I’m starting to have more and more conversations with pediatricians and pediatric subspecialists who are observing covid-19 “vaccine” side effects. Not long ago, these conversations were incredibly rare.
Pediatricians, as a group, are incredibly pro-vaccine and most would want to avoid the stigma of ever being labeled “anti-vax.” Use of the traditional term “vaccine” for new injection products implied traditional vaccine mechanism of action, safety profiles, and development and regulatory processes. The mechanism of action of these genetic technologies is far different than traditional vaccines, reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System since their introduction are greater than the previous 30 years for all vaccines combined, and nothing about the development and regulatory processes has been usual.
The usual vaccine development timeline takes about 5-10 years and consists of:
1. Preclinical trials, typically in animal models
2. Phase 1 clinical trials in small groups of healthy human volunteers to assess dosing, short-term safety, and immune response
3. Phase 2 clinical trials in larger groups of more diverse human volunteers to further assess safety and immune response
4. Phase 3 clinical trials in tens of thousands of volunteers to assess longer-term safety and vaccine efficacy
5. Regulatory approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
6. Scaling up vaccine manufacturing
7. Post-licensure vaccine safety monitoring
Phase 2 trials for the covid-19 genetic injections went as follows:
Pfizer: 45 participants, ages 19-54 (mean 35)
Moderna: 300 participants, ages 19-54 (mean 37); 50 participants, ages 55-87 (mean 64)
J&J: 796 participants, ages 18-55 (mean 34); 394 participants, ages 65-88 (mean 69)
The following populations were excluded:
Previous confirmed COVID-19 disease
Pregnant and lactating women (Pfizer, Moderna)
Children
Immune compromised
They were only designed to assess whether vaccines elicited expected antibody response with low short-term side effect profile.
Technically, all of these products are still under Phase 3 trial. None of the products available in the U.S. have been approved (Comirnaty was approved for ages 16+ but it is unavailable in the U.S.) All of the available products are still under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA).
It’s helpful to review the EUA timeline for these products:
December 2020
· Initial EUA for limited populations for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna
February 2021
· Initial EUA for limited populations for J&J
April 15, 2021
· Pfizer-BioNTech authorized for all, ages 16+
· Moderna and J&J authorized for all, ages 18+
May 12, 2021
· Pfizer/BioNTech authorized for 12-17 years old
November 3, 2021
· Pfizer/BioNTech authorized for 5+
November 20, 2021
· Boosters authorized for all 18+ (eligible 6 months after completing Pfizer or Moderna, or 2 months after receiving J&J)
December 17, 2021
· CDC/DOH recommendation that individuals 18+ receive mRNA product (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) instead of J&J
January 6, 2022
· Boosters authorized for all ages 12-17 (eligible 5 months after completing initial series)
May 17, 2022
· Boosters authorized for ages 5-11 (eligible 5 months after completing initial series)
June 15, 2022
· Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) will meet to discuss EUA for Pfizer and Moderna for children aged 6 months to 5 years old
As more and more children receive these products, the physicians who take care of them are starting to observe side effects. The FDA’s process has not inspired trust (they failed to convene the VRBPAC, an independent advisory panel, when they authorized boosters in children ages 5 to 11, for example). Interested parties can submit written comments prior to upcoming meetings discussing expanded EUA for these products in children.
Meanwhile, there is an increasing urgency among physicians and physician groups to raise alarms so that parents have full informed consent if they are considering boosters or initial injections in their younger children. One group to do so recently is the North Carolina Physicians for Freedom. Expect more.
It is extremely important to bring adverse effects to light. I have been inspired by Dr. Charles Hoffe in British Columbia, Canada, as he has faced persecution, loss of hospital privileges, and personal losses brought by the fire in Lytton last summer. Here is his story, a brave whistleblower. Keep him in your prayers, and bring the truth to the light.
https://www.visiontimes.com/2021/06/23/whistleblower-doctor-charles-hoffe-cancelled.html
A few corrections, some of the covid vaccines have gotten the standard, non-emergency use approval by now:
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/full-fda-approval-of-a-covid-19-vaccine-what-you-should-know
"The mechanism of action of these genetic technologies is far different than traditional vaccines, reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System since their introduction are greater than the previous 30 years for all vaccines combined, and nothing about the development and regulatory processes has been usual."
Also, considering that anyone can submit anything to the VAERS database, it shouldn't be cited as evidence of adverse effects until those effects have been verified by a medical professional. The VAERS page pretty thoroughly explains that. Additionally, most Americans weren't even aware that the database existed until covid hit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_Adverse_Event_Reporting_System
Still, why do you feel that the completed phase 3 trials were not actually completed?