TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

I, along with six colleagues, wrote a letter to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) expressing concerns about the COVID vaccines. The EMA responded, revealing shocking facts. They clarified that the vaccines were only approved for individual immunization, not for controlling or preventing infections. The EMA emphasized the lack of data on contagiousness and even stated that repeated exposure to the virus could increase the risk of infection in vaccinated individuals. The government's campaigns promoting vaccination to protect others were unauthorized and based on misinformation. The EMA also highlighted the importance of carefully considering safety information before administering vaccines. The government's failure to report vaccine side effects within the first 14 days was not only fraudulent but also endangered lives. The vaccination campaign should be halted as it does not meet EMA standards. The government and supporting political parties should be held accountable for their lies and deception.

A member of the pharmacovigilance scientific committee resigned due to disagreement over the accountability method, which excludes certain cases. This aligns with the European Court of Justice's confirmation of the administrative and judicial courts' stance since 2007-2008. The criteria for establishing causality include serious, specific, and consistent indicators, similar to pharmacovigilance's approach. These indicators involve temporal proximity, lack of personal and family history, and published and documented cases.

These ten deaths are the tip of the iceberg. There is a vast number of deaths in the peer reviewed literature. These have cases have already been vetted. We don't need FDA officials to comment to them on them. They're deeply concerning. And then our US CDC vaccine administration adverse event system, VAERS, has in total now, this is shocking for United States residents, nineteen thousand four hundred and eighty deaths. About two thousand of these have occurred right within forty eight hours of the shot, and then nineteen thousand two hundred seventy nine Americans reported to be permanently disabled. These are reported to VAERS by doctors like myself who have already determined the vaccine is the cause of the injury, disability, or death. Because if the vaccine was not the cause, then we wouldn't do the report to VAERS. So this is the VAERS does indicate causation by proxy of reporting. This is very important. The VAERS system, I'll say it again, indicates the vaccine is the cause of the problem because the doctor or the health care provider in the field at the scene who's examined the patient, examined the autopsy and the medical record information, examined the clinical record, the vaccine administration has determined the vaccine is the cause. Otherwise, a VAERS report would not be made. So this is very important. I would say at this point in time, both Macron and Prasad should immediately call for the COVID nineteen vaccines to be removed from the market. Every day they continue to delay on this, the more Americans will be hurt by boosters. We've already had several hundred deaths this year that have occurred on their watch. B, they should initiate a safety review of the 19480 deaths with an independent panel to review all the information. The CDC has the patients and their families' phone numbers, emails, addresses. There ought to be interviews of family members for the deceased, interviews of the patient themselves for injuries and disabilities to to get their side of the story. The CDC has all that information. The review should be done independently by people who are not CDC or FDA employees, And there should be multiple reviewers and should be an adjudication process and finally, a determination of causality for the vaccine. And then I would say, finally, the FDA officials, including Macari and Prasad, needs to start showing up to important proceedings in Washington. There have been multiple hearings on vaccine safety. One that I was the lead witness on, 05/21/2025. Yeah. We published a report indicating that there was a government cover up of COVID nineteen vaccine induced mild pericarditis, including fatal cases.

The discussion centers on the current coverage of the AstraZeneca vaccine and the assessment of safety concerns that have been in the news. The speaker states a firm personal position regarding the vaccine, emphasizing continued confidence in its safety and specifically asserting that there is, at this point, no evidence that the AstraZeneca vaccine causes blood clots. This assertion is presented as a clear conclusion based on available information. Further support for this position comes from official health authorities. The TGA (Therapeutic Goods Administration) is described as closely monitoring the situation. The speaker notes that the TGA has issued a statement on the matter, which conveys the same core message: while they are aware of the situation and have maintained close contact with European authorities, there is no link identified between the AstraZeneca vaccine and the reported blood clot cases as of now. The implication is that ongoing vigilance will continue, but current data do not indicate a causal relationship between the vaccine and blood clots. In addition to Australian authorities, the international response is cited to reinforce the stance. The World Health Organization (WHO) is reported as having issued a similar assessment overnight, aligning with the local authorities’ conclusion that there is no established connection between the AstraZeneca vaccine and the blood clot concerns at this time. The speaker highlights this international corroboration to underscore a consensus across different health governance levels. Within Australia, there is mention of a collaborative and unanimous position among key health bodies. The speaker references full alignment between themselves, the TGA, and the ATAGI group (the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation), describing a united front regarding the current understanding of the vaccine’s safety profile in relation to blood clots. The language used signals a coordinated stance aimed at reassuring the public while continuing to monitor developments. Overall, the message conveyed is that, based on current information from national and international health authorities, there is no evidence linking the AstraZeneca vaccine to blood clots. The authorities are actively monitoring the situation, maintaining vigilance for any new data, and reiterating a consistent conclusion that supports the vaccine’s safety profile in this context. This summary captures the emphasis on confidence, ongoing surveillance, and concordant assessments from the TGA, ATAGI, and the WHO.

A group of European Parliament members wrote a letter to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) expressing concerns about the COVID-19 vaccines. The EMA responded, stating that the vaccines were only approved for individual immunization and not for controlling or preventing infections. They also admitted a lack of data on vaccine effectiveness against infections. The government's campaign to vaccinate for the sake of others was based on misinformation. Furthermore, the EMA emphasized the need to carefully consider safety information before administering vaccines. The mass vaccination campaign should be halted as it does not meet the EMA's requirements and puts people's health at risk. The government and supporting political parties should be held accountable for their lies and deception.

A group of European Parliament members wrote a letter to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) expressing concerns about the COVID-19 vaccines. The EMA responded, stating that the vaccines were only approved for individual immunization, not for controlling or preventing infections. They also emphasized the lack of data on preventing infections and even mentioned that exposure to the virus could increase the risk of infection, even in vaccinated individuals. The EMA highlighted the importance of carefully considering safety information before administering vaccines. The government's vaccination campaigns were deemed unauthorized and based on misinformation. The EMA's information undermines the vaccination policies of the Dutch government, and they should be held accountable for their actions.

I am Max Melling, the statistician behind this study, with Viveke as the medical expert. The main result of our study is shown on the screen. It displays the number of adverse effects in each vaccine batch, based on official Danish data created for the study. Some batches are small, while others are large. Normally, a good vaccine would show a nearly perfect line, while a very bad vaccine would have scattered points. However, we observe three almost perfect lines, which is unexpected and suggests a problem with the product. Participants were unable to give informed consent due to the unknown risks. This is a concerning safety signal that requires further investigation.

The speaker discusses safety signals from VAERS data related to COVID-19 vaccines, highlighting a high number of adverse events and deaths. They question why these issues are not being addressed properly by authorities. Comparisons are made to past vaccine withdrawals due to adverse events. The speaker emphasizes the significant increase in adverse event reporting for COVID-19 vaccines, especially in children. They also mention specific criteria being met to establish causality. In conclusion, they criticize the lack of adherence to standard procedures by CDC, HHS, and FDA in addressing vaccine-related injuries.

The World Health Organization supports the use of the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine despite some countries pausing vaccinations due to blood clot concerns. There is no proven link between the vaccine and blood clots. AstraZeneca admitted in court that its COVID vaccine can cause rare blood clotting side effects, leading to lawsuits in the UK.

Last month, a group of European Parliament members, including myself, wrote a letter to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) expressing concerns about the COVID-19 vaccines. The EMA's response revealed shocking facts. They admitted that the vaccines were only approved for individual immunization and not for controlling or preventing infections. Furthermore, there is a lack of data supporting the vaccines' effectiveness in preventing infections. In fact, the EMA stated that repeated exposure to the virus increases the risk of infection even in vaccinated individuals. The government's campaigns promoting vaccination to protect others were unauthorized and based on misinformation. The EMA also emphasized the need to carefully consider safety information before administering vaccines. The mass vaccination efforts were in direct contradiction to the approved use of the vaccines. The government and supporting political parties should be held accountable for their lies and deception. The vaccination campaign needs to be halted as it is not safe and does not meet EMA requirements.

I testified in the US Senate on December 7, 2022, stating that the vaccine is causing a significant number of deaths. The vaccine fulfills the criteria for causality according to the Bradford Hill tenets. As of December 23, 2022, the CDC reported over 6,000 Americans who died shortly after receiving the vaccine, but this number is likely underestimated.

Last month, Joachim Küs and six other colleagues from the European Parliament wrote a letter to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) regarding concerns about the vaccines. The EMA responded, stating that the vaccines were only authorized for individual immunization and not for infection control, prevention, or reduction. In fact, the EMA highlighted a lack of data on contagion and stated that repeated exposure to the virus could increase the risk of infection even in vaccinated individuals. The massive vaccination campaigns aimed at protecting others were not authorized and lacked factual basis. The EMA emphasized that vaccinations were solely for the protection of the vaccinated individual, and safety information should be carefully considered before administering or recommending a vaccine. The government's vaccination policies disregarded this information, putting lives at risk. Vaccination campaigns should be halted immediately, and those responsible for the lies and deception held accountable.

Last month, Joachim Küs and six other colleagues from the European Parliament wrote a letter to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) regarding concerns about the vaccines. The EMA responded, stating that the vaccines were only authorized for individual immunization and not for infection control, prevention, or reduction. In fact, the EMA highlighted a lack of data on the vaccines' ability to prevent infections. The EMA also mentioned that repeated exposure to the virus could increase the risk of infection even in vaccinated individuals. The massive vaccination campaigns aimed at protecting others were not authorized and lacked factual basis. The EMA emphasized that vaccinations were solely for the protection of the vaccinated individual, and safety information should be carefully considered before administering vaccines. The government's vaccination policies and failure to report side effects were deemed dangerous and fraudulent. Vaccination campaigns should be halted immediately.

Tijdens een speciale RTL-uitzending over verkeerde informatie stond de premier tegenover jongeren en zei: "Ik controleerde het dezelfde avond nog. Het federaal geneesmiddelenbureau had al meer dan 14000 meldingen van bijwerkingen geregistreerd, waarvan 9800 ernstig. Van de 227 gerapporteerde sterfgevallen erkent het agentschap dat er in totaal 4 geacht worden waarschijnlijk verband te houden met het vaccin." Er is een probleem met het melden van bijwerkingen. "Kijk, dit is de Europese database van meldingen van bijwerkingen." Nederland heeft 0.7 bijwerkingen na vaccinatie; België ongeveer 0.15 procent. België zou 80 procent meer bijwerkingen moeten declareren om op het niveau van Nederland te komen. Een jong meisje kreeg 2 dagen na vaccinatie enorme iliofemoropoplitheale trombose; het ziekenhuisverslag zegt: diep-veneuze trombose, niet van een vaccin dat 2 dagen voordien werd toegediend, maar van een anticonceptiepil (oestroprogystageen). Bij tweede dosis vaccin kreeg ze opnieuw trombose; ze staat nog niet geregistreerd in de dossiers van de geneesmiddelenbewaking. Sommigen geloven dat het vaccin geen bijwerkingen kan hebben; promotie van het vaccin wordt voorgesteld als verplichting; elke arts die informatie verschaft die in strijd is met de huidige stand van de wetenschap zal streng worden vervolgd. De huidige stand van de wetenschap is dat het vaccin een wonder is dat geen bijwerking heeft. Dat is niet waar. English translation: During a special RTL broadcast about misinformation, the prime minister faced the youth and said: "I checked it the same evening. The federal medicines agency had already registered more than 14,000 reports of side effects, of which 9,800 were serious. Of the 227 reported deaths, the agency says that 4 are probably related to the vaccine." There is a problem with reporting side effects. "Look, this is the European database of adverse event reports." Netherlands has 0.7 side effects per vaccination; Belgium about 0.15 percent. Belgium would have to declare 80 percent more side effects to reach the Netherlands level. A young woman got 2 days after vaccination an enormous iliofemoropopliteal thrombosis; the hospital report says: deep vein thrombosis, not from a vaccine given 2 days earlier, but from a contraceptive pill (ethinyl estradiol). After a second dose, she had another thrombosis; she is still not registered in the pharmacovigilance dossiers. Some believe the vaccine cannot have side effects; promotion of the vaccine is presented as mandatory; any doctor who provides information that conflicts with the current science will be prosecuted. The current science is that the vaccine is a wonder with no side effects. That is not true.

And do you have any signs to back up your your opinion? The best data are autopsies. So in the largest autopsy series published to date, I know because I'm the senior author. Of all the deaths examined and we re reviewed them. We had an adjudication committee. We had ways of arbitration deciding on did the vaccine cause death. The answer is of these cases that came in for autopsy after vaccination, seventy three point nine percent of individuals, it was determined that the vaccine was the cause of death. First off, there's Hocher and colleagues who's sitting right behind me.

I am one of the scientists involved in a study on the safety and dependency of vaccine batches. We found three types of side effects: mild, severe, and even death. These adverse effects were present in the initial batches, which may have been changed during production or transportation. Patients were not informed of the risks and some received poor-quality batches. The Vice President of Pfizer admitted to building the plane while flying, and we have shown that one wing has fallen off. There is a safety issue that the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and national institutions should have addressed and informed the public about. Our study also suggests a potential link between certain cancers and different vaccine batches. We have observed increased mortality rates in European countries since May 21st. The EMA should have reacted to these findings and halted vaccinations or at least withdrawn the problematic batches. As a concerned citizen and doctor, I expected more action from the EMA. Thank you.

We submitted a vaccine injury paper to The Lancet about COVID-19 vaccine-related sudden deaths. The paper was taken down due to pressure from the pharmaceutical industry but has now passed peer review and will be published. It found that 74% of sudden deaths were caused by the vaccine. More evidence is emerging about the harm of COVID-19 vaccines, and politicians should act before it's too late.

According to Article L1112-2, before prescribing any medication or treatment, including surgical procedures, the law requires healthcare professionals to communicate the frequent or serious foreseeable risks to the patient. However, the predictability of risks is a concern, especially with vaccines that have been on the market for only a short period of time. European Directive 2001 states that a minimum of ten years is required to establish a well-established medical use of a component in a medication.

Last month, I, along with six colleagues from the European Parliament, wrote a letter to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) expressing concerns about the COVID vaccines. The EMA's response revealed shocking facts. They admitted that the vaccines were only approved for individual immunization, not for controlling or preventing infections. The EMA emphasized the lack of data on the vaccines' ability to prevent transmission. In fact, repeated exposure to the virus could increase the risk of infection even in vaccinated individuals. The government's campaigns promoting vaccination to protect others were unauthorized and based on misinformation. The EMA also stated that vaccinations were solely for the protection of the vaccinated individual, and each case should be carefully evaluated for safety before administering the vaccine. The government's vaccination policy disregarded reporting of side effects within the first two weeks after vaccination, falsely attributing any complaints to the virus. This information exposes the flaws in the vaccination strategy and calls for an immediate halt to the campaign.

The speakers discuss adverse reactions listed in Section 6.2 of a vaccine's package circular. They mention hypersensitive reactions, autoimmune diseases, nervous system disorders, and other conditions. The first speaker emphasizes that the presence of these reactions in the circular does not prove causation. The second speaker brings up the 2011 IOM report, which did not establish a causal relationship between the vaccine and multiple sclerosis. They discuss the need for a randomized, placebo-controlled study to determine causation. The second speaker questions the length of the safety review period for another hepatitis B vaccine and requests proof of any post-administration reactions. The presence of a control group in the trial is also discussed.

I am one of the scientists involved in a study on the safety and dependency of vaccine batches. We found three types of side effects: mild, severe, and even death. These adverse effects were present in the initial batches, which were later changed, possibly due to Pfizer altering the product or during transportation. Patients were not informed of the risks and some received poor-quality batches. The study also reveals a safety issue that both Pfizer and regulatory institutions should have addressed. Pfizer had already informed the European Medicines Agency (EMA) about the safety problem in August 2021. Our data from Sweden indicates that this is a European issue, not just a Danish one. We are concerned about long-term side effects and their potential links to cancer and increased mortality rates. The EMA should have taken action based on the data and informed the public. The vice-president of Pfizer's statement about building the plane while flying is apt, as we have shown that one wing has fallen off.

Last month, Joachim Küs and six other colleagues from the European Parliament wrote a letter to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) regarding concerns about the arrival of vaccines. The EMA responded, stating that the vaccines were only authorized for individual immunization, not for infection control, prevention, or reduction. The EMA also highlighted a lack of data on contagion and stated that repeated exposure to the virus could increase the risk of infection even in vaccinated individuals. The government's massive vaccination campaigns, aimed at protecting others, were not authorized and lacked factual basis. The EMA emphasized the importance of carefully considering safety information before administering vaccinations. The government's policy of not reporting complaints within the first 14 days of vaccination was seen as deliberate endangerment of human life. The speaker called for an end to vaccination campaigns and accountability for the government's lies and deception.

Dr. McCulloch is asked to weigh in. Speaker 1 responds that he has presented at FDA advisory meetings and advised companies for decades on regulatory science. He states that when a product definitely results in death, and there are thousands of peer-reviewed papers on this, the COVID vaccines in some people sadly result in death—some on the very first day they take the shot. He argues that this must be a black box warning on the product immediately. He says he checked the package inserts for the currently available products, noting that the ones Senator Blumenthal wants to pursue, and what the Governor still wants to pursue, and what the FDA still wants administered, do not have the word “death” in the package insert. He asserts that Americans are not fairly informed. Speaker 0 asks whether Speaker 1 doubts that the COVID injection caused some deaths, and asks for his view on the numbers listed on VAERS (thirty-seven thousand, six hundred seven, per the prompt) and whether he has any science to back up his opinion. Speaker 1 replies that the best data are autopsies. He references the largest autopsy series published to date and notes that he is the senior author. He says they examined deaths after vaccination, had an adjudication committee and methods of arbitration to decide whether the vaccine caused death, and that in these autopsy cases, seventy-three point nine percent of individuals, it was determined that the vaccine was the cause of death. He mentions Holsher and colleagues, who are right behind him. Speaker 0 reiterates the FDA’s own laws, asking that this be included in the package insert, correct? Speaker 1 confirms, noting that in 2021 Dr. Carol Tocetta, working with the Daily Cloud, wrote about Peters’ marks in 2023 and asked, “where’s the black box warning? Where is it?”

I, along with six colleagues, wrote a letter to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) expressing concerns about the COVID vaccines. The EMA's response revealed shocking facts. They admitted that the vaccines were only approved for individual immunization, not for controlling or preventing infections. The EMA emphasized the lack of data on contagiousness and stated that repeated exposure to the virus could increase the risk of infection, even for the unvaccinated. The government's campaigns promoting vaccination to protect others were unauthorized and based on false information. The EMA also highlighted the importance of carefully considering safety information before administering vaccines. The mass vaccination efforts were in direct contradiction to the approved use of the vaccines. The EMA expected reports of side effects, but the government failed to report them, endangering lives. The vaccination campaign should be halted immediately.

The speaker discusses the strange situation regarding the pharmacovigilance system's early awareness of menstrual side effects from the vaccine. Despite this, the European Medicines Agency initially concluded that it was not significant, but recently revised their diagnosis. It is peculiar that while the pharmacovigilance system alerted early based on feedback from vaccinated individuals, it took a considerable amount of time for the French National Agency for Medicines and Health Products Safety to accept it as a probable side effect.