Video Player is loading.

Up next


Viral Vaccine paper

AnonArrow2
AnonArrow2 - 369 Views
1,121
369 Views
Published on 11 Jul 2023 / In News and Politics

Batch-dependent safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13998

71% of the suspected adverse reactions occurred in 4.2% of the vaccine batches

Numbers of suspected adverse events (SAEs),

after BNT612b2 mRNA vaccination in Denmark.

27 December 2020–11 January 2022, (population 5.8 million)

(According to the number of doses per vaccine batch)

Each dot represents a single vaccine batch.

By 11 November 2022 (European area)

701 million doses of Pfizer given

971,021 reports of suspected adverse effects (SAEs)

Clinical data on individual vaccine batch levels have not been reported

(batch-dependent variation in the clinical efficacy and safety of authorized vaccines would appear to be highly unlikely)

We therefore examined rates of SAEs between different BNT162b2 vaccine batches administered in Denmark

Data on all SAE cases, Danish Medical Agency (DKMA)

SAE seriousness was classified as non-serious, serious

(hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, life-threatening illness, permanent disability or congenital malformation) or SAE-related d****

Anonymized data

SAEs were counted on a batch level by linking individual SAEs to the batch label(s) of BNT162b dose(s)

10,793,766 doses administered

4,026,575 persons

52 different BNT162b2 vaccine batches

(2,340–814,320 doses per batch)

43,496 SAEs were registered in 13,635 persons

61,847 batch-identifiable SAEs,

of which 14,509 (23.5%) were classified as severe,

579 (0.9%) were SAE-related d*****

Unexpectedly

Rates of SAEs per 1000 doses varied considerably between vaccine batches

From 1 SAE per 20 doses given to I in many thousands to zero

Variabilities

Vaccine manufacturing

Storage

Transportation

Clinical handling and control

Administration technique

Show more
1 Comments sort Sort by

AnonArrow2
AnonArrow2 1 year ago

a comment I found on the youtube source:
@furtivecat6895
5 days ago
Hi Dr. John, I'm a former Pfizer employee who specialised in manufacturing investigations.
I was one of the first vaccinated in early 2021. However, I was very hesitant to do so as I know how viral pandemics play out and that vaccinating against a virus like this was futile and the MRNA technology was untested. I finally decided to get the vaccine as I didn't want my family to receive it and thought if there was a bad reaction, I would experience it myself and give early warnings.
At the time as I said, I was working on production investigations, so I dug into the open investigations on the network. (Pfizer had introduced a networked investigation system called Sherlock around that time and I was granted access to the reams of data in the form of manufacturing deviations and customer complaints.)
I looked into the two batches that I had recieved and later in the year looked into the batches my partner had received, there were deviations for filter integrity failures that were passed and deemed safe. I am aware of several people that work for Pfizer that received the vaccines on the same day as me and had to be taken away by ambulance. In the early stages it was routine to undergo a monitoring period of 20 minutes post vaccine with a paramedic.

Anyways I've since left Pfizer as I can no longer tolerate the justifications and ethics of these companies. I personally believe the regulators need a serious reform too before we can even start truly investigating the misdeeds of big pharma.

Reply   thumb_up 0   thumb_down 0
Show more

Up next