By Andreas Zimmerman.
According to their own data in the approval study, modRNA injections do not reduce but rather increase the likelihood of children becoming seriously ill with Covid-19. So you make kids sick. Nevertheless, they have now been approved by the US FDA.
“It’s Always Worse” is the German title of a book by Laurence J. Peter, in which the author describes the effect of people in hierarchical structures often rising to the level of their incompetence. “It can always get worse” is also an appropriate description of the scientific (non-) quality of the registration studies for the bioRT broths from BioNTech / Pfizer, which were mistakenly called “Covid-19 vaccinations”.
Should the release of the original data from the first investigation of this kind still be sued in US courts to find, for example, that several investigators [unerwünschte Ereignisse/Zwischenfälle]not “side effects”, as I mistakenly wrote in my last article) were excluded from the study, as shown in the case of the approval of a total of three doses (!) for children between 6 months and 5 years, which have just been given in The United States the data officially published on the FDA’s website that the “vaccination” in this age group, as well as in all other age groups, causes significant harm without having any benefit.
Nevertheless, it is claimed that the “vaccination” would have an efficiency of 80 percent. I must admit that if it were not for the life and health of an unmanageable number of children who are threatened by a hugely harmful injection due to these rudely manipulated results, the audacity that BioNTech / Pfizer trades with the FDA on one or more Another way. be almost again admirable.
To what extent are the results manipulated? The procedure is actually as bold as it is clumsy. The study included 3,013 modRNA recipients (which parents actually volunteer their children for a study like this?) And 1,513 placebo recipients. A total of 375 “laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 cases” occurred in the study, as can be seen in Tables 19 and 20 in the documents. Which probably means that the counted children had one of a wide range of more or less random symptoms, as well as a positive PCR test that has about the same value as a coin toss.
But well, this is the official data that needs to be sought for approval. However, to calculate “vaccination efficacy”, only 10 (in word “ten”) of the 375 “Covid-19 cases” were used (ie an impressive 2.67 percent of all cases), namely the 10 cases that were at least 7 days after the third dose has occurred. Incidentally, the vaccination effectiveness for all coronists is also here, as in all approval studies, calculated on the basis of the “laboratory-confirmed cases”. This means that it is officially about preventing “infections”, not “serious courses”, as is often claimed.
If you use the entire dataset of 150 “cases” in the 1513 participants from the placebo group and 225 “cases” in 3013 modRNA participants in terms of “infections”, then you do not reach 80 percent, but only almost 25 percent “vaccination efficiency “, that is, the probability of an” infection “is reduced by only 25 percent. A value that is far below the normal approval limit for a vaccination of 50 per cent.
However, this is still better than the effectiveness against a serious “Covid-19 course”. This can also be calculated from data and results from a total of two severe sequences in the placebo group and six in the modRNA group. This results in a “vaccination effectiveness” against severe courses of impressive minus 50 percent – so much for “preventing serious events”.
These are not prevented by the modRNA injections, but are more likely to be almost exactly 1.5 times as likely in the “vaccination group” as in the placebo group. In other words, the modRNA injections do not actually reduce, they actually increase the likelihood of children becoming seriously ill with Covid-19. So you make kids sick. And that is before we even consider the common and serious side effects of modRNA injections.
Prof. Martin Neil from Queen Mary University came to a very similar conclusion, as only for the age group from 2 to under 5 years using a Bayesian calculation of an effectiveness of minus 177 percent for the prevention of a serious disease coming. And he finds very clear words that follow from this, which I would like to reproduce in the original: “Conclusion: The treatment causes serious illness in children. I should add that these statistics apply to the age group 2-4 years. Some might argue that “The study is too weak to draw firm conclusions about effectiveness or safety. They are misleading. Others may argue that the evidence is good enough for approval. They are evil.” (“Conclusion: The treatment causes serious illness in children. I should add that these statistics are for the age group 2-4. Some might argue that the study is under-authorized to draw firm conclusions about efficacy or safety. They are misleading. Others may argue that the evidence is good enough for admission. They are evil. “
In doing so, he expresses what critics of modRNA injections have rarely said with such clarity. Allowing, performing, or even ordering the injection of these drugs into children (or any other age group) is not just greedy, delusional, corrupt, or power-hungry. That is what our modern society likes to deny the existence of: it is evil.