Pfizer coronavirus vaccine in doctors or nurses hands in blue rubber gloves. Prevention of sars-cov-2 or Covid-19, January 2021, San Francisco, USA
- The Facts:
- Newly released Pfizer documents reveal tens of thousands of adverse reactions reported in the first two months of 2021.
- The documents were released after a plaintiff group of professors and scientist FOIA the FDA.
- Reflect On:
- How can Pfizer be trusted when there is a lack of transparency in the kinds of adverse reactions that are taking place?
- If the average person and physician are not fully educated about potential side effects, how can they be diagnosed and reported accurately?
- If they are not being reported accurately, how do we truly know how “rare” they are?
Pause – set your Pulse…
Take a breath. Release the tension in your body. Place attention on your physical heart. Breathe slowly into the area for 60 seconds, focusing on feeling a sense of ease. Click here to learn why we suggest this.
Previously confidential Pfizer documents have been released by the FDA revealing that there were tens of thousands of adverse reactions reported worldwide from Pfizer’s COVID vaccines within the first two months of 2021.
The newly published 91 pages of the documentation is the first drop down of over 300,000 requested pages. A plaintiff group of professors and scientists filed a freedom of information act (FIOA) to access all the information the FDA reviewed before licensing the Pfizer vaccine.
Sign up to our newsletter Big Tech censors independent media, stay connected to us through our newsletter. Click here to join.
In one of the documents titled, Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports of [the Vaccine] Received Through 28-Feb-2021 there is a graph breaking down the types of reported adverse events and classifys them as non-serious or serious.
The numbers represented in this graph are adverse events reported through to February 28, 2021. The report states there are medically confirmed adverse reactions and non-medically confirmed adverse reactions.
Some of the adverse reaction featured include, facial paralysis otherwise known as Bell’s palsy (pg.19), spontaneous abortion (pg.12), heart attacks (pg. 16), myocarditis (pg.20), seizures (pg.21), brain hemorrhage (pg.24) and the list goes on.
If these more severe reactions were on Pfizer’s radar since the end of February 2021, why were the people who were reporting such adverse reactions dismissed? In many cases they were also ostracized and called liars. Plus journalists trying to share these stories continue to be censored for spreading vaccine hesitancy and misinformation.
This is the same webpage updated with an extended list of side effects that now includes myocarditis and Bell’s palsy, as of Nov 23, 2021 on the Government of Canada website.
The Canadian Government seems to be catching up to what people have been saying for months, begging the question: why they are so far behind especially since Pfizer knew this early on? That said, there are still many missing potential adverse reactions not listed that Pfizer and the FDA appear to have been aware of since the beginning of 2021.
The six month Pfizer trials package released earlier this year showed that during trials, severe adverse reactions happened at a rate of 1.2%. But there was no details on what those events were. This percentage may seem small but adds up quickly during a worldwide vaccination campaign. Further, many severe reactions cannot be caught during small vaccine trials like what Pfizer ran, they will flesh out during vaccination campaigns.
Pharmaceutical drugs are required to list all potential adverse reactions no matter how rare they are. This is what is called informed consent. It is bioethical that a person understands what could happen when taking a kind of drug or medical procedure.
With the COVID vaccines it appears this did not happen and is still not happening.
The question is, if official government websites have been behind in knowing the potential adverse reactions of the COVID vaccines, how can they justify mandating them?
Furthermore, if information featured in the Pfizer documents is just now becoming public, how do we have confidence that the average doctor has been properly educated to assess if something is an adverse reaction?
Although people feel comfort in leaning on the belief that these serious reactions are rare, the uncomfortable truth being revealed is that it is not clear how rare these reactions truly are.
The situation is a perfect storm of confusion. First the pharmaceutical companies do not reveal all the potential adverse reactions of the vaccine, this leaves physicians unclear on what to look for when it comes to their patients.
The government and media then produce constant messaging that says the vaccines are “safe and effective” and anyone questioning them is an “anti-vaxxer.” Finally, those having adverse reactions either do not recognize them because they have been told that the vaccines are safe, or they are made to feel crazy for suggesting it could be from the vaccine.
All this divides people, cutting off communication and connection, the very things that are needed to solve problems and bring clarity.
It will be 2076 before all documents the FDA used to approve the Pfizer vaccine will be made public if they are granted the 55 years to fulfill the FOIA request. If the number one goal is public health and the safety of people, why can’t there be transparency?