UK Situation Room: Pfizer/Moderna Document Analysis

Introduction 

by Cheryl Grainger

Never before has so much harm been done to so many, by so few, based on so little questionable, potentially flawed data.

Bob Seely MP

Obtaining the Data

Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT) is an organisation in the US, made up of public health professionals, medical professionals, scientists, and journalists. PHMPT exists for the sole purpose of disseminating to the public the data and information in the biological product files for each of the Covid–19 vaccines. In furtherance of its mission, and to ensure that the FDA, the US regulator of medicines, acts in furtherance of its commitment to transparency, PHMPT sought to obtain the data and information relied upon by the FDA to license the Pfizer Covid vaccine via a Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) request.

On 9 September 2021, the FDA denied PHMPT’s request for expedited processing, on the basis that PHMPT did “not demonstrate a compelling need that involves an imminent threat to the life or physical safety of an individual” or “that there exists an urgency to inform the public concerning actual or alleged Federal Government activity.”

The FoIA request was eventually granted by court order through the PHMPT's attorney, Aaron Siri. The judge in the matter required the FDA to release all 451,000 pages of information over eight months, despite the FDA planning to retain the data for 75 years. 

The judge in the FDA Pfizer Court Order trial cited the following quotations:

Knowledge will forever govern ignorance.

James Madison

A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of the people.

John F. Kennedy

Excessive administrative secrecy [...] feeds conspiracy theories and reduces the public's confidence in the government.

John McCain

Analysing the Data

Dr Naomi Wolf, CEO of DailyClout.io, a website devoted to civic transparency, explains how the data was analysed:

We realised the raw documents were impossible to cover in normal journalistic ways, due to their massive scope and the documents are written for scientists and medical researchers.

We sent a call for expert volunteers ... we received 2000, then 2500, and finally 3500* responses from volunteers, many of whom are experts in their fields. Biostatisticians, lab clinicians, pathologists, anaesthesiologists, sports medicine physicians, cardiologists, research scientists, RNs, and many other related disciplines are represented among these decent, highly-skilled people who offered to read through these difficult, technical documents - pro bono, as a service to humanity (and out of respect as well, in many cases, for their own lifelong commitment to real science, real medicine, and truth in general). Many of them were not only published, peer-reviewed academic authors in their fields, but some were peer reviewers themselves. There was no way, with a group this distinguished in science and medicine doing the labour, that the interpretation of these documents could be dismissed as 'fringe', subjective, or as the work of 'conspiracy theorists'.

Of course, managing a project in which 3,500* highly trained specialists from all over the world work together virtually on unpacking and reporting on such a massive trove of material, would have been impossible for mere mortals. At first, indeed, we did not know how to organise the thousands of specialists who offered their help. Enter Amy Kelly, who is also a heroine of this story. She is a talented project manager, and now Daily Clout's COO; and she has a distinguished background in complex organisational projects in various fields.

Ms. Kelly managed, seemingly effortlessly, to organise the volunteers into six working teams, with subcommittees of expert readers. Under her extraordinary leadership, the thousands of specialists around the globe started to communicate with one another, share their findings, and draft their reports. I trained the volunteers in writing for a general audience, and the DailyClout editors in editing what was often dense medical language, but with extremely important findings, into accessible reports that anyone with any level of education could follow and understand.

For all of us, but mostly for the volunteers and Ms. Kelly, (this) represented a Herculean effort to turn this material, that one of the most powerful companies in the world trusted would never be made public, into ... readable reports sharing the most urgent headlines of all -- the reports that are now in your hands.

* 3,500 volunteered and 3,250 worked and continue to work on the project.

What Pfizer knew: 

  • The mRNA vaccines did not work. 
  • The ingredients, including lipid nanoparticles, in the mRNA injections bio-distributed throughout the body in a couple of days, accumulating in the liver, adrenals, spleen and ovaries. 
  • Pfizer and the FDA knew that the injections damaged the hearts of minors—and yet waited months to inform the public. 
  • Pfizer sought to hire over a thousand new staffers simply to manage the flood of "adverse events" reports that they were receiving and that the company anticipated receiving. 61 people in the trials died of strokes, and half of the stroke adverse events were within a couple of days after injection. 
  • Five people in the trials died of liver damage—with, again, many of the liver damage adverse events sustained shortly after the injection. 
  • Neurological events, cardiac events, strokes, brain haemorrhages, blood clots, lung clots and leg clots were occurring at massive scale. 
  • Headaches, joint pain, and muscle pain were rampant as adverse events, though these are not disclosed as routine side effect warnings by our agencies.

Dr Wolf continues:

[...[ most seriously of all, you will see a 360-degree attack on human reproductive capability: with harms to sperm count, testes, sperm motility; harms to ovaries, menstrual cycles, placentas; you will see that over 80 per cent of the pregnancies in one section of the Pfizer documents ended in spontaneous abortion or miscarriage. You will see that 72 per cent of the adverse events in one section of the documents were in women, and that 16 percent of those were "reproductive disorders,'' in Pfizer's own words. You will see a dozen or more names for the ruination of the menstrual cycles of women and teenage girls. You will see that Pfizer defined "exposure" to the mRNA vaccine as including skin contact, inhalation, and sexual contact, especially at the point of conception.

History has not yet concluded its assessment of what Pfizer—and the FDA, who were in custody of all these documents—has done. We are at the very start of that assessment. But it is clear the following documents, written by impeccably skilled experts, and linked to primary sources, show that a crime has likely been committed against humanity that is unprecedented in its scale. Evidence of fraud would, if found, negate any indemnity for Pfizer.

Our thanks must go out to all the volunteers, the Daily Clout and especially Naomi Wolf and Amy Kelly, Steve Bannon's War Room for actively discussing the analysis reports.


This is the schedule for the FDA document release:

  • Pfizer must produce 451,000 pages at a rate of 55,000 pages a month (as opposed to the 75 years that the FDA wanted to take). This will be complete by December 2023.
  • Moderna data (plus Pfizer vaccine data for twelve- to fifteen-year-olds) is much larger, at 4.8 million pages, and will be released from the FDA at 180,000 pages a month—which will take about 26 months to mid-2025 (as opposed to the 23½ years that the FDA wanted to take).

This data has been released by the FDA, but its British counterpart, the MHRA, and all regulators globally would have had the same Common Technical Documents (CTD) sent to them in application for licensing Covid–19 vaccines. The MHRA would have had access to the same data that is analysed and described in these reports.

The MHRA was the first regulator to approve the Pfizer Covid–19 vaccine, on 1 December 2020, and thus allowed the UK to be the first country to vaccinate for Covid. The MHRA was analysing the Pfizer data at the same time as the data for the AstraZeneca Covid–19 vaccine, which it authorised on 30 December 2022. The Moderna offering, CTD, arrived during this time, when the MHRA had a 25% decline in its workforce.
 

The level of risk

AgeInfection Fatality Rate (IFR), UK
Source: Health Security Agency
0–190.0027%
20–290.014%
30–390.031%
40–490.082%
50–590.275%
60–690.59%
70+ (non-institutional)2.4%
70+ (all)5.5%

 

These risks should be weighed against (if there are any) the benefits.

In the UK, it appears that 86% of the funding of the MHRA is provided by the pharmaceutical industry, by the very companies whose products the MHRA regulates with the ostensible aim of protecting the public from harm. Indeed, the capture of academia by Big Pharma threatens to undermine evidence-based medicine.

The MHRA is now intending, by its Chief Executive Officer's own proud admission, to operate as an "enabler" instead of a "regulator", and as such intends to bring medicines to market within 100 days. Dame June Raine stated:

Here in the UK, the MHRA worked really hard to overcome some of the obstacles within the structure of clinical trials taking place in different jurisdictions, and that was one of the reasons we were able to licence vaccines here in the UK faster than anywhere else: because of the flexibility yet robustness shown by the MHRA.

(See this review.)

These reports questions the validity of the MHRA's "robustness" of action.

Subject Index of the Pfizer and Moderna Reports (click to expand)

Main Image: Marco Verch Professional Photographer (CC BY 2.0 Deed)