Knowledge About Lack of Protection Against Transmission is Old, Not New
The admission by a Pfizer exec has set social media ablaze with shock. That's what you get when you suppress inconvenient truths. Now the flawed policies must be reversed or rescinded.
Please read this all the way through. It’s infuriating, I know. BUT - this is why I’m asking you to (1) upgrade to Paid and (2) share EVERY ARTICLE in real time.
Popular Rationalism applies reason and logic to real-world events. In this dystopian time of messaging, you’ll be a year ahead on the misinformation. This proves it.
Just when public trust in Public Health could not get lower, it fell of the crapper and into the fire.
With the EPOCH Times’ headline, “Pfizer Exec Concedes COVID-19 Vaccine Was Not Tested on Preventing Transmission Before Release”
comes the Orwellian tale of “we never did the studies because we had to move at the speed of science”. Seriously, you can’t make this up…
When asked by Rob Roos, a member of the European Parliament, “Was the Pfizer COVID vaccine tested on stopping the transmission of the virus before it entered the market? Did we know about stopping immunization before it entered the market?”
Pfizer’s Janine Small, president of international developed markets, said in response: “No … You know, we had to … really move at the speed of science to know what is taking place in the market.”
Epoch Times wrote:
“A Pfizer executive said Monday that neither she nor other Pfizer officials knew whether its COVID-19 vaccine would stop transmission before entering the market last year…
“…Roos, of the Netherlands, argued in a Twitter video Monday that following Small’s comments to him, millions of people around the world were duped by pharmaceutical companies and governments.
‘Millions of people worldwide felt forced to get vaccinated because of the myth that ‘you do it for others,'‘ Roos said. ‘Now, this turned out to be a cheap lie’ and ‘should be exposed,’ he added.”
Yikes.
But wait, there’s more.
“The Food and Drug Administration wrote in late 2020 that there was no data available to determine whether the vaccine would prevent transmission and for how long it would protect against transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19.”
‘At this time, data are not available to make a determination about how long the vaccine will provide protection, nor is there evidence that the vaccine prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from person to person,’ the agency specifically noted.
Hold the phone there, because my ally from the UK, John Stone, and the internet, remembers things a bit differently (the links provided are from John, the descriptions and quotes are pulled by me):
By Sept, 2020, the goalposts had already been moved to hospitalization, per the NY Times, which nudged:
“If you were to approve a coronavirus vaccine, would you approve one that you only knew protected people only from the most mild form of Covid-19, or one that would prevent its serious complications? The answer is obvious. You would want to protect against the worst cases.”
The WashPo got serious about this, warning that actually studying transmission rates (which track rates of mild or asymptomatic disease) should not be done:
“A close reading suggests the clinical trials have been designed to ensure the greatest possible success for these candidates — and that could overstate their effectiveness. In both the Moderna and Pfizer trials, for example, the primary objective is to prevent any occurrence of covid-19, not necessarily a severe case. Preventing serious illness is a secondary objective.”
Even vaccine risk, death and injury denialist Peter Hotez was telling Medpage today in early November:
"Even as the first vaccines become more widely available they may be only partially protective to reduce severity of illness and won't stop transmission anyway so we won't need to pay people for that purpose," he told MedPage Today. "So I don't foresee a reason to pay anyone to get vaccinated against COVID-19."
Similarly, vaccine injury denialist Fiona Godlee warned, explicitly in BMJ:
“So instead we are heading for vaccines that reduce severity of illness rather than protect against infection, provide only short lived immunity, and will at best have been trialled by the manufacturer against placebo. As well as damaging public confidence and wasting global resources by distributing a poorly effective vaccine, this could change what we understand a vaccine to be. Instead of long term, effective disease prevention it could become a suboptimal chronic treatment. This would be good for business but bad for global public health.”
John Stone also reminded BMJ about the lack of effectiveness that was being reported.
Now back to Epoch Times storyline:
“Meanwhile, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, around the same time, said his firm was ‘not certain’ if those who receive its mRNA vaccine will be able to transmit COVID-19 to other people.
‘I think this is something that needs to be examined. We are not certain about that right now,’ Bourla told NBC News in December 2020 in response to a question about transmissibility.
Former White House medical adviser Dr. Deborah Birx in June revealed that there was evidence in December 2020 that individuals who received COVID-19 vaccines, including Pfizer’s, could still transmit the virus.
“We knew early on in January of 2021, in late December of 2020, that reinfection was occurring after natural infection,” Birx, the White House COVID-19 response coordinator during the Trump administration, told members of Congress this year.
Enter the Faucists (My Subheading, Not ET’s)
A number of officials in the United States and around the world had claimed COVID-19 vaccines could prevent transmission. Among them, President Joe Biden in July 2021 remarked that “you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”
“Chief Biden administration medical adviser Anthony Fauci in May 2021 said in a CBS interview that vaccinated people are ‘dead ends’ for COVID-19, suggesting they cannot transmit the virus. ‘When you get vaccinated, you not only protect your own health and that of the family but also you contribute to the community health by preventing the spread of the virus throughout the community,’ Fauci said.
Epoch times goes on to report that by July Fauci, Walensky and the other Faucists were admitting no protection against transmission.
Remember that time when we swore in a President with no crowd, waiting for a vaccine that didn’t work, while Pierre Kory and Peter McCullough and others were yelling from the rooftops that early treatments work?
Dystopian movie? No. Dystopian USA, January, 2021.
Policies Set in Place Based on Misinformation from Fauci Must Be Reversed
California has criminalized misinformation from doctors. Fine. Turn in the doctors that tell you lies about COVID-19 vaccines. Ask them who is at greater risk of infection, and if they lie, turn them in.
We need to reverse any and all policies that have led to forced vaccination. The Military. Healthcare workers. Colleges. Front-liners. And everyone who lost their jobs due to refusal to obey should be given their jobs back with back pay. And compensation for any financial distress caused by their job loss.
You saw it all happening, chronicled right here in real time on Popular Rationalism.
Remember, Fauci was peddling a second lock-down in November in a last-ditch effort to win the argument on Federal vaccine mandates, after pitching Omicron as “dangerous”.
I predicted in that article no further lockdowns.
We saw increased risk of infection in the vaccinated here, in many, many articles.
Forbes was lying to us as well:
Barnstable County Data were widely known in October, 2021
And it was in November when they approved boosters based on no data:
And real-world data showed no protection:
And CDC tried to hide breakthrough infections - it didn’t work
And certain people who now won’t mask their children wanted you to not be able fly,
As I have requested: Please upgrade to a paid subscription and share EVERY ARTICLE in real time. I’m banned from Twitter, so it’s up to you.
Popular Rationalism applies reason and logic to real-world events. In this dystopian time of messaging, you’ll be a year ahead on the misinformation and you can help others learn to recognize the disinformation peddlers.
I appreciate all of you more than you can ever know.
"Anthony Fauci in May 2021 said in a CBS interview that vaccinated people are ‘dead ends’ for COVID-19, suggesting they cannot transmit the virus."
But he was singing a different tune in the Annals of Internal Medicine in May 2021:
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/full/10.7326/M21-0111
"Administration of parenterally administered vaccines alone typically does not result in potent mucosal immunity that might interrupt infection or transmission"
I just commented similar at The Vigilant Fox's substack post: "Smoking Gun – The Death Jab Failed":
"It was not a RCT because, based on my understanding, subjects with natural immunity were excluded from the trials. On this alone, the trials should have been found to be insufficient for the FDA to have authorized it.
On top of that, for search for efficacy (Phase 2) had been unethically prioritized over safety (Phase 1).
I hope everyone realizes that this is a lot larger than covid and vaccines because there's a slew of drugs and treatments that will follow this exact same method.
It was stated in the literature that much was unknown. It was stated very early on that it doesn't reduce transmission. It was the government at many levels, the media, and influencers (who were influenced) that kept repeating "safe and effective", "protect yourself and others" and "do your part. do the right thing". I'm not saying the drug companies had no role either. They did. They witnessed it all.
Another question is who redacted much of the Pfizer documents? Regardless of whether it was the FDA or Pfizer, the FDA should be held responsible for authorizing something that should not have been whether the information was redacted ahead of time or if the FDA redacted it. Hidden information is only hidden for a reason."