Major Problems with Batches of Pfizer COVID Shots

Danish scientists have uncovered irrefutable evidence that a large number of the batches of Pfizer's BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine consisted of placebos. About 30% of the Pfizer vaccines distributed in Europe had no adverse events at all associated with them because they were inert placebos (yellow line on chart figure at right). The remaining non-placebo batches (70% of vaccines) demonstrated higher-than-normal severe adverse events in shot recipients (green and blue lines on chart figure at right). This information calls into serious question vaccine quality, safety and efficacy.

Deception by Vaccine Regulators

Danish researchers reviewed Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines administered in Denmark between December 2020 and January 2022. They found that the batches of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines could be neatly divided into three groups. Two of the three groups had high numbers of adverse reactions associated with them. But the third group of batches had zero adverse events reported. Upon further investigation, researchers discovered that almost none of the batches from the yellow group were inspected or tested by regulators—it seemed like regulators knew they were harmless. What makes it worse is that this evidence points to regulators knowing about it and willingly administering them anyway. These Danish shot recipients received absolutely no benefit from the jab because no vaccine was in any of the placebo batches. Was the European medical system actively experimenting on the public or were they trying to cover up the numerous vaccine side effects?

Non-Placebo Batches (Green and Blue Lines)

German scientists discussed the Danish study and reached the following conclusions concerning the non-placebo vaccines (green and blue lines on chart).

The middle green batches line accounted for over 60% of the overall sample and demonstrated a moderately-high level of adverse events associated with administering them. 800,000 doses were administered with 2,000 adverse events. Approximately one severe adverse event was reported per 400 doses in this green batch. This is a much higher rate of severe adverse events reported than typically seen for the influenza vaccine.

The blue batches (top line) was associated with an extraordinarily high level of adverse events. There were 80,000 doses given and an astronomical 8,000 adverse events which equates to one in every ten doses (sometimes as high as one in every six doses!). This batch accounted for 50% of the vaccine-related deaths (579 total deaths) even though it only represented 5% of the total vaccine shots administered in Denmark. Scientists saw evidence that these especially bad batches were quietly pulled from the market by public health authorities.

German scientists commented on the variability of the Pfizer batches by stating that it appears that the good was bad, the bad was very bad, and the very good was saline solution! Who would ever suspect that medical health authorities could play such games of life and death on an unsuspecting population?

Bad Batch Phenomenon

The reason health officials don't want individual vaccine vials examined by independent scientists is because the individual vials can vary dramatically in quality and the mRNA is not always intact. What is more disturbing is that some of these "hot" lots are being released in a coordinated fashion suggesting that vaccine makers are intentionally doing lethal-dose testing on the public and that these "bad batches" are not merely the result of intermittently poor quality control in manufacturing plants.

COVID Censorship Continues

Another disturbing example of mainstream media's efforts to coverup problems with the COVID jab occurred in a medical journal. A study reviewing the autopsies of people who died after receiving a COVID shot was pulled less than 24 hours after it was published on The Lancet journal's preprint server. The research showed that 240 of the 325 autopsy cases (73.9%) were determined to be directly due or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination . The conclusions were made by 3 independent physicians. There were hundreds of downloads per minute from the server the first day because of the detailed analyses of third-party autopsies conducted. Clearly, someone became alarmed and told The Lancet to kill it immediately. Autopsies have been highly discouraged by the medical system to keep the public in the dark concerning vaccine injuries occurring.

This medical censorship was even more blatant at the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). NEJM rejected the study mere days after it was submitted and JAMA rejected it only one hour after submission. No peer review, no discussion, no reason given—the topic is taboo and so the submissions were dead on arrival (DOA). The study analysis was conducted by Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Harvey Risch, and Dr. Roger Hodkinson, an expert clinical pathologist. All three doctors have had hundreds of articles published in the past. Despite their stellar careers and previously published articles, they were canned. The medical journals are controlled by Big Pharma and no study is allowed to reach the public which even remotely contributes to vaccine hesitancy.

​These are serious concerns. The public has a right to depend on governmental regulatory agencies and the medical system to protect them from harm and ensure product safety and efficacy. Unfortunately, these government agencies and medical journals have been captured by the pharmaceutical industry and are more interested in doing their bidding. The watch-dog mainstream media has been compromised because they depend upon advertising dollars generated by the industry. A first step towards ending this incestuous relationship is to end pharmaceutical advertising on television and social media. When the money dries up, the news outlets might remember the integrity they used to display in holding big corporations accountable. We can only hope for elected officials to remember the little guy and muster the courage to tell the truth and fight for what is right and fair. ​