reSee.it - 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 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.

Every day, just the 1% of the cells of your DNA that gets replicated stretches from here to the sun four times. If you're to line it up end by end, that's very hard to conceptualize. But it should give you a little bit of humility before you go and start monkeying with it with these vaccines that can actually alter your DNA. And that's what I'm gonna show you. Is that the vaccines had a DNA contamination in them that didn't tell you about that could in fact alter your genome. Alright? These people are vibe coding your genome. And this is a major attack surface to the human gene pool because if this thing starts to alter the lifespan of people, it's going to part you with your Bitcoin. You're gonna end up spending money in a fiat system that has no controls, has no liability, and ends up oftentimes inducing mandates to get what it wants done. Many people had have peer have gone and replicated this work. It happened on Twitter. It did not happen very quickly in the peer review system. The peer review system kinda kicked it out. Some of these papers have now been peer reviewed, but it took years for them to come to this conclusion. Now, the FDA, the EMA and the TGA have all admitted that this mistake has happened. How did it happen? There's a big bait and switch. Pfizer actually ran the trial of 22,000 people on the process on the left and after they got to the trial, they then switched to the process on the right and didn't retrial the drug. And in doing so, they left a tremendous amount of excess DNA behind in the product. So all of the vaccine efficiency numbers you've heard in the news are flawed. They're not real because that's not what actually went into the trial. What went to the public was actually something that came out of this process too. It's published now in the BMJ that this fraud happened and no one has yet been prosecuted for it. So what did they leave in there? What they left in there was something we know from the polio scandal. If you're not familiar with the polio scandal, that polio vaccines were also contaminated with something known as SV40 and it created a massive cancer wave. Now the whole virus isn't in these vaccines, but there is a very curious part of this called the SV40 region that Pfizer intentionally removed from the disclosure that they gave to the FDA. So the FDA has admitted that this SV40 material is in there. They did not spell this out to the regulators. The regulators did not find them and they're actually running cover for them saying this DNA is too little consequence to matter, it's too small, and it's not functional. But we know it's functional because Dean et al has published that this piece of DNA drives DNA straight to the nucleus. It gets used in gene therapy vectors.

18 months ago, I spoke out about the evidence linking boosters to increased cancer, due to the s v 40 virus in Pfizer's vaccines. MPs are still supporting the vaccines despite mounting evidence against their safety and effectiveness. They are waiting until after the upcoming general election to address the issue.

Retired police constable Mark Sexton raises concerns about the contract between Pfizer and the South African government regarding the COVID-19 vaccine. He highlights that the contract states the long-term effects and efficacy of the vaccine are not known, contradicting claims made by the UK government. Sexton suggests that if the UK contract is similar, the government knowingly misled the public. He calls for legal action against the government and Pfizer, accusing them of fraud and crimes against humanity. Sexton urges the Metropolitan Police to investigate and emphasizes the need for accountability and justice for the victims. He provides a link to the contract for further examination. (147 words)

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.

Pfizer conducted trials using a synthetic PCR process called Process 1, which involved giving 40,000 people a precise mRNA sequence for the shots. However, for mass production, a second process was used, tested on only 252 people. This involved using a complementary DNA sequence to make the body produce the spike protein. Essentially, the trials were done using a controlled synthetic process, but the majority of the vaccines given to billions of people were made using a less tested method. This can be seen as a bait and switch.

Many are surprised to learn that the vaccines did not undergo traditional clinical trials. Initially, they were manufactured using PCR for 44,000 people, but when scaling up, the process was deemed too costly and was replaced with DNA from E. Coli, which also introduced endotoxins. In pharmaceutical manufacturing, the process is crucial; changing it typically requires new trials. The EMA requested a new trial with 252 patients, but the data was never provided, and it was considered too late since vaccinations had already begun. Thus, the rationale for conducting the trial became irrelevant.

The speakers discuss the discrepancy between the disclosed plasmid map from Pfizer and what was actually found, suggesting that something important is being hidden. They claim that the vaccines being administered are different from what was tested in the trials, which may explain adverse reactions like anaphylaxis. They emphasize the need to raise awareness about this issue as it affects everyone. The speakers also mention that informed consent was not possible because people were not informed about the significant changes in vaccine manufacturing.

Andrew Bridgeman raises concerns about the Pfizer COVID vaccine rollout, citing evidence from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He claims that the vaccine used in the rollout was not the same as the one trialed on volunteers and approved for emergency use. Bridgeman suggests that if ministers were unaware of this, it could be a criminal act by the MHRA. He argues that the public was misled, leading to a discrepancy between Pfizer's data and the UK's yellow card data on adverse events. Bridgeman requests a statement from the government on this matter.

I have an internal document from Pfizer Laboratories that reveals the manipulation of chemical and biological processes in the BioNTech Pfizer SARS CoV-2 vaccine. It contains Graphene Oxide, a dangerous toxin, with 15 billion nanoparticles in each 30mg shot. Graphene Oxide causes the spike protein to bind to blood cells, leading to blood clots and heart failure. The patent databases and a copy of the deleted Wuhan databases support the claim that COVID-19 and its vaccines are bioweapons.

The speaker discusses how people were not informed about receiving a different product than what was used in the clinical trial for the COVID-19 vaccine. This lack of transparency means that individuals could not give informed consent. The speaker feels upset and violated, as they had relied on the trial data to make their decision to get vaccinated. They compare this situation to a fraudulent sales tactic called "bait and switch." The importance of informed consent is emphasized, especially for the speaker who had made videos based on the trial data.

Andrew Bridgeman raises concerns about the Pfizer COVID vaccine rollout, citing evidence from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He claims that the vaccine used in the rollout was not the same as the one trialed on volunteers and approved for emergency use. Bridgeman suggests that if ministers were unaware of this, it could be considered a criminal act by the MHRA. He argues that the public was misled, leading to a discrepancy between Pfizer's data and the UK's yellow card data on adverse events. Bridgeman requests a statement from the government on this matter.

I'm a doctor and scientist who has worked with the NHS and the World Health Organization. I sent an urgent report to the MHRA stating that the COVID vaccines were unsafe and causing harm. The yellow card scheme showed 250,000 adverse event reports and 1,253 deaths associated with the vaccines. The MHRA responded, suggesting that some reports may be coincidental. Since then, the Vigi access database has recorded over 5,000,000 reports of COVID vaccine harms, injuries, and deaths. These vaccines are genetic therapies, not safe or effective. Trust me, I am a scientist and doctor.

At the outset, a process was approved by the FDA for emergency use authorization. However, it was later discovered that the approved process was swapped out for one containing contaminants like DNA and a cancer-causing substance. Pfizer redacted 800 pages of the manufacturing process, hiding the fact that a carcinogen was included. This lack of transparency led to no informed consent and potential harm to individuals. The vaccine rollout included a trial with a 2.4 times higher adverse event rate, including the presence of a carcinogen.

There are alarming signals in the Covid situation that are concerning for the health of our citizens. Many people have chosen to get vaccinated based on information from the government and doctors, believing they made an informed decision. However, informed consent is only possible if the information provided by member states and authorities is accurate. Unfortunately, when governments spread misinformation, doctors cannot give proper advice and people cannot make an informed choice. The timeframe for recording adverse effects after vaccination is flawed, as reactions usually occur within the first 14 days. This disregards the risks and side effects that may arise during this crucial period. The government's policies and media campaigns promoting Covid vaccinations fail to consider these risks. It is essential to address these concerns promptly to ensure informed consent and protect public health.

Speaker 0: They argue that because the vaccine is classified as such, they don’t have to worry about being sued. They claim immunity from liability is dependent on there being no fraud, and there clearly was fraud. Speaker 1: They say there is fraud. They note that immunity from liability depends on fraud, and in light of that, it matters. They explain that there was fraud. Speaker 0: Expresses surprise and asks for caveats about fraud. Acknowledges there were caveats. Speaker 1: Confirms there is fraud and says it makes the situation more interesting. Speaker 0: Asks how fraud is defined, noting that drugs were sold with multiple studies and only one was good. Speaker 1: Responds with a point about safety testing for the mRNA vaccines. States that the insufficient safety testing was done before release, and that the product injected into billions of people involved DNA plasmids. There is massive contamination in the shots actually delivered, including the SV40 promoter from simian virus 40. The point is that safety testing for one drug was completed, but people were injected with something different that had other components that were not tested, which is described as fraudulent. Speaker 0: Requests an explanation of the SV40 issue for the audience. Speaker 1: Describes production techniques used to generate the product. Explains that a plasmid, a circular piece of DNA, was used to produce the product in vats, with bacteria performing the production, later coated in lipid nanoparticle. There is a requirement to purify DNA and set standards for DNA contamination, with limits that cannot be exceeded. In this case, the problem isn’t only poor quality control but that there was a more painstaking way to produce the same product that did not involve DNA plasmids at all. Consequently, leftover material in vials injected into people contained DNA contamination across the board. Kevin McKernan tested vials, finding DNA contamination in the samples. Speaker 1: Explains that the DNA left over includes the SV40 promoter, a genetic trigger from simian virus 40, which is known to be carcinogenic. Since this promoter is left in the vials from injections given to people, it challenges the claim that the mRNA shots could not integrate into the genome. While acknowledging that there are cellular processes such as reverse transcription, the speaker asserts that even the claim of “no DNA” is false because there is DNA in the vials, specifically DNA with the SV40 promoter, a genetic engineering tool with carcinogenic potential. The speaker concludes that this appears to be fraud: injecting a different product into the public on the basis of safety testing that was conducted with a product produced by a different process. Speaker 0: Reiterates the conclusion: you can’t inject a different product into the public on the basis of safety testing that was done with something produced by a different process.

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.

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.

I analyzed data showing a consistent 1.3 mortality gap between Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, with Moderna being 30% more likely to cause death. Pfizer reduced its active ingredient dosage due to toxicity concerns. The medical community must address this issue to maintain credibility. I reached out to a journal editor to review the data, which could potentially damage the reputation of health authorities and regulators.

On August 7th, the speaker wrote to Prime Minister Rishi Sunak with evidence from Dr. Josh Gochko indicating that Pfizer, enabled by the MHRA, carried out a bait and switch operation with their vaccine. The speaker claims the Pfizer vaccine tested on 22,000 individuals was not the same vaccine rolled out in the UK and worldwide. Evidence for this is allegedly the MHRA changing guidelines on the second day of mass vaccination, requiring people to stay at the vaccination center for 15 minutes due to the risk of anaphylactic shock. The speaker asserts the MHRA hadn't expected anaphylactic shock because it wasn't shown in the Pfizer trials. Anaphylactic shock occurs when there are endotoxins in vaccines, which are present when vaccines are cultured in bacteria like E. coli. The speaker claims this demonstrates the vaccine rolled out was not manufactured the same way or to the same standards as the vaccine that received medical approval, meaning informed consent was impossible. They state people were told the vaccines were safe, effective, and tested, but they were taking a completely untested vaccine from Pfizer. The speaker is still awaiting a response from the prime minister regarding the 44 pages of evidence supplied.

I wrote to Prime Minister Rishi Sunak with evidence from Dr. Josh Gutschko, indicating that Pfizer carried out a bait and switch operation with their vaccine. The Pfizer vaccine tested on 22,000 individuals was not the same as the one rolled out worldwide. The MHRA changed guidelines on the second day of mass vaccination, requiring people to stay for 15 minutes due to the risk of anaphylactic shock. This shock is caused by endotoxins in vaccines, which are present when they are cultured in bacteria like Escherichia coli. The vaccine rolled out globally was not manufactured to the same standards as the approved one, meaning informed consent was not possible. I'm still awaiting a response from the Prime Minister regarding this crucial matter.

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.

I spent 9 months researching the Pfizer vaccine with whistleblowers and scientists. Trials showed a 1 in 800 risk of serious harm from the vaccine, higher than COVID hospitalization rates. Other vaccines were pulled for less harm. Serious harm included hospitalization, disability, and life-changing events, with 40% related to clotting disorders.

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.