involving heads of states and governments, as well as heads of international organisations, NGOs, and industries across the world.

So why would this International COVID Summit jump to its “third” iteration, when this was really the first time it was held? Could it be trying to mislead people into thinking that it was the third version of the Global COVID-19 Summit?!

Fact #3 : Coronavirus Was First Isolated In 1930s

David Martin said that the first coronavirus as a model of a pathogen was isolated in 1965. Well, I have no idea what he meant by “as a model of a pathogen”, but that’s wrong on several counts.

  • first coronavirus sample (IBV) was isolated in 1930s
  • second coronavirus sample (MHV) was isolated in 1947
  • third coronavirus sample (B814) was isolated in 1961
  • fourth coronavirus sample (229-E) was isolated in 1966
  • all four virus samples were determined to be from same group, and named “coronavirus” in 1967

You can read more about this in my earlier article – Did US + UK Create COVID-19 As Bioweapon?!

Fact #4 : Vaccines Work Even When Virus Mutates

All viruses can mutate when they replicate, just like how all animals evolve through reproduction. Just because a virus mutates does not mean that vaccines stop working.

Vaccines are training programs that teach our immune system how to identify the actual virus, and make its own antibodies against it. It’s like training your army by showing them how the enemy soldiers look like and behave, so they can train and prepare for war.

The vaccines do not stay in your body to fight the COVID-19 virus. They only teach your immune system how to do that, and they do that regardless of whether the virus has mutated or not.

As viruses evolve, they may get better at evading the antibodies that your immune system developed to defeat them. But that doesn’t mean they are immune. The antibodies may not be as effective, but they will still offer some protection, reducing the risk of severe disease and death.

This isn’t just theory. During the pandemic, the first vaccines only targeted the original SARS-CoV-2 virus. But it continued to offer robust protection against the Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants that came after.

Fact #5 : No Evidence US Released COVID-19 Virus In Wuhan

Claims that the US released the COVID-19 in Wuhan to create the pandemic has been circulating since 2020, but until today – there has been ZERO EVIDENCE of that.

Pro-CCP netizens and the Chinese 50 Cent Army (wumao, 五毛) accused US soldiers like Maatje Benassi of spreading the COVID-19 virus while participating in the 2019 Military World Games. They even spread a fake video (see below), claiming to show an American soldier spreading the COVID-19 virus in a subway in Wuhan.

However, all of those claims have long been proven to be completely false. More importantly, David Martin himself did not offer any actual evidence that the US released the COVID-19 virus, intentionally or otherwise, in Wuhan.

Recommended : Was COVID-19 Created In Fort Detrick Bio Lab?

Fact #6 : Most COVID-19 Vaccines Developed By Foreign Companies

The claim that the US government would create a pandemic to drive demand for vaccines is ludicrous. For one thing – big pharmaceutical companies are public-listed companies, and many are based outside of the United States.

More importantly – most COVID-19 vaccines were developed by foreign companies:

  • Only the Moderna Spikevax vaccine was developed in the United States
  • The Pfizer COMIRNATY vaccine was developed by German company, BioNTech
  • The AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine was developed by Oxford University, and AstraZeneca is a UK company.
  • The Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine was developed by Janssen Vaccines in the Netherlands.
  • The Sinovac, Sinopharm, CanSino COVID-19 vaccines were developed in China.

So the conspiracy theory that the United States created the COVID-19 pandemic for profit is absurd…

Fact #7 : Vaccines Are Cheaper Than Cures

I should also point out that prevention is always better and CHEAPER than the cure. Vaccines may seem expensive, and a way for Big Pharma to make billions of dollars. But vaccines are still better and CHEAPER than the cures.

Vaccines prevent you from developing severe COVID-19, thus negating your need to be hospitalised – which is expensive. Sure, Big Pharma now has drugs to treat COVID-19, like PAXLOVID, but they are much more expensive.

When it comes to dollars and common sense, vaccines are cheaper and better because they prevent hospitalisation. Big Pharma would make far more money selling you everything from expensive new drugs like PAXLOVID, or machines and drugs to keep you alive in the ICU!

Recommended : Do COVID-19 Vaccines DOUBLE Heart Attack Risk?!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | ScienceTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Is ICC launching Nuremberg 2 trials for COVID crimes?!

Is the International Criminal Court (ICC) preparing to launch the Nuremberg 2 trials for COVID-19 crimes against humanity?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : ICC Launching Nuremberg 2 Trials For COVID-19 Crimes!

People are sharing a NewsPunch article that claims that the International Criminal Court (ICC) preparing to launch the Nuremberg 2 trials for COVID-19 crimes against humanity!

Here is an excerpt from the very long article, so feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

VIP Elite Panic As Nuremberg 2.0 Trials for ‘Crimes Against Humanity’ Becomes Reality

Preparations are underway for crimes against humanity trials at the International Criminal Court in the Hague, according to an ICC insider who reveals that key figures from the globalist establishment are set to be sacrificed on the altar of public outrage for their crimes in the elite’s failed Covid plandemic.

Recommended : Died Suddenly : Anti-Vaccination Movie Lies Exposed!

 

Truth : ICC Is Not Launching Nuremberg 2 Trials For COVID Crimes!

This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS created and propagated by NewsPunch, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : NewsPunch Is A Fake News Website

Like Real Raw News, NewPunch is a FAKE NEWS website that capitalises on making shocking but fake stories to generate page views and money.

It was founded as Your News Wire in 2014, before being rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news spread on Facebook that year.

Their articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should NEVER share anything from NewsPunch. Here are some of their fake stories that I personally debunked earlier:

Fact #2 : No Evidence Of ICC Preparing To Launch Nuremberg 2 Trials

There is ZERO EVIDENCE that the International Criminal Court is preparing to launch any Nuremberg-like trials for COVID-19 crimes against humanity, whatever that means.

NewsPunch certainly offered no evidence to back up its claims that the ICC is preparing to launch Nuremberg 2 trials for COVID-19 crimes.

The official ICC website also has no reference or mention of COVID-related crimes.

Fact #3 : ICC Tweet Does Not Exist

A quick check for the ICC tweet that figured so prominently in the NewsPunch graphics, show that the tweet does not exist.

Not only did the International Criminal Court not tweet that, no one else on Twitter did so. The tweet was completely fabricated, as far as we can tell.

Fact #4 : ICC Tweet Appears To Be Fabricated

A closer examination of the ICC tweet shows many suspicious aspects. For example:

  • the official International Criminal Court account has a grey tick, not a blue tick.
  • the fake ICC post lacks a date stamp
  • real ICC posts often include a link to an official ICC statement

Based on those indications, it is more likely than not that the ICC tweet was fabricated.

Twitter started implementing a grey tick for government, official, or multilateral organisations, on 20 December 2022. That means this “fake tweet” was created before that time.

Fact #5 : ICC Has No Jurisdiction Over Non-Member Countries

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an intergovernmental organisation and tribunal based in The Hague, Netherlands, and the only permanent international court with the jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression.

However, the ICC only has jurisdiction in States (countries) that have signed and ratified the Rome Statute. Many major countries refuse to ratify the Rome Statute, and are therefore not under ICC jurisdiction.

The United States, Russia and Israel signed the Rome Statute, but have declared that they no longer intend to ratify it. China, India, Pakistan, Singapore, among other countries, completely refuse to sign the Rome Statute.

It would therefore be impossible for the ICC to prosecute citizens or residents of non-Member countries, which include many of those who conspiracy theorists claim would be charged in Nuremberg 2 trials, like Bill Gates, Dr. Anthony Fauci, George Soros, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, and Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel.

Fact #6 : “New Variant” Message Happened Before Vaccines Were Readily Available

The claim that UK Health Secretary Matt Hancock messaged that the British government “deployed the new variant” to intimidate people into getting the COVID-19 vaccine is nonsense.

Even if the leaked WhatsApp message is genuine, Matt Hancock sent it on 13 December 2020 – just 5 days after the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine was administered in the UK.

At that time, Matt Hancock wanted to reveal the new (at that time) Kent variant of COVID-19 to “scare” people into complying with the lockdown. It had nothing to do with COVID-19 vaccines, which was in very short supply at that time.

The next day, he announced the Kent variant of COVID-19, and four days later, the UK government scraped its plans to relax COVID-19 measures for Christmas.

Recommended : Did FAA Admit Pilot EKGs Not Normal After Vaccine?!

Fact #7 : Moderna Did Not Make COVID-19 Vaccine In 2019

The claim that Moderna made 100,000 doses of the COVID-19 vaccine in 2019 – before the pandemic happened, was an (intentional?) misunderstanding of what CEO Stephane Bancel said at Davos 2023.

At that time, Bancel said that Moderna made 100,000 vaccine doses for the whole of 2019. However, it was the entire year’s production of vaccines for cancer, the Zika virus, a flu vaccine, and vaccines against other respiratory viruses.

China only announced its novel coronavirus outbreak on 31 December 2019, and only released the first draft of its genome on 11 January 2020. So it would not be possible for Moderna to develop any COVID-19 vaccine in 2019, much less manufacture 100,000 doses.

Fact #8 : Dr Ugur Sahin Received COVID-19 Vaccine In 2021

The claim that one of the inventors of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine – Dr. Ugur Sahin, refused to receive his own mRNA vaccine against COVID-19 is utter nonsense that was debunked in 2021.

It was based on a 22 December 2020 interview by DW News that was edited to show Dr Ugur Sahin appear to admit that he did not take his own vaccine.

The truth is – the interview occurred before COVID-19 vaccines were rolled-out in Germany, and therefore, he would not be eligible to receive one.

Dr. Ugur Sahin was fully vaccinated by early 2021, and received his booster dose sometime in November 2021.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Was Pfizer CEO found guilty of vaccine misinformation?!

Was Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla just found guilty in the UK of misleading the public about the COVID-19 vaccine for children?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Pfizer CEO Found Guilty Of Vaccine Misinformation In UK!

These messages and a video have gone viral, claiming that Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla was just found guilty in the UK of misleading the public about the COVID-19 vaccine for children!

Pfizer found guilty of violating 3 sections of the British Pharmaceuticals Code of Practice The complainant alleged a breach of the Code as no information, whatsoever, was provided about reporting of side-effects, or indeed the side-effects themselves.

CEO of Pfizer Albert Bourla was found GUILTY in the UK of misleading the public about the Covid Vaccine for Children

Here is my rough transcript of what the woman said in the viral video :

As the news on our site is… that we can now talk about, we’ve been asked not to talk about it until now. We now can.

And so we took Pfizer to the regulator in the UK, um… about comments that he made on the BBC about the kids’ vaccine, and we won.

And so Pfizer CEO Dr. Bourla has been found guilty of misleading parents about the COVID vaccine for kids, and as you expect, we will be writing and talking more about that over the coming weeks

And yeah, it just reinforces our view that there are deep, deep issues plaguing kids in the UK, and you know, we will continue to fight the, um… regulatory capture and vested interest which we see as so detrimental to children’s health and welfare.

We really hope that you will stay with us through that journey, and yeah, stand by for more. Um, okay, have a great week, everyone. Thank you and bye bye.

Recommended : Died Suddenly : Anti-Vaccination Movie Lies Exposed!

 

Was Pfizer CEO Found Guilty Of Vaccine Misinformation In UK?!

Ultimately, the PMCPA found that Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla made one statement that breached the British pharmaceutical industry association’s code of conduct.

This may sound significant, but it is really much ado about nothing, because it did not prove that the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for children was deficient or dangerous in any way.

The PMCPA only ruled that Bourla made a single statement that was misleading, or not substantiated (at that time). Take a look for yourself…

Fact #1 : UK Regulatory Complaint Was Based On BBC Interview

First, let us establish some basic information and context about what’s going on.

This case is based on a December 2, 2021 BBC interview in which, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla made these statements.

  • Immunising that age group [children under the age of 11] in the UK and Europe would be a very good idea.
  • Covid in schools was thriving.
  • So, there was no doubt in my mind that the benefits completely were in favour of doing it.

You can read the full BBC article, and watch the 158 second-long video, here.

Fact #2 : UsForThem Filed The Complaint

A parent campaign group who call themselves UsForThem filed a complaint with the UK Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA), claiming that those comments were “disgracefully misleading“, as well as “egregiously false and misleading“.

The UsForThem group argued that the BBC interview of Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla breached several sections of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) code of conduct.

In addition, the group also alleged that Pfizer was guilty of a “breach of undertaking” after it was found guilty of “illegitimately promoting its Covid-19 vaccine” less than six months earlier.

Fact #3 : PMCPA Is A Self-Regulatory Body

It should also be noted that the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA) is not a government body, but an independent self-regulatory body established by the pharmaceutical industry in Britain.

The PMCPA serves to administer the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) Code of Practice for the Pharmaceutical Industry.

Recommended : MIT Professor Retsef Levi Vaccine Claims Examined!

Fact #4 : PMCPA Initially Ruled Some Breaches Of ABPI Code

The PMCPA panel initially agreed with the complainant, UsForThem, and ruled that Pfizer breached the ABPI Code in three of the five key claims:

Breach of Undertaking : The Panel ruled that there was “no breach of the Code”.

Immunising that age group … would be a very good idea : The Panel ruled that there was “a breach of the Code”

Covid in schools was thriving : The Panel ruled that there was “no breach of the Code”.

There was no doubt in my mind that the benefits completely were in favour of doing it : The Panel ruled that there were “breaches of the Code”.

The Panel also considered that Pfizer had failed to maintain high standards, and a breach of the Code was ruled.

Fact #5 : PMCPA Did Not Have Full Transcript Or Video

The PMCPA noted that it “did not have the full unedited transcript of the interview or the video” when it made its initial ruling.

While the Panel was “obliged” to make its ruling based on what Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla “actually stated rather than the edited published article and video”, it was only able to make its ruling “based on the limited BBC transcript”.

This is an important point to make, because the Panel noted that Pfizer CEO gave BBC a 45-minute interview, but only a small portion was posted on the BBC website. Pfizer was also not able to obtain the full video or its transcript from the BBC. Naturally, Pfizer appealed the Panel’s findings.

Recommended : Why Pfizer CEO Ignored Questions On Transmission!

Fact #6 : PMCPA Appeal Board Overturned Most Breaches

In its final ruling on 6 December 2022, the PMCPA Appeal Board overturned the Code breaches in the PMCPA Panel’s initial ruling (AUTH/3591/12/21).

Immunising that age group … would be a very good idea : The Appeal Board overturned the claim, and ruled that there was “no breach of the Code”

There was no doubt in my mind that the benefits completely were in favour of doing it : The Appeal Board ruled that there were “breaches of the Code”.

The Appeal Board also agreed that Pfizer breached the Code when its CEO stated that the benefits outweighed the risks when the UK regulatory authorities had not made any conclusions (at that time) to support that.

However, the Appeal Board overturned the claim that Pfizer failed to “encourage the rational use” of the vaccine, and ruled that there was “no breach of the Code”.

The Appeal Board also overturned the previous rulings of Code breaches by Pfizer in relation to high standards and Clause 2.

Fact #7 : PMCPA Did Not Penalise Pfizer

In the end, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla was only found to have breached the ABPI Code of Conduct for one specific statement he made – “So, there is no doubt in my mind that the benefits, completely, are in favour of doing it [vaccinating children against COVID-19]

The penalty for that statement was listed in the PMCPA report as “Undertaking received“. In other words – Pfizer undertook not to repeat the breaches it committed.

In each case where a breach of the Code is ruled, the company concerned must give an undertaking that the practice in question has ceased forthwith and that all possible steps have been taken to avoid a similar breach in the future. A number of other sanctions can also be applied.

Recommended : Does Pfizer CEO aim to cut world population by 50%?

Fact #8 : PMCPA Did Not Rule On Safety / Efficacy Of Pfizer Vaccine

To end, I think it is critical to note that, whether it rules for or against Pfizer, the PMCPA ruling had nothing to do with the safety or efficacy of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.

That’s because the PMCPA only adjudicates the code of conduct for the British pharmaceutical industry, not the individual company’s clinical trials or its products.

In the end, what matters most is whether the COVID-19 vaccine for children are safe and effective. Regardless of how the PMCPA ruled, the UK government approved and recommends the COVID-19 vaccines for children aged 5 to 11 years old.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

MIT Professor Retsef Levi Vaccine Claims Examined!

Take a look at the viral video by MIT professor Retsef Levi, who called for the immediate suspension of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, and find out what the facts really are!

 

MIT Professor Retsef Levi Calls For Suspension Of mRNA Vaccines!

A video by MIT professor Retsef Levi has gone viral, after he claimed that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were causing serious harm to young people, and called for their immediate suspension!

Here is my rough transcript of what Retsef Levi said in his viral video. It’s VERY long, so feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

Hi, my name if Retsef Levi, and since 2006, I’m a faculty member at MIT in Cambridge, Massachusetts. I have more than 30 years experience as a practitioner and an academic in using data analytics to assess and manage risk, particularly in the context of health systems, health policies, as well as the management of safety and quality of manufacturing of biologic drugs.

Recommended : Died Suddenly : Anti-Vaccination Movie Lies Exposed!

 

MIT Professor Retsef Levi Vaccine Claims Examined!

You do not have to be an MIT professor like Retsef Levi to go through his claims, and discover these facts for yourself. It’s really not difficult at all. Let me show you…

Fact #1 : Retsef Levi Is Professor of Management + Operations Management

Normally, I do not like to comment on anyone’s credentials, as the merits of their facts and arguments should stand on their own. However, Retsef Levi made a point of promoting his credentials, so I feel it is necessary to have a clearer picture of his credentials.

Retsef Levi is a professor of Management, as well as Operations Management at the MIT Sloan School of Management, which is a separate business school under the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

MIT Sloan focuses on MBA, Finance, Business Analytics, Management, etc. and is separate from the MIT School of Science, where the faculty teaches and researches the hard sciences from physics and biology to computational biology and statistics.

Management and Operations Management deal with business administration practices to create the highest level of efficiency within a business organisation, which are critical in managing large corporations like Pfizer and Moderna, but would have virtually nothing to do with the actual research and development (R&D) of their products.

Fact #2 : MIT Study Did Not Prove Pfizer Vaccine Raised Heart Problems!

The first study that Retsef Levi mentioned was the one he co-authored in April 2022, which I fact checked in May 2022. In my fact check article, I pointed out these problems:

  • No clinical research was conducted on any patient. The study only “analysed” data collected by a third party – the Israel National Emergency Medical Services.
  • The study relied on call data based on initial diagnosis by responding paramedics, not the final / actual diagnosis by doctors after the patients undergo all necessary clinical and laboratory investigations at the hospital.
  • The data did not include about 50% of cardiac arrest and acute coronary syndrome cases in Israel for that period of time.
  • The data was not tied to COVID-19 infection, or COVID-19 vaccination, or even pre-existing heart problems.
  • The authors themselves pointed out that they did not establish any causal relationship between COVID-19 vaccines and heart problems.
  • The authors also pointed out that the increase in cardiac arrests and acute coronary syndrome may be caused by “other underlying causal mechanisms”.

My fact check article goes much further, but suffice to say – that MIT study did not prove that the Pfizer vaccine increased the risk of heart problems like cardiac arrests in young adults.

Read more : Did MIT Study Prove Pfizer Vaccine Raised Heart Problems?!

Fact #3 : Adverse Events of Special Interest Are Not Vaccine Side Effects!

As supporting evidence, Professor Retsef Levi shared a September 2022 article called “Serious adverse events of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in randomized trials in adults“.

That article claimed that “secondary analysis of serious adverse events reported” in the Phase 3 trial of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines showed that they were associated with significantly higher risk of serious adverse events of special interest (AESI):

  • Pfizer : 36% higher risk of AESI
  • Moderna : 6% higher risk of AESI
  • Pfizer + Moderna combined : 16% higher risk of AESI

What I don’t understand about the article is why the authors performed their “analysis” of adverse events of special interest (AESI), when they are not side effects of the vaccines!

  • The AESI list is not specific to the Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines.
  • The AESI list includes “exposure to SARS-CoV-2”, and other viruses like Herpes, MERS, Varicella, as well as other “communicable disease”.
  • The AESI list includes manufacturing and lab test issues like “Manufacturing laboratory analytical testing issue, Manufacturing materials issue, Manufacturing production issue“.
  • The AESI list includes product supply issues like “Product availability issue, Product distribution issue, Product supply issue“.

That’s not all, but I think you catch the drift – the Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) list is not a list of vaccine side effects!

Read more : Why Adverse Events of Special Interest Are NOT Side Effects!

Fact #4 : Smallpox Vaccine Does Not Use mRNA Technology

Oddly enough, Retsef Levi referred to a 2015 US Military finding that the smallpox vaccine caused heart problems.

In this 2019 case study by the US military, the rate of myopericarditis was shown to increase by 50X after they switched from the older Dryvax smallpox vaccine, to the new ACAM2000 vaccine.

However, that new ACAM2000 smallpox vaccine does not use mRNA technology, but a single plaque-purified vaccinia virus derivative of Dryvax (NYCBH strain).

In other words – the smallpox vaccine uses a live but less dangerous virus called vaccinia, to help your body develop immunity against the smallpox virus.

Viral infections, even if they are mild, can lead to heart inflammation, so it would not be surprising if the smallpox vaccine (which uses an actual virus) can trigger heart inflammation in a small number of people.

Fact #5 : Implication Of Free Spike Protein In Vaccine Myocarditis Still Unknown

On 4 January 2023, a study published in the journal Circulation showed that 16 patients who developed myocarditis after mRNA vaccination had “markedly elevated levels of full-length spike protein” that were “unbound by antibodies”.

In contrast, no free spike proteins were detected in 45 control subjects who did not develop myocarditis after mRNA vaccination.

This is a very interesting finding, which suggests that free spike proteins (unbound by antibodies) may possibly be the cause of myocarditis in young adults who receive the mRNA vaccine. However, the implication isn’t clear because it is not known why there are free spike proteins in the first place.

The mRNA vaccines teach some of our cells to create spike proteins. Because they are expressed on the cell surface, those spike proteins do not float freely in the blood, but rather, trigger the immune system to develop antibodies that bind to them.

As the study noted, people who do not develop myocarditis after receive the mRNA vaccines do not show any free spike protein – precisely what was meant to happen.

So the implication of that finding of free spike protein is still unknown, and warrants additional research. It is, however, not evidence that the mRNA vaccines cause heart problems.

Recommended : Died Suddenly : Anti-Vaccination Movie Lies Exposed!

Fact #6 : Vaccine-Induced Myocarditis Can Be Confirmed

It is important to point out that vaccine-induced myocarditis can be clinically differentiated from classical myocarditis, as well as proven through histopathology.

Instead of relying on “statistical analysis” of partial data from emergency call centres, we should rely instead on proper medical diagnoses based on clinical and laboratory investigations.

That is how we can avoid prematurely claiming that people died from the COVID-19 vaccines, only for their autopsies to prove otherwise, like these cases:

Will these anti-vaccination activists apologise for lying to you? Nope! They will just move on to the next death / tragedy…

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Thailand Vow To Nullify Pfizer Vaccine Contracts?!

Did Thailand vow to be the first country to declare the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine contracts “null and void”?!

Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Thailand Vow To Declare Pfizer Vaccine Contracts Null + Void!

A video of Professor Sucharit Bhakdi has gone viral on Twitter, claiming that Thailand is preparing to declare the Pfizer vaccine contracts null and void!

Top Thai authorities including advisors to the King have been in discussions with Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi and are prepared to see to it that the Pfizer contracts are declared null and void!!

Thai Government Vows to be “First Country” to Declare Pfizer Contracts “Null” After Princess Drops of Heart Attack, Dr. Bhakdi Presents “Fraud”

Read more : Did Project Veritas Show Pfizer Mutating COVID-19?!

 

No Evidence Thailand Vowed To Nullify Pfizer Vaccine Contracts!

There is really NO EVIDENCE that Thailand has vowed to be the first country in the world to declare the Pfizer vaccine contracts as null and void!

Fact #1 : The Video Was Edited To Remove Context

Like the second viral video, this video clip appears to be edited to remove some context. I confirmed that by watching and comparing the video clip to the full interview of Sucharit Bhakdi by Pascal Najadi.

It looks like the person who edited the video wanted to remove references to the fact that Bhakdi was talking to Thai activists and not Thai officials.

Here are my rough transcripts from the first video clip, with the removed parts highlighted in bold.

Let me tell you the wonderful thing that happened when we decided to go back to Thailand for a holiday, which was badly needed. This was the beginning of January this year. There are Thai activists in Thailand with whom we have been connected over the past year.

They said, if you come to Thailand… uh, I’m still a Thai by the way… I’m Thai-German… we will connect you with the authorities and advisors to the highest authorities in Thailand, and this is what happened.

So I have the opportunity, the first opportunity in three years, to talk to the top advisors of a government in any country.

And it was very, very impressive, because I laid out to them that this whole COVID-19 agenda is a fake, and why it is a fake, and I was able to lay out for them the proof that the COVID vaccinations were based on fraud.

The person who edited the video, also appears to be trying to scrub out the part where Bhakdi was referring to safety pharmacological studies in 2021 and 2022.

The EMA – European Medical Agencies – was asked again and again and again to reveal whether BioNTech Pfizer had ever performed any safety pharmacological study in 2021 and 2022, and the answer is available to us and to you.

The official answer submitted on the 18th of October of 2022. 18th of October, which we have at our disposal, the EMA declared officially that safety pharmacological studies were never performed. Never. And they were never deemed necessary. So now we have it.

It also appears that the first video was scrubbed to remove the part where Bhakdi stated that it was not the mRNA that was the problem, but the lipid packaging that protected it.

The person who edited the video also removed the part where Bhakdi said that the Thais were Googling information on the Pfizer-BioNTech contract. This would have alerted any viewer that Bhakdi was talking about Thai activists, and not Thai officials who would not need to Google such information.

[/su_note]

And when I told the Thais this, you know guys, they jumped up, they jumped up in the roof. And so they said Thailand is going to join Switzerland. Thailand is going to join Switzerland and show the world how to go, because the contract to buy millions of doses of that damn vaccine that is deadly, known to be deadly.

Not because of the mRNA, but just because of the lipids that are packaging the mRNA, that is enough to kill people. Not even the spike protein is necessary. You just have to take the packaging, and that it in itself is deadly. And that it in itself will cause anyone, will force anyone to say that nothing that is packaged in this deadly package can be safe. If the package itself is deadly, then you don’t have to ask what is in the package.

And then they said alright, and they were Googling and said, the contract was signed in Thailand with Pfizer-BioNTech and in this case, it was based on fraud because there were no safety studies and therefore, and it is now known that, this package is not safe. It is immaterial what is in in the package. It is not safe, because of the packaging.

And so they said to me – we will see to it that Thailand is the first country in the world that is going to declare this contract null, and nullify the contract. Which means that Pfizer BioNTech is going to have to pay back those billions to Thailand, with which Thailand will recompensate those peoples [sic] that have lost their existence.

Read more : Is Pfizer In Trouble Over Thai Princess Vaccine Injury?!

Fact #2 : No Evidence Bhakdi Spoke To Thai Officials

As mentioned above, the viral video clip appears to have been edited to remove references to Thai activists, likely to convey the perception that Sucharit Bhakdi was speaking to Thai officials.

If you watch the full video or read the extended transcript above, Sucharit Bhakdi does not actually claim to have met any Thai official, never mind advisors to the royal family. He appears to have only met Thai activists who claimed that they can “connect” him with the authorities.

Fact #3 : No Evidence Thai Officials Plan To Nullify Pfizer Contracts

The full video, and the extended transcript above, shows that Sucharit Bhakdi appears to have spoken only with Thai activists, not Thai officials.

Therefore, there is no evidence Thailand is actually planning to nullify the Pfizer vaccine contracts. In fact, Bhakdi himself called for people to “start a movement” to “file a case against Pfizer-BioNTech“.

That would not be necessary if the Thai government is already planning to nullify the Pfizer vaccine contracts.

And if we are able in Thailand to start a movement to say, file a case against Pfizer-BioNTech that they pay for the damage they have done, let’s make it.

Read more : Did Thai Princess Bajrakitiyabha Collapse From Vaccine?!

Fact #4 : Use Of Pfizer Vaccine Minimal In Thailand

It is odd that Sucharit Bhakdi is so focused on the Pfizer vaccine when the Moderna vaccine uses a similar mRNA and lipid nanoparticle delivery technology.

In any case, the use of Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines in Thailand is minimal. This is partly because the mainstay of the Thai COVID-19 vaccination programme was the AstraZeneca vaccine, that was eventually manufactured by Siam Bioscience (owned by King Vajiralongkorn himself).

But due to supply issues, Thailand imported and used large amounts of the Sinovac CoronaVac vaccine, and eventually the Sinopharm BIBP vaccine.

mRNA vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna only make up 5.7% of the COVID-19 vaccines delivered to the Thai government.

Vaccine Brand Doses Ordered Doses Delivered
Sinovac 31.1 million 26.52 million
AstraZeneca 61 million 25.5 million
Sinopharm 15 million 15 million
Pfizer 30 million 3.5 million
Moderna 13 million 560,200

Fact #5 : Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Was Evaluated In 2020

I should also touch on the claim that the safety of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine was never tested.

Pfizer actually conducted their Phase 1/2 trial in 2020, testing the first participants on May 5, 2020, and posting the first date on August 20, 2020. That was followed up by the large Phase 3 trial, whose study was peer-reviewed and published in the New England Medical Journal in December 2020.

In other words, safety studies were carried out on the Pfizer vaccine in 2020, but not in 2021 or 2022 because it was the same vaccine.

It appears that the the first viral video was edited to removed the part about the EMA being asked whether Pfizer performed the safety tests in 2021 and 2022,  to convey the false perception that Pfizer never conducted safety tests at all.

The EMA – European Medical Agencies – was asked again and again and again to reveal whether BioNTech Pfizer had ever performed any safety pharmacological study in 2021 and 2022, and the answer is available to us and to you.

The official answer submitted on the 18th of October of 2022. 18th of October, which we have at our disposal, the EMA declared officially that safety pharmacological studies were never performed. Never. And they were never deemed necessary. So now we have it.