It's official. Unless the media cares about a certain subject, it is of no real consequence. There is no other single entity that has the power to force regimes to acknowledge something they really don't want to acknowledge. It doesn't seem to matter how serious it is – the fact that there is a man in the White House who achieved his position via the mechanism of a corrupt election, who is clearly cognitively impaired and provably corrupt into the bargain elicits no coverage. No coverage equates to no pressure, no requirement to front up or to answer the obvious questions.
It doesn't matter what the rest of us think. We can stop watching their news output, abandon their newspapers and online hackery and they don't particularly care. Their business models cannot require them to be profitable – they are there to act as the mouthpiece of the progressive regime. Not the administration; at least, not Trump's administration. The regime, the deep state, whatever we want to call it. Them. Through the medium of the media, the regime and it apparatchiks are able to set out their agenda without serious challenge and completely ignore any inconvenient facts.
As is the case with all the nonsense that they spout, whether we believe it or not is besides the point. For them, the important part is that they are on the record; their talking point has been aired. The repetitive nature of propaganda dictates that constant reinforcement is required. The palisade of lies and misdirections is made more secure with each new affirmation.
Conversely, when the truth threatens to make an unauthorized appearance, the standard response is to completely ignore it; especially when the truth is potent enough to cause lasting damage. Even more so when there is no way to neutralize it in any other way, because alerting people to the existence of the truth would be a colossal mistake. Arguing on the facts is rarely the best option for serial liars; if they are forced into giving a response, it will take the form of a misrepresentation of the truth (or a focus on a tiny part of it) followed by a rebuttal – perhaps in the form of a straw man argument – or it will be an ad hominem on the character of the person representing the truth.
It's also the case that, because we are continually bombarded with lies, it is sometimes difficult to recognize truth, even really seismic truth, when it happens along. A truth of that proportion has been revealing itself, once a month, since March. This truth is so damaging to the narrative that the media has decided to leave well alone – even the simple act of recognizing its existence would be a serious error. There is no way of engaging with the evidence without soiling the regime's nest. I refer to the Pfizer document dump concerning the 'vaccine' trials.
These documents are being released by the FDA, to whom they had been provided by way of evidence to warrant the granting of an Emergency Use Authorization for the Pfizer 'vaccine', henceforth to be referred to as an experimental gene therapy (EGT) which is what it is. If the FDA had had its way, the job of analyzing said papers would have fallen to our great grandchildren, as the papers would have been under wraps for another 75 years. The justification for this delay rapidly fell apart in federal court and vast tranches of documents have been published monthly. It hasn't taken long for the reason for the FDA's reticence to be revealed.
Thusfar, neither Pfizer nor the FDA have had to fashion a response to the vast majority of the revelations contained within the papers, which has resulted in an all-too-familiar scenario – a patently corrupt and illegal enterprise has clearly been undertaken, but those responsible for it have been allowed the luxury of pretending that it hasn't. And I'm not talking about some minor breaches of the regulations or a debatable moral hazard; these papers reveal that a genocide has been attempted and is in the process of being accomplished and yet there is an eerie silence in the public square,where there ought to be outrage and instant retribution.
Yes, I said genocide. I'll set out what has been found, but I don't believe there can be any doubt about it; Pfizer's own documents confirm it. As you will see, the only quibble that could realistically be entertained is the question of whether it was designed as such or whether, when it became apparent that the EGT were deadly, they merely turned a blind eye and carried on jabbing. Given other considerations, such as the publicly stated beliefs of some of the individuals heavily involved in both the financing and promotion of the EGT and the small matter of what motive could possibly induce regimes to keep jabbing, I know where my money is.
It may seem astonishing that we have reached this place, but it isn't really. While the Loony Left are the ideological spearhead that is constantly jabbed in our direction, the bureaucratic state shares much of the same impulses dressed up as pathological care. The same authoritarian tendencies are identifiable in both groups. However, their bedfellows in Big Business aren't interested in looking out for anyone, other than them and theirs. They care not one jot about the welfare of the masses. All three groupings want control – they don't all want it for the same reasons.
Either way, this nexus has a stranglehold on power in all its forms; the public sphere, private enterprises and the Fourth Estate. And, as the maxim states, if power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Hence, we are presented with a situation where between 60% and 70% (at the very least) of Western Europe and the Anglosphere have been injected with a substance that is of no benefit, but which degrades health, obliterates the immune system, and kills people instead. Deliberately. For nearly two years. And, so far, there has been no blow-back.
Before we selectively delve into the trial data and malfeasance that continued once the roll-out had begun, it's worth setting out what was known about mRNA even before trials had even begun. mRNA vaccines had been researched for many years. Moderna was founded in 2009, specifically as an mRNA company, with designs on using the technology to advance cures for diseases. Other major companies were also in the hunt, but gradually dropped out. The technology was problematic.
Nobody could find a way to use them without inducing serious, short term side effects, which increased in line with the number of shots required. It was believed that the polyethylene glycol (PEG) element of the vaccine, the coating on the nano particles, was mainly responsible. As a report from an executive at Moderna itself stated,
“Currently, no mRNA therapeutic is approved for use in humans, and a beneficial safety profile in patients still has to be demonstrated. A first clinical application will likely not be a prophylactic vaccine, because the tolerance for side effects is very low for a drug that is injected into healthy individuals.”(1)
Additionally, it was found that a majority of people have anti PEG antibodies in their immune systems and that approximately 10% of vaccinated people may have an adverse effect. For that reason, it was recommended that all patients should be screened prior to the administration of a PEGylated drug.(2)
There was at least one other reason that mRNA had yet to prove 'safe and effective'; a process known as codon optimisation.
“Trying to tell your body to generate proteins is hard for many reasons. One of them is the fact that when you try to run the protein information via ribosomes which process that code and generate the protein, it can be very slow or can get stuck during the process.
Luckily, scientists found a way to overcome this problem, by doing code substitution: instead of using the original genetic code to generate the protein,they changed the letters in the code so the code would be optimized. This is known as Codon Optimization.”(3)
Once again, it transpires that messing about with natural processes has consequences beyond what was intended - if, of course, we hold that any of the downsides of the 'vaccines' are indeed unintended, which I don't. In any event, it turns out that this method of speeding up the production of spike protein engendered by the mRNA 'vaccines' is deeply flawed, and was known to be so prior to the development of the Covid 'vaccines'.
This is because the optimization process is prone to producing misfolded proteins and misfolded proteins are known to produce completely unforeseen consequences. When I say unforeseen, what I really mean is that the specific consequence is unforeseen, not the range of possible outcomes. They are largely known and none of them are good; Alzheimers, Parkinsons, heart disease as well as a number of other possible conditions. This was known as long ago as 2011.(4)
Pfizer has admitted that the optimisation process results in elevated levels of gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT), which in turn is an early marker for heart failure. So, why optimise codons? Because unless they do, the 'vaccines' won't produce enough protein to be 'effective'. Can you sense the circular logic? They have to make the jab dangerous or it won't be able to protect against something that's dangerous.
Independently of the trials, let's also deal with some other non-negotiables. Firstly, any product that is still undergoing trials (which the Pfizer product is, to this day), whose effectiveness has not been evaluated is not, by definition, a vaccine. After all, establishing whether it works in preventing disease is the purpose of said trial; unless and until it is proved effective, it can only ever be an experimental treatment and referring to it as a 'vaccine' is deliberately misleading.
Secondly, the science behind my decision to call the 'vaccines' EGT. A treatment that does not a) prevent disease in the vaccinated and b) prevent them spreading the disease to the unvaccinated, or indeed to other vaccinated people, does not fit the definition of a vaccine. Unless the definition is changed, of course, which is already being attempted.(5) None of the main 'vaccine' suppliers make any claims to the contrary. Vaccines prevent infection and transmission – these treatments were not designed to do either. They are the archetypal 'leaky' vaccine – a term that applies to an inoculation that isn't actually a vaccine, even if it is referred to as such, but is instead a treatment which enable symptoms to be ameliorated without killing the disease. If it were a vaccine it would, by definition, not be leaky.(6)
They are, instead, experimental gene therapies. This should not be regarded as a partisan statement; it should not put one on the margins of the debate. It's a factual statement. The injection contains mRNA, material which instructs the host body to produce a foreign substance, a pathogenic spike protein. As such, it is hijacking our genetic structure. Were anyone able to question the drug companies, they would have no option but to confirm it, as the technology has been around for decades; in pharmaceutical circles, this is common knowledge. However, the Federal Drug Agency and the EU equivalent are not allowed to authorize experimental gene therapies, so they call them vaccines instead.
The truth is that no regulatory authority has approved these therapies for use. These treatments are authorized instead, using a device called an Emergency Use Authority (EUA), because without it, the state thinks we'd all be dead in our beds – allegedly. So, the normal process of clinical trials was interrupted and, with our lives hanging in the balance, the state allowed Big Pharma to stick a needle in our arm and save us.
Not only that. Without the 'vaccine', there could be no mandate. There is one tiny problem – the 'vaccine' isn't a vaccine. It's an ESG and, as such, doesn't qualify for consideration as a vaccine. That, right there, is enough to invalidate everything that comes after. Yes, even the Pfizer one that they've told you is approved (COMIRNATY). It isn't. Furthermore, vaccines can only be approved for emergency use if there is no other suitable treatment. As was known at the time of the authorization, and for months before, there are a number of early treatment options that are very effective – much more effective than the jab.
You may have heard vague tell of this, perhaps an echo of the words hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin. There are many others besides. And this information was known to doctors; which is why these two drugs were the most prescribed treatments in the first couple of months of the pandemic and it's why they are being used in many different parts of the world with great success. So, given the fact that effective alternatives exist, there never was a justification for the issuance of an EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) on the grounds that the EGT was all there was. That's two strikes against Pfizer & co.
That's before getting into any discussion about informed consent (there hasn't been any, as that would entail knowledge of ingredients and side effects, among other details). Also, of course, the fact that there is no constitutional basis for mandating any vaccine, let alone one that isn't approved. All of those elements are downstream from the one that matters most; the original (and continuing) EUAs.
The game was rigged from the beginning and participating in it is to concede the most important ground before battle is joined. Governments did not and do not have the right to do what they are doing. Period. There is no emergency, there are no grounds for an EUA, they cannot mandate a 'vaccine' on an EUA and it's not a vaccine, anyway.
I have written extensively about the 'pandemic' and the EGT and it is apparent to me that both Covid and the therapy that has been touted as its cure are engineered bioweapons. Some of the information supporting this assertion can be gleaned from what we already knew about the clinical trials, which was the information that the FDA and Pfizer chose to reveal. The ongoing document dump is an additional treasure trove of information that they definitely didn't want to be made public.
We get to peek behind the scenes and examine the structure of the clinical trials, as well as the results and some of the most damning evidence takes the form of questions they didn't ask; Pfizer (followed by the FDA) evinced zero curiosity in some of the most basic enquiries into side effects. We are also able to compare and contrast the authorities' public statements with evidence of what they actually knew at the time and draw some unequivocal conclusions.
We must be aware of one huge caveat – we are reliant on Pfizer themselves for the provision of the data. There are at least two problems with that, namely that we don't know what we don't know and, further, it's Pfizer. This is the company fined $2.3 billion for criminal and civil offences which involved fraudulently promoting its products for off label usage. This is also the company that we are required to trust in doing the right thing. If any information is being withheld it is highly likely that it constitutes a devastating indictment of both Pfizer and the FDA, because the evidence they have actually disclosed already proves criminal malfeasance.
The most far reaching conclusion that we can reach with minimal effort is that the EGT is a de-population tool, both in terms of the lethal effects they have on those naïve enough to submit to them and in their effect on the fertility of both males and females. It is apparent that Pfizer were fully aware of this effect. We can, therefore, state that the FDA were too as the evidence comes from the papers that the FDA is being forced to reveal.
Pfizer knew that, despite what the public were being told, the mRNA did not stay at the injection site in the deltoid but, within 48 hours, was transported (via the bloodstream) to the spleen, liver, adrenals, lymph nodes, testes and ovaries.(7)(8) They weren't the only ones in the know; the FDA were informed on November 11th 2020, which is to say before the EGT were rolled out.(9) There shouldn't have been any confusion on this point. There is a paper from 2018 which shows that mRNA passes into the testes and wreaks reproductive havoc.(10)
Figure 1
Both also knew that the lipid nanoparticles which contain mRNA cross the amniotic membrane and that the assurances that the EGTs are safe and effective for pregnant women was based on the observation of 44 pregnant rats for six weeks.(11) That was it – no human trials, just some French rats. They didn't even bother to dose the male rats, only the female rats that mated with them.(12) Even this excuse for a trial was compromised by the fact that all the newborn rats were euthanised before any study could be made of their reproductive capabilities, thus rendering it invalid. A clear indication that Pfizer knew of the risks can be found in the trial structures themselves, as they explicitly excluded pregnant women. Not only that, but the men in the trials were required to
“Abstain from heterosexual intercourse with a female of childbearing potential as their preferred and usual lifestyle. They must be abstinent from heterosexual intercourse with a female of childbearing age on a long-term and persistent basis and they must agree to remain abstinent.
OR the men in the Pfizer trial:
Must agree to use a male condom when engaging in any activity that allows for passage of ejaculate to another person.”(13)
But despite these stringent requirements (in trials that commenced as long ago as summer 2020), around 270 women still got pregnant after they had received at least one injection but, in yet another breach of acceptable practice, around 230 of them disappeared from the data set with no explanation provided. We may perhaps infer one, nonetheless, as of the 36 women that remained under observation, a staggering 28 lost their babies.(14)
Men weren't spared either. Once again, the structure of the trial is clearly indicative of foreknowledge. Obvious tests were not performed, the better to conceal the existence of inconvenient truths. No tests were carried out on men's semen (15) or on the development of offspring,(16) even though it was already known that the mRNA reached the testes.(17) Men were not allowed to donate sperm, either.(18)
The aforementioned 2018 study did the work that the clinical trial avoided and detailed the damage that occurs to men. The epididymis, which transports sperm from the testes is compromised. The Sertoli cells, vital to the development of the testes, are also damaged as are the Leydig cells, which are responsible for the production of testosterone. This compromises masculinity and is especially problematic when the EGT is injected into pre-pubescent boys. To add to the devastation of the male productive system, anti-sperm antibodies were also found in male sperm, as early as February 2021. Not before then, of course, because Pfizer had avoided doing the requisite testing. These antibodies prevent the sperm from reaching the egg and fertilizing it.(19)
Despite all this evidence, at no point (even now) has anybody in medical officialdom acknowledged the existence of any reproductive problems. Throughout 2021, all the reproductive societies in the US lied through their teeth. Other health agencies, charged with issuing guidelines that served to protect health, did likewise. In February 2022, Fauci's NIH stated that “Covid 19 vaccination does not reduce the chances of reproduction.”(20) There is, in fact, a 22% drop in male fertility after the first two injections and the motility, concentration and total count of semen all decrease over a period of six months.(21) The result? In the UK, to September 2022, the birth rate is down by 15%.(22)
The cavalier attitude towards reproductive health in general – and women's in particular – is apparent from this gem, which is official guidance issued to doctors;
“a conversation between the (pregnant) patient and their clinical team may assist with decisions regarding the use of the vaccines approved under EUA for the prevention of Covid-19…including…the potential efficacy of the vaccine…. (and) the safety of the vaccine for the pregnant patient and the fetus. While a conversation with a clinician may be helpful, it should not be required prior to vaccination as this may cause unnecessary barriers to access.”(23)
This clearly turns the principle of informed consent on its head. Not only is there no proper consent, due to the true nature of the EGT being known only to Pfizer and the FDA, the proposal is that there isn't even a conversation with the patient. Female patients were in no position to know that the pregnant were officially excluded from the trials or that, of those who fell pregnant anyway, around 80% of them suffered a miscarriage. This is what they should have been told instead;
“(1) the mRNA Covid-19 vaccine is experimental; (2) it is not licensed by the FDA but rather is authorized for emergency use; (3) there is no authorization for emergency use for pregnant women; (4) pregnant women were excluded from clinical trials; (5) the vaccine does not provide immunity or stop transmission of the virus; (6) the vaccine lacks durability; (7) the vaccine does not stay at the injection site but instead travels through the blood stream; and (8) the vaccine has serious unknown and known safety risks to the mother and baby, including fetal death and congenital abnormalities”(24)
There are many more problems of a serious nature that are still being hidden from the public. Both Pfizer and the FDA knew, prior to roll-out, that the EGT didn't work. And, despite the fact that Pfizer weighted the clinical trials so that 75% of the participants were female (presumably due the fact that women are less prone to cardiac disease, which is yet another indication of foreknowledge), the trials still recorded over 42,000 adverse events. For 1,200 people, that adverse event was death; four of them, on the day that they were injected.(25)
Figure 2
The malfeasance by both Pfizer and the FDA is not limited to reproductive issues or to the lack of informed consent. Between them, they have committed some truly egregious sins. For instance, the list of adverse events, as documented by Pfizer, is not the same as those made public by the CDC. Or those cited by medical associations and other captured entities. These are far more extensive;
“These include vast columns of joint pain, muscle pain (myalgia), masses of neurological effects include MS, Guillain Barre and Bell’s Palsy, encephaly, every iteration possible of blood clotting, thrombocytopenia at scale, strokes, hemorrhages, and many kinds of ruptures of membranes throughout the human body. The side effects about which Pfizer and the FDA knew but you did not, include blistering problems, rashes, shingles, and herpetic conditions (indeed, a range of blistering conditions oddly foreshadowing the symptoms of monkeypox).”(26)
These effects were known about prior to launch in December 2020, but were not in the public domain. Presumably, the authorities didn't want to foster 'vaccine hesitancy', otherwise known as a refusal to take a jab manufactured at warp speed by a company known for its criminality. The issue with adverse events was so overwhelming that, by the end of February 2021, Pfizer had to commit to the hiring of an additional 2,400 members of staff just to deal with them.
The public didn't know about the different types of adverse events (1,290 of them) until November. The FDA were in the picture and yet, despite the knowledge that they possessed, they still renewed the EUA in August 2021.(27) Further, by May 2021, Pfizer already knew that 35 minors (children) hearts had been damaged within a week of injection, but that didn't stop the FDA from issuing an EUA for teens just a month later.(28)
There were also 22 cases of a rare myocarditis by the end of February 2021, but the FDA didn't include this information on the fact sheets until June and only did so then because they were under pressure to do so. All of the cases were within seven days of injection.(29)(30) Further, the information in Figure 2 was produced by Pfizer for internal consumption, not for public disclosure. That's why it's labelled confidential. The outside world was treated to a report that claimed that the deaths and adverse events were identical in both the 'vaccinated' group and the placebo group.(31) This is clearly a lie.
As previously noted, the design of the clinical trials' was clearly faulty. A persistent theme was the way in which the trials avoided seeking outcomes that could be negative and simply ditched data altogether with no explanation. It's known that 780 people dropped out of the trials after receiving one shot, but it is not known what their reasoning was nor what effect the inoculation had on them.(32)
Pfizer also made it difficult for the clinical trials participants to report side effects. They partnered with a company called Signant Health and produced an app that was used to notify adverse events. However, the app used a drop down menu that only listed various types of inflammation. Any other suspected event was incapable of being recorded on the app.(33) Once again, this is unethical and misleading. Clinical trials are required to list all side effects.
Pfizer also eliminated the original placebo control group after four months of the trial by inoculating them with the EGT, thus making it impossible to compare and contrast longer term effects. They also made sure to give this group a third and fourth shot (and only this group), thus muddying the waters still further.(34) This last action may well have been undertaken in an effort to make the placebo group sicker, in the long term, than the jabbed group.
Additionally, no study was done of the rate of degradation of the mRNA.(35) Likewise, their was no attempt to study the toxicity nor whether the mRNA was transcribed into DNA. This is almost certainly because they knew that, not only was the jab toxic, it altered DNA. A Swedish study has since confirmed the latter; mRNA can enter liver cells and be so transcribed. Within six hours of the Pfizer shot, the DNA of the affected cell is permanently altered.(36) There are two obvious questions that present themselves. Shouldn't these questions have been answered before the product was tested on humans? And doesn't informed consent require these answers? Yes and yes.
Another little known fact – the EUA wasn't granted on the basis of 44,000 trial participants. There were many different regimens within the trial groups; there were a large number of dosing protocols and the timing of the jab was also tinkered with. The one that was chosen – two doses, 21 days apart with 30 microgrammes of mRNA (allegedly) - had only been given to 170 participants. The proof that the injection worked? Not a particularly high bar; efficacy was assumed if there was no evidence of infection in the participants seven days after dose two.(37)
There were two further revelations that reveal these people for the charlatans that they truly are. They knew about the phenomenon of shedding - as defined as exposure via sexual contact, skin contact, inhalation or lactation - before they even conducted the trials.(38) mRNA can clearly be transmitted between the jabbed and the non jabbed.(39) This didn't stop them lying about it until they were blue in the face. In fact, as recently as July 2022, the CDC was still telling everyone that viral shedding was a myth.(40) And they also knew about the anaphylactic shock caused by the polyethylene glycol (PEG) in the EGT, too.(41) But those with such an allergy were not warned. Doctors were not standing by with defibrillators. They didn't care enough for that.
The level of mental gymnastics necessary to render all this evidence of malfeasance moot is beyond me. Only the terminally gullible or Big Pharma shills would attempt to justify or dispute any of it and then only selectively, but it still can't be done. This is evidence provided by the wrongdoers; they're kneecapping themselves. There is no need for tin foil hatters. It is clear that one of the main functions of the EGT is to depopulate via the destruction of the human reproductive system of both males and female and by the culling of the existing population too.
The list of adverse events is beyond extensive. The evidence from the trials, while spotty and incomplete, still demonstrates that the injections have a catastrophic effect on a significant proportion of the jabbed. Pfizer has gone to considerable lengths to avoid finding out inconvenient facts. They went even further in their efforts to hide the truth from us and they were joined in the endeavor by the FDA themselves and the entire medical infrastructure of the western world.
Why would this be? Does it really matter? Is theory and informed guesswork of any consequence? Or should we be more concerned by the fact that they have done it than we the reasons why? For my own part, it is inconceivable that what has transpired is accidental. There is far too much evidence of willfulness for this campaign to be the result of mere incompetence. It's deliberate; no matter how much we would prefer otherwise, it's an attempted genocide of both the born and the unborn. How can it be otherwise?
And if this is so, what does this tell us about those that rule over us? If they are capable of this, what else are they up? Can we take their word for anything?
Citations
(2) The Post Millennial @TPostMillennial
(3)
(4) https://www.nature.com/articles/nm1211-1536
(5) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vaccine
(6) https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2104974
(8) https://www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/125742_S1_M4_4223_185350.pdf
(9) Ditto
(10) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30587973/
(11) https://dailyclout.io/covid-19-vaccines-pregnancy-risky-business/
(13) https://www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/125742_S1_M2_24_nonclinical-overview.pdf
(14) https://dailyclout.io/covid-19-vaccines-pregnancy-risky-business/
(16) https://www.schc.org/assets/docs/ghs_info_sheets/schc_osha_reproductive_toxicity_4-4-16.pdf
(17) https://www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/125742_S1_M4_4223_185350.pdf
(18) https://www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/125742_S1_M2_24_nonclinical-overview.pdf
(19) https://www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/reissue_5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf
(20) Ditto
(21) https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/andr.13209
(22)
(23) https://dailyclout.io/why-covid-19-vaccine-consent-must-be-informed/
(24) Ditto
(25)
(26) https://dailyclout.io/pfizer-vaccine-fda-fails-to-mention-risk-of-heart-damage-in-teens/
(27) https://dailyclout.io/how-pfizer-covered-up-anticipated-adverse-events/
(28) https://dailyclout.io/pfizer-vaccine-fda-fails-to-mention-risk-of-heart-damage-in-teens/
(29) https://dailyclout.io/twenty-two-cases-of-rare-myocarditis-by-february-2021/
(30) https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavirus-covid-19-update-june-25-2021
(31) https://dailyclout.io/if-pfizer-controlled-the-data-they-controlled-the-outcome/
(32) https://expose-news.com/2022/06/15/pfizer-documents-800-people-never-finished-trial/
(34) https://dailyclout.io/inconsistencies-in-pfizer-clinical-trials-are-surfacing-report/
(35) https://www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/125742_S1_M2_24_nonclinical-overview.pdf
(37) https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9780471462422.eoct341
(38) https://dailyclout.io/vaccine-shedding-can-this-be-real-after-all/
(39) https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.28.22274443v1
(40) https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/facts.html
(41) https://www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/reissue_5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf
Figure 1 https://www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/reissue_5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf
Figure 2 Ditto