TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @bin_vera

bin_vera
Posted - November 27, 2023 at 4:01 PM
Saved - November 28, 2023 at 10:33 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
A groundbreaking American doctor's innovative work has attracted attention from colleagues and patients across America and beyond. Dr. Jordan Vaughn and his team have discovered tiny blood clots that cause significant health issues. These clots, related to the spike protein produced after corona vaccines, can obstruct blood vessels, leading to oxygen deprivation in tissues and organs. Concerns have been raised about long-term damage to millions of people's blood vessels. Dr. Vaughn's treatment offers miraculous recovery, challenging traditional methods. Censorship and calls for spreading awareness surround this topic.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

1)Os pacientes deste médico se recuperam milagrosamente após a injeção, mas você não tem permissão para saber disso. O trabalho de um médico americano é tão inovador que colegas e pacientes de toda a América e de outros lugares procuram a sua ajuda.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

2)Os cientistas estão começando a desvendar os mistérios que cercam as muitas doenças que às vezes aparecem meses ou anos após as vacinas corona. O trabalho de um médico americano é tão inovador que colegas e pacientes de toda a América e de outros países procuram a sua ajuda.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

3)Ele até recebe mensagens da Alemanha. O médico Jordan Vaughn descobriu coágulos sanguíneos em seus pacientes que eram tão pequenos que eram quase impossíveis de detectar. No entanto, eles causam muitos problemas de saúde. O que Vaughn e sua equipe descobriram tornou-se um tabu,

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

4)especialmente quando se trata dos efeitos colaterais das vacinas. O médico acha que sabe por que as pessoas que tomaram as vacinas corona e reforços costumam ser as mais doentes. Tem a ver com a fibrina, uma proteína de coagulação do sangue no plasma

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

5)sanguíneo que desempenha um papel importante na cicatrização de feridas e na coagulação do sangue, mas também na resposta inflamatória. Parece espaguete que acabou de sair do escorredor de macarrão,explicou ele à jornalista Sharyl Attkisson. https://fullmeasure.news/newest-videos/the-clot-factor-11-16-2023

The Clot Factor Full Measure is a weekly Sunday television news program focusing on investigative, original and accountability reporting. The managing editor and host is Sharyl Attkisson, five-time Emmy Award winner and recipient of the Edward R. Murrow award for investigative reporting. She is backed by a team of award-winning journalists with decades of experience. Each week, our cover story explores untouchable and underreported topics in an accurate, fair and fearless way. We’ll never waste your time rehashing the same stories you’ve already seen and read about all week. fullmeasure.news

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

6)Mas a fibrina que seu corpo produz após a vacinação e a corona em resposta à proteína spike é como restos queimados de espaguete e queijo que você só consegue tirar da panela com uma esponja de limpeza. A questão é se o seu corpo pode decompô-lo.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

7)Caso contrário, os vasos sanguíneos ficam obstruídos e os tecidos ou órgãos não recebem oxigênio, com todas as consequências que isso acarreta.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

8)Centenas de milhões Em dezembro de 2020, o médico Patrick Whelen enviou uma carta ao órgão regulador americano de medicamentos, FDA, na qual escrevia: “Parece que a proteína spike produzida após as vacinas corona é também uma das principais causas de danos aos órgãos”.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

9)Ele temia que as vacinas causassem danos a longo prazo ou mesmo permanentes aos pequenos vasos sanguíneos do cérebro ou do coração de centenas de milhões de pessoas. Assista no youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Glq7era7BqM

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

10)Recuperação milagrosa Vaughn dá palestras a cada poucos meses para grupos de centenas de médicos interessados ​​no que ele faz. Muitas pessoas percebem que os métodos tradicionais não funcionam. Vaughn desenvolveu um tratamento que leva a uma recuperação milagrosa.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

11)Quando Sharyl Attkisson postou sobre isso no X, apareceu uma mensagem informando que havia sido removido, mesmo ainda estando na plataforma. Ela fala de censura e pede que as pessoas divulguem a mensagem. Assista a transmissão completa aqui. https://fullmeasure.news/newest-videos/the-clot-factor-11-16-2023

The Clot Factor Full Measure is a weekly Sunday television news program focusing on investigative, original and accountability reporting. The managing editor and host is Sharyl Attkisson, five-time Emmy Award winner and recipient of the Edward R. Murrow award for investigative reporting. She is backed by a team of award-winning journalists with decades of experience. Each week, our cover story explores untouchable and underreported topics in an accurate, fair and fearless way. We’ll never waste your time rehashing the same stories you’ve already seen and read about all week. fullmeasure.news

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

12)Não se esqueça de compartilhar isso: ROBIN DE BOER(HOLANDA)

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

@g_garc2 @CrisIberoFelice @toque_2 @saritacoelho.@g_garc2 @iaragb @cidaqueiroz @CrisIberoFelice @EventosfinaisGt @cristinagraeml @silentblond @valjtb @IracemaHorta @tucabr54 @PrJosiasPereir3 @Robertajair22 @JussaraWeyll @teixeira7095 @doloresguedes08 @SoniaPatriotaJB

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

@MiyagiThedragon @PedroBF11 @cristinagraeml @DefecatingB @Monkey_Gun762 @arlene_ferrari2 @saiadamatrixbr @sucurlei1 @OPROPRIOCANDIDO @CrisIberoFelice @floresdepapel6 @app_viana @LEspartanoBR @adrianafquintas @rev_quantica @FtimaLessa6 @Matoart @Matias79135321 @DeOlhonaAgenda

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

@BravaGent @DanielCabral21 @CAgualusa @draraissasoares @PietraTito @Cinara_Brasil @FtimaLessa6 @Ellengyn @ogatopiro @RivaCywiak @Andykk2012 @orionmovement @CAgualusa @kamaleoa67 @Homecomputer19 @PrMarcioSilva10 @KageJohnJK @Alberto78238949 @prisssypresley @VeniltonMatos

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

@OPROPRIOCANDIDO @PauloSerafimBR @AG21D @DefecatingB @rev_quantica @tucabr54

bin_vera
Posted - November 22, 2023 at 5:23 PM
Saved - November 23, 2023 at 2:36 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has revealed shocking information about Covid-19 vaccines. They state that the vaccines were authorized solely for individual immunization, not for infection control or prevention. The EMA also highlights the lack of data on vaccine contagion and warns about the increased risk of infection even among vaccinated individuals. The agency emphasizes the need for careful consideration and reporting of side effects. This information undermines the vaccination policies of Rutte and De Jonge, who failed to share these crucial details with the public. The vaccination campaigns should be halted immediately, and those responsible for the deception held accountable. This scandal has garnered worldwide attention and calls for truth and transparency.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

1)Holanda: Esta informação da EMA é devastadora para a política de vacinação de Rutte( Primeiro Ministro dos Países Baixos) e De Jonge(Ministro da Saúde, Bem-Estar e Esporte) Marcel de Graaff e sete outros eurodeputados

@dorienrose - Dorien Rose Duinker

Breaking News about the experimental injections: Watch the press conference that was held at the European Parliament in Strasbourg. At this press conference, Marcel de Graaff @MJRLdeGraaff (FVD MEP), Joachim Kuhs (AfD MEP), Willem Engel @dancalegria @willem_engel (WillDoFreedom/ pharmacologist), Vibeke Manniche (physician) and Max Smeling (statistician) discussed the shocking revelations contained in the letter from the European Medicines Agency (EMA). This letter came in response to a request by Marcel de Graaff and Joachim Kuhs for the immediate suspension of authorisations for Covid-19 vaccines.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Willem Engel, a pharmaceutical scientist and human rights activist, discusses the concerns and safety issues surrounding COVID vaccines. He criticizes the spread of misinformation by governments and the lack of accurate registration of vaccine risks. He questions the validity of informed consent when crucial information is not shared with the public. Another speaker highlights the patterns of adverse reactions in different vaccine batches, suggesting that informed consent was impossible due to the unknown risks associated with each batch. The statistician presents data showing three distinct patterns of adverse reactions in different vaccine batches, indicating a concerning safety signal. The speakers call for the withdrawal of vaccine marketing authorizations and accountability for the alleged mishandling of the vaccination campaign.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Willem Engel, Nederlein, Gestalt in pharmaceutical sciences, Maval Och human rights activist. This is uncertain, hard marked For, the corona vaccines and the To see the effect of on the batches, Banker Hohner vaccines, batch dependency number Maxi's statistics, Vibeke is Mady's doctor, the, in all days is for the 2 Latin Vansnes middle of the Europesia market. Over the fatal problem around the COVID vaccines. And there's a problem inside the Zohrout that tried the EMA FUKHO on in tracking from the Mark II Latine. Alain and Alexleuten, Optumarket, have took a lot for individual immunization. An absolute need For And for Klarke, Over Besmettegens, The underbauer that the Vaxesens help at the Esmerald smettingen. The aim of Verklaert The Masala Overheads The It is Speaker 1: Thank you very much, Marcel. I beg your pardon for my bad pron pronunciation, my bad English, but, if I Would have known that, we could I could speak in German, then I would have done it. But now I have an English script. Please, pardon me. There are so many red flags in this COVID affair that it almost hurts your eyes. There's a big thing at stake, the health of our citizens. Many of them have decided to be repeatedly vaccinated against COVID Based on the information they received from their government and doctors, they assumed that they had made a well informed choice and have an informed consent. But informed consent is only possible when the information spread by the member states and its authorities regard Seeth vaccines is regarding these vaccines is correct. When misinformation is spread by the governments of our member states, Doctors can't give good advice, and people can't make a good choice whether they want to be vaccinated or not. One of the major consideration for people whether or not to take a vaccine is a possible risks and side effects. EMA mentioned in its letter to us, they expect, I quote, reports of conditions occurring at At or soon after vaccination, end quote. This implies that data on adverse events or side effects Within 14 days of vaccinations are the of of the utmost importance to assess the risks related to the vaccines. However, member state officials adopted the policy that, as it would take 10 to 14 days for the vaccine To produce spike proteins, adverse events within 14 days after vaccination were not to be registered as related to the vaccination. Statistically, they considered the person who got the vaccine as not vaccinated Within those 1st 14 days, what a nonsense. Government policies and also governmental media campaigns To promote COVID vaccinations are, thus, leaving out the risks and side effects that might occur in those 1st 14 days. Most allergic reactions occur within 20 minutes to 2 hours after getting into contact with the allergen. Side effects of regular vaccines our children get normally occur within 1 to 2 days. But yet, somehow, they just invented This 14 days story, to create this fake feeling of security and reducing the amounts of registered side effects. And that's my impression, they did it because they knew from the reports of Pfizer and Moderna and so on That many and severe side effects will come. Where are the governmental policies then based on? How can doctors correctly advise their patients whether or not to take the vaccines? How can a citizen Who is thinking about vaccination then assess for himself the safety of the COVID vaccines? How can there then be a truly informed choice And thus, a valid consent when this crucial information is not shared? And why did the EMA not intervene? How can they upheld some market authorization when there is no accurate registration of the risks? It was also recently disclosed that the side effects registration institute in the US called VAERS Has one register that's public and another closed database that is only available for certain pharmaceutical companies and officials. The closed database contains more more serious and more detailed side effects than the database that is not publicly accessible. That is, of course, unheard of and unacceptable. In this way, the ordinary citizen who only has access to the public Database is not correctly and fully informed about the risks, and, therefore, the citizen cannot give a truly informed contribution To the vaccination. In Europe, we have a similar database called OITRAVigilance. Do they also have a closed and a public version? Are they also misleading our citizens? I don't know the answers, but we must get this question answered as soon as possible. The health of our citizens is at stake, and the next COVID booster campaigns have already started. Thank you for your attention. Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you, Joachim. And now I'd like to to give the the floor to, Willem Engel. Speaker 2: So we are here today to inform you, the public, and its representatives about the grave errors and safety issues with the mRNA injections. You've heard from the previous speakers what political mortal sins have been committed by the EMA and the European Commission, Willfully misleading the public and using pseudoscience and public office to nudge, push, and even force people into participating into An uncontrolled and potentially deadly experiment. The EMA has admitted that the information given to the public is not adequate For informed consent. Moreover, the lack of proof for transmission control from the start made the campaign of vaccinating for the other a scam, An illegal marketing campaign that the EMA tries to hide behind the fact that it's just advising the European Commission is weak An unbecoming of an agency that was founded to protect the European public against medical and pharmaceutical mistakes. Moreover, the arguments that it would be a disservice to the frail and elderly who are at risk from corona infection is a false argument As the whole population was forced in some way to participate in this real world experiment. From the EMA and other national institutes, we keep hearing that the benefits outweigh the risks for each specific case or group. Yet we have seen no assessment or calculation. We have to assume this is a marketing line As it is not backed up by facts, the reality is that we are dealing with a public health crisis as we speak, not caused by a virus, But by these mRNA injections, many 1,000 have been injured and cannot live a normal life because they were forced to participate in a potentially Deadly experiment. Ignoring the Aarhus Treaty is a violation of international law that we have raised, and with us, National institutes like the Commission For Genetic Modification, the COHEM. In their report, they argue that the exemption under directive 2020 slash 1043 should be void as it cannot be in the interest of the public to skip studies on environmental impact and human health Due to genetically modified organisms, which were used to produce the mRNA injections. To be very clear, the mRNA is nonhuman and part of a GMO. Moreover, the recent publications on plasma DNA contamination in these mRNA injection fluids Proves beyond doubt that we are dealing with a GMO product regardless the attempts to redefine the term GMO Following an EU court ruling from 2018, any innovation containing or derived from the use of genetic engineering techniques is to be considered the same as an m GMO and subject to the same regulatory approval system. Now integration of bacterial or viral genetic code into the human genome has been associated with a higher risk of cancer. Whether that will be the case, we don't know. But we should have known, more precisely, the EMA should have known before giving a positive advice. Another serious concern is the interaction with the microbiome each person carries. By integration of antibiotic resistant genes, Some bacteria or fungal strains could become a health risk. An attempt was made to classify these injections as vaccines, An attempt that continues to this day. In regulation 2009/1/20, a line is misinterpreted. Gene therapy shall not include vaccines against infectious diseases. It should be read as mutually exclusive. Two essential components of a vaccine is long lasting immunity, also called active immunity as opposed to the passive immunity derived from antibody therapies. Secondly, a vaccine should contain an antigen. None of the mRNA injections contain an antigen. Using redefinition, omission, and skewing, An appointed expert group has tried to circumvent the regulations guarding the safety on gene therapy by silently changing the classification and conditions for the marketing application of these mRNA injections. In the directives 2019 slash five End 2021 slash 756, the words corona and coding sequence were added to the conditions after the granting of the original marketing authorizations, making these authorizations themselves Proof of fraud. The EMA, in her reply, is well aware of what happened, but tried to evade answering the questions about the legitimacy Of the marketing applications by stating this is a political matter and should be taken up with the European Commission. Rest assured, we will. We will not stop until all mRNA injections are taken off the market. All victims are acknowledged, and those responsible for the biggest scandal in medical history are held accountable. Thank you for your attention. Speaker 0: Thank you, Willem, for your. You have got the floor. Speaker 3: Yes. Thank you for having us, and I do agree that it's a public health crisis we are in the midst of. I'm one of 3, scientists who are behind the study of batch dependency safety issues, and Max will talk about that, in a minute. But what we actually have shown, just to put it shortly, is that there was and still is three patterns of the side effects, both the, less serious side effects and the more serious side effects, and also the death, Max will show in a minute, which shows that from the beginning, the batches which were given were the so called bad batches. Actually, along the way, it changed we the whether it was Pfizer who changed the product, whether it was the transportation, the administration, we don't know. But what we know is that the patients or the people, the children, the young ones, The elderly who had these side effects, they weren't informed by the risk. They didn't have the benefit. You didn't have the beneficial and the the risk ratio, And some were giving very bad batches, and that we know from our study. And that reminds me of what, the vice president from Pfizer said at one point in nature. She said that, they were building the airplane while flying. And for me, that's obviously what happened because we shown that one of the wings Fell off. And then I'm like, well, if you know you have a safety issue, why don't you handle that safety issue? Why don't you withdraw the batches? Why don't you communicate to the public which EMAN did and all the national, similar institutes didn't? And what our study also shows is that you have this safety issue, but it also shows that, EMA and the national institutions should have actually informed the public, because Pfizer did that already in August 21. They actually informed the IMEI that there was a safety issue. They informed IMEI that some of the batches, what we call the blue batches, gave many more side effects than some of the other batches. So we know that already. We have just replicated our data, into Sweden, which shows us us that It's a European matter. It's not just a Danish matter. It's a European issue. We know that now from Sweden. And I'm quite sure if we looked into the data From the rest of Europe, we would see exactly the same pattern. And what we are now into is that what we've shown was the short term, side effects, But we are very much interested into looking into the long term side effects. You mentioned cancer. Will there be a relation of certain cancers toward, the the different batches. Will there be a difference between the all cause mortality? You have mentioned, Marcel, the excess mortality. We know from the data that since May 21, it was, like, literally literally on the spot that excess mortality happened in all the European countries. We have, seen those graphs or made those graphs ourselves, and we can see that the excess mortality It's still there. Some places may be waning a little, but there's still an excess mortality, and that is very varying. And that brings me back to that I think I would have expected, as a citizen, I'm not a politician, I'm just a doctor, I would have expected EMA to react on these data. Even before we published the data in April, I would have expected that they saw the safety issue, that they saw that in the database, and that they, You know, halted some of the vaccination, at least withdrawn, these blues batches, and also informed The population, the young ones, the elderly and so on, we do have a problem. So going back to the the thing that the vice president from from Pfizer said, that they were building the airplane while flying, I must say the wing fell off. Thank you. Speaker 0: Thank you, Ruben. And now I'd like to give the floor to, Max Schmer, who's the statistician, who did all the data processing. Max, You have the floor. Speaker 4: Thank you very much. My name is Max Meeling, and I'm the statistician behind this study, Where is the medical, the medical capacity behind it. The, As you can see in front of you on this screen, is the result, the main result of our study. It shows from the Official Danish data that we queried for, for the study, it shows each batch and how many, how many adverse reactions Were present in each batch. You can see that along the y axis, the vertical axis. And along the, Horizontal axis, you can see how big were the batches. I should perhaps just mention a batch is a unit of, vaccine that is produced, Filled into vials, packaged up, and sent out to different countries. As you can see from the graph, Some of these batches are very small. Some of them are very big. And in this case, If we, assume that we would see a normal vaccine, a really good vaccine, something that was very consistently produced, We would see a near perfect line, one near perfect line. If we, on the other hand, produce A really horrible vaccine, the worst one we could possibly conceive, we would see no line. We would see just scattered dots. In this case, we see 3. Not 1, but we see 3 lines, and they are actually near perfect. The problem with this is that it's obviously, it's something that is completely outside the category of what we should expect to see in adverse Adverse data. And in this case, it very clearly shows right away that it was Because of the product nature, it has been impossible for the, for the participants, for the vaccinees, People who receive the vaccines to give informed consent. Because if you cannot know the risk, how can you how, how can you make Informed consent. How can you give informed consent? That's the main finding of this study. But something that is also very troubling is This shows a system. It shows a structure in the data. Adverse reactions, Error, errors in production are by nature. They're random, but this shows structure. We do not know yet why, but we're obviously researching this this issue, as Vivica also mentioned. But as of now, we do not know why it is. But the only thing that we do know is that this Should by no means be present. And that is why it's a very alarming safety signal, as has been mentioned. And I would like to stress again this this makes it absolutely impossible to give informed consent. And I think I would like to stop there. Speaker 0: Okay. Speaker 4: Thank you. Speaker 0: Thank you much. I think you made it very clear that there are Three different types of batches and every batch gives another risk. And the Blue one gives the highest mortality risk, and nobody knew upfront which batch you would get. Nobody knew that there was this difference between these batches. Nobody knew. But the EMA gets samples of every batch, And they can test it, and they can see whether or not they they are identical. And that's their job because their job is To protect us from, mistakes made by pharmaceutical industries, and they didn't. So that's it's very worrying. Thank you for, for making that clear, both of you. And that is also something that in a second letter to the AMA, we are going to address. Be sure of that, As are the things as contamination, by DNA of bacteria in the in the vaccines, As are the things that Joachim mentioned about, are there 2 databases with adverse events? How come that the EMA never warned us? And how could it be that they accepted governments to To campaign for off label use. Is there anyone who would like to ask a question? We still have some minutes Before we round up, yes, please. Speaker 5: 1st of all, thank you very much for your contribution to this press conference. I have a question in the letter of summons. One of the arguments you have made with regards to the suspension of the Marketing authorizations is that in the SMPCs of Pfizer and Moderna, that they are now very comprehensive and unreadable. However, one thing is very clear. I saw on page 4 of the document of the SMPC that is by now 574 Pages. It's literally mentioned some cases required intensive care support, and fatal cases have been observed, quote, unquote. And, my question is, how is it possible that the marketing authorizations have not been suspended And also withdrawn immediately by the EMA since Pfizer and Moderna themselves admit that the remedy is now worse than the disease. Could you maybe elaborate on that a little bit? Speaker 0: I can tell you this. That's a question for the EMA. The EMA needs to Assess all these statistics, the safety, and then take a decision. We demanded From the EMA to withdraw market approval immediately because of all these, Sick sorry. Signals of people dying of the myocarditis, pericarditis. People With this heart failure, dropping death on the football field, in front of television, that is all related to these vaccines, and that is what has been obscured. Obscured by bad registration. So, yes, it's a very valid point. It only stresses that even now the The the pharmaceutical industry is making this clear statements in their, additional information Of 574 pages. Sorry. I mean, that is not accessible information For a medical doctor or for a patient, they need to make a very concise, small, clear, List of side effects and the and and the probability. How much how probable how often does it occur? Like, 1 in 10,000, for instance. If 1 in 10 10,000 vaccinated will drop dead, Sorry to put it that blunt. Because of the vaccine, then it is much worse than getting a COVID infection. So that stated, I think the ball lies now with the EMA to take measures. Thank you. Other questions? None? Okay. Speaker 5: Well, maybe 1 more. Because, Last one. It seems that, you have to have, separate, SMPCs per booster. Could you elaborate on that maybe a little bit more, mister Engel? Speaker 2: Yeah. It's strange that we see 1 document For all the the variants they have produced, the reasoning of the EMA is that it's still the same marketing application. And it's a very concerning point. We see that the clinical trials were just ongoing for 3 weeks, Yet the XBB 1.5 booster was granted a market authorization. So the EMA really does not follow its own guidelines, and they have created a sort of, punched A hole in this, overdravigilance safety registration. So now we have untested medical products on the market. Speaker 0: Okay. Well, I'm sorry. It's we have to end this. No more questions. Thank you all very much for attending this press conference. Thank you very much for listening or watching us Via the social media channels, and we'll inform you about our follow-up.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

2)receberam uma carta da Agência Europeia de Medicamentos (EMA) que contém “fatos chocantes”. De Graaff disse isto na terça-feira durante uma conferência de imprensa no Parlamento Europeu.

@dorienrose - Dorien Rose Duinker

Breaking News about the experimental injections: Watch the press conference that was held at the European Parliament in Strasbourg. At this press conference, Marcel de Graaff @MJRLdeGraaff (FVD MEP), Joachim Kuhs (AfD MEP), Willem Engel @dancalegria @willem_engel (WillDoFreedom/ pharmacologist), Vibeke Manniche (physician) and Max Smeling (statistician) discussed the shocking revelations contained in the letter from the European Medicines Agency (EMA). This letter came in response to a request by Marcel de Graaff and Joachim Kuhs for the immediate suspension of authorisations for Covid-19 vaccines.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Willem Engel, a human rights activist, and other speakers discuss the safety issues and lack of informed consent surrounding COVID vaccines. They highlight the problem of adverse events not being properly registered within the first 14 days after vaccination, leading to a false sense of security. They also raise concerns about the classification of mRNA injections as vaccines and the potential long-term side effects. The speakers present data showing different patterns of adverse reactions in different vaccine batches, indicating a lack of consistency and informed consent. They criticize the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for not taking appropriate action and call for the withdrawal of market authorizations.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Willem Engel, Nederlein, Gestalt in pharmaceutical sciences, Maval Och human rights activist. This is uncertain, hard marked For, the corona vaccines and the To see the effect of on the batches, Banker Hohner vaccines, batch dependency number Maxi's statistics, Vibeke is Mady's doctor, the, in all days is for the 2 Latin Vansnes middle of the Europesia market. Over the fatal problem around the COVID vaccines. And there's a problem inside the Zohrout that tried the EMA FUKHO on in tracking from the Mark II Latine. Alain and Alexleuten, Optumarket, have took a lot for individual immunization. An absolute need For And for Klarke, Over Besmettegens, The underbauer that the Vaxesens help at the Esmerald smettingen. The aim of Verklaert The Masala Overheads The It is Speaker 1: Thank you very much, Marcel. I beg your pardon for my bad pron pronunciation, my bad English, but, if I Would have known that, we could I could speak in German, then I would have done it. But now I have an English script. Please, pardon me. There are so many red flags in this COVID affair that it almost hurts your eyes. There's a big thing at stake, the health of our citizens. Many of them have decided to be repeatedly vaccinated against COVID Based on the information they received from their government and doctors, they assumed that they had made a well informed choice and have an informed consent. But informed consent is only possible when the information spread by the member states and its authorities regard Seeth vaccines is regarding these vaccines is correct. When misinformation is spread by the governments of our member states, Doctors can't give good advice, and people can't make a good choice whether they want to be vaccinated or not. One of the major consideration for people whether or not to take a vaccine is a possible risks and side effects. EMA mentioned in its letter to us, they expect, I quote, reports of conditions occurring at At or soon after vaccination, end quote. This implies that data on adverse events or side effects Within 14 days of vaccinations are the of of the utmost importance to assess the risks related to the vaccines. However, member state officials adopted the policy that, as it would take 10 to 14 days for the vaccine To produce spike proteins, adverse events within 14 days after vaccination were not to be registered as related to the vaccination. Statistically, they considered the person who got the vaccine as not vaccinated Within those 1st 14 days, what a nonsense. Government policies and also governmental media campaigns To promote COVID vaccinations are, thus, leaving out the risks and side effects that might occur in those 1st 14 days. Most allergic reactions occur within 20 minutes to 2 hours after getting into contact with the allergen. Side effects of regular vaccines our children get normally occur within 1 to 2 days. But yet, somehow, they just invented This 14 days story, to create this fake feeling of security and reducing the amounts of registered side effects. And that's my impression, they did it because they knew from the reports of Pfizer and Moderna and so on That many and severe side effects will come. Where are the governmental policies then based on? How can doctors correctly advise their patients whether or not to take the vaccines? How can a citizen Who is thinking about vaccination then assess for himself the safety of the COVID vaccines? How can there then be a truly informed choice And thus, a valid consent when this crucial information is not shared? And why did the EMA not intervene? How can they upheld some market authorization when there is no accurate registration of the risks? It was also recently disclosed that the side effects registration institute in the US called VAERS Has one register that's public and another closed database that is only available for certain pharmaceutical companies and officials. The closed database contains more more serious and more detailed side effects than the database that is not publicly accessible. That is, of course, unheard of and unacceptable. In this way, the ordinary citizen who only has access to the public Database is not correctly and fully informed about the risks, and, therefore, the citizen cannot give a truly informed contribution To the vaccination. In Europe, we have a similar database called OITRAVigilance. Do they also have a closed and a public version? Are they also misleading our citizens? I don't know the answers, but we must get this question answered as soon as possible. The health of our citizens is at stake, and the next COVID booster campaigns have already started. Thank you for your attention. Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you, Joachim. And now I'd like to to give the the floor to, Willem Engel. Speaker 2: So we are here today to inform you, the public, and its representatives about the grave errors and safety issues with the mRNA injections. You've heard from the previous speakers what political mortal sins have been committed by the EMA and the European Commission, Willfully misleading the public and using pseudoscience and public office to nudge, push, and even force people into participating into An uncontrolled and potentially deadly experiment. The EMA has admitted that the information given to the public is not adequate For informed consent. Moreover, the lack of proof for transmission control from the start made the campaign of vaccinating for the other a scam, An illegal marketing campaign that the EMA tries to hide behind the fact that it's just advising the European Commission is weak An unbecoming of an agency that was founded to protect the European public against medical and pharmaceutical mistakes. Moreover, the arguments that it would be a disservice to the frail and elderly who are at risk from corona infection is a false argument As the whole population was forced in some way to participate in this real world experiment. From the EMA and other national institutes, we keep hearing that the benefits outweigh the risks for each specific case or group. Yet we have seen no assessment or calculation. We have to assume this is a marketing line As it is not backed up by facts, the reality is that we are dealing with a public health crisis as we speak, not caused by a virus, But by these mRNA injections, many 1,000 have been injured and cannot live a normal life because they were forced to participate in a potentially Deadly experiment. Ignoring the Aarhus Treaty is a violation of international law that we have raised, and with us, National institutes like the Commission For Genetic Modification, the COHEM. In their report, they argue that the exemption under directive 2020 slash 1043 should be void as it cannot be in the interest of the public to skip studies on environmental impact and human health Due to genetically modified organisms, which were used to produce the mRNA injections. To be very clear, the mRNA is nonhuman and part of a GMO. Moreover, the recent publications on plasma DNA contamination in these mRNA injection fluids Proves beyond doubt that we are dealing with a GMO product regardless the attempts to redefine the term GMO Following an EU court ruling from 2018, any innovation containing or derived from the use of genetic engineering techniques is to be considered the same as an m GMO and subject to the same regulatory approval system. Now integration of bacterial or viral genetic code into the human genome has been associated with a higher risk of cancer. Whether that will be the case, we don't know. But we should have known, more precisely, the EMA should have known before giving a positive advice. Another serious concern is the interaction with the microbiome each person carries. By integration of antibiotic resistant genes, Some bacteria or fungal strains could become a health risk. An attempt was made to classify these injections as vaccines, An attempt that continues to this day. In regulation 2009/1/20, a line is misinterpreted. Gene therapy shall not include vaccines against infectious diseases. It should be read as mutually exclusive. Two essential components of a vaccine is long lasting immunity, also called active immunity as opposed to the passive immunity derived from antibody therapies. Secondly, a vaccine should contain an antigen. None of the mRNA injections contain an antigen. Using redefinition, omission, and skewing, An appointed expert group has tried to circumvent the regulations guarding the safety on gene therapy by silently changing the classification and conditions for the marketing application of these mRNA injections. In the directives 2019 slash five End 2021 slash 756, the words corona and coding sequence were added to the conditions after the granting of the original marketing authorizations, making these authorizations themselves Proof of fraud. The EMA, in her reply, is well aware of what happened, but tried to evade answering the questions about the legitimacy Of the marketing applications by stating this is a political matter and should be taken up with the European Commission. Rest assured, we will. We will not stop until all mRNA injections are taken off the market. All victims are acknowledged, and those responsible for the biggest scandal in medical history are held accountable. Thank you for your attention. Speaker 0: Thank you, Willem, for your. You have got the floor. Speaker 3: Yes. Thank you for having us, and I do agree that it's a public health crisis we are in the midst of. I'm one of 3, scientists who are behind the study of batch dependency safety issues, and Max will talk about that, in a minute. But what we actually have shown, just to put it shortly, is that there was and still is three patterns of the side effects, both the, less serious side effects and the more serious side effects, and also the death, Max will show in a minute, which shows that from the beginning, the batches which were given were the so called bad batches. Actually, along the way, it changed we the whether it was Pfizer who changed the product, whether it was the transportation, the administration, we don't know. But what we know is that the patients or the people, the children, the young ones, The elderly who had these side effects, they weren't informed by the risk. They didn't have the benefit. You didn't have the beneficial and the the risk ratio, And some were giving very bad batches, and that we know from our study. And that reminds me of what, the vice president from Pfizer said at one point in nature. She said that, they were building the airplane while flying. And for me, that's obviously what happened because we shown that one of the wings Fell off. And then I'm like, well, if you know you have a safety issue, why don't you handle that safety issue? Why don't you withdraw the batches? Why don't you communicate to the public which EMAN did and all the national, similar institutes didn't? And what our study also shows is that you have this safety issue, but it also shows that, EMA and the national institutions should have actually informed the public, because Pfizer did that already in August 21. They actually informed the IMEI that there was a safety issue. They informed IMEI that some of the batches, what we call the blue batches, gave many more side effects than some of the other batches. So we know that already. We have just replicated our data, into Sweden, which shows us us that It's a European matter. It's not just a Danish matter. It's a European issue. We know that now from Sweden. And I'm quite sure if we looked into the data From the rest of Europe, we would see exactly the same pattern. And what we are now into is that what we've shown was the short term, side effects, But we are very much interested into looking into the long term side effects. You mentioned cancer. Will there be a relation of certain cancers toward, the the different batches. Will there be a difference between the all cause mortality? You have mentioned, Marcel, the excess mortality. We know from the data that since May 21, it was, like, literally literally on the spot that excess mortality happened in all the European countries. We have, seen those graphs or made those graphs ourselves, and we can see that the excess mortality It's still there. Some places may be waning a little, but there's still an excess mortality, and that is very varying. And that brings me back to that I think I would have expected, as a citizen, I'm not a politician, I'm just a doctor, I would have expected EMA to react on these data. Even before we published the data in April, I would have expected that they saw the safety issue, that they saw that in the database, and that they, You know, halted some of the vaccination, at least withdrawn, these blues batches, and also informed The population, the young ones, the elderly and so on, we do have a problem. So going back to the the thing that the vice president from from Pfizer said, that they were building the airplane while flying, I must say the wing fell off. Thank you. Speaker 0: Thank you, Ruben. And now I'd like to give the floor to, Max Schmer, who's the statistician, who did all the data processing. Max, You have the floor. Speaker 4: Thank you very much. My name is Max Meeling, and I'm the statistician behind this study, Where is the medical, the medical capacity behind it. The, As you can see in front of you on this screen, is the result, the main result of our study. It shows from the Official Danish data that we queried for, for the study, it shows each batch and how many, how many adverse reactions Were present in each batch. You can see that along the y axis, the vertical axis. And along the, Horizontal axis, you can see how big were the batches. I should perhaps just mention a batch is a unit of, vaccine that is produced, Filled into vials, packaged up, and sent out to different countries. As you can see from the graph, Some of these batches are very small. Some of them are very big. And in this case, If we, assume that we would see a normal vaccine, a really good vaccine, something that was very consistently produced, We would see a near perfect line, one near perfect line. If we, on the other hand, produce A really horrible vaccine, the worst one we could possibly conceive, we would see no line. We would see just scattered dots. In this case, we see 3. Not 1, but we see 3 lines, and they are actually near perfect. The problem with this is that it's obviously, it's something that is completely outside the category of what we should expect to see in adverse Adverse data. And in this case, it very clearly shows right away that it was Because of the product nature, it has been impossible for the, for the participants, for the vaccinees, People who receive the vaccines to give informed consent. Because if you cannot know the risk, how can you how, how can you make Informed consent. How can you give informed consent? That's the main finding of this study. But something that is also very troubling is This shows a system. It shows a structure in the data. Adverse reactions, Error, errors in production are by nature. They're random, but this shows structure. We do not know yet why, but we're obviously researching this this issue, as Vivica also mentioned. But as of now, we do not know why it is. But the only thing that we do know is that this Should by no means be present. And that is why it's a very alarming safety signal, as has been mentioned. And I would like to stress again this this makes it absolutely impossible to give informed consent. And I think I would like to stop there. Speaker 0: Okay. Speaker 4: Thank you. Speaker 0: Thank you much. I think you made it very clear that there are Three different types of batches and every batch gives another risk. And the Blue one gives the highest mortality risk, and nobody knew upfront which batch you would get. Nobody knew that there was this difference between these batches. Nobody knew. But the EMA gets samples of every batch, And they can test it, and they can see whether or not they they are identical. And that's their job because their job is To protect us from, mistakes made by pharmaceutical industries, and they didn't. So that's it's very worrying. Thank you for, for making that clear, both of you. And that is also something that in a second letter to the AMA, we are going to address. Be sure of that, As are the things as contamination, by DNA of bacteria in the in the vaccines, As are the things that Joachim mentioned about, are there 2 databases with adverse events? How come that the EMA never warned us? And how could it be that they accepted governments to To campaign for off label use. Is there anyone who would like to ask a question? We still have some minutes Before we round up, yes, please. Speaker 5: 1st of all, thank you very much for your contribution to this press conference. I have a question in the letter of summons. One of the arguments you have made with regards to the suspension of the Marketing authorizations is that in the SMPCs of Pfizer and Moderna, that they are now very comprehensive and unreadable. However, one thing is very clear. I saw on page 4 of the document of the SMPC that is by now 574 Pages. It's literally mentioned some cases required intensive care support, and fatal cases have been observed, quote, unquote. And, my question is, how is it possible that the marketing authorizations have not been suspended And also withdrawn immediately by the EMA since Pfizer and Moderna themselves admit that the remedy is now worse than the disease. Could you maybe elaborate on that a little bit? Speaker 0: I can tell you this. That's a question for the EMA. The EMA needs to Assess all these statistics, the safety, and then take a decision. We demanded From the EMA to withdraw market approval immediately because of all these, Sick sorry. Signals of people dying of the myocarditis, pericarditis. People With this heart failure, dropping death on the football field, in front of television, that is all related to these vaccines, and that is what has been obscured. Obscured by bad registration. So, yes, it's a very valid point. It only stresses that even now the The the pharmaceutical industry is making this clear statements in their, additional information Of 574 pages. Sorry. I mean, that is not accessible information For a medical doctor or for a patient, they need to make a very concise, small, clear, List of side effects and the and and the probability. How much how probable how often does it occur? Like, 1 in 10,000, for instance. If 1 in 10 10,000 vaccinated will drop dead, Sorry to put it that blunt. Because of the vaccine, then it is much worse than getting a COVID infection. So that stated, I think the ball lies now with the EMA to take measures. Thank you. Other questions? None? Okay. Speaker 5: Well, maybe 1 more. Because, Last one. It seems that, you have to have, separate, SMPCs per booster. Could you elaborate on that maybe a little bit more, mister Engel? Speaker 2: Yeah. It's strange that we see 1 document For all the the variants they have produced, the reasoning of the EMA is that it's still the same marketing application. And it's a very concerning point. We see that the clinical trials were just ongoing for 3 weeks, Yet the XBB 1.5 booster was granted a market authorization. So the EMA really does not follow its own guidelines, and they have created a sort of, punched A hole in this, overdravigilance safety registration. So now we have untested medical products on the market. Speaker 0: Okay. Well, I'm sorry. It's we have to end this. No more questions. Thank you all very much for attending this press conference. Thank you very much for listening or watching us Via the social media channels, and we'll inform you about our follow-up.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

3)“Em primeiro lugar, a EMA afirma explicitamente que permitiu única e exclusivamente as vacinas corona no mercado para imunização individual e de forma alguma para o controlo de infeções e para a prevenção ou redução de infeções”, revelou o eurodeputado. Isto é devastador para

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

4)os governos que se esforçaram ao máximo nos órgãos de campanha com a mensagem: vocês estão fazendo isso por outra pessoa. “Nada disso está certo.” https://www.ninefornews.nl/deze-informatie-van-ema-is-vernietigend-voor-het-gevoerde-vaccinatiebeleid-van-rutte-en-de-jonge/ Bobagem completa e não baseada em fatos A agência vai ainda mais longe:

Deze informatie van EMA is vernietigend voor het gevoerde vaccinatiebeleid van Rutte en De Jonge “Dit is een wereldschandaal van ongekende grootte." ninefornews.nl

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

5)«Os relatórios de avaliação sobre a autorização de vacinas sublinham a falta de dados sobre a contagiosidade». Em outras palavras: as vacinas não se destinavam a prevenir infecções e certamente não existem dados que sustentem que as vacinas ajudem ou ajudavam contra infecções.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

6)Na verdade, a EMA afirma que a exposição repetida ao vírus aumentou o risco de infeções mesmo entre pessoas vacinadas. “As campanhas massivas do governo […] não foram apenas não autorizadas, mas também completamente absurdas e não baseadas em fatos”, enfatizou De Graaff.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

7)Completamente em conflito Fica cada vez pior. A EMA afirma que as vacinações são exclusivamente para a proteção do indivíduo vacinado. Além disso, a vacinação exige “consideração cuidadosa de todas as informações de segurança antes de administrar ou recomendar a vacinação”.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

8)“Portanto, só era elegível para a vacinação depois de um médico ter determinado que isso era sensato no seu caso”, disse o eurodeputado. “Os pavilhões desportivos repletos de vacinas eram totalmente contrários à utilização para a qual as vacinas foram autorizadas pela EMA.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

9)” Fica ainda pior. Para avaliar a segurança das vacinas, era essencial para a EMA que os efeitos secundários fossem devidamente registados. “Esperamos muitos relatos de efeitos colaterais que ocorreramm durante ou logo após a vacinação”, escreve a agência na carta.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

10)Isso significa que as reclamações deveriam ser comunicadas no primeiro período após a vacinação. Colocando deliberadamente em risco a vida humana No entanto, o governo apoiou uma política em que as queixas não eram comunicadas nos primeiros 14 dias após a vacinação porque a

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

11)vacina necessitaria de 10 a 14 dias para se tornar eficaz. “Todas as reclamações durante esse período foram atribuídas ao coronavírus”, disse De Graaff. “Isso não é apenas fraudulento, mas também colocou deliberadamente vidas humanas em perigo.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

12)E gostaria de lembrar mais uma vez que ainda estamos lutando contra um excesso de mortalidade gigantesco e supostamente inexplicável.” De Graaff resume: estsa informações da EMA é devastadora para a política de vacinação seguida por Rutte e De Jonge. O governo sabia que as

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

13)vacinas não protegeriam contra a propagação do vírus, mas não partilhou esta informação com os cidadãos.Pelo contrário: as vacinas foram impostas aos nossos cidadãos com mentiras, encobrindo os efeitos secundários e pondo em perigo a saúde de todos os que tomaram a tal vacina.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

14)As campanhas de vacinação devem ser interrompidas o mais rápido possível. Simplesmente não é seguro e não cumpre os requisitos estabelecidos pela EMA. O governo e todos os partidos políticos que apoiaram isto devem ser responsabilizados pelas suas mentiras e enganos.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

15)Escândalo mundial de proporções sem precedentes A coletiva de imprensa provocou muitas reações. "Inacreditável. O escândalo médico do século”, responde o deputado Pepijn van Houwelingen (FVD)/HOLANDA . A treinadora empreendedora Fiona Zwart escreve:

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

16)“Este é um escândalo mundial de magnitude sem precedentes. Mas, como vemos, a verdade sempre encontra o seu caminho.” Respostas surpreendentes que não estão de acordo com o que alguns políticos e

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

17)médicos da mesa redonda disseram, observa o jornalista investigativo Marc van der Vegt/Holanda.

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

@g_garc2 @CrisIberoFelice @toque_2 @saritacoelho.@g_garc2 @iaragb @cidaqueiroz @CrisIberoFelice @EventosfinaisGt @cristinagraeml @silentblond @valjtb @tucabr54 @PrJosiasPereir3 @Robertajair22 @JussaraWeyll @teixeira7095 @doloresguedes08 @SoniaPatriotaJB @MiyagiThedragon

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

@PedroBF11 @cristinagraeml @DefecatingB @Monkey_Gun762 @arlene_ferrari2 @saiadamatrixbr @sucurlei1 @OPROPRIOCANDIDO @CrisIberoFelice @floresdepapel6 @app_viana @LEspartanoBR @adrianafquintas @rev_quantica @FtimaLessa6 @Matoart @Matias79135321 @DeOlhonaAgenda @BravaGent

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

@DanielCabral21 @CAgualusa @draraissasoares @PietraTito @Cinara_Brasil @FtimaLessa6 @Ellengyn @ogatopiro @RivaCywiak @Andykk2012 @orionmovement @CAgualusa @kamaleoa67 @Homecomputer19 @PrMarcioSilva10 @KageJohnJK @Alberto78238949 @prisssypresley @VeniltonMatos @OPROPRIOCANDIDO

@bin_vera - vera ana bin

@PauloSerafimBR @AG21D @DefecatingB @rev_quantica @tucabr54 @CAgualusa

View Full Interactive Feed