The weekly VAERS numbers, from Megan Redshaw at childrenshealthdefense.org:
VAERS data released today by the CDC showed a total of 441,931 reports of adverse events from all age groups following COVID vaccines, including 6,985 deaths and 34,065 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and June 25, 2021.
This week’s number of total adverse events for all age groups following COVID vaccines surpassed 400,000, according to data released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The data comes directly from reports submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed.
Every Friday, VAERS makes public all vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date, usually about a week prior to the release date.
Data released today show that between Dec. 14, 2020 and June 25, 2021, a total of 411,931 total adverse events were reported to VAERS, including 6,985 deaths — an increase of 872 deaths over the previous week. There were 34,065 serious injury reports, up 2,825 compared with last week.
Some inconvenient truths about Covid-19 vaccines, from an American Expat in Austria at lewrockwell.com:
I do not meant to offend you, but I feel compelled to respond to what you had to say to me on the phone this morning regarding how if there is a big up-tick of “covid19” in the fall, that all the sickness and death will be the fault of all the people, who like myself, who are not allowing an experimental “gene therapy” to be injected into their body.
I hope that you realize here that this way of seeing things is absolutely not your own independent thinking, but that you have been programmed by your government and the mass media to “demonize” those of us who do not want to subject their bodies nor their natural immune systems to all the very real hazards of an experimental and never-before-used “gene therapy” which is absolutely not a “vaccine”. (This push to get everyone injected is truly, truly a very Nazi type agenda and I would have thought that Austrians already learned the lesson from 1938 – 1945 [??]).
But before I go on to explain more, . . .
I have a question. Can you please send me via e-mail if possible some kind of documentation that is backed up by scientific evidence that shows that the “covid19” “vaccines” are EFFECTIVE and that they are SAFE? (I need solid and backed up evidence to believe something.)
Despite having spent some time searching, I have been unable to locate any information from the manufacturers of the vaccines or from the government or from the mass media that shows beyond reasonable doubt that the “covid19” “vaccines” are EFFECTIVE and that they are SAFE.
None of the Covid vaccines are safe or effective as those terms were understand by regulators before the coronavirus outbreak. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:
Sluggishly, “the science” – as expostulated by the Vatican of Sickness, the Centers for Disease Control – is admitting that the “safe and effective” whatever’s-in-those-needles it has been very aggressively pushing for everyone to experiment with, especially children and young adults, actually isn’t.
But without saying it’s not.
They are admitting it – post facto, because the facts are becoming too-well-known not to admit it; kind of like admitting that the sun generally rises most mornings.
Whatever’s-in-those-needles “does appear . . . to be a new trigger for myocarditis,” says a CDC Advisory Panel on Immunization Practices. Myocarditis is heart inflammation. Pericarditis, which is the related inflammation of the membrane surrounding the heart, is another sickness almost no one in the previously healthy 25-and-under age group is generally afflicted with – until after having received a “safe and effective” vaccination for a sickness that presents almost no chance of giving them the sniffles.
Over just the past several months, at least 1,200 young people developed one or both of these potentially – and in several cases, actually – fatal sicknesses.
It has been reported that what is styled the “post secondary dose risk” of myocarditis/pericarditis post Holy Anointing for people under the age of 25 is 200 times the normal rate of the natural rate of occurrence for these illnesses in people 25 and under.
More about all of this here.
But the vaccines are still “safe and effective” – officially.
Even if the Covid vaccines were 100 percent safe, which they are assuredly not, the should not be given to everyone, and certainly should not be mandatory. From Kathy Gyngell at conservativewoman.co.uk:
Yesterday we published the first part of Tucker Carlson’s revelatory ‘Where is the conversation about the treatment of Covid-19?’ interview with Dr Peter McCullough on Fox News.
The second part today focuses on vaccination groupthink and the pressure on people to submit; the medical principles of autonomy and clinical judgement; the risks for groups excluded from the trials including those with Covid antibodies; why other vaccines are not given to pregnant women and, finally, why mandatory vaccination is so unacceptable, especially when too new to weigh the risks and benefits.
TUCKER CARLSON: I feel like there are two different arguments, maybe on different tracks. I mean, there’s the question of what kind of society you want to live in and what the Bill of Rights guarantees you as an American citizen. I think that’s a very important conversation, we have all the time. But there’s a completely separate conversation about what’s in the best physical interests of the patient, what medicines to give the patient, and that’s in the realm of science. And that should not be influenced by other considerations.
DR PETER McCULLOUGH: Well, it’s in the realm of clinical judgement. And you brought up a great point. Our public health officials make recommendations for a population and they use generalities.
P McC: But the next patient in front of me, says, ‘Doctor, I’ve really got a bad allergy to this medicine’, I say, ‘Well, it’s recommended, but you shouldn’t have it.’ The doctor weighs risks and benefits. And no matter what, you know, whether it’s a medicine, a vaccine protocol, it’s our judgement that reigns supreme. And when I was pressured on the NIH guidelines and through some agencies, I talked to some agency officials, they say, Dr McCullough, don’t be too hard on us, look at page eight. And I turn there and it says, ‘Even though these are recommendations, the doctor’s judgement overall has the final word on what happens to the patient.’ I said, ‘Thank you for that paragraph.’ And I’ve used it over and over again. I said, ‘Even though the NIH says don’t treat patients as an outpatient, it says here that I can use my judgement and I am.’
Given the rush to market for the Covid vaccines, could their safety be adequately assessed? No chance. From Suzie Halewood at off-guardian.org:
In 1956 German pharmaceutical company Chemie Grünenthal GmbH, licensed a new experimental drug designed to treat colds, flu, nausea and morning sickness. Known as Distaval in the UK, Distillers Biochemicals Ltd declared the drug could ‘be given with complete safety to pregnant women and nursing mothers without adverse effect on mother or child’ – a basic pre-requisite for licensing a drug.
While forty-nine countries licensed the drug under multiple different names, the then head of the FDA Dr. Frances Kelsey, a physician-pharmacologist with a profound interest in fetal development, refused authorization for use in the US market due to her concerns about the lack of evidence regarding the drug’s safety.
The drug was also known as Thalidomide.
Sixty-five years on and the stringent safety measures brought in to avoid another scandal on the scale of Thalidomide have been swept aside in order to fast track the approval of experimental mRNA vaccines. This is in spite of concerns voiced by (among others) Dr Wolfgang Wodarg and Dr Michael Yeadon who petitioned the European Medical Agency (EMA) with a Administrative/Regulatory Stay Of Action in regard to the BioNtech/Pfizer study on BNT162b – not just in regard to concerns about pregnant women, the foetus and infertility – but also in regard to the effect of the mRNA vaccines on those with prior immunity, for whom immunization could lead to a hyperinflammatory response, a cytokine storm, and a generally dysregulation of the immune system that allows the virus to cause more damage to their lungs and other organs of their body.