Have you read this, Steve❓❓❓Deaths Multiplied by Ten
Looking for a baseline of comparison, Latypova, a TrialSite contributor and host of the “Due Diligence” show, reviews 30 years of data for flu vaccines. She found over the past 30 years across vaccine lots, the Severe Adverse Events (SAEs) reported were in the same ballpark, with about 3-5 SAEs reported per lot. In comparison, a review of SAE’s across COVID-19 vaccine lots reveals a “wildly random” variation, with events ranging from one to 1,544 per lot.
According to Pfizer’s EMA documents, argues Latypova, the greater the integrity of the mRNA chains, the greater the deaths per batch. For example, with 55% of mRNA remaining intact, the medical product entrepreneur calculates deaths reported at 0.005% of vaccine recipients. On the other hand, when 69% of the mRNA was intact, the deaths reported multiplied by a factor of 10, to 0.05% of recipients reported as dying, according to Ms. Latypova’s analysis.
Use of the Vaccine Adverse Event Report (VAERS) data is subject to the critique that adverse events and deaths reported are not necessarily linked to the vaccine event. That’s because the events are self-reported often by provider or other healthcare professionals. But VAERS was established to detect signals, and the ongoing research driven by Latypova seeks to identify additional signals meriting further investigation.
“Safer When Broken”
Using the term, “safer when broken,” Latypova notes that SAEs declined dramatically from October 2020 to December 2021 for the Pfizer product. Likewise, Moderna’s vaccines had two massive spikes in SAEs for batches from July 2020, and by May 2021, the numbers were much lower. In the case of one lot, Ms. Latypova opines that 870 SAEs and 58 deaths should be considered “intentional.”
This is because as to this lot, Orange County in California “paused” use on January 18, 2021, due to allergic reactions. This pause was widely reported, yet the rest of the lot was used around the US, without any recall or other action, resulting in the above-described SAEs and deaths. Looking at the data from another angle, Latypova found wild variation in deaths per 100,000 vaccinations across US states. For example, California had 1.92 deaths and Utah had 1.7, yet South Dakota had 33 deaths and Kentucky had 24. This put the later states “way beyond” two standard deviations from the average across all states.
Although not part of a peer reviewed analyses, Latypova’ s ongoing research, nonetheless, continues to lead to serious questions that should be further investigated. Assuming veracity in the data, what could explain these vast discrepancies?
What is In the Vaccines?
Next, Pfizer’s declared product labeling states that the vaccine should have 30 nanograms of mRNA per vial, along with describing the other ingredients that should be present.
In independent testing all over the globe, no vials were found that conform to these labels. A recent TrialSite review explains some of these studies, noting why the findings tend to not be uploaded to any preprint server.
Pfizer’s international contracts forbid this independent testing at the vial level. That hasn’t stopped 26 groups around the world from conducted vial level tests. While not considered evidence by the scientific community, these informal study outcomes indicate none conformed to the putative mRNA levels. Again a caveat: these findings as TrialSite reported cannot be considered scientific “evidence” in the strict sense as the output hasn’t been subject to the scrutiny of the peer review process.
These independent researchers claim to have found large structures appearing as crystals, fibers, and squares. See the link for a TrialSite take on some of these informal studies. In one case, the authors claim they found “leftover” magnetic beads which are used in production but are supposed to be removed from the final product.
Perhaps, this could explain the unusual, outlandish claims by individuals that magnets would stick to their skin where they received the vaccines? Also, all of the vials evaluated in these independent endeavors claim to have found DNA, which should not be present. But again, these claims would need to be verified scientifically.
Pfizer documents reveal that while DNA should be below 10 nanograms per dose, the independent, unverified testing efforts discussed herein claim a presence of 1,300 to 2,100 nanograms. If accurate, why would the manufacturing process have gone so bad—seemingly so out of control from a good manufacturing practices perspective? Latypova suggests it is just not feasible scientifically to scale-up the mRNA batch size without producing a “garbage soup” of impurities. In her opinion, the batches with the “correct” amount of RNA produced the most adverse events.
Who’s In Charge?
Turning to the question of who is actually in charge of vaccine production, the vaccine-making process is positioned as a “public-private partnership,” with the government paying private firms to produce vaccines in an “arm’s length” contractual scenario. Yet reviewing government contracts reveal that the Chief Operating Officer for vaccine production appears to be the US Department of Defense (DoD), with the pharma firms not being directly in charge of this process.
This could make sense, given the emergency declarations associated with COVID-19. Latypova, again an expert in “GmP manufacturing and supply chain, suggests that the DoD and Moderna relationship needs further scrutiny---even systematic study (with peer review) of vaccine samples and an assessment of overall product quality processes during the pandemic response.
DoD has maintained relevant vaccine manufacturing capacity since 2012, using contractors such as Emergent BioSolutions and Ology Bioservices (RESILIENCE). The former has had a handful of manufacturing quality-related mishaps during the pandemic covered by this media. For example, Johnson and Johnson experienced quality degradation at one Emergent BioSolutions facility. Quality problems with Emergent BioSolutions were also reported with the AstraZeneca vaccine as well.
Drug production, manufacturing, supply chain expert, and TrialSite contributor Hedley Rees continues to raise challenges associated with gene and cell therapy biotech production in heavily outsourced models. In one piece, the UK-based consultant cautions to investors that they start understanding mounting quality concerns given complex outsourcing dependencies.
Latypova argues that it wasn’t feasible to fulfill the vaccine production contracts without established DoD vendors, given constraints of time. She points out that it should be firms like Pfizer contracting with the manufacturers, yet as noted at least in some instances, this appears to have been done between the DoD and the subcontractor. Contracts reviewed also revealed that the vaccine products are designated as having “military application.” This aligns with the concept that the medicinal products are in fact, DoD-driven “countermeasures” developed in response to the invisible enemy—the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen.
Likewise, upon review, the Moderna-DoD contracts convey that the vaccines are being developed for both “civil and military application.” All of the issues raised by Ms. Latypova should be cause for question, if not concern.
TrialSite’s review of Public Citizen’s analysis of COVID-19 contracts with various nations revealed disturbing findings. See “Pfizer’s Power in the COVID-19 Vaccine Space.” What force(s) empowered Pfizer to essentially compel so many nations into in many cases, what read like adhesion contracts?
The ongoing research spearheaded by Latypova drives uncomfortable, but important questions that need to be asked, such as where the line is, if any, between civilian and defense elements driving the unfolding COVID-19 response in the United States. What entities are actually in charge? Are these products’ sponsors beholden to the same levels of regulatory and quality scrutiny as the general biopharma industry or has emergency status somehow changed (lowered) such standards? Are the countermeasures (vaccines and other products) civilian or actually defense-related products? Or both? Concerning the vaccine lot discrepancies identified and described by Latypova, what specific entities are accountable to the American public?
Steve you are unstoppable. That's because you don't get stuck when you encounter a dead end. You find a way around it. Again, and again. There are not many people like you out there. Thanks for all you do.
We are winning for sure. The worm is turning. Seriously. We just need to keep going. I talked with a friend today about the Thai vaccine study. He told me his young friend got an "irregular heartbeat" post-vaccine. I talked about my young friend who got a heart problem after his booster. Talking helps. We can't stay silent. We are not alone. Each of us can make a difference.
I think that now you finally realize the deadly scam of vackseens, it is time to change the name of your organization from VSRF to something else, since there is not such thing as "vackseen safety."
"...a lot of complaints about the term vaccine. The medical literature doesn't refer to them as bio-weapons or clot shots. If we are to reach the blue pilled audience, especially doctors, it's important to use language they will not immediately reject and stop reading."
I happen to agree with Steve on this but regardless I don't think either you or I would change his mind. At least now you know the reasoning behind him using the term even though he knows it's not a vaccine.
It's good to be flexible, but accurate. For a blue pilled audience I prefer "pseudovaccines," "so-called 'vaccines'," "COVID-19 injections," "novel mRNA-LNP injections developed and trialled at warp speed at Trump's behest, unlike other vaccines or drugs that have been historically trialled for much longer, after 30 years of failure to gain regulatory approval'" etc
I think I understand where you are coming from. There's overwhelming evidence of clots from the shots. Therefore "clot shot" is accurate. It was definitely a "death jab" for Carol Pearce in Canada after she died in 7 minutes after she was injected with the new bivalent booster that was tested on 8 mice. Others are dead too. So "death jab" and "slab jab" are accurate toio. Further, Rochelle Walensky has urged people who have not had a jab for 2 months to get a booster ASAP. An injection that needs to be repeated every 2 months for the duration of a person's life is not a vaccine in my opinion. You are right to not want to placate or coddle the pushers. I think whoever wrire that quote attributed to Steve was talking about persuading rather than placating. There is no point arguing with pushers. Arguing with a fool only proves there are two.
My beef is that the medical industry shoulders a great deal of responsibility for the clusterfuck we find ourselves in. I don't feel like speaking their language...
Bully billy goats will provide breast milk for a fee. Fake breast milque and even fake breasts to pretend....that is why they destroyed Womanity, to profit more and increasingly blatantly
What we are seeing now, 91 or 92 weeks since the vaccination program started, is rising disability. Everyone focuses on the deaths, and that’s bad, but disability is multiples of the deaths, and these are disabilities where people can’t work. They are incapacitated. Three million people disappeared from the labor force from death and disability. That number will cause labor shortages. That number will cause supply chain breaks, and we are seeing that. https://usawatchdog.com/unpayable-debt-vax-causing-hell-on-earth-ed-dowd/
Steve if you are into genetics, and human gene variance, couple of new papers. In the future everyone might have custom tailored treatment according to what genes they have inherited, not a one size fits all vaccine for mandating all ( sort of like mandating the pseudoscience of bloodletting for all-someting to take into consideration when clinical trials with new mRNA vaccines are used in human's). Current Biology September 26 2022---The contribution of Neaderthal introgression to modern human traits. Patrick F Reilly et al. "recent research into host susceptibility to the host genomics of COVID-19 identified Neaderthal variants contributing to both susceptibility to and protection against COVID-19 in Eurasian populations". Another interesting read on inherited variant genetics, The Selection Landscape and Genetic Legacy of Ancient Eurasians, September 23 2022 Evan K. Iriving-Pease et al...
As predicted by Robert Heinlein in 1942 with his story "Beyond This Horizon." Heinlein had the world run by geneticists but responsibly, with a control group. In case things went wrong with genetic modification the human race would survive as it always had.
I don't think people care about that anymore - they'll destroy the human race just to see if they can alter genetics the way they want.
Nice of Naomi to pop in for 15 min while at a nightclub. Weird.
https://new.awakeningchannel.com/the-big-reset-movie/
Have you read this, Steve❓❓❓Deaths Multiplied by Ten
Looking for a baseline of comparison, Latypova, a TrialSite contributor and host of the “Due Diligence” show, reviews 30 years of data for flu vaccines. She found over the past 30 years across vaccine lots, the Severe Adverse Events (SAEs) reported were in the same ballpark, with about 3-5 SAEs reported per lot. In comparison, a review of SAE’s across COVID-19 vaccine lots reveals a “wildly random” variation, with events ranging from one to 1,544 per lot.
According to Pfizer’s EMA documents, argues Latypova, the greater the integrity of the mRNA chains, the greater the deaths per batch. For example, with 55% of mRNA remaining intact, the medical product entrepreneur calculates deaths reported at 0.005% of vaccine recipients. On the other hand, when 69% of the mRNA was intact, the deaths reported multiplied by a factor of 10, to 0.05% of recipients reported as dying, according to Ms. Latypova’s analysis.
Use of the Vaccine Adverse Event Report (VAERS) data is subject to the critique that adverse events and deaths reported are not necessarily linked to the vaccine event. That’s because the events are self-reported often by provider or other healthcare professionals. But VAERS was established to detect signals, and the ongoing research driven by Latypova seeks to identify additional signals meriting further investigation.
“Safer When Broken”
Using the term, “safer when broken,” Latypova notes that SAEs declined dramatically from October 2020 to December 2021 for the Pfizer product. Likewise, Moderna’s vaccines had two massive spikes in SAEs for batches from July 2020, and by May 2021, the numbers were much lower. In the case of one lot, Ms. Latypova opines that 870 SAEs and 58 deaths should be considered “intentional.”
This is because as to this lot, Orange County in California “paused” use on January 18, 2021, due to allergic reactions. This pause was widely reported, yet the rest of the lot was used around the US, without any recall or other action, resulting in the above-described SAEs and deaths. Looking at the data from another angle, Latypova found wild variation in deaths per 100,000 vaccinations across US states. For example, California had 1.92 deaths and Utah had 1.7, yet South Dakota had 33 deaths and Kentucky had 24. This put the later states “way beyond” two standard deviations from the average across all states.
Although not part of a peer reviewed analyses, Latypova’ s ongoing research, nonetheless, continues to lead to serious questions that should be further investigated. Assuming veracity in the data, what could explain these vast discrepancies?
What is In the Vaccines?
Next, Pfizer’s declared product labeling states that the vaccine should have 30 nanograms of mRNA per vial, along with describing the other ingredients that should be present.
In independent testing all over the globe, no vials were found that conform to these labels. A recent TrialSite review explains some of these studies, noting why the findings tend to not be uploaded to any preprint server.
Pfizer’s international contracts forbid this independent testing at the vial level. That hasn’t stopped 26 groups around the world from conducted vial level tests. While not considered evidence by the scientific community, these informal study outcomes indicate none conformed to the putative mRNA levels. Again a caveat: these findings as TrialSite reported cannot be considered scientific “evidence” in the strict sense as the output hasn’t been subject to the scrutiny of the peer review process.
These independent researchers claim to have found large structures appearing as crystals, fibers, and squares. See the link for a TrialSite take on some of these informal studies. In one case, the authors claim they found “leftover” magnetic beads which are used in production but are supposed to be removed from the final product.
Perhaps, this could explain the unusual, outlandish claims by individuals that magnets would stick to their skin where they received the vaccines? Also, all of the vials evaluated in these independent endeavors claim to have found DNA, which should not be present. But again, these claims would need to be verified scientifically.
Pfizer documents reveal that while DNA should be below 10 nanograms per dose, the independent, unverified testing efforts discussed herein claim a presence of 1,300 to 2,100 nanograms. If accurate, why would the manufacturing process have gone so bad—seemingly so out of control from a good manufacturing practices perspective? Latypova suggests it is just not feasible scientifically to scale-up the mRNA batch size without producing a “garbage soup” of impurities. In her opinion, the batches with the “correct” amount of RNA produced the most adverse events.
Who’s In Charge?
Turning to the question of who is actually in charge of vaccine production, the vaccine-making process is positioned as a “public-private partnership,” with the government paying private firms to produce vaccines in an “arm’s length” contractual scenario. Yet reviewing government contracts reveal that the Chief Operating Officer for vaccine production appears to be the US Department of Defense (DoD), with the pharma firms not being directly in charge of this process.
This could make sense, given the emergency declarations associated with COVID-19. Latypova, again an expert in “GmP manufacturing and supply chain, suggests that the DoD and Moderna relationship needs further scrutiny---even systematic study (with peer review) of vaccine samples and an assessment of overall product quality processes during the pandemic response.
DoD has maintained relevant vaccine manufacturing capacity since 2012, using contractors such as Emergent BioSolutions and Ology Bioservices (RESILIENCE). The former has had a handful of manufacturing quality-related mishaps during the pandemic covered by this media. For example, Johnson and Johnson experienced quality degradation at one Emergent BioSolutions facility. Quality problems with Emergent BioSolutions were also reported with the AstraZeneca vaccine as well.
Drug production, manufacturing, supply chain expert, and TrialSite contributor Hedley Rees continues to raise challenges associated with gene and cell therapy biotech production in heavily outsourced models. In one piece, the UK-based consultant cautions to investors that they start understanding mounting quality concerns given complex outsourcing dependencies.
Latypova argues that it wasn’t feasible to fulfill the vaccine production contracts without established DoD vendors, given constraints of time. She points out that it should be firms like Pfizer contracting with the manufacturers, yet as noted at least in some instances, this appears to have been done between the DoD and the subcontractor. Contracts reviewed also revealed that the vaccine products are designated as having “military application.” This aligns with the concept that the medicinal products are in fact, DoD-driven “countermeasures” developed in response to the invisible enemy—the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen.
Likewise, upon review, the Moderna-DoD contracts convey that the vaccines are being developed for both “civil and military application.” All of the issues raised by Ms. Latypova should be cause for question, if not concern.
TrialSite’s review of Public Citizen’s analysis of COVID-19 contracts with various nations revealed disturbing findings. See “Pfizer’s Power in the COVID-19 Vaccine Space.” What force(s) empowered Pfizer to essentially compel so many nations into in many cases, what read like adhesion contracts?
The ongoing research spearheaded by Latypova drives uncomfortable, but important questions that need to be asked, such as where the line is, if any, between civilian and defense elements driving the unfolding COVID-19 response in the United States. What entities are actually in charge? Are these products’ sponsors beholden to the same levels of regulatory and quality scrutiny as the general biopharma industry or has emergency status somehow changed (lowered) such standards? Are the countermeasures (vaccines and other products) civilian or actually defense-related products? Or both? Concerning the vaccine lot discrepancies identified and described by Latypova, what specific entities are accountable to the American public?
COVID-19
Manufacturing
mRNA
Vaccines
Pfizer
Comments (3)
What do you think?
0/3000
Publish
M
m.l.king
Sure to be an informative episode. I look forward to watching!
https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-09-28-fired-nurse-attests-vaccine-induced-myocarditis-kids.html
Steve, you are mentioned in this article.
Steve you are unstoppable. That's because you don't get stuck when you encounter a dead end. You find a way around it. Again, and again. There are not many people like you out there. Thanks for all you do.
We are winning for sure. The worm is turning. Seriously. We just need to keep going. I talked with a friend today about the Thai vaccine study. He told me his young friend got an "irregular heartbeat" post-vaccine. I talked about my young friend who got a heart problem after his booster. Talking helps. We can't stay silent. We are not alone. Each of us can make a difference.
Thanks again for your leadership.
I think that now you finally realize the deadly scam of vackseens, it is time to change the name of your organization from VSRF to something else, since there is not such thing as "vackseen safety."
"...a lot of complaints about the term vaccine. The medical literature doesn't refer to them as bio-weapons or clot shots. If we are to reach the blue pilled audience, especially doctors, it's important to use language they will not immediately reject and stop reading."
- Steve Kirsch
Did you really say/write that, Steve?
It's in a pinned comment of "Evidence of Harm" https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/the-evidence if you would like to read it in context.
I happen to agree with Steve on this but regardless I don't think either you or I would change his mind. At least now you know the reasoning behind him using the term even though he knows it's not a vaccine.
It's good to be flexible, but accurate. For a blue pilled audience I prefer "pseudovaccines," "so-called 'vaccines'," "COVID-19 injections," "novel mRNA-LNP injections developed and trialled at warp speed at Trump's behest, unlike other vaccines or drugs that have been historically trialled for much longer, after 30 years of failure to gain regulatory approval'" etc
The medical literature best refer to these jabs as the clot shots that they are... They are NOT vaccines!
I'm not interested in placating ANYONE. Coddling is not what this crisis demands...
I think I understand where you are coming from. There's overwhelming evidence of clots from the shots. Therefore "clot shot" is accurate. It was definitely a "death jab" for Carol Pearce in Canada after she died in 7 minutes after she was injected with the new bivalent booster that was tested on 8 mice. Others are dead too. So "death jab" and "slab jab" are accurate toio. Further, Rochelle Walensky has urged people who have not had a jab for 2 months to get a booster ASAP. An injection that needs to be repeated every 2 months for the duration of a person's life is not a vaccine in my opinion. You are right to not want to placate or coddle the pushers. I think whoever wrire that quote attributed to Steve was talking about persuading rather than placating. There is no point arguing with pushers. Arguing with a fool only proves there are two.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply.
My beef is that the medical industry shoulders a great deal of responsibility for the clusterfuck we find ourselves in. I don't feel like speaking their language...
They do shoulder that responsibility. Many are conformists who seem to just do what Pharma tells them. It's good that you don't bow down before them.
Quackcine, quackcine, quackcine, quackcine
I'm begging of you please don't take my man, or woman
Quackcine, quackcine, quackcine, quackcine
Please don't take them even though you can
I had to have this talk with you
My happiness depends on you
And whatever you decide to do
Quackcine
Don't worry
Bully billy goats will provide breast milk for a fee. Fake breast milque and even fake breasts to pretend....that is why they destroyed Womanity, to profit more and increasingly blatantly
Sounds interesting, Steve. Keep up the good work!
It was a heartbreaking report by Dr. Naomi Wolf on the WarRoom yesterday.
Can you post the link?
It's about 26 minutes...
https://rumble.com/v1lwzcs-dr.-naomi-wolf-on-the-ccps-control-of-the-covid-vaccine.html
Thank you.
This will be amazing!
Thank you so much Steve Kirsch, Dr. Naomi Wolf and Dr. Thorp!! Very Grateful!❤️🩹
Everything being pushed from the Liberal Left right now, are to achieve one thing: DEPOP.
The government wants us dead.
What we are seeing now, 91 or 92 weeks since the vaccination program started, is rising disability. Everyone focuses on the deaths, and that’s bad, but disability is multiples of the deaths, and these are disabilities where people can’t work. They are incapacitated. Three million people disappeared from the labor force from death and disability. That number will cause labor shortages. That number will cause supply chain breaks, and we are seeing that. https://usawatchdog.com/unpayable-debt-vax-causing-hell-on-earth-ed-dowd/
New film by Oracle with John Bove: https://youtu.be/dIVZ5ssWB-o
Steve if you are into genetics, and human gene variance, couple of new papers. In the future everyone might have custom tailored treatment according to what genes they have inherited, not a one size fits all vaccine for mandating all ( sort of like mandating the pseudoscience of bloodletting for all-someting to take into consideration when clinical trials with new mRNA vaccines are used in human's). Current Biology September 26 2022---The contribution of Neaderthal introgression to modern human traits. Patrick F Reilly et al. "recent research into host susceptibility to the host genomics of COVID-19 identified Neaderthal variants contributing to both susceptibility to and protection against COVID-19 in Eurasian populations". Another interesting read on inherited variant genetics, The Selection Landscape and Genetic Legacy of Ancient Eurasians, September 23 2022 Evan K. Iriving-Pease et al...
As predicted by Robert Heinlein in 1942 with his story "Beyond This Horizon." Heinlein had the world run by geneticists but responsibly, with a control group. In case things went wrong with genetic modification the human race would survive as it always had.
I don't think people care about that anymore - they'll destroy the human race just to see if they can alter genetics the way they want.