“URGENT: I am now a prisoner in my own body. I was forced to get the mandated COVID-19 vaccine. I suffer every single day,” the text on the video reads.
“I am pro vacc, and I understand there are risks to any vaccine… but I disagree that [people] need to enforce fear to prevent other people from protecting themselves.”
This is my uncle Johnny. He took one dose of the vaccine and hasn't been able to walk straight since. This is a crime. Thanks Pfizer. pic.twitter.com/4ffHqL1BCN
Dedicated to all those fakes and frauds that are shaking because of the “jab”. Thanks Pfizer for the laughs we are receiving. pic.twitter.com/MPS7ruqTgX
For those who think @Johnincarlisle is doing it for the community service, this income exceeds even the income of most US physicians. https://t.co/kH38DxT1Vy
— Frank Han MD 🇺🇦Pediatric/ACHD/GUCH Cardiologist (@han_francis) March 15, 2023
Former nurse John Campbell’s descent into covid crankery has proven very profitable. Company accounts for the year to June 2022 show he had over £1m cash in hand, with net assets of £800,000, up from just £150,000 a year earlier!
Most of this cash presumably came from John Campbell’s YouTube channel, which went from being cited by UNICEF as a good example to counter online misinformation in 2020, to increasingly spreading misinformation itself from 2021 onwards.
..
Profit and loss from John Campbell's company. Note: 2021 is from July 2020 to June 2021 when Campbell was primarily sharing Covid stats with a little ivermectin conspiracy. 2022 is from July 2021 to June 2022 when Campbell switched to Covid minimisation and antivax conspiracy. pic.twitter.com/cfjPyCByLb
Former nurse John Campbell's descent into covid crankery has proven very profitable. Company accounts for the year to June 2022 show he had over £1m cash in hand, with net assets of £800,000, up from just £150,000 a year earlier!
Campbell's YouTube subscribers rapidly increased in late 2021, after he started making false claims about everything from ivermectin and vaccines to covid death figures, and featuring the likes of Tess Lawrie, Norman Fenton and Neil Oliver.
A great video (24 minutes) highlighting how John Campbell, who makes millions of dollars from antivax YouTube, uses selective statistics.https://t.co/WmAnLZc1UD
Apparently John Campbell has been misrepresenting a study from Taiwan looking at EKG changes after vaccination. This is what the study actually showed: https://t.co/iAFOmzuidJ
Once again, spreading gross misinformation. According to your OWN DATA: 1) Vaccinated much lower COVID and ALL CAUSE mortality than unvaccinated 2) Countries with very high vaccination rates (Sweden) much lower excess deaths.
this was at a traffic light on a main road, and they went into the MRR2 highway with both kids head out the sunroof.. I purposely left the plate number unpixelated.
2. Police say that based on the recording, the incident occurred along the NKVE from Subang Jaya heading towards Bukit Lanjan.
The individual involved can be sentenced to imprisonment not exceeding three months, or a fine not exceeding RM500 or both under Section 336. pic.twitter.com/NJ5IjiyfRi
Pfizer’s document released by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration contains information about adverse events that occurred following vaccination. Adverse events are health problems that occur after vaccination but aren’t necessarily caused by the vaccine. Therefore, these reports don’t establish a causal relationship between the events and the vaccine. These reports alone thus are insufficient to demonstrate that the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine caused any new side effects or is unsafe.
Nine pages of adverse event reports from Pfizer-BioNTech in relation to its COVID-19 vaccine are not confirmed adverse events to the shot. They “may not have any causal relationship” to each other, the pharmaceutical company has told Reuters. The statement comes in response to claims online that the list is definitive.
Some people on social media have since concluded that every entry is definitively caused by Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
The nine pages of “adverse events of special interest” are not confirmed side effects from Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
So the argument made by Sonia Elijah suggesting the “real VE” of the Pfizer vaccines is 12% is an old one dating back to January 2021, and an erroneous one. The fact this claim is spreading virally around social media without confirmation or justification, and with very few questioning where it came from or whether it was a legitimate claim, shows how easy it is for unsubstantiated and false claims to quickly spread on social media, where they find a large set of receptive ears ready to believe and promote the claim without any documentation or justification, primarily because it feeds the narrative they believe and are promoting.
I’m sure it’ll be all over the mainstream news that Pfizer has now declared their COVID vaccines unsafe for pregnancy and breastfeeding after the government coerced and mandated thousands of pregnant women into having one.
In his ruling, the judge recognized that the release of this data is of paramount public importance and should be one of the FDA’s highest priorities. He quoted James Madison as saying a “popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy” and John F. Kennedy as explaining that a “nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”
This is an exampleof fake claims about the Pfizer documents.
Pfizer lost court case and required to disclose all the serious side effects.
*Congratulations to those who were not vaccinated! **Your persistence is absolutely wise and correct! ** FDA loses case! Pfizer forced to disclose vaccine side effects data! 9 pages of side effects!
The whole world was stunned.
US168 Information Network 2022-03-05 02:1
cardiomyopathy, acute respiratory failure, injection site vasculitis, seizures, alopecia areata, anaphylactic shock, Anaphylaxis of pregnancy, aplastic anemia, thrombosis, Arrhythmias, arthritis, Asthma, bronchospasm, cardiac arrest, heart failure, Chest discomfort, choking, chronic autoimmune glomerulonephritis, chronic cutaneous lupus erythematosus, chronic spontaneous urticaria, hemolytic anemia, colitis, dermatitis, diabetes, disseminated varicella zoster, Embolic cerebral infarction, Endocrine disorders, pruritus, swollen eyes, facial paralysis, genital herpes, glossopharyngeal nerve palsy, hemorrhagic vasculitis, cervicitis, lupus cystitis, lupus encephalitis, multiple sclerosis, neonatal myasthenia gravis, myelitis, noninfectious oophoritis, thyroiditis, Ulcerative proctitis.The above is more than a thousand kinds of reactions, not limited to the side effects / physical discomfort symptoms that many people have.
It is the choice behavior that hurts oneself out of fear…Out of 46,000 people tested, 42,000 had adverse reactions! 1200 people died! Did you hit? Nothing fun! Nothing fun! Unvaccinated people! **Congratulations on keeping your immune system functioning properly*. *
"Remember" all you like. The pages you list contain a generic list of potential adverse reactions to vaccines in general, not to the Pfizer #CovidVaccine specifically. As @mpc_xetts pointed out to you, it says so right in the full document.🤦🏻♂️ https://t.co/sSBVqNNSfU
Incorrect: Pfizer’s safety document doesn’t list known side effects of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine but adverse events that occurred following vaccination, regardless of what caused them. Inadequate support: The list of adverse events attributed to the vaccine are based on reports that, on their own, don’t demonstrate that the vaccine caused the adverse event and therefore can’t be used as evidence that the vaccine is unsafe.
KEY TAKE AWAY
Pfizer’s document released by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration contains information about adverse events that occurred following vaccination. Adverse events are health problems that occur after vaccination but aren’t necessarily caused by the vaccine. Therefore, these reports don’t establish a causal relationship between the events and the vaccine. These reports alone thus are insufficient to demonstrate that the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine caused any new side effects or is unsafe.
Nine pages of adverse event reports from Pfizer-BioNTech in relation to its COVID-19 vaccine are not confirmed adverse events to the shot. They “may not have any causal relationship” to each other, the pharmaceutical company has told Reuters. The statement comes in response to claims online that the list is definitive. .
Some people on social media have since concluded that every entry is definitively caused by Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
One post, which includes screenshots of all nine pages (here) and has been shared hundreds of times, reads: “Amongst these newly released pages are 9 PAGES OF ADVERSE SIDE-EFFECTS! The list includes auto-immune conditions, multitudinous heart issues, hemorrhaging, kidney disease, many syndromes relayed to other viruses, and even anti-sperm antibodies! Safe and effective, right…?” .
However, the list was compiled using voluntary reports through various national reporting systems, such as the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the UK’s Yellow Card reporting scheme and the EU’s EudraVigilance database.
Reuters has produced numerous fact checks on these systems (VAERS: here and here; Yellow Card: here and here); EudraVigilance here and here) – all of which explain that reports of potential side-effects are not definitively linked to vaccines.
A Pfizer spokesperson told Reuters that reported side effects “may not have any causal relationship to the vaccine”, adding that all reports are taken “very seriously”.
“Rather, the event may be due to an underlying disease or some other factor such as past medical history or concomitant medication or the AEs (adverse events) may be coincidental,” they said. .
VERDICT
Missing context. The nine pages of “adverse events of special interest” are not confirmed side effects from Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our fact-checking work here.
So Sonia Elijah is making the same specious argument Peter Doshi did in his editorial in British Medical Journal in January 2021, which I refuted in detail in my blog post that same month. It seems she is making the mistake of not realizing that “suspected but unconfirmed cases” in the protocol refers to individuals receiving PCR tests because that had a symptom from a large pre-specifed list that triggered a PCR test, but for which the PCR test was negative. The authors of the FDA briefing document choosing the term “suspected but unconfirmed cases” for those with negative PCR tests was a poor choice that has contributed to this confusion and led many to misinterpret what it means.
So the argument made by Sonia Elijah suggesting the “real VE” of the Pfizer vaccines is 12% is an old one dating back to January 2021, and an erroneous one. The fact this claim is spreading virally around social media without confirmation or justification, and with very few questioning where it came from or whether it was a legitimate claim, shows how easy it is for unsubstantiated and false claims to quickly spread on social media, where they find a large set of receptive ears ready to believe and promote the claim without any documentation or justification, primarily because it feeds the narrative they believe and are promoting.
I’m sure it’ll be all over the mainstream news that Pfizer has now declared their COVID vaccines unsafe for pregnancy and breastfeeding after the government coerced and mandated thousands of pregnant women into having one.
Many social media users are sharing screenshots of the documentation, particularly one document which states that “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 is not recommended during pregnancy” and: “It is unknown whether the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 is excreted in human milk” (examples here, here and here). The screenshot many users are sharing, however, shows information from Great Britain’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) in 2020, and not documentation from Pfizer (link to the original MHRA document can be read here). MHRA has since updated its advice on vaccinating those who are pregnant and breastfeeding. Health authorities in Britain and the United States recommend COVID-19 vaccination for pregnant and breastfeeding women. The latest version can be read here.
An MHRA spokesperson told Reuters via email that “this was our assessment at the time of approval for the vaccine”.
The spokesperson added: “Since then new data which has come to light (both non-clinical and post-authorisation ‘real world’ data) supports the updated advice on vaccinating those who are pregnant and breastfeeding.
“Over 104,000 pregnant people have received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine in England and Scotland and no concerns of the safety of the vaccines have been raised.”
The limited evidence available at the time on COVID-19 vaccine safety during pregnancy does not constitute evidence that COVID-19 vaccination has had a negative effect on pregnancy.
Another popular claim alleges that the new documents prove that the vaccine is only 12% effective at protecting from COVID-19, not the 95% that Pfizer initially reported (examples here and here). None of those making the claim, however, link to any actual documentation. The original allegation can be traced to a Substack user known as Sonia Elijah. And despite tweets presenting the alleged finding as new, the Substack article itself was published on April 3rd, weeks before these documents were shared
The vast majority of the documents released so far have generally not been relevant to the conversation around the safety and effectiveness of the Pfizer vaccine. The truth is that many of the claims under the #pfizerdocuments trend have already been debunked, despite the emphasis by conspiracy theorists that these issues have suddenly come to light by the release of these documents. You can read more about these debunked conspiracies when it comes to the COVID-19 vaccines here,here and here.
