My statement at the Feb 4 ACIP meeting re: Moderna vaccine approval
My statement at the Feb 4 ACIP meeting re: Moderna vaccine approval
I gave four compelling reasons why they should not approve the Moderna COVID vaccine. My remarks fell on deaf ears. They voted 13-0 to approve the Moderna vaccine.
About ACIP
ACIP is the outside committee that advises the CDC on vaccines. It is chaired by Stanford Professor Grace Lee.
None of the ACIP committee members will talk to me. They ignore everything I send, including my offer to donate $1M to a charity of their choice if they would just answer my questions on a recorded zoom call.
They are not interested in seeing the safety signals we found either. The FDA and CDC don’t want to see those signals either. I’ve tried numerous times and gave up.
About this meeting
You can watch it here starting at 10am EST.
There were 9 public speakers. I was speaker #6. The public speakers begin about 1 hour and 15 minutes after the start of the meeting. No vaccine injured people were chosen to speak.
Here is the Meeting agenda.
Slides: ACIP slides for Feb 4 meeting
After the public statements and additional presentations, they voted 13-0 to approve the Moderna vaccine for >18 years olds.
My oral statement
My name is Steve Kirsch. I’m the Executive Director of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation. I have no conflicts.
My remarks, as well as all supporting data, are posted on my substack at stevekirsch.substack.com.
There are four compelling reasons why you should not approve the Moderna vaccine.
Reason #1 After 90 days, the Moderna vaccine has negative efficacy against Omicron
You cannot possibly approve a vaccine which, after just 90 days, demonstrates negative efficacy against the predominant variant. This was very clearly shown for the Moderna vaccine in the Denmark study and subsequently confirmed by data from the German government. There are now over 13 studies, including the famous Harvard study, that clearly show that the infection rate is highest in those countries with the greatest vaccination rate. If the vaccines worked as claimed, how do you explain these studies?
Reason #2 The Moderna vaccine kills more people than it is likely to save
A very conservative estimate of the number of deaths using the VAERS data and the CDC’s own methodology shows that the Moderna vaccine has killed at least 64,000 people. The Moderna trial data shows that over 13,000 lives may have been saved, but that is optimistic because the dominant variant has shifted. In short, the Moderna vaccine will kill at least 4.8 people from all-cause mortality for every life we might save from COVID. It makes no sense.
Reason #3 The vaccine fails on an absolute safety basis
The Moderna vaccine kills at least 643 people per million as I just pointed out. That makes these vaccines nearly 1,000 times deadlier than the smallpox vaccine which previously was the most deadly vaccine in human history and is considered too unsafe to use by experts.
Reason #4 You should not approve the vaccine until you see all the safety signals.
Although the phase 3 trials claimed that “No safety concerns were identified”, there are hundreds of very serious adverse events that are being ignored.
For example, according to VAERS US data, the average rate of pulmonary embolism reports is just 3 per year. With Moderna, we have 1,245 events. 415X normal. How can that not be flagged as an adverse event? The only way that can happen is if the people who are in charge of monitoring the safety signals are either blind or corrupt. The public is not being informed of hundreds of safety signals like this.
Some people believe that the reports in VAERS are unreliable. There is no evidence of this. In fact, individual doctors report seeing adverse event rates that are 20,000 times higher than any other vaccine. These doctors are afraid to speak out due to threats and intimidation by state medical boards and others. And there were Facebook vaccine injury support groups with 250,000 people that were deleted by Facebook. Both of these anecdotes are impossible to explain if the COVID vaccines are truly as safe and effective as claimed.
All of the supporting data is posted to my substack at stevekirsch.substack.com.
Additional arguments
The CDC claims that there are no deaths. Zero. Nobody questions them on this. This is a clear signal of corruption. As I note below, Dr. Peter Schirmacher determined at least 30% of the deaths two-weeks after the vaccine were caused by the vaccine. Yet at the ACIP meeting, nobody died.
The "pro" argument is essentially data free - it's all based on a premise of some kind of miracle vaccine. None of the public speakers who spoke in favor of the vaccine cited any VAERS data or studies on the efficacy against Omicron. Most didn’t recognize this meeting was about approving Moderna for 18 year old and over.
An Indiana life insurance company reports a 40% increase in deaths after the vaccines rolled out. This is impossible to happen by chance. There must be a cause and it wasn’t COVID. What was it? Why can’t anyone explain it?
There were 6 speakers who spoke in support, two (David Wiseman and myself) who opposed the approval, and one who opposed mandates but didn’t oppose the vaccine (likely because he wanted to preserve his job). There were no speakers at the ACIP meeting from the vaccine injured.
Today, we still don’t know the duration, distribution, and amount of spike protein created by the vaccine. The animal studies were never done.
We still don’t know what the d-Dimer and troponin levels are for people post-vaccine. How long do they last? In what percentage of people? And how high do levels for both of these get.
If the Moderna vaccine is so safe, how can Dr. Ryan Cole observe blood clots that are more extensive than anything he seen in his career in autopsies done shortly after vaccination?
The CDC people never talked about the underreporting factor in VAERS or how to calculate it. As usual, they pretend the event rates in VAERS are fully reported.
The trial collected data for less than 6 months. Where is the follow up data? Answer: it was shown at the meeting and it showed 8 deaths in the vaccine group compared to 1 death in the placebo group.
Any argument about hospitals being overwhelmed is exacerbated by a vaccine with negative efficacy after 90 days against the current variant.
If the myocarditis rates are so low, how come even school nurses cannot even get their peers to talk about the myocarditis rates that they are seeing in their high schools?
If this is so safe and effective, then why are they unwilling to have robust discussions with leading doctors and scientists who disagree? Instead they have these carefully choreographed presentations. We never have any invited presentations from qualified people with opposing views. Is that any way for a committee to make the best decisions?
The vaccines are clearly not working. There is a worldwide effort and it has made the problem worse, not better as shown in this graph from an Alex Berenson article:
Vaccine efficacy is overblown; they have not been effective in preventing transmission, infection, hospitalization or deaths. See Table 13 from week 5 of report from UK.
Why is the FDA hiding its own data?
Interesting brief report from Epoch Times about an FDA analysis referenced in their Moderna approval document, which the reporter found on their website and then when he wrote to ask about it, they took it down (see the article at ZeroHedge on scrubbing the data). Long story short, the study shows a myocarditis rate following Moderna among men 18-24 was 148 per million vs CDC VAERS estimate of 56 per million, which is 2.6 times as frequent.
Here's the link:
Even Dr. Paul Offit doesn’t support the use of boosters, especially in children.
In some European countries, the use of the experimental Moderna vaccine was suspended in those under 30 years old last year. This wasn't done on a whim; the signal is obvious.
Adherence to protocols was not followed in the Phase 3 trial. They were designed to follow participants for at least 2 years to monitor safety and yet there is no follow up.
The CDC claims no one has died from the Moderna vaccine. They are lying about that. They should not be trusted.
The CDC will not comment on any autopsy reports that show the vaccine is the cause of death. They reply that they are “studying” them.
The NIH is unable to treat any vaccine injured and restore them to normal.
There are over 20,000 death reports in VAERS. The committee should ask to see the analysis of each of them that proves that none of these deaths were caused by the vaccine. If just 1% were caused by the vaccine, the vaccine would be too unsafe to deploy.
Even the mice aren’t buying it:
Backup data
Risk benefit calculation for Moderna
VAERS shows 4,270 deaths associated with Moderna. After subtracting 200 background deaths and 855 COVID deaths, we are left with 3,215 deaths. If we use the most conservative estimate of the VAERS URF in the scientific literature (20), we conservatively estimate that there are 64,300 excess deaths from Moderna. If the vaccine didn’t kill those people, then what did? On the benefit side, based on the Moderna Phase 3 trial, we might save 2 lives net per 15,000 fully vaccinated people. So this is approximately 13,333 lives saved for the 100M fully vaccinated people.
The 200 background deaths comes from 40% of 2*250 since Moderna is ~40% of the vaccine doses and there are 250 background deaths in a typical year. Since there are 2 doses, we double the 250 background death rate since there are twice as many chances to see a background death.
Number of deaths from Moderna:
There are 855 cases where they died with COVID symptoms. To be super conservative, we assume that all deaths with COVID were from COVID so we subtract all of them.
Pulmonary embolism
Pulmonary embolism happens 15 times in 5 years. So that’s an average of 3 reports per year from all vaccines:
But for Moderna, the rates are off-the-charts compared to normal. If this isn’t a safety signal, I don’t know what is. We are seeing 415 times more events than a normal year. If it wasn’t the vaccine that caused these events, then what did? The CDC cannot find this safety signal which is life threatening. When left untreated, the mortality rate is up to 30% but when treated early, the mortality rate is 8%. Acute onset of pulmonary embolism can cause people to die suddenly 10% of the time.
1 death per million dose reference
The reference on Paul Offit and 1 death per million being unsafe is in this 60 Minutes interview.
Alternate very conservative causal death estimate still shows the Moderna vaccine is unsafe for use in humans
If you don’t like VAERS, then we can also compute an extremely conservative causal death estimate using the work of Dr. Peter Schirmacher, one of the top 100 pathologists in the world. He found at least 30% of the people who died after vaccination were killed by the vaccine. So taking the 4270*.3=1281. Now divide by the 100M fully vaccinated (since 200M Moderna doses) and we get 12 deaths per million. So we easily still exceed the Paul Offit stopping condition by a factor of 10.
So this uses a VAERS URF of 1 which is 41 times lower than the number I derived.
20,000 times higher adverse event rates with these vaccines
A neurology practice with over 20,000 patients has approximately 2,000 patients who are vaccine injured that would be reportable to VAERS. Number of VAERS-reportable adverse event rates for the same practice in the past 11 years: 0.
The neurologists don’t want to be identified because they know they would lose their licenses to practice medicine if they spoke out publicly.
I’ll post a third party reference here who knows the doctor.
Facebook groups with 250K vaccine injured being deleted
Facebook should admit this. If not, there are plenty of vaccine injured who would be happy to validate this.
Myocarditis rates
You have to ask yourself how there can be four cases of myocarditis at Monte Vista Christian school in Watsonville, CA. There are only an estimated 200 boys who have been vaccinated (at most 400). So that is a myocarditis rate of at least 1 in 100 teenage boys which is much higher than the CDC is telling us (1 in over 22,000 which is 220X lower than we saw at Monte Vista school).
I’m sure myocarditis rates are high at other schools, but nobody is talking. Everyone is remaining silent.
Hundreds of adverse events that the CDC is ignoring
This has been known for a long time, but nobody cares for some reason. Here’s a link to the article I wrote November 8, 2021:
Here is the table of the top 37 most elevated symptoms compared to baseline (the X-factor is the rate for these vaccines compared to vaccines in a normal year). See the article for the full list of all adverse events.
VAERS URF estimates
I’m aware of at least four estimates of the VAERS underreporting factor (URF):
Aaron Siri: 50
My calculation: 41
Jessica Rose’s calculation using Pfizer clinical trial: 30
You can read about all the methods in detail here. For my remarks, I chose the most conservative of the four.
VAERS and causality
The CDC and “fact checkers” love to point out that correlation doesn’t equal causation.
Sure, but the over 63,000 “excess deaths” have to be caused by something.
If it wasn’t the vaccine, then what caused the excess deaths (those above the background rate and COVID rates)?
Nobody wants to talk about this. There is a reason for that. They cannot explain it.
Threats and intimidation tactics
Conflict of interest
Members of the CDC's ACIP Committee have a significant influence on the health of nearly every member of the American population. They are responsible for adding to and/or altering the national vaccine schedule.
A significant number of ACIP committee members receive direct financial returns when more vaccinations are added to the current schedule. Some own vaccination related patent(s) and/or stock shares of the pharmaceutical companies responsible for supplying new vaccines to the public. Others receive research grant money, funding for their academic departments, or payments for the oversight of vaccine safety trials.
The following is a partial list of some of the patents that are owned or shared by members of the CDC and/or ACIP committee:
"Nucleic acid vaccines for prevention of flavivirus infection"- This patent comes into play during the manufacturing process of vaccines for yellow fever, Zika, Dengue, West Nile virus and more.
Various vaccination testing methods - When pharmaceutical companies need to test aspects of a new vaccine, they may utilize one of the CDC's patented testing methods including an artificial lung system for aerosol vaccines and a process that screens new vaccines for human rhinoviruses.
Adjuvant patents - Adjuvants are components within vaccinations intended to create an intensified immune reaction; members of the ACIP own patents on adjuvants used specifically in vaccinations created for premature babies and full term newborns.
Assays that assist vaccine development - During the vaccine development process, manufacturers will often observe biological samples for specific antibodies; the CDC owns a patent on an assay that facilitates this monitoring system.
Vaccine quality control - patents on various aspects of quality control for vaccinations are utilized by pharmaceutical companies on a large scale once a new vaccine is actively distributed to the public.
In total, 56 individual patents were found to be owned or shared by one or more members of the ACIP committee or other committees within the CDC.
Summary
The only way the ACIP committee can vote to approve these vaccines is if the committee members are either asleep, incompetent, or corrupt.
My prediction is that none of my points will be addressed or even discussed and the Moderna vaccine will be unanimously approved.
Steve, you’re my hero!
all of the members of the ACIP committee are anti-vaxxers. Their reluctance to debate with Steve, or anyone else, on the safety of vaccines is creating mistrust of the health authorities. This mistrust, and the fact that their actions show they are hiding something, is what is causing us to be vaccine hesitant. It's not the "misinformation" making us hesitant, it's the fact that the health authorities will not present the data to correct the misinformation. This means that they fall into new definition of an anti-vaxxer as they are the direct cause of most people's "hesitancy".