First COVID Vaccine Approved, But Is It Truly 'Safe' & 'Effective'? Vaccination Won't Stop The 'Pandemic' & Long Term Safety Unknown, Experts Say

(source)

After being hailed as totally "safe and effective" following clinical trials, the first Covid19 vaccine approval has been granted, with the Pfizer vaccine being approved for public use by the FDA in the USA, Canada and other countries at the beginning of the week following its initial approval in the UK. This Pfizer vaccine, one of six vaccines developed as a part of the military's Operation Warp Speed, will now begin to be given to the general public, starting with front line workers and those deemed most vulnerable, followed by the rest of society (which won't be until sometime later next year). Pfizer's approval will likely be immediately followed by the approval of the Moderna vaccine, with dozens more varieties of coronavirus vaccine to soon reach the approval stage, many of which have already secured contracts to supply billions of their vaccine doses to governments around the world, such as AstraZeneca, anticipated to also receive approval for widespread public use. But are these vaccines truly as "safe" and "effective" as the media would have us believe?

Over the past several weeks as a number of these vaccines neared approval stage, particularly following the announcement of the declared high rates of efficacy of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, the mainstream media has been strongly pushing the one-sided narrative that these vaccines are both "safe" and "effective," and that they will soon be here to 'save the day' and usher in the end of this months-long 'pandemic'. This idea that only a coming vaccine will be able to vanquish this 'deadly virus' has been ingrained into the American and surely also the global psyche since Bill Gates and Co. - all the way back in March and April - began relentlessly talking up vaccines as being the ultimate, and in the words of Gates himself, "the final solution" to this so-called pandemic. We were all told over and over again that the bulk of the totalitarian "measures" implemented in the name of 'fighting the pandemic' would remain in place until a vaccine is developed and approved.

And now, with many states reimposing some or all or reinvented versions of the same strict devastating lockdown measures imposed in the Spring, and millions of Americans sick and tired of being 'forced' to wear a mask absolutely everywhere they go, the masses are hungry for any 'magic bullet' that could bring this madness to a relatively immediate end, and most have been thoroughly convinced that these new experimental vaccines are that solution, and will bring a speedy end to the so-called pandemic. This is certainly one driving force behind many people's eager willingness and in some cases even desperation to be vaccinated. If Americans knew that mass vaccination of society couldn't be guaranteed to bring an end to this 'pandemic', and that the bulk of the restrictive measures they were now being subjected to in the name of fighting the 'pandemic' would definitely remain in place even after people were vaccinated, how many would still be so eager to roll up their sleeves and get the shot? And yet this is exactly what the powers that be have been openly telling us, at least those of us willing to listen, that the vaccine won't stop the pandemic, or at the very least that getting vaccinated won't exempt you from any of the restrictions supposedly aimed at doing what the vaccine is claimed to be "effective" at - stopping the spread of a 'virus' and defeating this 'pandemic'.

In mid-November, the head of the WHO clearly warned that a vaccine alone "will not end the pandemic," saying that other measures will need to stay in place even after populations are vaccinated, dashing the hopes of those who trusted Bill Gates' assurances that vaccines would in fact be "the final solution" this 'pandemic'.

In the midst of the early successes of Moderna and Pfizer’s promising vaccine candidates, the head of the World Health Organization warned that a vaccine alone won’t end the Covid-19 pandemic, stressing that the “virus will still have a lot (of) room to move” once vaccines start to roll out.

In a video Monday, WHO head Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that while a vaccine is “essential for bringing the pandemic under control” it is used to complement other pandemic fighting tools, “not replace them.”

“A vaccine on its own, will not end the pandemic,” he said.

https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1328314929741504513

- AFP

Even if the vaccines are truly as effective as they have been deemed, mass vaccination of a majority of the global population as planned could take months or even years, while the deployment of the Pfizer vaccine in particular is not practical due to the extraordinarily cold temperatures it must be stored at to remain viable.

Even if approved, and also accounting for the fact that manufacturers have been ramping up production anticipating approval, it will take time for vaccines to be distributed, administered and to take effect. The low temperatures required by Pfizer’s vaccine could complicate this further, if not make it entirely impractical to use in many parts of the world.

Furthermore, even if the vaccine was 100% effective at creating immunity in patients, this immunity could still fade with time and 'Covid19' could end up being with humanity permanently, according to the 'experts', as even Forbes notes:

This could take months or even years to achieve adequately around the world, and not much is known about how long immunity might last. It’s very possible Covid-19, once under control, could become a cyclical illness that stays with us, much like the flu, experts say.

Keeping this in mind, it is well worth noting that much more recently on December 3, UK government officials reportedly declared that "recipients of the COVID-19 vaccine in the United Kingdom will not be exempted from self isolation if they are contacted by the country's tracing system." The reasoning behind this apparently nonsensical declaration, as reported by The Telegraph, is that: "The jabs provide Covid-19 immunity but scientists are yet to prove this prevents recipients from carrying and spreading the virus."

So while the Pfizer vaccine has been officially declared "90% effective at preventing the disease," it is apparently not necessarily effective at stopping the spread of the 'virus', meaning those who are vaccinated, although personally immune, could still be a 'carrier' and therefore a 'spreader' of 'Covid19' - one of those scary 'asymptomatic carriers' we have been programmed to fear as the driving force behind the rapid spread of the 'virus' and also the very justification for all of the insane tyrannical measures being implemented, from mass masking to city/county/statewide lockdowns and stay-at-home orders.

This shouldn't come as a surprise to those who have been paying attention, for the predictive programmers have made it abundantly clear that the 'new normal' is here to stay, and that things will never be going back to a pre-pandemic normal, not even after the arrival of a vaccine. For example, the 'experts' have already said that we should anticipate wearing masks after the arrival of a vaccine, even after the 'end' of the 'pandemic', for years, maybe even forever - as a documented in a post of mine several months ago:

They want the public convinced these vaccines are truly "safe and effective" so people are eager and not hesitant to be vaccinated, but at the same time they want us programmed to accept the continuation of totalitarian 'pandemic' measures and even implementation of new such measures even after widespread vaccination of the public. So they push the vaccine as the end-all-be-all solution while at the same time telling us it might not actually solve the illusory 'problem', ensuring the agenda will continue marching forward even after the global vaccination campaign has been completed sometime in 2021 (according to Bill Gates' timeline). All they will have to do when people begin to question why the vaccine didn't 'end the pandemic' is to say, 'look, we told you months ago the vaccine wasn't the "silver bullet"the media made it out to be.'

And so amidst all of the coverage pushing the vaccine you also have headlines like the one attached to a widely shared NY Times article published on November 30: "COVID-19 vaccines are coming. But first, a long and dark winter."

And much more recently on December 15 we now have a ABC News media headline reading: "Vaccine rollout was a moment of hope in COVID-19's darkest days, but experts warn of more dark days ahead".

This piece apparently originated from CNN, which later heavily altered both the headline and text as seen below, for whatever that info is worth...

Original CNN headline(s) with opening text:

Updated headline and opening text, seen when clicking on the MSN News link screencaptured above:

All CNN changes aside, the current ABC version of the article warns that despite all 50 states receiving vaccine doses on Monday and initial vaccination of front line workers underway with nursing home occupants set to be next, "vaccines will make little impact on what's coming up ahead: a devastating winter that leading health officials have projected will be one of the most difficult times in the nation's history."

"This vaccine, as wonderful as it is, is not going to change the trajectory of what we experience this winter," Besser told CNN. "It's not going to change what we need to do; it's not going change the need for us all to wear masks, and social distance and wash our hands."

As the 'pandemic' prophets have been predicting for months now, and media headlines are now confirming, the US is in for a very 'dark winter', which is currently arriving right on schedule. Recent video of mine linked below documents the predictive programming and arrival of this so-called 'dark winter' psychological operation (psyop):

No vaccine will be allowed to get in the way of this engineered future centered around this 'dark winter' narrative; and as we have seen, this future will not likely magically end as Spring arrives either, but 'Covid19' will instead likely be with us for good, just like the flu and common cold (which is just another coronavirus).

Another highly relevant question regarding the true efficacy of these new experimental vaccines is the fact that they have presumably been engineered to create immunity within recipients, but what exactly have they been designed to create immunity against when the 'virus' they claim to offer protection against - so-called SARS-CoV2 - hasn't even been proven to exist according to the current scientific gold standard of virus identification (isolation)??? It's an important question that must be asked.

Meanwhile the newly approved vaccine is also being hailed as extremely "safe," but what does that mean exactly? It may be less effective than the media has led us to believe, so it shouldn't be surprising to find out it may also be a bit less safe than advertised by the media either. We have been told this Pfizer vaccine is entirely "safe and effective," with "no serious safety concerns observed." And yet the FDA itself has admitted the vaccines they are reviewing may cause a number of serious adverse events including death, and has announced that a number of participants in the Pfizer trials have indeed reported serious adverse events following vaccination, including the death of two Pfizer trial participants.

The FDA is aware that the Covid19 vaccines it has been reviewing (including Pfizer and Moderna) may cause 21 different serious adverse events including death. As summarized by GreenMedInfo:

A US Food & Drug Administration advisory committee meeting titled, “Vaccines and Related Biological Products,” presented online on October 22, 2020, included a 27 slide powerpoint presentation by Steve Anderson, PhD, MPP Director, Office of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). Slide 16 of his presentation included a “DRAFT Working list of possible adverse event outcomes” associated with the imminent rollout of COVID-19 vaccines subject to FDA safety surveillance, showing that death, as well as 21 other conditions (most of which are possibly life-threatening), are listed as possible adverse outcomes of the COVID-19 vaccines.

The FDA later made the official announcement that up to 4.6% of Pfizer vaccine trial participants had developed serious adverse effects it called "severe adverse reactions."

Severe adverse reactions occurred in 0.0-4.6% of participants, were more frequent after Dose 2 than after Dose 1 and were generally less frequent in older adults (>55 years of age) (<2.8%) as compared to younger participants (≤4.6%). Among reported unsolicited adverse events, lymphadenopathy occurred much more frequently in the vaccine group than the placebo group and is plausibly related to vaccination.

One of these likely "severe adverse reactions" was Bell's palsy, developed by four Pfizer vaccine trial participants. Bell's palsy is a form of facial paralysis, and we also know that at least one AstraZeneca trial participant was at least temporarily paralyzed by a spinal condition that developed during the trial. The media is reporting that these cases of Bell's palsy "do not represent a frequency above that expected in the general population," and thus are not likely caused by the vaccine but rather developed 'naturally' during the trial.

"Always there are people who are skeptical about vaccines, but I have to say they are wrong," the Pfizer CEO himself argued.

But there are rightfully still many people who are skeptical, not convinced by the mere reassurance of a Big Pharma CEO. After all, even those who are rolling out this massive vaccination program are aware that the actual long-term safety of the vaccine cannot yet be known because it may take months or even years for some adverse effects to appear. This is why Operation Warp Speed is being used to conduct a 2-year "pharmacovigilance surveillance" program that will closely monitor all vaccine recipients for 24 months following initial inoculation. As a November 17 Bloomberg headline clearly reveals, even the mainstream media is well aware that: "Vaccine Safety to Remain Unclear Until Millions Get Their Shots".

Monitoring Covid-19 vaccines for safety issues will fall to a group of U.S. health agencies that also will have a hand in their rollout, a potential hurdle in persuading skeptics to get the shots, say former government officials who helped control an outbreak a decade ago.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs and other health agencies all have separate systems to track side effects and safety in people who get the first shots. But there are concerns the groups advising the agencies on all aspects of a vaccine may face public skepticism over their safety assessments at a time when vaccine hesitancy is a major concern.

It typically takes 5-10 years to fully develop a new vaccine, with four years being the record speed until now, when a vaccine has for the first time in history been developed, tested and approved in just 10 months flat, obviously leaving many skeptical about vaccine safety.

"That means longer-term problems with the shots may not be seen until millions of Americans have already been vaccinated," Bloomberg reported. "The U.S., meanwhile, will be depending on monitoring programs tied to a range of different agencies to respond quickly to reports of side effects or safety issues."

From the beginning, vaccine manufacturers have been racing to have a vaccine developed, tested and approved by 2021. "But," CNBC reported in May, "these timelines — having a vaccine to actually deploy by early next year — require everything going right, and going right the first time. That rarely happens in drug development."

And yet for some reason that extremely "rare" possibility occurred, we are told, with the very first vaccine to be tested, and is anticipated to take place with the next one and the next one after that as well. What are the chances of that? The odds are certainly low enough to legitimize the widespread vaccine skepticism, hesitancy and safety concerns in this particular case. Funny to have the same mainstream media that was warning Trump's timeline was an impossibility is now praising the now-approved rushed vaccine instead of questioning its safety and efficacy.

Likewise on November 1st CNN ran a story with the headline, "Past vaccine disasters show why rushing a coronavirus vaccine now would be 'colossally stupid'," but now that the first of these same rushed vaccines are actually here, all of these seemingly cautious mainstream outlets jump to repeat the 'safe and effective vaccine' mantra as they push vaccination on the entire population, with programming aimed at overcoming 'vaccine hesitancy' among the millions of skeptics.

As far as efficacy goes, not only are we being told that this vaccine may not help to slow or stop the spread of the virus, but the Pfizer vaccine was declared to only be 90% effective, as compared to its cousin vaccine from Moderna that scored a 94.5% official efficacy rating upon conclusion of Phase 3 trials. Furthermore, the potentials serious adverse effects of the vaccine are more likely to occur in the younger populations than those who are older. These are the same young people who are at the least risk of dying from 'Covid19', with Americans under 50 having a 99.98% survivability rate according to the CDC itself. The CDC data also shows that Americans between the ages of 50-60 still have a survivability rate of 99.5%, meaning they only have a one half percent chance of dying from COVID if they get the disease, while 10% of those receiving the Pfizer vaccine will not be personally protected, with vaccination possibly causing no reduction in Covid19 spread either. Considering that those who are younger have both an extremely high survivability rate if they do happen to get 'Covid19' and are at the greatest risk of developing a serious adverse effect from the vaccine, the safest choice, logically speaking, for those under the age of 60 clearly seems to be opting out of receiving this new experimental vaccine.

Not only is this an extremely rushed vaccine with no long-term safety data, but it is also features brand new, never-before-used-on humans, mRNA vaccine technology that is "effective" at building immunity in the patient not by creating antibodies through injected antigens, but by altering the patient's DNA. This makes the lack of long-term safety data even more concerning, but the fakestream media won't cover much if any of this, instead blindly regurgitating the official line that all approved vaccines and this one in particular are completely "safe and effective."

Nothing could be further than the truth, for there is no such thing as a 100% safe vaccine on the market today, although some are far more dangerous or safer than others. I have previously discussed this truth alongside the safety concerns with these particular vaccines at length, so instead of repeating myself and citing all the evidence of vaccine injuries caused by currently approved "safe and effective" vaccines, I'll just leave the link to my latest in-depth post on the subject here for all to visit.

"Vaccines are superstitions," one Big Pharma insider speaking in an interview with Jon Rappaport under the condition of anonymity explained several years ago, insisting that vaccine harm is both very real and widespread.

And with superstitions, you don’t get facts you can use. You only get stories, most of which are designed to enforce the superstition. But, from many vaccine campaigns, we can piece together a narrative that does reveal some very disturbing things. People have been harmed. The harm is real, and it can be deep and it can mean death. The harm is NOT limited to a few cases, as we have been led to believe. In the US, there are groups of mothers who are testifying about autism and childhood vaccines. They are coming forward and standing up at meetings. They are essentially trying to fill in the gap that has been created by the researchers and doctors who turn their backs on the whole thing.

FDA approval does not equate to a safe vaccine! As a former vaccine sales rep for Merck explains after ditching the industry to expose the truth about vaccine injuries:

Indeed, the FDA has even admitted that two Pfizer vaccine trial participants died during the trials, bringing the total number of Covid19 vaccine trial deaths to at least five. Such deaths may or may not be caused by the vaccine itself, but are worth noting and shouldn't be immediately discounted as 'natural' deaths just to be able to chant the 'safe and effective vaccine' mantra with confidence. One American man from Philadelphia died during a Moderna trial, one Brazilian died during an AstraZeneca trial and another Brazilian trial participant - in a Cinovax trial - also died.

Maybe this is one of the reasons that CNN featured a doctor in a December 4th piece warning readers not to be alarmed of reports of deaths occurring in older nursing home patients a day or two after receiving the new vaccination. This, both CNN and the doctor assure us, isn't because the vaccine is causing any of these deaths, but is simply rather a coincidence due to the fact that old people are dying every day in nursing homes anyway.

When shots begin to go into arms of residents, Moore said Americans need to understand that deaths may occur that won't necessarily have anything to do with the vaccine.

"We would not at all be surprised to see, coincidentally, vaccination happening and then having someone pass away a short time after they receive a vaccine, not because it has anything to do with the vaccination but just because that's the place where people at the end of their lives reside," Moore said.

"One of the things we want to make sure people understand is that they should not be unnecessarily alarmed if there are reports, once we start vaccinating, of someone or multiple people dying within a day or two of their vaccination who are residents of a long-term care facility. That would be something we would expect, as a normal occurrence, because people die frequently in nursing homes."

At the same time, however, a main subject of the CNN article is a dissenting CDC panelist - the only one out of 14 CDC advisors who voted against the CDC recommending the new vaccine be given to the elderly in nursing homes, due to both safety concerns and concerns also raised by Moore about lack of certainty regarding efficacy in the frail and elderly stemming from a complete lack of trial data from the elderly. "The Covid-19 vaccines have not been tested in the frail elderly, many of whom are residents of long-term care facilities," CNN explains.

"Since they haven't been studied in people in those populations, we don't know how well the vaccine will work for them. We know that most vaccines don't work nearly as well in a frail elderly person as they would in someone who is fit and vigorous, even if they happen to be the same age," Moore said.
"There's a question about the direct benefit of the vaccine, if given to people who live in those facilities, because we haven't studied how well it works in that group yet."

It's this uncertainty that led Talbot to vote no.

Dr. Helen "Keipp" Talbot, of Vanderbilt University, cast the lone dissenting vote of the CDC panelists, explaining her decision was based upon her disagreement with the 'hope for the best, find out later' attitude of her colleagues towards the most frail and elderly of our populations.

"I have spent my career studying vaccines in older adults. And we have traditionally tried a vaccine in a young healthy population and then hoped it works in our frail older adults," she told the committee ahead of her vote. "And so we enter this realm of 'we hope it works, and we hope it's safe,' and that concerns me on many levels."

This is the very same reckless attitude driving the greater global vaccination campaign now underway, pushing this vaccine as completely "safe and effective" without any long-term safety data whatsoever, and even before the vaccine has been tested in all age groups. And those behind these efforts know this.

In a CNN article published just yesterday - entitled "The coronavirus vaccine rollout will be messy. People will have to deal with that." - readers are warned that one of the "problems the US public can expect to see with any mass vaccination effort" is that "There will be side effects."

Trump's vaccine czar even warns that 15% of recipients of the new Covid19 vaccine can expect to develop serious side effects that include symptoms rivaling those experienced by 'Covid19' patients, similar to those described by one Moderna vaccine trial participant who "woke up with a terrible stomach ache and a headache" just 12 hours after getting her second dose, an experience she described as being "like I was at the beginning stages of a bad flu." "It was like every part of my body was hurting for about four hours," the trial participant Susan Froehlich added.

"It's not unexpected," CNN reported. "Slaoui has said up to 15% of Pfizer and Moderna vaccine trial participants have "quite noticeable side effects" including nausea, body aches, headaches and chills."

Many 'Covid19' patients experience extremely mild symptoms and are never hospitalized, meaning that even among the "90%" of those who are 'protected' by the vaccine, the side effects in as many as 15% may still be worse than those they would experience were they to catch this 'coronavirus' and come down with 'Covid19'. Obviously those two groups will overlap to some degree, meaning some people will likely be among those who experience symptoms mimicking a bad case of the flu while never getting the promised benefit of "immunization" against the so-called coronavirus. Given the extremely high survivability rate of those in my age group who do come down with the so-called Covid19 disease, the above statistics and the rushed/experimental nature of these new vaccines, my own personal choice to opt out of vaccination in this case is really easy. Maybe it won't be quite as easy a choice for others, but hopefully it will still be your own personal choice and not the choice of the media, the government, or the 'experts' like Bill Gates.

Because if the Big Pharma medical cartel, the technocrats engineering the 'pandemic' response, and the petty tyrants doing their bidding eventually all get their wish, you won't have choice because it will instead be mandatory. And that is, in my book, entirely unacceptable for a free society. But individual freedom doesn't really play much of a part in Bill Gates' plan to vaccinate the world, and so far this global vaccination program is all going according to plan.

For more on this vaccination agenda long in the works, see my fairly recent vaccine 'documentary', Covid1984: Global Vaccination | Bill Gates Exposed: