As you are no doubt aware, the new AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine is currently at the centre of an ongoing global shit storm.
Heralded as a life saver, it has since become far more famous for taking lives instead of saving them.
In the UK alone, between 4 January 2021 and 7 March 2021, the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine has accumulated 61,304 MeDRA reports comprised of 228,337 adverse reactions and 289 fatalities.
Remember, that's just in the UK and from only 2 months of use.
The drug was a collaboration between UK's Oxford University and AstraZeneca, which is headquartered in Cambridge, England. Like all its Big Pharma brethren, AstraZeneca is a serial-offending corporate felon, having racked up some $1.8 billion in fines and settlements for dishonesty offences since its formation in 1999.
Not only are there huge sums of money at stake, but the race for a COVID vaccine quickly became something of an international pissing contest between current and former superpowers, with the US, UK, Russia and China all scrambling to get a COVID vaccine to market. The UK now appears extremely reluctant to acknowledge that its contribution to the COVID arms race is a dangerous dud.
It was the continental Europeans who swung into action after the 7 March death of a 49-year-old Austrian woman from severe coagulation disorder after receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine, and the hospitalization of a 35-year-old vaccine recipient with lung blood clots that same day.
As news of similar events began accumulating, Denmark became the first country to suspend use of AstraZeneca's vaccine, and by 16 March had been joined by at least 15 other countries throughout the world.
While all this was going on, the usual group of high-profile liars stubbornly insisted the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine was Safe and Effective!™, despite rapidly growing evidence to the contrary.
AstraZeneca said it reviewed safety data from 17 million people who got the shot in the UK and EU, and found fewer clot-related adverse effects than would be expected in any group of that size. That analysis has not yet been made public.
Interestingly, a group that doesn't make billions of dollars from peddling dodgey drugs found the exact opposite in Germany, something we'll discuss in a moment.
Boris Johnson, a 56 year old man who still hasn't learned how to comb his hair, insisted the vaccine was safe and that he planned to receive it on Friday 19 March. Which begged the obvious question - why hadn't the leader of the UK, who had relentlessly talked up the vaccine, already had his shot? After all, the vaccine had been available for two months?
But not to worry, because on Friday Johnson rolled up to St Thomas Hospital, rolled up his sleeve, and got the jab.
Or did he?
Media outlets owned by billionaire vaccine shills Rupert Murdoch and Bill Gates triumphantly posted videos of Johnson getting his injection. Except they didn't show him getting the injection. The cameras were rolling as he entered and exited the hospital, but for some strange reason all we got inside the hospital were still shots of Johnson with a non-inserted needle next to his arm, followed by a still shot of the permanently disheveled one doing a double thumbs up.
What a farce.
"I didn't feel a thing," said Johnson.
Of course you didn't, you twat, because you never got the vaccine. The needle was never actually inserted into your flabby pale arm, was it?
Despite these PR damage control efforts, or perhaps because of them, both the UK Sterling and AstraZeneca shares took a hit. The price of oil even dropped three days in a row "as COVID-19 vaccine halt threatens demand."
Well, it's one thing for innocent people to die, but when politicians are being embarrassed and wealthy investors start feeling the pinch, hey, that's just not cricket!
And so the bullshit campaign kicked into even higher gear, courtesy of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and World Health Organization (WHO).
The EMA on Wednesday 11 March noted two other "thrombotic events" in people who had received the vaccine, but claimed there was "no indication" the vaccine had caused these events. The EMA - which receives around 86% of its annual budget from its drug industry clientele - nonetheless promised a thorough whitewash investigation of the matter.
The WHO, which counts the world's most famous vaccine shills, Bill & Melinda Gates, among its strategic partners, also set about conducting a thorough whitewash investigation of the matter.
Thankfully, there were a couple of outfits also looking at this matter that were more interested in what the actual science showed, rather than whatever PR and financial pressures their buddies in high places might be feeling.
Among these was The Paul Ehrlich Institute, a German research institution and medical regulatory body, and also the country's federal institute for vaccines and biomedicines. As a federal agency, it is subordinate to Germany's Federal Ministry of Health. It is also a WHO Collaborating Centre for quality assurance of blood products and in vitro diagnostic devices. The Institute is not some 'fringe' outfit, but about as mainstream as you can get.
Nor is it some self-proclaimed expert panel founded by self-aggrandizing, vaccine-pimping, billionaire developers of buggy software or owners of muck-raking media empires.
And just to clarify, the Institute was formed in 1896 and named after immunologist and Nobel Prize laureate Paul Ehrlich - not the unrepentant American alarmist and population control advocate Paul R Ehrlich who wrote the the hysterical 1968 book The Population Bomb.
So what did The Paul Ehrlich Institute researchers find?
Its 15 March 2021 press statement revealed "the experts of the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut now see a striking accumulation of a special form of very rare cerebral vein thrombosis (sinus vein thrombosis) in connection with a deficiency of blood platelets (thrombocytopenia) and bleeding in temporal proximity to vaccinations with the COVID-19 vaccine AstraZeneca ... Following intensive consultations on the serious thrombotic events that have occurred in Germany and Europe, the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut recommends the temporary suspension of vaccinations with the COVID-19 vaccine AstraZeneca." (Bold emphasis added)
Allow me to further quote from the Institute's FAQ on the matter, again adding bold emphasis where I believe it to be warranted:
"A specific form of severe cerebral venous thrombosis associated with platelet deficiency (thrombocytopenia) and bleeding has been identified in seven cases (as of 15 March 2021) [in Germany] in temporal association with vaccination with COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca.
(1) It is a very serious disease that is also difficult to treat. Of the seven affected individuals, three individuals had died.
(2) The affected individuals had ages ranging from about 20 to 50 years.
(3) Six of the affected persons had a particular form of cerebral venous thrombosis, called sinus vein thrombosis. All six individuals were younger to middle-aged women ... Another case with cerebral hemorrhage in platelet deficiency and thrombosis was medically very comparable. All cases occurred between four and 16 days after vaccination with COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca. This presented as a comparable pattern.
(4) The number of these cases after vaccination with COVID-19 AstraZeneca is statistically significantly higher than the number of cerebral venous thromboses that normally occur in the unvaccinated population. For this purpose, an observed-versus-expected analysis was performed, comparing the number of cases expected without vaccination in a 14-day time window with the number of cases reported after approximately 1.6 million AstraZeneca vaccinations in Germany. About one case would have been expected, and seven cases had been reported.
(5) The younger to middle-aged population affected by the severe cerebral venous thrombosis with platelet deficiency is not the population at high risk for a severe or even fatal COVID-19 course.
(6) In addition to the experts from the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, other experts in thrombosis, haematology, and an adenovirus specialist were consulted with the details of the reported cases. All experts agreed unanimously that a pattern could be discerned here and that a connection between the reported above-mentioned diseases and the vaccination with COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca was not implausible.
"Whether there is a causal relationship between the vaccination and the disease is currently being investigated," added the Institute.
Further north, a collaboration between Oslo University Hospital and the University Hospital of North Norway HF was doing just that: Investigating whether the link between the AstraZeneca vaccine and deadly blood clots was causal, or just a coincidence.
They concluded it was the former.
Oslo Hospital University chief physician and professor Pål Andre Holme led the work to find out why three health workers under 50 were hospitalized with serious blood clots and low levels of blood platelets after having taken the AstraZeneca vaccine. One of the health workers died on Monday, 15 March.
“The reason for the condition of our patients has been found,” Holme announced to Norwegian national newspaper VG. The collaboration he led worked on a theory that the vaccine triggered an unexpected and powerful immune response - a theory they now believe they have confirmed.
“[W]e have found specific antibodies against blood platelets that can cause these reactions, and which we know from other fields of medicine, but then with medical drugs as the cause of the reaction,” said Holme. "Nothing but the vaccine can explain why these individuals had this immune response.” (Bold emphasis added).
When VG asked Holme how he could be sure know the immune response was not caused by something other than the vaccine, he replied: “There is nothing in the patient history of these individuals that can give such a powerful immune response. I am confident that the antibodies that we have found are the cause, and I see no other explanation than it being the vaccine which triggers it.”
The three affected health workers all came into the hospital with the following normally rare features:
- They had acute pain
- They had blood clots in unusual places, such as their stomachs and brains
- In addition, they had bleeding and low levels of platelets
This is a similar pattern observed in other countries where cases of blood clots in AstraZeneca vaccine recipients have been reported.
The EMA, however, was not going to be moved by a little something like consistent patterns of normally rare blood clot syndromes in otherwise young and healthy Germans and Norwegians who had recently received the nefarious AstraZeneca vaccine.
The same day VG spoke to Holme, the EMA announced it had completed its whitewash investigation of the AstraZeneca vaccine at its "extraordinary meeting" of 18 March 2021.
It must have been an extraordinary meeting alright, because the news release that resulted from it contained more cowshit than a Kansas feedlot.
Confirming it is completely without honesty and ethics, the EMA stated: "The Committee was of the opinion that the vaccine’s proven efficacy in preventing hospitalisation and death from COVID-19 outweighs the extremely small likelihood of developing DIC or CVST." (Bold emphasis added)
The EMA provided no reference or citation for this statement, because none exists. It is complete bullshit.
The WHO's statement was somewhat more guarded, claiming the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine "continues to have a positive benefit-risk profile, with tremendous potential to prevent infections and reduce deaths across the world." (Bold emphasis added)
"Tremendous potential," huh?
Let's cut the crap.
THERE IS NO PROOF THAT THE ASTRAZENECA VACCINE PREVENTS HOSPITALIZATION AND DEATH FROM COVID-19 - and the EMA and WHO know it.
In fact, there is nothing even resembling valid evidence to support this dubious claim.
The only clinical data so far published for the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine is an absolute joke. It comprises of two studies published in the Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine. I described the Lancet paper in detail in this article, but to quickly recap:
- That data has been taken from only the first two months of a still ongoing trial - and using only half the participants that have been enrolled!
- The only arm of the trial (South Africa) that is double-blind was left out of the analysis; only data from the Brazil and two UK arms - where the researchers were not blinded - was used.
- Only one of the trial arms contains a non-vaccine placebo, and that was the same one left out of the analysis. Instead of a saline placebo, control subjects in the three other arms were given a meningococcal vaccine. The researchers unwittingly admitted this was to even out the rate of "local and systemic" side effects!
- Participants were heavily filtered during recruitment and are not representative of 'real world' general populations. In general, the participants were healthier, slimmer and younger than usual, with very few of the participants aged over 55.
- The trial is riddled with conflicts of interest. Eleven of the listed researchers are directly employed by AstraZeneca, while another 106 work for Oxford University, which partnered with AstraZeneca to develop the vaccine. A company called Vaccitech was also an early collaborator in the development of the vaccine, and a number of the researchers have financial ties to Vaccitech and will benefit from sales of the vaccine.
This hopelessly biased, poorly controlled slop was published in the the Lancet on 8 December 2020. This was the same data that supposedly showed the vaccine was Safe and Effective!™ and justified its approval by UK authorities on 30 December 2020.
Trouble is, the study proved no such thing. It was not double-blind, so the researchers could easily have manipulated the results.
And even with this huge advantage, there were only ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19 among the 11,000+ participants included in the Lancet analysis, all in the meningococcal vaccine group, including one death.
Not only are these small numbers, they tell us nothing about COVID-19 VACCINE versus NO VACCINE because the only trial arm using a saline placebo was mysteriously omitted from the analysis.
There were four non-COVID-19 deaths reported (one Oxford-AstraZeneca subject and three meningococcal vaccine subjects) that were all considered unrelated to the vaccines. The causes of death were determined to be from road traffic accident, blunt force trauma, homicide, and fungal pneumonia.
The NEJM study, meanwhile, was published on 16 March 2021, and I have written it up here. That study finally reported on the double-blind South African arm of the trial, and found no difference in COVID-19 cases among the vaccine and saline placebo groups. Furthermore, there were no COVID hospitalizations or deaths in either group.
As of this writing, there is no other published clinical trial data for the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine available, so the EMA can only be referring to the Lancet and NEJM papers when it writes of the vaccine’s alleged "proven efficacy in preventing hospitalisation and death from COVID-19."
But to make that claim from these two papers, which in reality showed no such thing, is truly absurd.
The reality is that there exists no quality evidence whatsoever to show the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine - nor the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccines - can save even a single life.
What we do know is that every passing week brings an even greater tally of death and adverse event reports for all three vaccines. I will reiterate that as of 7 March 2021, in the UK alone, the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine has accumulated 61,304 MeDRA reports comprised of 228,337 adverse reactions and 289 fatalities.
How all this can possibly equate to "a positive benefit-risk profile" is beyond me.
This isn't going to end well, folks. In less insane times, drugs have been pulled from the market after causing a lot less damage than these new junk vaccines.
The EMA surely realizes this, which is why it peppered its press release with cover-your-ass statements like "A causal link with the vaccine is not proven, but is possible and deserves further analysis" ... "in younger patients there remain some concerns, related in particular to these rare cases" ... "patients should be aware of the remote possibility of such syndromes, and if symptoms suggestive of clotting problems occur patients should seek immediate medical attention and inform healthcare professionals of their recent vaccination. Steps are already being taken to update the product information for the vaccine to include more information on these risks."
The European Medicines Agency: Just Another Big Pharma-Funded Regulator
The EMA's willingness to spout anti-scientific nonsense in favour of a problematic new drug no doubt has something to do with its close industry ties. As with the UK's MHRA and the US's FDA and CDC agencies, the agency relies heavily on the pharmaceutical industry to fund its lavish budget.
And just like the UK and US agencies, the EMA has long been marred by the infamous "revolving door" phenomenon, in which employees move back and forth between the agency and pharmaceutical companies.
The EMA website states the agency "works closely with its partners and stakeholders."
You bet it does.
"The pharmaceutical industry is one of the European Medicines Agency's (EMA) main stakeholders," continues the EMA. "Interacting with pharmaceutical companies has been a major part of EMA's daily business since it began operating. These interactions are guided by a formal framework that rests on the principles of accountability, transparency and broad representation."
Yeah, sure. Those interactions are also guided by money, and lots of it.
"For certain activities, EMA charges pharmaceutical companies administrative fees," states the EMA website. "The bulk of the income from fees is redistributed among European Member States who provide the scientific expertise for assessing regulatory applications."
What sort of fees are we talking about?
For a drug marketing authorization, the EMA slugs a minimum of €296,500 (US $352,985). And that's just for a "single strength, one pharmaceutical form, one presentation" application. If you are planning to offer your new drug in a variety of dosages or various forms (capsules, liquid, injectable), then you'll need to fork out the minimum €296,500 fee for each one.
Once your drug is approved, you'll need to pay a €106,300 annual fee for each marketing authorisation of a medicinal product. So, for example, if the EMA has licensed your new drug to treat both adult depression and social anxiety, you'll need to pay the EMA €212,600 annually.
If you seek an additional licensed use for your drug, you'll need to pay the EMA another €89,000.
And if you want the EMA to give your company 'scientific advice,' you'll need to hand over between €44,400 to €89,000.
Nice work if you can get it.
The bottom line is that the EMA relies on the drug industry for the bulk of its income. For 2021, the total budget of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) amounts to €385.9 million. Around 86% of this hefty budget derives from fees and charges to industry.
This hardly inspires confidence in the EMA's impartiality when it comes to assessing the drugs it approves, especially when continued approval of a drug ensures an ongoing income stream for the agency.
The Great Rort and Reset
COVID-19 vaccination is a scam built upon a scam. Despite highly suspicious origins indicative of bioweaponry, COVID-19 nevertheless has a very low infection fatality rate of less than 0.5%. Even the CDC shows this at its website, although it doesn't exactly go out of its way to publicize this fact.
Despite the low threat posed, the relentless global scare campaign has successfully frightened millions of naive individuals into getting vaccinated with poorly tested drugs based on dubious and problematic technologies.
We are now seeing the inevitable consequences: Between the US and UK alone, we already have tens of thousands of adverse events and thousands of deaths reported for these vaccines in less than three months of use.
And after only two months, the AstraZeneca vaccine has already been suspended from use in numerous countries around the world. For a drug to begin its commercial life with that kind of controversy does not bode well for its future. Under normal circumstances, I'd confidently declare the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine the drug equivalent of a dead man walking. We are, however, living in the new abnormal, so it remains to be seen if and when this dangerous junk is removed from the market.
Oh, and don't be fooled by claims the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine is a "non-profit" drug. Harbour no illusions: Neither AstraZeneca, Oxford University or Vaccitech are charitable organizations. AstraZeneca has repeatedly promised not to profit from its COVID-19 vaccine “during the pandemic," but documents obtained by the Financial Times show the drug giant defines the “Pandemic Period” as ending on 1 July 2021. Oxford and Vaccitech, meanwhile, have made no such pledge.
And like all multi-billion multinationals, AstraZeneca is more than happy to take taxpayer money to fund activities it should damn well fund itself. As part of Trump's terribly misguided Operation Warp Speed (which was led by a former Moderna executive), AstraZeneca received $1 billion in funding from the US government for the production of its now highly troublesome COVID vaccine. This is a company, mind you, that enjoys total revenue of $7.41 billion and a pre-tax profit of $1.17 billion.
In other words, US taxpayers were made to cough up a billion greenbacks to fund a drug made in another country by a money-minting criminal pharma giant, a drug for which US "emergency use" authorization has yet to be granted. If the current controversy continues, that authorization may never be granted.
To all you terribly misguided woke types who wank on about the evils of capitalism, this is not capitalism - it's corporate socialism. While everyday people increasingly do it tough, there are always plenty of taxpayer handouts for the obscenely wealthy. Anyone who knows anything about how the world is really run knows that Planet Earth is not a hotbed of genuinely free enterprise, but a giant, heavily-regulated exercise in behavioral control and financial extraction. You work and pay an endless array of taxes, fees, levies, rates and fines to fund the antics of a bunch of self-serving rorters and elitist, technocratic control freaks.
The COVID-19 farce has provided the cover for a dramatic acceleration of this rort, a campaign the elite themselves have dubbed The Great Reset. As innocent people around the world lose their jobs and small and medium businesses have the life choked out of them, the world's billionaires are getting even richer.
The International Labour Organization estimates the COVID hysteria has cost workers around the world $3.7 trillion in lost earnings, and that 8.8% of working hours were lost in 2020 relative to the end of 2019, equivalent to 255 million full-time jobs.
American billionaires, meanwhile, continued to profit handsomely from the Great Coronavirus Con as their total wealth shot past $4.2 trillion in February — up $1.3 trillion, or 44 percent, since the pandemic recession began 1 year ago.
A similar phenomenon has occurred globally. A recent report by Oxfam found that, worldwide, billionaires' wealth increased by a staggering $3.9 trillion between 18 March and 31 December 2020. During that same period, the world’s 10 richest billionaires collectively saw their wealth increase by $540 billion.
The Oxfam report is available in various languages here.
In September 2020, Jeff Bezos could have paid all 876,000 Amazon workers a $105,000 bonus each, and still remained as wealthy as he was before the pandemic. Instead, he continued to subject them to appalling working conditions.
Like the rest of his Big Tech buddies, Bezos and his Washington Post have vigorously promoted the official COVID-19 narrative. A year ago, Bezos said Amazon was working directly with the WHO in a number of different capacities to tackle the coronavirus pandemic.
As a measure of what Bezos really thinks of the COVID charade, a few months later a group of Amazon employees filed suit against the company alleging it fostered a work environment in which employees “were explicitly or implicitly encouraged to continue attending work and prevented from adequately washing their hands or sanitizing their workstations.”
The lawsuit also alleged Amazon has taken a lax approach to contact tracing investigations to try and determine which employees may have come into contact with someone diagnosed with COVID-19, and that the company has punished workers for speaking out about safety concerns.
“HR just told me that I should keep it quiet,” one of the plaintiffs told The Verge back in April about her conversation with her supervisors regarding her positive test results. “That’s all they told me.”
The lawsuit, filed in New York, is not seeking damages for illness or death, Bloomberg reports. Instead, the suit is asking for a formal injunction to force Amazon to adhere to public health guidance.
Amazon responded the best way it knew how: With standard, form letter-style bullshit. A company spokesperson said in a statement it was “saddened by the tragic impact COVID-19 has had on communities across the globe, including on some Amazon team members and their family and friends.”
Amazon warehouses are notorious for their inhumane, third-world-style working conditions. After reports of absurdly long hours, dehydration, and mental breakdowns, a Daily Beast investigation found emergency workers were summoned to Amazon’s warehouses nearly 200 times for suicide attempts and other mental health crises between 2013-2018.
Amazon, a company renowned for treating its employees like shit, serves as a useful barometer of what working life will be like if this Great Reset agenda is successfully implemented. Once the majority of small and medium businesses have been successfully eliminated, you'll be faced with the choice of working for a pittance under exploitative billionaires like Bezos, or receiving an even more meager "Universal Basic Income." You'll be too poor to own anything, but according to World Economic Forum head, Great Reset mastermind, and technocratic sociopath Klaus Schwab, you'll be happy about it.
Or else.
If You Found This Article Helpful, Please Consider Leaving a Tip
This site is self-funded and relies on reader generosity. Researching and writing articles like this takes a lot of time, so any and all tips are greatly appreciated!