Author: Nikola Tesla

This new report really complicates what we are going through right now because it basically concluded that the damage caused by the jabs (as reported in VAERS) is consistently variable based on which lot number was received and that there are “safer” lots which went to only 12 states and “dangerous” lots which went to between 13 and 50 states!

Spoiler alert: the states were not disclosed but I have personally sent a message asking for this information. It’s not clear why they didn’t disclose that information.

So just the other day TheExpose.uk dropped a report which analyzed VAERS data of both the Pfizer and Moderna Covid-19 lots for adverse events, hospitalizations and deaths and they founds some very interesting but rather disturbing information.

In case you are new to this VAERS is the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System which is the only reporting system active in the US for public data on adverse events that is specific to vaccine injury. It’s run by the CDC and the FDA.

This new report seems like a clever analysis because they used data from Influenza vaccines as a control group to establish a baseline of how many adverse events that could be expected per lot number as well as the spread of adverse events across many different lots numbers. This analysis included the average number of hospitalizations and deaths per lot as well as the minimums and maximums in these categories per lot number.

It’s not 100% clear how many vials are in each lot because these pharma companies are clearly disclosing the least amount of information they can get away with at this point and they are clearly taking advantage of the liability shield that was established last year (by Trump?) when this whole fiasco started. However, it is estimated that each lot has approximately 1000 vials and that this equates to 6000 doses.

So when we see that for the Influenza shots data shows:

The VAERS database showed a total of 1,608 adverse event reports against the flu vaccines alongside 15 deaths and 73 hospitalisations. The total count of lot numbers returned was 494.

https://www.bitchute.com/channel/CL6NVTZ5Q3Yv/And again this is 494 lots so this isn’t just a tiny sample of five or ten lots.

With that baseline it’s quite disturbing to me that this is what we are seeing for Pfizer in this analysis:

The VAERS database showed a total of 171,463 adverse event reports against the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine alongside 2,828 deaths and 14,262 hospitalisations. The total count of lot numbers returned was 4,522.

This data alone shows that there have been 106 times as many adverse reactions, 189 times as many deaths, and 195 times as many hospitalisations due to the Pfizer Covid-19 jab than there have been due to all other influenza vaccines combined.

In this case the data is pulled from nearly ten times as many lots as the control, but again this is analyzing the reports PER LOT number so this is very significant!

This is even more disturbing data:

The highest number of adverse event reports made to VAERS against a single lot number of the influenza vaccine was 26. Which makes it all the more shocking to discover that the highest number of adverse event reports made to VAERS against a single lot number of the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine up to October 15th 2021 was 3,563, and this isn’t an anomaly.

Moderna isn’t any better either. The data on Moderna show that the highest number of adverse events reported from a single lot was 4967. This number is huge considering we are assuming a lot size of approximately 6000 doses!

Digging in deeper we see the spread of adverse events in the Moderna lots was also wide:

The data reveals that 2,908 lots (64%) had just a single adverse event report made against them, whilst 2 specific lots had over 3000 adverse event reports made against them.

Shockingly we can also see from the data that 30 lots of Pfizer vaccine had between 1,000 and 1,499 adverse event reports per lot, another 20 lots had between 1,500 and 1,999 adverse event reports per lot, and another 23 lots had between 2,000 and 2,499 adverse event reports per lot.

The big question we need to be asking is why hasn’t the CDC or FDA discovered this data in their own data banks? Especially in light that they are now giving authorization to Pfizer for 5-11 year olds when these children have literally zero risk of death from the condition known as Covid-19.

Moving on with this report it actually got worse…

When analyzing the data for Pfizer lots it shows that 96% of the lots analyzed had zero deaths reported and that only 4% of the lots have had 2828 deaths reported!

Five lot numbers were associated with 61-80 deaths each, a further 5 lot numbers were associated with 81-100 deaths each, and just 2 separate lot numbers were associated with over 100 deaths each.

So why are these specific lots associated with so many deaths and the others are not?

Well before we get to that let’s look at Moderna for corroboration of the above.

Again with Moderna 95% of all the lots analyzed had zero deaths reported and 5% had 2603 deaths reported!

Thirteen lot numbers were associated with 41-60 deaths each, 2 lot numbers were associated with 61-80 deaths each and 1 lot number was associated with 81-100 deaths.

Of course the next question was where were the lots distributed to. I would have suspected that it would be simpler to distribute an entire lot (or multiple lots) to each state meaning each lot number would only exist in one state. This way if a recall was needed for a specific lot it would all be consolidated in a single state. However, this is not how these lots were distributed for whatever reason.

In fact one lot in California was reported in the news as being recalled in Orange County California and this was lot number 041L20A from Moderna but this lot was allegedly still distributed in other areas of the country!

That specific lot was identified as the 2nd most damaging lot number from Moderna in terms of the number of adverse events overall. Death numbers were analyzed separately.

…identified the actual lot numbers of Moderna vaccine that have caused the most harm in the USA. The most harmful of which is lot number ‘039K20A’; causing over 4,000 adverse event reports.

This next part is a real doozy!

4,289 different lots of Pfizer vaccine were distributed to 12 states or less across the USA, recording 9,141 adverse event reports against them alongside 99 deaths and 657 hospitalisations. This equates to an average of 2 adverse event reports per lot and 0 deaths and hospitalisations.

However, a further 130 different lots of Pfizer vaccine were distributed to between 13-50 states across the USA, recording 166,170 adverse event reports, 2,799 deaths, and 14,155 hospitalisations. This equates to an average of 1,278 adverse event reports per lot number, alongside 22 deaths and 109 hospitalisations.

This data therefore shows that each lot from the 130 different lot numbers of Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine distributed to more than 13 states, harmed on average 639 times more people, hospitalised on average 109 times more people, and killed on average 22 times more people.

There is a lot of speculation going on that “testing” is rampant in this extensive human trial that is ongoing with the human public and that specific lots may represent different formulas that are being “tested” for efficacy. My question is efficacy of what? Of how efficient they are at putting people in the hospital?

In the comments of this report (see link below) someone made this comment:

“Think4yrself” Reply to Ian Parker

I believe you may be correct. Get the book “Vaccine A”. A physician tells of his horrific experience when our U.S. military required the participation of military personnel in a disastrous experiment by vaccine developers at Dover Airforce base. Differing amounts of adjuvant were intentionally administered by batch lot but officials denied the adjuvant altogether initially. The book is available on Audible as well as book form through amazon.

I haven’t read that book but it’s now on my booklist for this winter…

As you can see this research identifies a lot of issues of consistency with these so called vaccines that are actually intended to be genetic code injections yet these pharma companies are hiding behind a liability shield and the notion of “proprietary” technology in order to avoid questions about such data exemplified above.

Are these inconsistencies due to gross negligence in quality control at the production facilities such as mold contamination? Is this a systemic issue which relates to ongoing “research” on the human population and if so who is in charge of such godlike research?

Here’s a video interview about this analysis:

As usual you can see the videos directly and subscribe here:

https://www.bitchute.com/channel/CL6NVTZ5Q3Yv/

Thank you for reading and spreading the truth. Please share this post far and wide to get this out and stop censorship and share your thoughts in the comments below.

 

Source:

https://theexpose.uk/2021/10/31/100-percent-of-covid-19-vaccine-deaths-caused-by-just-5-percent-of-the-batches-produced/comment-page-1/#comments 

Photo By Viewminder

You’ve probably heard about it if you haven’t actually read the report from TheExpose.uk about Vaccine Induced AIDS. The phenomena of drug induced AIDS actually goes back to the beginning of the AIDS epidemic and we clearly known about by players like Fraudulent Fauci back in the 1980s.

How can we be sure?

Well drugs like Amyl Nitrite inhalers were known to be immune-suppressive and marketed heavily to the gay population as “poppers”. These drugs combined with other immune-suppressive drugs were known to be driving the AIDS epidemic despite the fraud of the HIV virus cause. This fact was articulated well in books such as “AIDS Inc.” by Jon Rappaport and “AIDS, Opium, Diamonds and Empire” by Nancy Turner Banks.

So how much of a surprise would it be that an injected drug, a genetic code injection in this case, would actually disrupt immune function rather than support it?

AZT is another example. This family of drugs (created by Burroughs Wellcome as I recall) was originally used intentionally to suppress the immune system for organ transplant recipients. It became common that some of these transplant recipients would get hallmark AIDS conditions such as Kaposi Sarcoma (a type of skin cancer) and Pneumocystis (sp?) Pneumonia but when they lowered the dose of AZT family drugs or eliminated the drug these conditions would go away. (see Nancy Turner Banks citation)

Even if you prefer to believe that there is not a cabal out there which exists against the best interest of the people, time and time again pharma fails to deliver it’s promises of a cure.

This can be seen in the Vioxx scandal that lead arguably to over 100,000 deaths hidden in adverse cardiovascular events and while I’m not footnoting that statistic I believe that was covered in Nancy Turner Banks incredible work cited above.

But getting back to TheExpose.uk work.

I’ve read their short article on the PHE UK research and it was so brief that it left me with no choice but to examine the sources. My assessment is pretty clear that Public Health England is not reporting the same conclusion as TheExpose.

So why is this?

I believe the crux of this is that PHE is hiding important statistics in a clever sleight of hand. The most important statistic that PHE seems to have left out of all their graphs and conclusions is this one labeled: “Second dose ≥14 days before specimen date”.

Within that label sits a majority of hospitalizations and deaths!

When they eliminate that statistic from the graphs it hides the majority of hospitalizations and deaths of the vaccinated and highlights the hospitalizations and deaths of the “unvaccinated” which wouldn’t show such high peaks if they were shown next to a higher peak that included these “Second dose…” cohorts.

To give an idea of the numbers in this research let’s look at “Death within 28 days of positive PCR test” in the 80+ age range (of week 41 referenced below) where we see 1179 out of a total of 1382 deaths which were in the above cited “Second dose ≥14 days before specimen date”. It’s the majority of vaccinated dehttps://theexpose.uk/2021/10/15/its-worse-than-we-thought-fully-covid-vaccinated-ade/aths and these were left out of all the graphs!

As you can see that’s the majority of the deaths and you can also see that it’s the majority of deaths in the “Death within 60 days of positive PCR test” 80+ age cohort where we see 1447 out of 1680 total deaths. One could try to argue that more deaths are likely in this age range and while that’s true the same phenomenon shows in the lower age range albeit with smaller numbers overall.

And by the way, in my assessment I ignored the statistics on “case rates” because those are based on PCR testing and not symptomatic cases. These PHE reports also highlight the risk of “asymptomatic spread” which has been proven in plenty of studies to be negligent. Please share feedback if you believe I should be citing on this I’ve neglected it because to me it seems like old news.

So while I agree with the conclusion that TheExpose.uk made:

These immune system degradations could be caused by ADE (Antibody Dependent Enhancement – where the vaccine induced antibodies start working in reverse) and be specific to Covid, or could be more general and result in a form of vaccine mediated AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome). The fact that the 3rd Jabs worked in Israel (for a short period of time before the 4th jabs were proposed) means that vaccine antibodies do still have a protective effect immediately after vaccination. So that rules out ADE.

The falling efficacy of the vaccines does not asymptotically approach zero (which would mean that vaccines merely lose effectiveness over time). It goes straight through zero and then goes dangerously negative (which means the vaccines become toxic to the immune system). Then it goes more negative in a linear manner week on week. If this continues then the vaccines will completely destroy the part of your immune system which deals with Covid by the end of January.

Yet I’m still not so clear having reviewed the source data where exactly they came up with their conclusion and how exactly they totaled up their statistics because the graphs they reported are not (from my study) shown in the source data. Maybe they totaled a few of the different tables from the source document but in this age of transparency my feedback to TheExpose.uk is that their reporting seems rather incomplete.

Now maybe I missed something in my review of the original source documents but either way TheExpose.uk seems to have made a rather thin post on this subject given the huge amount of data packed into the original sources and the fact that their conclusion of the data contrasts sharply with that of TheExpose.uk as well as my own conclusion.

Here’s a great explanation of how vaccine induced immune dysfunction works:

And here is a video hyping up the post from TheExpose.uk if you like things like that 😉

As usual you can see my video posts and subscribe to my bitchute channel right here:
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/CL6NVTZ5Q3Yv/

I hope you found this post to be helpful as an interpretation to research that is being spread around frantically right now without any level headed examination.

Please give this post a share and spread the word.

 

Sources:

“AIDS, Opium, Diamonds and Empire” by Nancy Turner Banks
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1016465/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_36.pdf
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1018416/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_37_v2.pdf
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1019992/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_38.pdf
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1022238/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_39.pdf
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1023849/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_40.pdf
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1025358/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-41.pdf
https://theexpose.uk/2021/10/15/its-worse-than-we-thought-fully-covid-vaccinated-ade/

Featured Photo By Edifica
Amyl Nitrite Image courtesy of: alexliivet
Vaccine Art Image courtesy of: ebrkut

Karen Kingston, as a whistle blower has brought us very tangible facts that have teeth. This is likely because she is a former Pfizer employee so she brings us inside knowledge and this recent expose is no different.

Here she exposes important patents that give us a hint at the real purpose of these Covid jabs. When examining the patents it’s important to understand that all the mRNA shots including Pfizer BioNtech fall under the Moderna patents.

Case in point from Moderna patent number 10,703,789 B2 from July 7, 2020 and if you look at that patent you can see a description of the 4 lipid nano-particles which encapsulate the mRNA. In section 201 of this patent you can see that they’ve built in a delivery system that can be delivering the mRNA over periods of hours, days, months, or even years:

In one embodiment, therapeutic nanoparticle may be formulated for sustained release. As used herein, “sustained release” refers to a pharmaceutical composition or compound that conforms to a release rate over a specific period of time. The period of time may include, but is not limited to, hours, days, weeks, months and years.

(page 120 of patent 10,703,789 B2)

The above patent references and is related to another patent which reveals what Dr Zandre Botha discovered when looking at vials under her microscope. This patent is US20100216804A1.

Examining this patent you can see that these nanoparticles contain 4 things one of which is docetaxel, which is a chemotherapy agent. As Karen Kingston explains in the video below one of the working mechanisms behind a chemotherapy agent is to turn off the innate immune function. This has been seen in individuals who are subjected to these experimental shots.

This patent exposes in section 0046:

Disclosed nanoparticles can be used for a variety of applications, such as, without limitation, drug delivery, gene therapy, medical diagnosis, and for medical therapeutics for cancer, pathogen-borne diseases, hormone-related diseases, reaction-by-products associated with organ transplants, and other abnormal cell or tissue growth.

Then in section 0074:

Disclosed nanoparticles may include optional targeting moieties, which may be selected to ensure that the nanoparticles selectively attach to, or otherwise associate with, a selected marker or target. For example, in some embodiments, disclosed nanoparticles may be functionalized with an amount of targeting moiety effective for the treatment of prostate cancer in a subject (e.g., a low-molecular weight PSMA ligand). Through functionalization of nanoparticle surfaces with such targeting moieties, the nanoparticles are effective only at targeted sites, which minimizes adverse side effects and improves efficacy. Targeted delivery also allows for the administration of a lower dose of therapeutic agent, which may reduce undesirable side effects commonly associated with traditional treatments of disease.

This means they have built in targeted delivery and are delivering these nanoparticles intentionally to specific organs which would mean that what is referred to as “adverse events” may not be adverse at all but rather intentional based on the design of the encapsulated nanoparticles.

Moving on to the next referenced patent US20120265001A1 which discusses composite magnetic nanoparticles for a drug delivery system. This brings light to what many microscopists worldwide have been discovering in looking at vials under the microscope, they are seeing all these nanoparticles that reflect light and these are literally magnetic nanoparticles, originally developed for delivery of chemotherapy agents to targeted organs (for example the organ affected by cancer).

This stuff may seem like science fiction, and it really is because in reality it shows again how crude and unscientific our medical establishment is with their toxic drugs and how willing they are to test experimental therapies on healthy humans.

In my opinion it is one thing for someone with terminal cancer to be given a choice to take an experimental protocol like this but to give these sorts of injections to entire populations of relatively healthy humans is a clear violation of the Nuremberg code and plenty of other humanitarian laws.

Moving on to the graphene oxide carbon nanotubes the patent for that is US20130251618A1 which is referenced from the master Moderna patent clarifies that the presence of graphene oxide in these shots can’t simply be “debunked” as some conspiracy theory by the corporate shills any longer.

As usual my videos are always on my bitchute channel which you can subscribe to right here:
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/CL6NVTZ5Q3Yv/

Please share this post far and wide and get this information out there to people who care so we can stop the censorship. Also share your thoughts in the comments below.

 

Sources:

https://www.modernatx.com/sites/default/files/US10703789.pdf

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20100216804A1/en

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20120265001A1/en

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20130251618A1/en