Australian politicians are talking about injecting these vaccines in the arms of those down to the age of twelve! Here ‘Stew Peters talks with former Pfizer employee and biotech analyst, Karen Kingston. Kingston reveals what the FDA approval really means, and why it’s “game over” for the vaccine manufacturer, and for the inoculation.’
Disease
Remember South Africa’s Apartheid? Well, now in New South Wales, Australia we have the Covid Health Apartheid! Our ‘leaders’ have deemed that only those who submit to the government push for these experimental vaccines may have a ‘LITTLE’ of their freedom back. So, ‘Fully vaccinated NSW residents will be able to take advantage of eased coronavirus rules from September 13.
The new rules will be different for people inside coronavirus hotspots and those outside those areas.
But in all areas, those who take advantage of the eased rules must be fully vaccinated with two doses and be able to prove their vaccination status if asked by an official.
For people outside of local government areas (LGAs) of concern, the rule changes will mean:
- Fully vaccinated people can gather outside in groups of up to five
- All those people must be vaccinated
- The gathering must take place in the people’s LGA or within 5km of home
- The limit is five individuals whether the people are children or adults
For people in LGAs of concern, the rule changes will mean:
- Fully vaccinated adults can gather outside for one hour of recreation per day
- The outdoor activity can be a picnic, not just exercise
- The rest of the restrictions still apply, meaning there’s a limit of two people unless the people gathering are all from the same household
- The one hour of recreation is in addition to the allowed one hour of exercise, meaning each person can be outside for a total of two hours in a day
- The gathering must take place outside curfew hours
The curfew in hotspot area is from 9pm to 5am.
The Sydney hotspot areas are:
- Bayside
- Blacktown
- Burwood
- Campbelltown
- Canterbury-Bankstown
- Cumberland
- Fairfield
- Georges River
- Liverpool
- Parramatta
- Strathfield
- Penrith for the following suburbs: Caddens, Claremont Meadows, Colyton, Erskine Park, Kemps Creek, Kingswood, Mount Vernon, North St Marys, Orchard Hills, Oxley Park, St Clair and St Marys.
Under the current rules, hotspot residents can only go outside for one hour of exercise.
People outside the hotspots are already allowed to go outside for recreation, but with only one other person unless they’re from the same household.
“While there are various options we looked at, that was the option that met the mental health needs and wellbeing of our community,” NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian said.
She had previously said her government would announce eased rules for vaccinated people once the state had reached more than six million jabs.
That milestone was reached this week.
Ms Berejiklian also said there would be more rules that would ease once the state hits another target of getting 70 per cent of the population vaccinated against the coronavirus.
There would also be another set of rules that would change once an 80 per cent vaccination level was reached.
However, it wasn’t immediately clear what those rule changes would be.
“I want to strongly message today that NSW is calling on industry and citizens to get ready for when we are 70 per cent double vaccinated, that’s when things will start to open,” Ms Berejiklian said.
“The NSW government will start conversations with industry, but we do say that the condition of you participating and what will be reopening is on you being vaccinated.
“Because when you start opening at 70 per cent, there are certain activities only vaccinated people can do.”
The announcement came on another record day of coronavirus infections, with 1029 local cases.’https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/news/nsw-restrictions-for-fully-vaccinated-people-all-the-changes-to-start-from-midseptember/news-story/04d878cb8e0049b4e5493869a1a4f166
‘Monday, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a biologics license application for the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine.
The press reported that vaccine mandates are now legal for military, healthcare workers, college students and employees in many industries. New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has now required the vaccine for all teachers and school staff. The Pentagon is proceeding with its mandate for all military service members.
But there are several bizarre aspects to the FDA approval that will prove confusing to those not familiar with the pervasiveness of the FDA’s regulatory capture, or the depths of the agency’s cynicism.
First, the FDA acknowledges that while Pfizer has “insufficient stocks” of the newly licensed Comirnaty vaccine available, there is “a significant amount” of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine — produced under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) — still available for use.
The FDA decrees that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine under the EUA should remain unlicensed but can be used “interchangeably” (page 2, footnote 8) with the newly licensed Comirnaty product.
Second, the FDA pointed out that the licensed Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine and the existing, EUA Pfizer vaccine are “legally distinct,” but proclaims that their differences do not “impact safety or effectiveness.”
There is a huge real-world difference between products approved under EUA compared with those the FDA has fully licensed.
EUA products are experimental under U.S. law. Both the Nuremberg Code and federal regulations provide that no one can force a human being to participate in this experiment. Under 21 U.S. Code Sec.360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III), “authorization for medical products for use in emergencies,” it is unlawful to deny someone a job or an education because they refuse to be an experimental subject. Instead, potential recipients have an absolute right to refuse EUA vaccines.
U.S. laws, however, permit employers and schools to require students and workers to take licensed vaccines.
EUA-approved COVID vaccines have an extraordinary liability shield under the 2005 Public Readiness and Preparedness Act. Vaccine manufacturers, distributors, providers and government planners are immune from liability. The only way an injured party can sue is if he or she can prove willful misconduct, and if the U.S. government has also brought an enforcement action against the party for willful misconduct. No such lawsuit has ever succeeded.
The government has created an extremely stingy compensation program, the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program, to redress injuries from all EUA products. The program’s parsimonious administrators have compensated under 4% of petitioners to date — and not a single COVID vaccine injury — despite the fact that physicians, families and injured vaccine recipients have reported more than 600,000 COVID vaccine injuries.
At least for the moment, the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine has no liability shield. Vials of the branded product, which say “Comirnaty” on the label, are subject to the same product liability laws as other U.S. products.
When the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices places a vaccine on the mandatory schedule, a childhood vaccine benefits from a generous retinue of liability protections.
But licensed adult vaccines, including the new Comirnaty, do not enjoy any liability shield. Just as with Ford’s exploding Pinto, or Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup, people injured by the Comirnaty vaccine could potentially sue for damages.
And because adults injured by the vaccine will be able to show that the manufacturer knew of the problems with the product, jury awards could be astronomical.
Pfizer is therefore unlikely to allow any American to take a Comirnaty vaccine until it can somehow arrange immunity for this product.
Given this background, the FDA’s acknowledgement in its approval letter that there are insufficient stocks of the licensed Comirnaty, but an abundant supply of the EUA Pfizer BioNTech jab, exposes the “approval” as a cynical scheme to encourage businesses and schools to impose illegal jab mandates.
The FDA’s clear motivation is to enable Pfizer to quickly unload inventories of a vaccine that science and the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System have exposed as unreasonably dangerous, and that the Delta variant has rendered obsolete.’https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/mainstream-media-fda-approval-pfizer-vaccine/
‘Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said on Tuesday that, at some point in the future, a strain of COVID-19 that is resistant to vaccines is likely to emerge.
“Every time that the variant appears in the world, our scientists are getting their hands around it,” Bourla told Fox News in an interview. “They are researching to see if this variant can escape the protection of our vaccine. We haven’t identified any yet but we believe that it is likely that one day, one of them will emerge.”
This is not the first time Bourla has made the ominous prediction. He addressed the issue in a wide-ranging interview with Fortune in February, around the time when attention was increasingly turning to new mutations of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, the pathogen that causes COVID-19.
Responding to a question about the effectiveness of the Pfizer vaccine against emerging variants, Bourla said he was “quite confident” it could neutralize the new mutations and cited encouraging lab results. At the same time, he said that “the fundamental question” is how likely it is that there will eventually emerge a vaccine-resistant strain of coronavirus.
“Theoretically, it’s a very possible scenario. If you protect a very big part of the population, and if there is a strain that emerges that can use this pool of population to replicate while the current strains cannot, obviously this will overtake the original. So it’s not a certainty, but it is now, I believe, a likely scenario,” he said.
At the time, Bourla told Fortune that the mRNA technology used in the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine allows for the rapid development of a new version able to create a different immunogenicity that could cover new mutations. He predicted that such a vaccine could be developed in around two months but noted this would depend on multiple factors including the regulatory framework.
In his interview with Fox News, he expanded on this, saying Pfizer has a process in place allowing the company to develop a variant-specific vaccine within 95 days of identifying a new mutation.
His remarks came on the same day that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported new data shedding more light on vaccine effectiveness against the Delta variant. Based on a study of 4,217 fully vaccinated participants—65 percent of whom received the Pfizer shot, 33 percent took Moderna’s vaccine, and 2 percent got the Johnson&Johnson jab—the CDC report found lower effectiveness (66 percent) during the Delta prominent period compared to the months preceding Delta predominance (91 percent).
A day earlier, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted full regulatory approval for Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine for people 16 and older, making it the first such shot to make it beyond the emergency-use-only stage.’https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/pfizer-ceo-predicts-vaccine-resistant-covid-19-variant-likely-to-emerge_3963263.html?utm_source=morningbriefnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-08-25&mktids=eaa8fdcff4f0407d01ee4d202f3a7e63&est=2p%2FQE9kO6HazVCAkZZqv7i7C1sUxBjti4dXWGCZIsohzKTmU4KIVz%2BDjlep%2F4PuuVA%3D%3D
It seems since the Wuhan virus has come upon us we have looked to our elected officials who are being run by the bureaucrats! One of these over paid people is Dr. Anthony Fauci who definitely ‘…has had himself a year (or two).
As 2020 began, he was a senior federal bureaucrat best-known for helping defang the AIDS crisis. A week before, he had turned 79, well past the standard retirement age for government employees – though he controlled a multi-billion research budget and no one was publicly suggesting he step down.
The novel coronavirus changed everything for him.
Within months, practically every American knew his name. People worldwide viewed him as their best hope to defeat Covid. As President Trump fumbled, Fauci’s authority grew.
“How Anthony Fauci Became America’s Doctor,” the New Yorker wrote in April 2020. The nickname stuck.
Once Joe Biden replaced Donald Trump, the title essentially became official. Fauci is now “Chief Medical Advisor to the President” in addition to his day job as head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
He is probably the world’s best-known scientist.
He earned that title the hard way, by giving too many interviews to count. As the Washington Post explained in a glowing July 2020 profile:
At first, as soon as Fauci was anywhere, he was everywhere. The New York Times dubbed him the explainer-in-chief for all things coronavirus, and he did his explaining to Laura Ingraham and Chris Cuomo, in the largest papers and the littlest websites, on the early morning rundowns and the noontime Sunday shows. He showed up to chat with Trevor Noah and Stephen Curry.
The schedule would have been grueling for a person half Fauci’s age – especially since he had to find time between those interviews to, you know, actually track the science around Sars-Cov-2 and vaccine and drug development.
But he managed!
“With all due modesty, I think I’m pretty effective,” Fauci told InStyle. “I certainly am energetic. And I think everybody thinks I’m doing more than an outstanding job.”
With all due modesty… everybody thinks I’m doing more than outstanding job.
As the United States faces the biggest decisions yet of the epidemic – whether to force mRNA vaccines on unwilling Americans, whether to encourage booster shots for the already vaccinated – the way Fauci views himself and his critics deserves a look.
To be clear, I’m not writing today about the substance of the choices we and Fauci face.
Nor will I examine the evidence that weeks after Sars-Cov-2 emerged, Fauci appeared worried the virus had leaked from a lab in Wuhan performing the “gain-of-function” research he championed. Those are crucial topics worthy of a deep dive. For now I simply want to look at Fauci’s attitude.
Fauci has always been a skilled courtier. He said as much in a 2014 interview with the Journal of Clinical Investigation:
I think one of the best things I did was realize this is the terrain, so get used to it and get good at it. And I learned some fundamental principles. One of the first things is to understand the relationships between people in power: the Congressmen and -women, the Senators, the chairs of committees, and importantly, the Presidents of the United States. I never in my wildest dreams would have thought that I would become adviser to five separate Presidents.
Sometimes, that means making sure powerful people know how much you care about and respect them – and even love them!
But Fauci made sure that those powerful people – and everyone else – understood he was a scientist first. Sometimes he would even offer a visual aid, as the Post’s 2020 profile explained:
“Shalala [Donna Shalala, Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Health and Human Services] often sent Fauci to the Oval Office when Clinton’s aides told her she had an hour with the commander in chief to do with what she wished. When Shalala asked Fauci to speak to the country, she had a special request: ‘Put on your white coat … because people trust the doc.’”
Who was Tony Fauci to argue?
Along the way, though, Fauci developed a healthy self-regard. Maybe he always had it. When President George H.W. Bush asked him to run the entire National Institutes of Health in 1989, Fauci said no. “This is not the time for the general to leave the battlefield to go back to the Pentagon,” he told Science magazine.
Woe to anyone who disagreed with him, though.
In August 2020, President Trump named Dr. Scott Atlas as a special adviser on coronavirus. Like Fauci, Atlas is a physician, although he comes from outside the public health establishment. Unlike Fauci, Atlas did not support lockdowns.
Within weeks, Fauci attacked Atlas, telling CNN that Atlas was giving Trump information that was “either taken out of context or actually incorrect.” But Fauci hoped he and Atlas could find common scientific ground, he said:
If I have an issue with someone, I’ll try and sit down with them and let them know why I differ with them and see if we can come to some sort of resolution. I mean my differences with Dr. Atlas, I’m always willing to sit down and talk with him.
Which made an interview Fauci gave to Politico in January 2021, after Biden took over, particularly interesting. Asked about Atlas, Fauci responded, “He didn’t undermine me, because I didn’t give a sh.. about him. I didn’t really care what he said.”
I didn’t give a sh.. about him.
So much for a sitting down and talking. Or a reasoned conversation about the pros and cons of lockdowns. With the public health establishment and the media on his side, Fauci was untouchable, and he knew it.
Occasionally, if Fauci were challenged hard, his mask would slip even in public. Kentucky senator Rand Paul found this out when he pushed Fauci on whether the NIH had funded “gain-of-function” research in China – research designed to make viruses more dangerous.
“Senator Paul, you do not know what you are talking about, quite frankly,” Fauci answered.
Quite frankly became a Fauci catchphrase of sorts.
Asked in October 2020 about the possibility of reaching widespread immunity against the coronavirus without waiting for a vaccine, he answered, “Quite frankly that is nonsense, and anybody who knows anything about epidemiology will tell you that that is nonsense and very dangerous.”
Anybody who knows anything about epidemiology apparently did not include the epidemiologists who had suggested the possibility.
But Fauci’s most stunning comment came two months ago, in an interview with MSNBC.
“Quite frankly, the attacks on me are attacks on science,” he said. “If you are trying to, you know, get at me as a public health official and a scientist, you’re really attacking not only Dr. Anthony Fauci, you’re attacking science…”
This level of arrogance would seem almost absurd if the stakes were not so high.
But they are.
The United States desperately needs a full and independent investigation into what Fauci and other officials knew about the risks of gain of function research and whether they worked to steer scientists and reporters away from examining the origins of the virus in 2020. Such an inquiry may turn out to be embarrassing for Fauci, but it should have happened already.
Even more importantly, data from Israel and increasingly the United States show that the mRNA vaccines Fauci championed are far less effective than they seemed months ago.
A rational response to their plunging effectiveness would be – at the least – to stop encouraging their use while scientists investigate why they have stopped working so quickly. Instead Fauci is pressing Americans to take a third mRNA dose in the hope it will work better and longer than the original two.
But no clinical trial data shows a third dose will reduce infections, much less hospitalizations or deaths. And a research preprint released Monday (Aug. 23) in Japan suggests the Delta variant could evolve in a way that could produce vaccine antibody-dependent enhancement, a nightmare scenario.
Figuring out whether this risk is real – and what to do if it is – will require open debate that may include uncomfortable moments for the public health advocates who have pressed these vaccines.
Instead, Tony Fauci has taken the position that questioning him is attacking science.
Unless he changes – or is forced to change – his attitude – we may have a hard time finding the answers we need.’https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/quite-frankly
‘COVID Early Treatment and Prevention by Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet’
In New South Wales, Australia we continue to be locked down for our health, so we are told. Here is a link to a video that seeks to show the attitude of those who rule us. https://www.bitchute.com/video/99XNyoV53xQ7/
Is the FDA as WOKE as other organizations seem to be? Even if they are not as woke would you trust them now that Biden is in the Oval Office? Therefore, does the FDA’s approval of Pfizer change your opinion of these Wuhan flu drugs?
‘U.S. drug regulators on Aug. 23 approved the COVID-19 vaccine from Pfizer and BioNTech for people 16 and older, making it the first such shot to receive full approval in the country.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said the vaccine, which will be known as Comirnaty, proved effective in a clinical trial of approximately 44,000 people. The shot was 91 percent effective in preventing COVID-19 infection, regulators said, and also was effective in preventing severe disease and hospitalization.
The trial continues in centers in six different countries, including the United States, and the data cited was gathered through March 13. Participants received either two doses of Pfizer’s shot or a placebo.
FDA officials said they also reviewed safety data and determined that the vaccine’s known and potential benefits outweigh its known and potential risks, including side effects.
“As the first FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccine, the public can be very confident that this vaccine meets the high standards for safety, effectiveness, and manufacturing quality the FDA requires of an approved product,” Dr. Janet Woodcock, the FDA’s acting commissioner, said in a statement.
“While millions of people have already safely received COVID-19 vaccines, we recognize that for some, the FDA approval of a vaccine may now instill additional confidence to get vaccinated. Today’s milestone puts us one step closer to altering the course of this pandemic in the U.S.”’https://www.theepochtimes.com/us-drug-regulators-approve-pfizers-covid-19-vaccine_3961021.html?utm_source=newsnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-08-23-1&est=oST4kwHkxvyZ8LOSbWeeWxrjYcOLX5%2BZWHmGc989eLuIlgqqsZ4ZCnLspyBYIXgTMg%3D%3D
whatyareckon 