Journey

And indeed, page 19, unfortunately, still quite a few black boxes on that page. Yes, what, why is this material still being redacted? Why isn’t it in the public domain for discussion now?

Well, that’s an excellent question. I mean, you know, this sort of behavior by the pharmaceutical companies, myself and a couple of other Senators down here in Australia, we’ve tried to get the actual Pfizer contract and the government says it’s commercial in confidence. I don’t think that’s the case at all. I mean, if they wanted to keep the amount they paid for the vaccine commercial in confidence, I mean, I’d argue that’s not okay either, but when you’re talking about something that we are expected to take the government’s word on that it’s safe and effective, surely we should have access to all the medical data and biochemical data involved in the vaccine, and we’ve been denied that right.

For example, what I’ve just read out to you was originally redacted. Why was critical information that was critical to the production of this vaccine withheld from the public?

I mean, the whole point of science is that you publish material and open it to peer review.

Absolutely, science has to be contestable.

And not only in this document, well, it was attempted to be hidden from the public, it was only this tenacious lady with the Freedom of Information request that got us this document, and even now that it’s still partly redacted, why can’t the world’s scientists, statisticians, and data scientists, of which we have plenty, read this and peer-review it for us? It just seems unnecessarily cryptic for some reason.

It does indeed. Given the large number of vaccine injuries and the rise in excess deaths across the world, I think people are entitled to know and have answers from both our health regulators and Big Pharma as to the risks of this vaccine and why they didn’t warn people about this early on.

So the Australian authorities authorized the vaccine based on this document, which is primarily written by the TGA and shared with Pfizer. This is like a clarification of the TGA’s thinking at the time?

Yeah, so this is basically the TGA’s regulation document to say, “Well, this is how we’ve examined what Pfizer has given to us.”

It’s worth noting that the TGA has never examined the patient data of the actual Pfizer trial, never drilled down on some granular data, and actually did an audit of the Pfizer trial results, and I’m sure you’ve covered that in the past. ^{(01) BMJ Clinical Trial Whistleblower Sues Pfizer (Brook Jackson) (02) Former Pfizer Staff Speak Out (03) TGA admits they didn’t analyse the patient data! https://youtu.be/HdDocA-h-tc}

So for example, when Pfizer described Maddie de Garay as just having stomach issues, the TGA never went and drilled down on those issues to find out that actually, she’s in a wheelchair and being fed through a tube. They’ve just taken a lot of that Pfizer’s data at face value.

And then, that’s non-clinical data, and that of course would be clinical data, but yeah, I mean, we’ve rubber-stamped what Pfizer has given us, more or less. But, interestingly enough, they rubber-stamped it after highlighting a number of risks, and I don’t know if they thought they never had to release this document and that it was never going to be open to scrutiny. And I’m very grateful to Nancy, the lady who actually got this document, as well as the doctors who have helped me out with this, getting information to me. But, without this information being released, we would not have had any idea just how poor the auditing and quality assurance on the production and rollout of the vaccine has been.

Yeah, we expect these national adjudication authorities to really go the extra mile to look after our safety and our kids’ safety. And it appears that in the TGA example that we have in front of us here, that wasn’t done. Personally, I have no reason to suspect that other countries are any better than the Australian authorities, which are normally very, very rigorous indeed.

Yeah, and I should point out, John, it’s not the extra mile, it’s actually their job. They fail to do their job.

Here in Australia, 96% of the TGA’s funding actually comes from Big Pharma fees. So, there is a massive conflict of interest. The question really needs to be asked, should these regulatory bodies be funded by Big Pharma in what they call cost recouping, or do we need a department that approves the drugs, but then we need a separate entirely arms length department that reviews the people that actually review the drugs and regulate the drugs, because there is a massive conflict of interest. ^{(04) COVID Conflict$ of Interest Australia [Video] (05) Conflicts of Interest Australia COVID Policy [Part 1]}

I know John Skerritt is on the board of a couple of international committees that are funded by Big Pharma, so he’s got another conflict of interest there. John Skerritt , for the listeners who aren’t aware, was the head of the TGA in Australia. He’s just recently resigned, but massive conflicts of interest themselves are red flags when you’re trying to call the bureaucrats and the government of the day to account, they just brush you aside, as if to say, it doesn’t matter. ^{(06)Today, Professor John Skerritt has announced his decision to retire from his position of Deputy Secretary Health Products Regulation Group, effective 18th April 2023. … Click for full citation (07)2023 Australia – NHMRC funding round – massive grants paid to those who toed the line during COVID. … Click for full citation}

The really sad thing about this is that there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people out there across the world who have been badly let down by their governments.

1. First of all, by not properly reviewing the risks of this vaccine,
2. and number two, in many cases, mandating that they have to get this vaccine.
3. And then number three, those people who did get vaccinated and who have been injured and are struggling now to get compensation, both financial and proper medical support.

The thing I’ve never really understood about the vaccination program, especially looking back, and I think my disquiet grew at about the same time as yours, in October 2021. Things were becoming pretty uncomfortable at that time. Before that, we were basically taking their word for it, but if they’d released this document in 2021, then we would have been in a much better position.

The question in my mind is, why did they go for mRNA vaccines and indeed, adenovirus vector vaccines with the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine, as opposed to a tried and trusted technology? Given that we had a vaccine rollout that was going to, at the time, it was planned to go to about seven billion people, why on Earth would they not use something tried and tested? Why on Earth would they use something novel?

That is a very good question. And I know that this has been stated on your show before with Robert Clancy. He has said that there’s this myth that it takes a lot longer to produce a protein vaccine. And, he’d know, right? I mean, he’s one of Australia’s eminent vaccinologists. They have produced protein vaccines in a matter of months in the past, it wasn’t as though they needed to go there. ^{(08) Search Dr John Campbell’s YouTube channel for interviews with Prof. Robert Clancy https://www.youtube.com/@Campbellteaching/search?query=clancy}

And yet again, another question: why did they take on a novel technology that hadn’t been adequately tested over the tried and true methods of a protein vaccine?

I’m sure the virus existed. I’m not saying the virus didn’t exist and it wasn’t a risk to older people, but when you look at the healthy working-age population, they had a much lower risk of the virus. And yeah, they may still have got sick, don’t get me wrong. But did we need to, you know, when we weigh up the costs and benefits or the risk and reward, was it really worth risking the health of younger people in particular, to take this vaccine when their risk from the virus is very low?

And I should just add this week, ATAGI, which is sort of another regulatory body, has actually admitted that for people under 30, the risk of the vaccine, in regards to myocarditis, is actually greater from the vaccine than what it was from the virus. ^{(09)ATAGI major admission on vax side effect … Click for full citation}

So, they’ve actually got themselves in big trouble now because they’ve been saying the opposite thing for the last two years.

And there’s young children, I’ve spoken to many of them, Faith being one of them, who’ve had their lives destroyed by the vaccine. She is a beautiful 16-year-old girl, and she can’t go to school now. She started back at school this year after having a year off, and she struggles to get through more than a couple of hours. There really needs to be answers. These people need to explain why they’ve destroyed so many lives.

Faith Ranson’s story: pic.twitter.com/oTjYwKByTf

— COVID VACCINE INJURIES .COM (@Storiesofinjury) February 5, 2022

When the Omicron virus became predominant and that was for most of Australia’s outbreak, actually most of Australia’s pandemic, did the government and the regulatory authorities realize Omicron was much less pathogenic than the previous variants and change their vaccination recommendations, or did they just plow on as they were before?

They didn’t just plow on; they doubled down. About the same time, I think it was Kyle, the mountain biker came out, when I started getting – literally the same week – I started getting injuries from young people as well. And that was a very, very important video you released there, John. You should be very proud of what you did there. ^{(10) 11 May 2022 Kyle’s vaccine injury update (11) 11 Nov 2021 Kyle’s statement before US Senate expert panel on federal vaccine mandates and vaccine injuries Pericarditis after vaccine (12) 22 Oct 2021 Pericarditis after vaccination, possible inadvertent intravenous administration. Kyle’s vaccine complication}

Kyle should be very proud of sharing himself for just coming out.

I mean, he was injured, you know? He was a victim, and he was just treated terribly, and subsequently, as it turns out, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars have been treated the same way.

Our guys here in Australia doubled down. So we were supposed to open up at 80% vaccination rate across the country, but instead, what our state premiers did was they doubled down and told everyone to get a booster.

This is when Omicron was breaking out, so at the same time they were saying it wasn’t as bad, they were telling everyone to get a booster, children had to get vaccinated as well as teenagers. I mean, I heard from teenagers who couldn’t go to school formals because they weren’t vaccinated. You had students, university students two or three years through their degree, they can’t complete it because they’re not vaccinated.

I mean, this is just absurd, right? And you were basically locked out of society if you didn’t get your first two jabs for a vaccine which was prepared for the Alpha variant, and by this stage, we’ve gone through Alpha, Delta, and Omicron, so the vaccine itself is out of date.

Well even earlier, it was more for the Wuhan version.

Exactly, the original one. And as you know, this document shows that antibodies started to drop off after 30 to 35 days anyway.

Yeah, I mean, I was surprised. I was really surprised by that.

And that was a stronger dose, remember, because those monkeys, they only weighed 10 kilograms, and they were getting three times the dose. So you know, a weight-to-dose ratio 20 times stronger than a human, and the antibodies are dropping off after 35 days? So how many days did that last in the 70-kilogram? Maybe two to three, who knows, right? We don’t know.

Yeah, we simply don’t know. We haven’t been told.

Short answer: No one knows, not even Moderna or Pfizer.

Both companies are said to have not looked at the proteins made by their synthetic mRNA shots in cell culture for mors than 48 hours after transfection.

Longer answer 👇🏾 https://t.co/S8dhPdOtSa pic.twitter.com/kAmctmjhAq

— Dr. Eashwarran Kohilathas (@drkohilathas) March 20, 2023

So the Australian government’s made a deal recently with Moderna, as has the UK government, as has the Canadian government, and they’re building a plant, I think it might be Brisbane area, I’m not sure, to produce 100 million doses of mRNA vaccines a year in Australia. Do you have any concerns about that? ^{(13) Clip, Moderna expands, UK, Canada and Australia plants}

Absolutely, because the fact that they’ve come out and made this commitment, it’s actually in Melbourne they’re going to do it, but they’ve made this commitment, and because the government’s involved with this, it’s become political, and health shouldn’t be political.

So the question is, and if you’ve got, and we know that the big pharmaceutical companies have a lot of influence over governments because of the conflict of interest with the TGA. That hasn’t been resolved, and it needs to be resolved, but if the government is dropping two billion dollars on helping Moderna build this plant in Melbourne, they’re going to have to justify why they’re spending this money. So, you know, it creates an incentive to report on every new virus as though it’s a threat to mankind, or, you know, at least overemphasize the risk of it. There’s definitely incentive there because the people who, are the so-called health experts are the people who rely on the existence of these viruses to justify their own careers, right? So it becomes, self-feeding.

And the reality is that we have lived with viruses for, you know, thousands of years. I think it’s important that people know there’s different types of pathogens. So you have a bacterial type of pathogen, a double-stranded DNA type of pathogen, hence your smallpox that was originally the Edward Jenner, virus that Edward found the first type of vaccine for, and then you have the single-stranded mRNA virus, which potentially mutates much faster, and coronaviruses are known to mutate very fast. So the idea that we’re going to continually try and vaccinate against fast, rapidly mutating viruses, is ridiculous.

Especially in light of the fact that we know about immune imprinting, is that repeated vaccination, just like we all know we shouldn’t overuse antibiotics, is the same principle when it comes to vaccines. You shouldn’t overuse vaccines because you will downregulate. Robert Clancy has touched on this many times with you, that you will eventually bring in your down-regulating antibodies, which can have catastrophic effects on the body.

Does it concern you that there are plans to produce other vaccines in the mRNA format as well, for example, influenza? There are plans to make the influenza vaccine an mRNA vaccine. I mean, do you think that could give the same autoimmune problems as the COVID mRNA vaccine? ^{(14) NSW fast tracks mRNA Livestock jabs (15) Funeral Directors warn of new Flu Shots}

Potentially. I mean, obviously, it’ll depend on the quality of the vaccine. I do think we should judge every vaccine on its own merits. Given what we’ve seen from the mRNA vaccine with the coronavirus, the fact of the matter is that, as we highlighted those risks before, there are a lot more risks involved with using an mRNA vaccine than there is with a protein vaccine. And, of course, the other thing is we haven’t touched on, which I know you touched on before with Robert, is the fact that a flu vaccine is a respiratory virus that comes into the mucosal system, so are we better off looking at nasal sprays that kill the virus in the mucosal system, rather than injecting an mRNA vaccine into your bloodstream that won’t have the same impact as something that can get to your mucosal system?

And yet again, are we better off rather than trying to treat the entire population, should we look at early treatments, whether it’s other types of whatever that drug may be that will actually deal with people when they get sick and that the one percent of people that get sick, rather than expose 100% of the population to all the risks that come with giving a vaccine and the repeated doses of the vaccine.

Not to mention the cost. I mean, here in Australia, we spent eight billion dollars on vaccines. I mean, that would have built a lot of hospitals and employed a lot of nurses and doctors.

That’s for a population of what?

Eight billion dollars for 25 million people.

It’s just an unimaginable amount of money, isn’t it? It’s just quite incredible.

So in the UK, if someone has an adverse reaction to a drug or a vaccine, we fill out something called Yellow Card. In the States, I think we have something called VAERs, the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System. Is there a system in Australia, and are you happy with it?

Look, there is a system. It’s called the TGA database here in Australia. It’s called the DAEN database. I’m gonna have to go in about two minutes. I’ve got the bells. I’ll finish off on this. We do have a voluntary system. It doesn’t force people to report, and a lot of people that I’ve spoken to who are injured, don’t even know about it. So, you know, because when they’re given the vaccine, they’re not told, “Well, if you get injured, come back, contact us, and we will lodge that data.”

But I’ve got a friend who’s a cardiologist, for example, who had reported three cases of myocarditis, and the Queensland Health Department knocked it back and said these people have to go to see their GP. So there has been, in my view, what I would call the deliberate interference by governments to downplay the reporting of serious injuries. So it should be mandatory. ^{(16) Heart Damage: MRNA Vaccines (Pfizer/Moderna) (17) It Is Not “Safe” For Everyone}

We’ve got another reporting system, AusVax, that had a much higher rate of incidents. They reported after three days, they’ve sent text messages to everyone after three days, and one percent of people had to go to hospital or see a doctor after the vax, just after three days, and I’ve spoken to a lot of people who didn’t see their doctor until well after three days, but yeah, it is a real concern, and yet again, there’s been deliberate downplaying of the actual vaccine risks by the regulatory authorities that approved it, which in itself is of concern. ^{(18) AusVax Safety https://ausvaxsafety.org.au/vaccine-safety-data/covid-19-vaccines (19) Jul 3, 2021 Craig Kelly “Are the TGA underestimating the rate of adverse events from the jabs by a factor of more than a 100?” https://twitter.com/CKellyUAP/status/1411170025180864513}

AUSTRALIA:
2022 JUN 02 Another reporting tool that doesn’t get a lot of attention is the AusVax safety data. https://t.co/z7uFAh0Kx7 pic.twitter.com/9FlvrE4enx

— CEO #4cminews #4cmiTV #4cminewswire (@gary4cm) June 2, 2022