Richard Fleming – Event 2021 – Parts 1-7 (Notes)

IN COVID-19 News

Event 2021 Notes (Source) (01)

This is what I’m watching today (Wed 23rd June, 2021).
I’ll remove this message when I’ve finished all parts.
(Videos are still being slowly-uploaded

Part 1

You are all involved in the largest experimental study ever in the history of mankind; either in the experimental or control group. (02)

(03) (04)

This is a slice through tissue of a coronavirus, anyone telling you ‘they don’t exist’ needs to look at this. Anyone who tells you ‘we don’t have the genetic sequence’, we do. This is what it looks like, these are spike proteins. (05) And this is a cryo-electron micrograph. (06)

Click to Collapse

I think this is the video he played in the presentation.

I think he needs to really explain the isolation thing in further detail – most of my ‘truther-buddies’ would need more than this to convince them it’s been isolated. – Penny

(07) (08)

The unique thing about this virus is its spike protein. This is the spike protein. It looks like a tree. It is a molecule. The 3 unique regions above are not found in other CoronaViruses.

Spike protein has at least 3 unusual inserts not found together in related natural CVs:

1. HIV Pseudovirus glycoprotein 120
2. PRRA insert furin cleavage site
3. Prion-like domain at RBS (ACE2 receptor binding site)

Click to Collapse

Not in presentation, but this is what he is referring to:

See also My Pandemic Timeline for more references to the Gain of Function research USA-Wuhan

In 2006, the Chinese put together 4 viruses. HIV 1, Hepatitis C, and identified it as SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-2. (10) (11)

Click to Collapse

I believe this might be the document he’s referring to:

Not in presentation, but Dr Yan (Whistle-blower) has been sounding the alarm about the virus being deliberately created and intentionally released to the world to destroy economies & freedoms since the very beginning of the pandemic.

They used PCR-testing to prove that’s what they had.

They followed Kary Mullis (1944 – 2019) who got the patent for PCR-test, and what Dr Mullis said, is you stop PCR-testing at 20 cycles. and that’s what his patent said, because anything more causes you to artificially induce things that really aren’t real and at 20 cycles you will find anything that’s really there. Dr Mullis was the last person to take on Anthony Fauci. He died from pneumonia in a few months before the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in 2019 at age 74.

Click to Collapse

The entire ‘pandemic’ is centred around PCR-testing & Mullis definitely would’ve been vocal about both Fauci & how the PCR-tests were being used. – Penny.

Not in presentation, but this is Kary Mullis talking about the PCR Test.

Not in presentation, but this is Kary Mullis on Fauci.

Not in presentation but relevant. A study published by Oxford Academic on the correlation between 3,790 positive PCR tests and 1,941 SARS-CoV-2 isolates, found that at a cycle threshold (ct) of 25, the test was 70 percent reliable, a figure that dropped to 20 percent at 30 cycles, and just three percent at 35 cycles. That meant 97 percent were false positives, yet that was used “in most laboratories in the USA and Europe.” (12)

“Patients could not be contagious with CT >25 as the virus is not detected in culture above this value.
At CT 25, up to 70% of patients remain positive in culture. At CT 35, less than 3% of cultures are positive.
High CT = Low Viral Loads except in rare cases.

The lower the Ct value of a specific gene, the more the gene exists in the sample. However, the problem with a Ct-based diagnosis is that there is no absolute or constant Ct cutoff value, and Ct cutoff values are different for each diagnostic reagent even for the same gene.

For example, although there are differences according to diagnostic reagents, a sample is usually judged positive for COVID-19 based on a Ct value of 35. Although the Ct value in a rRT-PCR test is relatively accurate, error of 1–2 cycles are not uncommon in a Ct value depending on various factors, including the skill of the examiner.

Therefore, when there is ambiguity in the Ct value, such as 34–36, the result may be interpreted as false negative or false positive depending on the Ct cutoff value.

Furthermore, because the Ct value is inversely proportional to the amount of the target gene, there is also the disadvantage of a sample being interpreted as false negative in the early stages of COVID-19 infection without large amounts of virus multiplication or depending on the accuracy of the swab.

Interpreting the COVID-19 Test Results (by authors of the above paper) (13)

Another paper ‘Predicting Infectious Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 From Diagnostic Samples – Oxford Academic – Nov 2020′ (14) showed no positive viral cultures with a Ct > 24 or STT > 8 days. The odds of a positive culture were decreased by 32% for each unit increase in Ct.

Part 2

Federal monies that have invested into this research spans decades. (19)

Patent: Methods And Compositions For Chimeric Coronavirus Spike Proteins (20)

NIH put grant-money into this patent, so they have certain rights in the invention.

Click to Collapse

Patent: Methods And Compositions For Chimeric Coronavirus Spike Proteins (21)

COVID-19, SARS and Bats Coronaviruses Genomes Unexpected Exogenous RNA Sequences (22) (23)
S2 is the Unstable part of the spike protein – where all the variants are occurring. S1 is where the PRRA (furin cleavage site) insert is. (24)
Click to Collapse

PRRA is essential to infecting Human Cells.

A Multibasic Cleavage Site in the Spike Protein of SARS-CoV-2 Is Essential for Infection of Human Lung Cells (25) (26) (27)

NIH has patent rights for the insertion of the enzymes related to the furin cleavage site.

Click to Collapse

Insertions: We’ve got HIV gp 120 and PRRA, which produces a prion-like domain.

We’re supposed to do animal-research before we do people. Here’s what we know from animal studies:

In ‘humanized-mice’ (mice that we gave Ace-2 receptors to so we can work with them), 98% of them were dead after 2 weeks. When we looked at them, we saw this under the microscope (video does not pan to indicate where he’s pointing). This looks like a sponge, and it’s in the brain, that the general public calls “Mad Cow disease”. (34)

In Monkeys, in 5-6 week, a part of their brain was infected with spike proteins. And when we looked at their brains, we saw inflammatory cells and lewy bodies (Alzheimer’s & other neurological diseases). Animals didn’t have this before they were exposed. This is the result of the spike protein crossing the blood-brain barrier & getting to its target. (35)

Click to Expand

I didn’t really comprehend his explanation, so will add notes here from elsewhere that might help me understand.

Symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 vs COVID-19

Symptoms may appear 2-14 days after exposure to the virus. People with these symptoms may have COVID-19:

  • Fever or chills
  • Cough
  • Shortness of breath or difficulty breathing
  • Fatigue
  • Muscle or body aches
  • Headache
  • New loss of taste or smell
  • Sore throat
  • Congestion or runny nose
  • Nausea or vomiting
  • Diarrhea

How do you know when the infection becomes the disease “COVID-19”.

Emergency warning signs for COVID-19:

If someone is showing any of these signs, seek
emergency medical care immediately:

  • Trouble breathing
  • Persistent pain or pressure in the chest
  • New confusion
  • Inability to wake or stay awake
  • Pale, gray, or blue-coloured skin, lips, or nail beds, depending on skin tone

(37)

COVID-19 is an InflammoThrombotic disease that occurs in people who already have InflammoThrombotic diseases. Obesity, Heart Disease, Diabetes, High blood-pressure, Cancer, Vascular disease. These diseases already have blood clotting & inflammation associated with them. These pre-disposed people without treatment, will die.

The blood clots come from your legs and other places, this is a deep venous thrombosis, which is our term for a blood clot in the veins, deep in the body, usually in the calves or the thighs. It forms there, and when it loosens up, it’s a ‘moving blood-clot’.

Part 3

How is SARS-CoV-2 Transmitted?

Person-to-Person via respiratory or gastrointestinal passages, or by injecting it.

Patients of COVID-19 are not being treated because the doctors are told there are no treatments and that if you treat, there will be repercussions. (39)

Treatment needs to focus on:

  1. Virus attachment & Entry into the cell.
  2. Virus replication once inside the cell.
  3. Reducing Inflammation & Blood Clotting (ITR) associated with the T-Cell (Innate) response to the virus.
  4. Reducing Inflammation & Blood Clotting (ITR) associated with the B-cell (Delayed Humoral) response to the virus.
  5. As well as Medicines that improve airflow & reduce blood clotting.

Deaths are all the result of the federal government telling people there is no treatment, and not allowing doctors to practice medicine, and controlling the way in which that practice of medicine is being conducted.

You have to address the air-flow and the blood-clotting independently. (40)

Quantitatively Measured Treatments with 1800 infected people across 7 countries. Focusing on 10 different treatment options in 52 treatment combinations. (Cuba, India, Philippines, South Africa, Belgium, Germany, Brazil)

Successful treatment outcomes were defined using the quantitative measurements of FMTVDM with a reduction of > 25, or a level of < 150, Ferritin levels < 270 ng/ml for men and < 160 ng/ml for women, and an IL-6 level of < 5 pg/ml.

(1) 100% Effective [Treatment Regimen 4]
• Primaquine 200 mg by mouth on day 1.
• Clindamycin 150 mg by mouth every 6-hours for 7-days.
Hydroxychloroquine 200 mg by mouth every 8-hours for 10-days.
(3) 74.2% Effective [Treatment Regimen 1]
• Hydroxychloroquine 200 mg by mouth every 8-hours for 10-days.
• Azithromycin 500 mg by mouth on day 1, then 250 mg by mouth on days 2 through 5.
(2) 97.9% Effective [Treatment Regimen 3]
• Hydroxychloroquine 200 mg by mouth every 8-hours for 10-days.
• Clindamycin 150 mg by mouth every 6-hours for 7-days.
(4) 69.1% Effective [Treatment Regimen 2]
• Hydroxychloroquine 200 mg by mouth every 8-hours for 10-days.
• Doxycycline 100 mg by mouth every 12-hours for 10-days.
(42)

What If The People You Trust Are The People Causing The Problem?

  • The same people who helped fund and develop SARS-CoV-2 have also controlled how doctors, nurses, & other health care providers are treating patients.
  • These people – it turns out – are the same people who helped fund and develop the drug vaccines.

Part 4

Unlike the other Infectious Agents, Viruses do NOT have a Nucleus or Ribosomes. They can’t independently reproduce, or make their own energy (mitochondria/chloroplasts).

Viruses are essentially ‘genetic material’ wrapped up in a ball, that require other cells to do their work for them. So treating them with drugs that we would normally use for bacteria, fungi, yeast, or parasites doesn’t work. You have to target ‘what they do’. What they are good at, is infecting cells and using the cells they infect to do all they can’t; to make more of themselves.

The focus needs to be what you can do to prevent attachment, the replication, what can you do when the inflammation and blood-clotting affects the ability for the patient to get enough oxygen, the T-cell & B-cell response.

Different drugs target what the virus does.

For example, Hydroxychloroquine inhibits the viral RNA replication, inhibits toll-like receptor 7 (TLR7) to reduce inflammatory response, inhibits glycoprotein IIb/Illa thereby interfering with thrombus formation, inhibits viral attachment at ACE-2 receptor site, reduces the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, enhances entry of zinc through zinc ionophore, increases cytosol pH to reduce removal of viral envelope required for replication, increases cellular pH decreasing major histocompatibility complex (MHC) viral antigen presentation to B-cells thereby decreasing release of inflammatory cytokines, & enhances production of Type I Interferons.

We have all these drugs that have mechanisms of action that can target the virus, but the government says there’s no treatment available. If you think your doctor is not afraid of the government coming after them, you’re wrong. The premise is that ‘if the government comes after you, you must be the bad guy’. So we have government preventing doctors from using drugs, and we’re left with vaccines. (53)

Do the vaccines prevent you from infection or transmitting it?

// Plays video from Fauci (which I couldn’t find a link to, but it’s in the presentation)

95% chance you will not get symptomatic infection… until we prove that the vaccine prevents transmission… people who are vaccinated should wear a mask around those who might be vulnerable to infection.

~ Fauci

Vaccines work because they prime your body to be ready when you are infected. Something comes in, it’s an antigen; a vaccine – a protein that is foreign to your body, comes in, gets broken down in the cells, gets presented to the MHC-I, where the T-cells will recognize it, and they get activated and they look for other cells that are infected that also have this antigen presented.

They release chemicals, cause damage, cause inflammation, and cause blood-clotting. To “kill” the invading organism. Except in this case there’s no actual invading organism. You injected it into yourself.

The pieces that go out, whether that’s the whole virus or the vaccine, and in this case, the spike protein, come back into other cells, those cells will pick them up with MHC-II (3-5 days), a little bit later on (7-10 days), Beta cells recognize MHC-II, and make antibodies. So anything outside in the bloodstream, the antibodies will go and attack, and take them out of commission so they can’t attach to you and cause harm. That’s what vaccines do.

They cause you to make T-cell & B-cell responses, that you will form memory cells to. We do not want T-cell and antibodies floating around your bloodstream forever.

Nothing you have seen in the emergency-use authorization documents for these experimental vaccines, show any of this data, which ought to be the data that the FDA would want to show that it’s working. It’s a vaccine that should produce T-cell and B-cell responses.

How do scientists actually know if a drug or biological (vaccine) agent works?

(56)

Before we begin testing people, we begin with pre-clinical testing.

1.) When possible computer modelling and work on isolated cell cultures and tissue.

2.) Animal testing has been an obligatory step before testing on humans. There are a wide-variety of ‘rules’ when animal testing.

There are 3 fundamental principles followed to protect the well-being of the research animals:

  • Reduce the number of animals to a min.
  • Reduce or minimize the harm & injury to the animal
  • Replace animal experiments with nonanimal studies wherever possible.

Once you know enough from the animal studies to determine RISKS & BENEFITS, THEN human research trials are considered.

Part 5

Phases of Clinical Trials (57)

Phase one: Is it Safe?
Phase two: Is it Effective?
Phase three: Is it Better?
(Typically 10 years)

  • Phase I – Determine Safety.
  • Phase II (aka Exploratory Trials) – If a Safe Dose is Found – Does the Drug Work?

  • Phase III – How does the drug compare with that already used for the problem? (This phase of research occurs when there is compelling evidence of efficacy & safety).

    Demonstrate the drug is Effective & Safe in a larger number of patients in the target group (the people the drug is intended to treat). Monitor side effects & risks. Test different doses and different ways of giving the drug. Can the drug be used at different stages of the disease being treated – early, late .…Provide sufficient information about the drug for marketing approval -> FDA.

  • Phase IV – Post Marketing Surveillance Studies (The long-term effect of the drug or treatment & other impact or use of the drug.)

Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines to Prevent COVID-19 (FDA)

The Emergency Use Authorization document. Issued in Oct 2020. Non-binding recommendation. Doesn’t place the FDA or the public under any obligation.

These are the Emergency Use Authorization requirements:

Click to Collapse

Based on this declaration and determination, FDA may issue an EUA after FDA has determined that the following statutory requirements are met (section 564 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360bbb-3)) (Ref. 3): (58)

  1. The chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) agent referred to in the March 27, 2020 EUA declaration by the Secretary of HHS (SARS-CoV-2) can cause a serious or life-threatening disease or condition.
  2. Based on the totality of scientific evidence available, including data from adequate and well-controlled trials, if available, it is reasonable to believe that the product may be effective to prevent, diagnose, or treat such serious or life-threatening disease or condition that can be caused by SARS-CoV-2.
  3. The known and potential benefits of the product, when used to diagnose, prevent, or treat the identified serious or life-threatening disease or condition, outweigh the known and potential risks of the product.
  4. There is no adequate, approved, and available alternative to the product for diagnosing, preventing, or treating the disease or condition.

These are critical. If any of these 4 get knocked-out, EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) dies. The problem is, there ARE adequate treatments.

By “definition”, the EUA doesn’t exist. The PCR-Tests – Gone. The Emergency-Vaccines – Gone.

If we don’t learn from history, we are destined to repeat it.

Plays an old (1979) segment from CBS ’60 Minutes’ on the swine flu (also known as H1N1) & the vaccine that was developed to stop the pandemic.

Video Transcript

MIKE WALLACE: The flu season is upon us. Which type will we worry about this year, and what kind of shots will we be told to take? Remember the swine flu scare of 1976? That was the year the U.S. government told us all that swine flu could turn out to be a killer that could spread across the nation, and Washington decided that every man, woman and child in the nation should get a shot to prevent a nation-wide outbreak, a pandemic.

Well 46 million of us obediently took the shot, and now 4,000 Americans are claiming damages from Uncle Sam amounting to three and a half billion dollars because of what happened when they took that shot. By far the greatest number of the claims – two thirds of them are for neurological damage, or even death, allegedly triggered by the flu shot.

We pick up the story back in 1976, when the threat posed by the swine flu virus seemed very real indeed.

PRESIDENT GERALD FORD; This virus was the cause of a pandemic in 1918 and 1919 that resulted in over half a million deaths in the United States, as well as 20 million deaths around the world.

WALLACE: Thus the U.S. government’s publicity machine was cranked into action to urge all America to protect itself against the swine flu menace. (Excerpt from TV commercial urging everyone to get a swine flu shot.) One of those who did roll up her sleeve was Judy Roberts. She was perfectly healthy, an active woman, when, in November of 1976, she took her shot. Two weeks later, she says, she began to feel a numbness starting up her legs.

JUDY ROBERTS: And I joked about it at that time. I said I’ll be numb to the knees by Friday if this keeps up. By the following week, I was totally paralyzed.

WALLACE: So completely paralyzed, in fact, that they had to operate on her to enable her to breathe. And for six months, Judy Roberts was a quadriplegic. The diagnosis: A neurological disorder called “Guillain-Barre Syndrome” – GBS for short. These neurological diseases are little understood. They affect people in different ways.

As you can see in these home movies taken by a friend, Judy Roberts’ paralysis confined her mostly to a wheelchair for over a year. But this disease can even kill. Indeed, there are 300 claims now pending from the families of GBS victims who died, allegedly as a result of the swine flu shot. In other GBS victims, the crippling effects diminish and all but disappear. But for Judy Roberts, progress back to good health has been painful and partial.

Now, I notice that your smile, Judy, is a little bit constricted.

ROBERTS: Yes, it is.

WALLACE: Is it different from what it used to be?

ROBERTS: Very different, I have a – a greatly decreased mobility in my lips. And I can’t drink through a straw on the right-band side. I can’t blow out birthday candles. I don’t whistle any more, for which my husband is grateful.

WALLACE: It may be a little difficult for you to answer this question, but have you recovered as much as you are going to recover?

ROBERTS: Yes. This – this is it.

WALLACE: So you will now have a legacy of braces on your legs for the rest of your life?

ROBERTS: Yes. The weakness in my hands will stay and the leg braces will stay.

WALLACE: So Judy Roberts and her husband have filed a claim against the U.S. government. They’re asking $12 million, though they don’t expect to get nearly that much. Judy, why did you take the flu shot?

ROBERTS: I’d never taken any other flu shots, but I felt like this was going to be a major epidemic, and the only way to prevent a major epidemic of a – a really deadly variety of flu was for every body to be immunized.

WALLACE: Where did this so called “deadly variety of flu”, where did it first hit back in 1976? It began right here at Fort Dix in New Jersey in January of that year, when a number of recruits began to complain of respiratory ailments, something like the common cold. An Army doctor here sent samples of their throat cultures to the New Jersey Public Health Lab to find our just what kind of bug was going around here. One of those samples was from a Private David Lewis, who had left his sick bed to go on a forced march. Private Lewis had collapsed on that march, and his sergeant had revived him by mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. But the sergeant showed no signs of illness. A few days later, Private Lewis died.

ROBERTS: If this disease is so potentially fatal that it’s going to kill a young, healthy man, a middle-aged schoolteacher doesn’t have a prayer.

WALLACE: The New Jersey lab identified most of those solders’ throat cultures as the normal kind of flu virus going around that year, but they could not make out what kind of virus was in the culture from the dead soldier, and from four others who were sick. So they sent those cultures to the Federal Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia, for further study. A few days later they got the verdict: swine flu. But that much-publicized outbreak of swine flu at Fort Dix involved only Private Lewis, who died, and those four other soldiers, who recovered completely without the swine flu shot.

ROBERTS: If I had known at that time that the boy had been in a sick bed, got up, went out on a forced march and then collapsed and died, I would never have taken the shot.

DR DAVID SENCER: The rationale for our recommendation was not on the basis of the death of a – a single individual, but it was on the basis that when we do see a change in the characteristics of the influenza virus, it is a massive public-health problem in the country.

WALLACE: Dr David Sencer, then head of the CDS – the Center of Disease Control in Atlanta – is now in private industry. He devised the swine flu program and he pushed it.

WALLACE: You began to give flu shots to the American people in October of ’76?

DR SENCER: October 1st.

WALLACE: By that time, how many cases of swine flu around the world had been reported?

DR SENCER: There had been several reported, but none confirmed. There had been cases in Australia that were reported by the press, by the news media. There were cases in –

WALLACE: None confirmed? Did you ever uncover any other outbreaks of swine flu anywhere in the world?

DR SENCER: No

WALLACE: Now, nearly everyone was to receive a shot in a public health facility where a doctor might not be present, therefore it was up to the CDC to come up with some kind of official consent form giving the public all the information it needed about the swine flu shot. This form stated that the swine flu vaccine had been tested. What it didn’t say was that after those tests were completed, the scientists developed another vaccine and that it was the one given to most of the 46 million who took the shot. That vaccine was called “X-53a”. Was X-53a ever field tested?

DR SENCER: I-I can’t say. I would have to –

WALLACE: It wasn’t

DR SENCER: I don’t know

WALLACE: Well, I would think that you’re in charge of the program

DR SENCER: 1 would have to check the records. I haven’t looked at this in some time.

WALLACE: The information form the consent form was also supposed to warn people about any risk of serious complications following the shot. But did it?

ROBERTS: No, I had never heard of any reactions other than a sore arm, fever, this sort of thing.

WALLACE: Judy Roberts’ husband, Gene, also took the shot.

GENE ROBERTS: Yes, I looked at that document, I signed it. Nothing on there said I was going to have a heart attack, or I can get Guillain Barre, which I’d never heard of.

WALLACE: What if people from the government, from the Center for Disease Control, what if they had indeed, known about it, what would be your feeling?

JUDY ROBERTS: They should have told us.

WALLACE: Did anyone ever come to you and say, “You know something, fellows, there’s the possibility of neurological damage if you get into a mass immunization program?”

DR SENCER: No

WALLACE: No one ever did?

DR SENCER: No

WALLACE: Do you know Michael Hattwick?

DR SENCER: Yes, uh-hmm.

WALLACE: Dr Michael Hattwick directed the surveillance team for the swine flu program at the CDC. His job was to find out what possible complications could arise from taking the shot and to report his findings to those in charge. Did you know ahead of time, Dr Hattwick that there had been case reports of neurological disorders, neurological illness, apparently associated with the injection of influenza vaccine?

DR MICHAEL HATTWICK: Absolutely

WALLACE: You did?

DR HATIWICK: Yes

WALLACE: How did you know that?

DR Hattwick: By review of the literature.

WALLACE: So you told your superiors – the men in charge of the swine flu immunization program – about the possibility of neurological disorders?

DR RATTWICK: Absolutely

WALLACE: What would you say if I told you that your superiors say that you never told them about the possibility of neurological complications?

DR HAJTWICK: That’s nonsense. I can’t believe that they would say that they did not know that there were neurological illnesses associated with influenza vaccination. That simply is not true. We did know that.

DR SENCER: I have said that Dr Hattwick had never told me of his feelings on this subject.

WALLACE: Then he’s lying?

DR SENCER: I guess you would have to make that assumption.

WALLACE: Then why does this report from your own agency, dated July 1976, list neurological complications as a possibility?

DR SENCER: I think the consensus of the scientific community was that the evidence relating neurologic disorders to influenza immunization was such that they did not feel that this association was a real one.

WALLACE: You didn’t feel it was necessary to tell the American people that information

DR SENCER: I think that over the – the years we have tried to inform the American people as – as fully as possible.

WALLACE: As part of informing Americans about the swine flu threat, Dr Sencer’s CDC also helped create the advertising to get the public to take the shot. Let me read to your from one of your own agency’s memos planning the campaign to urge Americans to take the shot. “The swine flu vaccine has been taken by many important persons,” he wrote. “Example: President Ford, Henry Kissinger, Elton John, Muhammad Ah, Mary Tyler Moore, Rudolf Nureyev, Walter Cronkite, Ralph Nader, Edward Kennedy” -etcetera, etcetera, True?

DR SENCER: I’m not familiar with that particular piece of paper, but I do know that, at least of that group, President Ford did take the vaccination.

WALLACE: Did you talk to these people beforehand to find out if they planned to take the shot?

DR SENCER: I did not, no.

WALLACE: Did anybody?

DR SENC ER: I do not know.

WALLACE: Did you get permission to use their names in your campaign?

DR SENCER: I do not know.

WALLACE: Mary, did you take a swine flu shot?

MARY TYLER MOORE: No, I did not.

WALLACE: Did you give them permission to use your name saying that you had or were going to?

MOORE: Absolutely not. Never did.

WALLACE: Did you ask your own doctor about taking the swine flu shot?

MOORE: Yes, and at the time he thought it might be a good idea. But I resisted it, because I was leery of having the symptoms that sometimes go with that kind of inoculation.

WALLACE: So you didn’t?

MOORE: No, I didn’t.

WALLACE: Have you spoken to your doctor since?

MOORE: Yes.

WALLACE: And?

MOORE: He’s delighted that I didn’t take that shot.

WALLACE: You’re in charge. Somebody’s in charge.

DR SENCER: There are –

WALLACE: This is your advertising strategy that I have a copy of here.

DR SENCER: Who’s it signed by?

WALLACE: This one is unsigned. But you–you’ll acknowledge that it was your baby so to speak?

DR SENCER: It could have been from the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. It could be from CDC. I don’t know. I’ll be happy to take responsibility for it.

WALLACE: It’s been three years now since you fell ill by GBS right?

ROBERTS: Right.

WALLACE: Has the federal government, in your estimation, played fair with you about your claim?

ROBERTS: No, I don’t think so. It seems to be dragging on and on and on, and really no end in sight that I can see at this point.

JOSEPH CALIFANO: With respect to the cases of Guillain Barre…

WALLACE: Former Secretary of HEW Joseph Caifano, too was disturbed that there was no end in sight. So a year and a half ago, he proposed that Uncle Sam would cut the bureaucratic red tape for victims suffering from GBS and would pay up quickly.

CALIFANO: We shouldn’t hold them to an impossible or too difficult standard of proving that they were hurt. Even if we pay a few people a few thousand dollars that might not have deserved it, I think justice requires that we promptly pay those people who do deserve it.

WALLACE: Who’s making the decision to be so hard-nosed about settling?

CALIFANO: Well, I assume the Justice Department is.

WALLACE: Griffin Bell, before he left?

CALIFANO: Well, the Justice Department agreed to the statement I made. It was cleared word for word with the lawyers in the Justice Department by my HEW lawyers.

CALIFANO: That-that statement said that we should pay Guillain Barre claims without regard to whether the federal government was negligent, if they – if they resulted from the swine flu shot.

GENE ROBERTS: I think the government knows its wrong.

JUDY ROBERTS: If it drags out long enough, that people will just give up, let it go.

GENE ROBERTS: I—I am a little more adamant in my thoughts than my wife is, because I asked – told Judy to take the shot. She wasn’t going to take it, and she never had had shots. And I’m mad with my government because they knew the fact, but they didn’t realize those facts because they – if they had released them, the people wouldn’t have taken it. And they can come out tomorrow and tell me there’s going to be an epidemic, and they can drop off like flies to – next to me, I will not take another shot that my government tells me to take.

WALLACE: Meantime, Judy Roberts and some 4,000 others like her are still waiting for their day in court.

Transcript Source

Click to Collapse

Not in presentation, but also found this nugget:

And already had a post Déjà Vu… Swine Flu which contains the Swine Flu panic from 10 years ago:

And this is recent short <3 min video from Mr. Hall – Senate Committee:

December 2020 – April 2021: 3,362 deaths from COVID Vaccines (30 people a day dying). Estimated as being less than 1% of what actually happens. There has been more COVID-19 vaccine deaths than all the vaccine deaths for the 15 year period between 1997 and 2013. Plus almost a thousand heart attacks and over 8000 hospitalizations.

In 1976, there were 45 million people vaccinated for the Swine Flu, 53 people died and the program was immediately halted because it was considered too risky.

A law passed in 1986, which created a compensation programme, which shields vaccine manufacturers & the medical personnel who administer the vaccines from liability.

“These vaccines have not been formally approved by the FDA, and that means noone can be required to take the vaccine.”

Part 6

Go to FlemingMethod.com

In the Menu, Click on More to find Documents

You will find 60+ papers detailing much of what the presentation was about, & a lot of things that weren’t, including information that relates to the argument of whether you want to be having antibodies.

Last year, the Osaka Japanese group published a paper talking about Antibody Dependent Enhancement (preprint). This Antibody Dependent Enhancement attaches to part of the spike protein, and when it does that, it opens up the spike protein to make it more infective. They discovered that part of the reason why people in hospitals were not doing better even when they made antibodies, is because the antibodies they made might have too much antibody to where it exacerbated the infection.

Click to Collapse

There are a lot of terms used regarding Vaccine Efficacy. You should know 3 terms.

(61)

The relative risk reduction. This is what you’ve heard so much about, the 95%, the 94%, the 65%. This is how many people got diagnosed with covid in the vaccinated group vs people who got diagnosed in the non-vaccinated group.

There is a more important term for you to understand, and that’s absolute risk reduction: a comparison of those groups that says ‘what’s the “REAL” difference between those groups?”

Then there’s the number needed to vaccinate, which is ‘how many people would you have to vaccinate, to try to reduce one person from being diagnosed with covid.

(62)

This means the # of people who got vaccinated that were diagnosed with covid. This is one example from Pfizer. Compared to the people who did not get vaccinated who got diagnosed with covid. When you do the math, it gives you 0.05. 1 minus that number tells you vaccine-efficacy. Multiplied by 100 gives you percent.

So how did they decide who made the diagnose of covid? You had to have 2 things, you had to have a positive PCR-test, and you had to have a set of symptoms.

(63)

Pfizer – same symptoms you would get with ‘any‘ infection – viral, bacterial, fungal, tuberculosis, etc.
Moderna – same problem, same issue. They’re what you’d normally have for symptoms – ache’s and pains, muscle discomfort, cough, runny nose, that type of thing.
J&J – Belgium company which btw, Belgium pulled this from the market.

Let’s look at the Emergency Use documents.

(64) (65)

Pfizer

  • 8 people who got vaccinated were diagnosed with covid. (66)
  • 162 in non-vaccinated group were diagnosed with covid. (67)
  • Comes up with 95% efficacy
  • But you’re not asking how often you’re going to get covid.
  • Your question is will it prevent me from getting diagnosed with covid?
  • Will it prevent me from dying with covid?
  • So let’s look at the data. Their data, not mine.

Part 7

(68)

(69) (70)
  • If we ask for confirmed covid cases, you’ll see that in the vaccinated group for Pfizer there was 17,411 people
  • 8 people diagnosed with covid.
  • Which leaves you with 17,403 who did not develop covid.
  • Non-vaccinated, there were 17,511
  • 162 were diagnosed with covid.
  • Which leaves you with 17,349 who did not develop covid.

If you’re a scientist like me, you analyze the data and ask “is there any real difference between those 2 groups?”

It turns out, when you do that, there’s not. It’s not statistically different.

  • What was the absolute risk reduction?
  • 0.93 minus the difference in those vaccinated, gives you an absolute risk reduction of 0.88%
  • If you ask if it cut down the risk of death, here’s the data:

(71) (72)
  • Pfizer had 2 deaths, Non-vaccinated had 4 deaths
  • No statistically significant difference in the numbers of deaths, and they represent what is seen in the general population.
  • Pfizer = No statistically difference whether you get vaccinated or not. No significant changes in deaths.

Moderna

These are the EUA-presented to the FDA that resulted in them being granted Emergency Use Authorization clearance.

(73) (74)
  • COVID diagnosis = 11 people vaccinated group, 185 people in non-vaccinated group gives you 94% efficacy.

(75) (76)
  • Vaccinated group 13934 people. 11 ended up with covid. Leaves you with 13923 who didn’t get covid.
  • Non-Vaccinated group 13983 people. 185 ended up with covid. Leaves you with 13698 who didn’t get covid.
  • Is there differences between those groups? No there isn’t.
  • The absolute risk reduction 1.33% minus 0.08% = 1.25%

(77) (78)
  • Deaths = 6 in the moderna group
  • Deaths = 7 in the non-vaccinated group
  • No statistical difference.
  • And it’s what you’d expect to see in the general population.

Janssen (J&J / Johnson & Johnson)

(79) (80)
  • They use: Moderate to Severe as definition. 14 days & 28 days.
  • At 14 days, 176 in vaccinated group, 513 in non-vaccinated group. Efficacy 66%
  • At 28 days, 114 in vaccinated group, 326 in non-vaccinated group. Efficacy 65%
  • Now let’s look at the likelihood that you won’t develop covid.

(81)
  • 14 days – 21636 in the vaccinated group. 21575 in non-vaccinated group.
  • 21460 did not develop covid in vaccinated group.
  • 21575 did not develop covid in non-vaccinated group.
  • There is a statistically significant difference of 0.05%
  • Absolute Risk Reduction at 14 days. 2.38% minus 0.81% = 1.57%
  • The 14 day data is what they got EUA approval with (not the 28 day data)
  • Let’s look at the data 2 weeks later.

(82)
  • 28 days – 21424 – 114 diagnosed with covid = 21310 vaccinated group
  • 28 days – 21199 – 326 diagnosed with covid = 20873 non-vaccinated group
  • 2 weeks later. No longer statistically significant.
  • Absolute Risk Reduction = 1.54% minus 0.53% = 1.01%

(83)
  • Everytime you do a research study in more than one site, you have everybody making their decisions non-centrally.
  • But everything goes to a central lab, where the people in charge make a decision. Yes or No.

(84)
  • Not centrally confirmed numbers (Table 14) vs centrally confirmed numbers (Table 15)
  • Go to centrally confirmed and eliminate “Mild” (because noone dies from “mild covid”)
  • And you get 32-42% drop in the covid cases when you use the centrally-confirmed lab results.
  • Which was not used to determine whether the FDA should authorize EUA.

(85)
  • 5 Deaths in Janssen group. Of these Five: 2 of them were ‘unknown’
  • 20 Deaths in non-vaccinated group.

(Conference gets a Skype call-in from Dr. Yan so presentation is halted to hear from her.)

Waiting for Part 9 to be uploaded to continue this section.

Click to Collapse

Interested in this section as I have been trying to wrap my mind around this since a few researchers published papers about the Absolute Risk Reduction not included in the vaccine data. (See Vaccines Failed To Disclose Absolute Risk Reduction To Exaggerate Efficacy).

Part 9 – Hasn’t been uploaded yet

(86)

Olliaro P, Torreele E, Vaillant M. COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and effectiveness. Lancet Microbe. 2021 (87)

Based Upon the FDA (EUA) Documents:

  • There is no statistical reduction in COVID rates.
  • There is no statistical reduction in COVID death rates.
  • There is an unacceptable VAERS death and adverse event rates. (88)
  • The vaccine Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) rate for developing COVID is really only 0.8 to 1.3%. Not the 67 to 95% you’ve been lead to believe.

The FDA, the Federal Government and the Media failed to do their job. They failed to ask the Scientific Questions that should have been asked.

References[+]

Penny (PennyButler.com)
Penny (PennyButler.com)

Truth-seeker, ever-questioning, ever-learning, ever-researching, ever delving further and deeper, ever trying to 'figure it out'. This site is a legacy of sorts, a place to collect thoughts, notes, book summaries, & random points of interests.