Story at-a-glance:

• Pfizer is demanding countries put up sovereign assets, including bank reserves, military bases and embassy buildings, as collateral for expected vaccine injury lawsuits resulting from its COVID-19 inoculation.
• Argentina and Brazil have rejected Pfizer’s demands. According to legal experts, Pfizer is abusing its power.
• In the U.S., vaccine makers already enjoy full indemnity against injuries occurring from the COVID-19 vaccine under the PREP Act. If you’re injured, you’d have to file a compensation claim with the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), which is funded by U.S. taxpayers.
• A significant problem with the CICP is that it’s administered within the Department of Health and Human Services, which is also sponsoring the COVID-19 vaccination program. This conflict of interest makes the CICP less likely to admit fault with the vaccine.
• The maximum CICP payout you can receive — even in cases of permanent disability or death — is $250,000 per person, and you first have to exhaust your private insurance policy before the CICP kicks in.

As reported by New Delhi-based World Is One News (WION), Pfizer is demanding countries put up sovereign assets as collateral for expected vaccine injury lawsuits resulting from its COVID-19 inoculation. In other words, it wants governments to guarantee the company will be compensated for any expenses resulting from injury lawsuits against it.

WION reports that Argentina and Brazil have rejected Pfizer’s demands. Initially, the company demanded indemnification legislation to be enacted, such as that which it enjoys in the U.S. Argentina proposed legislation that would restrict Pfizer’s financial responsibility for injuries to those resulting from negligence or malice.

Pfizer rejected the proposal. It also rejected a rewritten proposal that included a clearer definition of negligence. Pfizer then demanded the Argentinian government put up sovereign assets — including its bank reserves, military bases and embassy buildings — as collateral. Argentina refused. A similar situation occurred in Brazil. Pfizer demanded Brazil:

1. “Waive sovereignty of its assets abroad in favor of Pfizer.”
2. Not apply its domestic laws to the company.
3. Not penalize Pfizer for vaccine delivery delays.
4. Exempt Pfizer from all civil liability for side effects.

Brazil rejected Pfizer’s demands, calling them “abusive.” As noted by WION, Pfizer developed its vaccine with the help of government funding, and now it — a private company — is demanding governments hand over sovereign assets to ensure the company won’t lose a dime if its product injures people, even if those injuries are the result of negligent company practices, fraud or malice.

Aside from Argentina and Brazil, nine other South American countries have reportedly negotiated deals with Pfizer. It’s unclear whether they actually ended up giving up national assets in return.

Vaccine maker accused of abusing its power

According to STAT News, “Legal experts have raised concerns that Pfizer’s demands amount to an abuse of power.” Lawrence Gostin, law professor at Georgetown University and director of the World Health Organization’s Collaborating Center on National and Global Health Law told STAT:

“Pharmaceutical companies shouldn’t be using their power to limit lifesaving vaccines in low- and middle-income countries. [This] seems to be exactly what they’re doing … Some liability protection is warranted, but certainly not for fraud, gross negligence, mismanagement, failure to follow good manufacturing practices. Companies have no right to ask for indemnity for these things.”

Mark Eccleston-Turner, a lecturer in global health law at Keele University in England, added:

“[Pfizer] is trying to eke out as much profit and minimize its risk at every juncture with this vaccine development then this vaccine rollout. Now, the vaccine development has been heavily subsidized already. So there’s very minimal risk for the manufacturer involved there.”

Don’t expect compensation if injured by COVID-19 vaccine

In the U.S., vaccine makers already enjoy full indemnity against injuries occurring from this or any other pandemic vaccine under the PREP Act. If you’re injured, you’d have to file a compensation claim with the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), which is funded by U.S. taxpayers via Congressional appropriation to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).

While similar to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), which applies to nonpandemic vaccines, the CICP is even less generous when it comes to compensation. For example, while the NVICP pays some of the costs associated with any given claim, the CICP does not. This means you’ll also be responsible for attorney fees and expert witness fees.

A significant problem with the CICP is that it’s administered within the DHHS, which is also sponsoring the COVID-19 vaccination program. This conflict of interest makes the CICP less than likely to find fault with the vaccine.

Your only route of appeal is within the DHHS, where your case would simply be reviewed by another employee. The DHHS is also responsible for making the payment, so the DHHS effectively acts as judge, jury and defendant. As reported by Dr. Meryl Nass, the maximum payout you can receive — even in cases of permanent disability or death — is $250,000 per person; however, you’d have to exhaust your private insurance policy before the CICP gives you a dime.

CICP will only pay the difference between what your insurance covers and the total payout amount established for your case. For permanent disability, even $250,000 won’t go far. The CICP also has a one year statute of limitations, so you have to act quickly.

This too is a significant problem, as no one really knows what injuries might arise from the COVID-19 vaccine, or when, and this makes tying the injury to the vaccination a difficult prospect. Employers that mandate the COVID-19 vaccine will also be indemnified from liability for side effects. Instead, claims will be routed through worker’s compensation programs.

If the COVID-19 vaccines are as safe as the manufacturers claim, why do they insist on so much indemnification? Do they suspect or know something they’re refusing to admit publicly?

Side effects are inevitable

Of course, those of us who have been looking at the science behind the mRNA technology used to create these novel “vaccines” have long since realized there are tremendous risks involved. For starters, mRNA vaccines are most accurately referred to as gene therapies, as this is what they are.

They effectively turn your cells into bioreactors that churn out viral proteins to incite an immune response, and there’s no off-switch. Based on historical and preliminary evidence, significant short- and long-term side effects are, quite frankly, inevitable.

For starters, your body sees the synthetic mRNA as “non-self,” which can cause autoantibodies to attack your own tissues. Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., explained this in her interview, featured in “How COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’ May Destroy the Lives of Millions.”

Free mRNA also drive inflammatory diseases, which is why making synthetic mRNA thermostable — i.e., slowing the breakdown of the RNA by encasing it in lipid nanoparticles — is likely to be problematic. The nanoparticles themselves also pose a risk. COVID-19 vaccines use PEGylated lipid nanoparticles, which is known to cause allergic reactions and anaphylaxis.

What’s more, previous attempts to develop an mRNA-based drug using lipid nanoparticles failed and had to be abandoned because when the dose was too low, the drug had no effect, and when dosed too high, the drug became too toxic. An obvious question is: What has changed that now makes this technology safe enough for mass use?

As detailed in my interview with Mikovits, the synthetic RNA influences the gene syncytin, which can result in:

• Brain inflammation.
• Dysregulated communication between the microglia in your brain, which are critical for clearing toxins and pathogens.
• Dysregulated immune system.
• Dysregulated endocannabinoid system (which calms inflammation).

Pathogenic priming and antibody-dependent enhancement

Another significant problem is that we don’t know whether antibody production is protective or pathogenic in coronavirus infections. If pathogenic, vaccinated individuals may be at increased risk of severe illness if they’re exposed to SARS-CoV-2 in the future. As reported in a December 11, 2020, Vaccine: X paper:

“The first SARS-CoV-2 vaccine(s) will likely be licensed based on neutralizing antibodies in Phase 2 trials, but there are significant concerns about using antibody response in coronavirus infections as a sole metric of protective immunity.

“Antibody response is often a poor marker of prior coronavirus infection, particularly in mild infections, and is shorter-lived than virus-reactive T-cells … Strong antibody response correlates with more severe clinical disease while T-cell response is correlated with less severe disease; and antibody-dependent enhancement of pathology and clinical severity has been described.

“Indeed, it is unclear whether antibody production is protective or pathogenic in coronavirus infections. Early data with SARS-CoV-2 support these findings. Data from coronavirus infections in animals and humans emphasize the generation of a high-quality T cell response in protective immunity.”

A number of reports in the medical literature have indeed highlighted the risk of pathogenic priming and antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). As explained in “Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire? Due Diligence Warranted for ADE in COVID-19”:

“ADE is an immunological phenomenon whereby a previous immune response to a virus can render an individual more susceptible to a subsequent analogous infection.

“Rather than viral recognition and clearance, the prior development of virus-specific antibodies at a non-neutralizing level can facilitate viral uptake, enhancing replication; a possible immune evasion strategy avoiding intracellular innate immune sensors, or pattern recognition receptors …

“ADE of SARS-CoV has also been described through a novel FcγRII-dependent and ACE2-independent cell entry mechanism. The authors state that this warrants concern in the safety evaluation of any candidate human vaccines against SARS-CoV.”

Similarly, “Pathogenic Priming Likely Contributes to Serious and Critical Illness and Mortality in COVID-19 Via Autoimmunity,” published in the Journal of Translational Autoimmunity, warns that:

“Failure of SARS and MERS vaccines in animal trials involved pathogenesis consistent with an immunological priming that could involve autoimmunity in lung tissues due to previous exposure to the SARS and MERS spike protein. Exposure pathogenesis to SARS-CoV-2 in COVID-19 likely will lead to similar outcomes.”

So, to be clear, what all of this means is that if you get vaccinated, you may actually be at increased risk for serious illness if/when you’re exposed to any number of mutated SARS-CoV-2 strains in the future.

This is why the recommendation to vaccinate individuals who have previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2, or who have an active SARS-CoV-2 infection, may actually be quite dangerous. Dr. Hooman Noorchashm recently sent a public letter to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner detailing these risks.

How mRNA injections may trigger prion disease

What’s more, in a paper titled, “COVID-19 RNA Based Vaccines and the Risk of Prion Disease,” published in Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, Dr. Bart Classen warns there are also troubling evidences suggesting some of the mRNA shots may cause prion diseases such as Alzheimer’s and ALS. He writes:

“In the current paper, the concern is raised that the RNA based COVID vaccines have the potential to cause more disease than the epidemic of COVID-19. This paper focuses on a novel potential adverse event mechanism causing prion disease which could be even more common and debilitating than the viral infection the vaccine is designed to prevent …

“Analysis of the Pfizer vaccine against COVID-19 identified two potential risk factors for inducing prion disease is humans. The RNA sequence in the vaccine contains sequences believed to induce TDP-43 and FUS to aggregate in their prion based conformation leading to the development of common neurodegenerative diseases.

“In particular it has been shown that RNA sequences GGUA, UG rich sequences, UG tandem repeats, and G Quadruplex sequences, have increased affinity to bind TDP-43 and or FUS and may cause TDP-43 or FUS to take their pathologic configurations in the cytoplasm.

“In the current analysis a total of sixteen UG tandem repeats were identified and additional UG rich sequences were identified. Two GGΨA sequences were found. G Quadruplex sequences are possibly present but sophisticated computer programs are needed to verify these.

“The spike protein encoded by the vaccine binds angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), an enzyme which contains zinc molecules. The binding of spike protein to ACE2 has the potential to release the zinc molecule, an ion that causes TDP-43 to assume its pathologic prion transformation.”

mRNA technology has potential to cause microvascular injury

Additionally, Dr. J. Patrick Whelan, a pediatric rheumatologist specializing in multisystem inflammatory syndrome, submitted a public comment to the FDA back in December 2020, in which he expressed concern that mRNA vaccines have “the potential to cause microvascular injury to the brain, heart, liver and kidneys in ways that were not assessed in safety trials.”

He cited research showing that “the spike protein in brain endothelial cells is associated with formation of microthrombi (clots),” and that since no viral RNA has been found in brain endothelium, “viral proteins appear to cause tissue damage without actively replicating virus.”

“Is it possible the spike protein itself causes the tissue damage associated with Covid-19?” he asks. “In 13/13 brains from patients with fatal COVID-19, pseudovirions (spike, envelope, and membrane proteins) without viral RNA are present in the endothelia of cerebral microvessels …

“It appears that the viral spike protein that is the target of the major SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is also one of the key agents causing the damage to distant organs that may include the brain, heart, lung, and kidney.

“Before any of these vaccines are approved for widespread use in humans, it is important to assess in vaccinated subjects the effects of vaccination on the heart … Vaccinated patients could also be tested for distant tissue damage in deltoid area skin biopsies …”

Reports of side effects are rapidly mounting

Around the world, reports are now pouring in of people dying shortly after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. In many cases, they die suddenly within hours of getting the shot. In others, death occurs within the span of a couple of weeks.

In the wake of 29 senior citizen deaths, Norway is reportedly considering excluding the very old and terminally ill from getting the AstraZeneca vaccine. According to the Norwegian Medicines Agency:

“Most people have experienced the expected side effects of the vaccine, such as nausea and vomiting, fever, local reactions at the injection site, and worsening of their underlying condition.”

The Norwegian Institute of Public Health further noted that “for those with the most severe frailty, even relatively mild vaccine side effects can have serious consequences,” and that “For those who have a very short remaining life span anyway, the benefit of the vaccine may be marginal or irrelevant.”

In Sweden, hospitals in Sörmland and Gävleborg suspended the AstraZeneca vaccine in mid-February 2021 after a full quarter of the vaccinated hospital staff reported side effects. To prevent staff shortages and conduct an investigation, the vaccination push was temporarily paused. Examples of side effects reported after vaccination with Pfizer’s, Moderna’s and AstraZeneca’s vaccines from around the world include:

In the U.K., there were 49,472 reported side effects to the Pfizer vaccine and 21,032 reactions to the AstraZeneca vaccine as of January 24, 2021. As reported by Principia Scientific International, “For both vaccines this equates to 1 in every 333 people suffering an adverse reaction. This rate could actually be higher as some cases may have not been reported …”

Greatest risk of all: sudden death

Perhaps most concerning of all are rapidly mounting reports of sudden death, mostly in the elderly but also in much younger, healthy individuals. In the U.S., COVID-19 vaccines accounted for 70% of vaccine-related deaths between January 2020 and January 2021.

As of Feb. 12, 2021, the number of side effects reported to VAERS totaled 15,923, including 929 deaths. Of the 799 deaths reported within the U.S., one-third occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 21% of them were cardiac-related.

Pfizer’s vaccine was the most dangerous in terms of death, being responsible for 58% of deaths while Moderna’s vaccine accounted for 41% of deaths. Pfizer’s vaccine was also responsible for 75% of Bell’s Palsy cases, compared to Moderna’s at 25%.

Curiously, based on the data submitted to the FDA, Moderna’s vaccine has a death rate 5.41 times higher than Pfizer’s, yet both are dramatically lower than the national average. As noted by The Defender, the dramatic discrepancy in death rates “deserves notice and requires explanation,” adding:

“If Moderna’s on-vaccine death rate is so far below the national death rate and also simultaneously more than five times greater than Pfizer’s on-vaccine death rate, then Pfizer’s study sample appears even less representative of the entire population …

“Moderna’s screening process and exclusion criteria in the trial led to evidence that the general population is dying at a rate 6.3 times greater than the death rate in the Moderna trial — which means the Moderna study, including its estimated efficacy rate and the vaccine’s alleged safety profile — cannot possibly be relevant to most of the U.S. population.

“The super-healthy cohorts studied by Moderna are in no way representative of the U.S. population. Most deaths from COVID-19 involve pre-existing health conditions of the types excluded from both Pfizer and Moderna trials …

“Those enrolling in the post-market surveillance studies deserve to know the abject absence of any relevant information on efficacy and risk for them. In their zeal to help humanity, or to help themselves, these people may very well be walking into a situation that will cause autoimmunity due to pathogenic priming, potentially leading to disease enhancement should they become infected following vaccination.”

Do a risk-benefit analysis before making up your mind

To avoid becoming a sad statistic, I urge you to review the science very carefully before making up your mind about this experimental gene therapy. Also remember that the lethality of COVID-19 is actually surprisingly low. It’s lower than the flu for those under the age of 60.

If you’re under the age of 40, your risk of dying from COVID-19 is just 0.01%, meaning you have a 99.99% chance of surviving the infection. And you could improve that to 99.999% if you’re metabolically flexible, insulin sensitive, and vitamin D replete.

So, really, what are we protecting against with a COVID-19 vaccine? These mRNA vaccines aren’t even designed to prevent infection, only to reduce the severity of symptoms. Meanwhile, they could potentially make you sicker once you’re exposed to the virus, and/or cause persistent serious side effects such as those reviewed above.

While I won’t tell anyone what to do, I would urge you to take the time to review the science and weigh the potential risks and benefits based on your individual situation before you make a decision that you may regret for the rest of your life, which can actually be shortened with this vaccine. Undoubtedly, Pfizer and other vaccine makers suspect this as well, which is why Pfizer is bullying nations into covering for any and all of its mistakes.

Originally published by Mercola.

The post Pfizer Demands Nations Put Up Collateral to Cover Vaccine Injury Lawsuits appeared first on Children’s Health Defense.

Read More

A group of prominent scientists and doctors want the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to answer “urgent” safety questions about the three COVID-19 vaccines authorised for use in the EU, or withdraw the vaccines’ authorisation.

In an open letter published this week, the group questioned “whether cardinal issues regarding the safety of the vaccines were adequately addressed prior to their approval” by the EMA.

The EMA, which is the EU equivalent of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration,  approved three vaccines for emergency use in the EU: the Pfizer-BioNtech, Moderna and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines.

In their letter, 12 scientists and doctors noted a “wide range of side effects” is reported following vaccination of previously healthy younger individuals with the gene-based COVID-19 vaccines.

They wrote:

“Moreover, there have been numerous media reports from around the world of care homes being struck by COVID-19 within days of vaccination of residents. While we recognise that these occurrences might, every one of them, have been unfortunate coincidences, we are concerned that there has been and there continues to be inadequate scrutiny of the possible causes of illness or death under these circumstances, and especially so in the absence of post-mortems examinations.”

In their original letter, sent Feb. 28 via email to the EMA, the group asked the EMA to provide responses to seven safety-related issues within ”seven days and address all our concerns substantively. Should you choose not to comply with this reasonable request, we will make this letter public.”

The authors, led by Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, professor emeritus of medical microbiology and immunology, and former chair, Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, have not yet received a response from the EMA.

In a written statement Wednesday, the group said:

“Therefore, as a starting point, we believe it is important to enumerate and evaluate all deaths which have occurred within 28 days of vaccination, and to compare the clinical pictures with those who have not been vaccinated.

“More broadly, with respect to the development of COVID-19 vaccines, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has stated in their Resolution 2361, on 27th January 2021, that member states must ensure all COVID-19 vaccines are supported by high quality trials that are sound and conducted in an ethical manner. EMA officials, and other regulatory bodies in EU countries, are bound by these criteria. They should be made aware that they may be violating Resolution 2361 by applying medical products still in phase 3 studies. 

“Under Resolution 2361, member states must also inform citizens that vaccination is NOT mandatory and ensure that no one is politically, socially, or otherwise pressured to become vaccinated. States are further required to ensure that no one is discriminated against for not receiving the vaccine.”

Bhakdi also issued this video statement, in which he says, “The time for governments to act, the time for everyone to act, is now:”

These are the seven “urgent” safety issues the group wants the EMA to address:

1. Following intramuscular injection, it must be expected that the gene-based vaccines will reach the bloodstream and disseminate throughout the body. We request evidence that this possibility was excluded in preclinical animal models with all three vaccines prior to their approval for use in humans by the EMA.
2. If such evidence is not available, it must be expected that the vaccines will remain entrapped in the circulation and be taken up by endothelial cells. There is reason to assume that this will happen particularly at sites of slow blood flow, i.e. in small vessels and capillaries. We request evidence that this probability was excluded in preclinical animal models with all three vaccines prior to their approval for use in humans by the EMA.
   
3. If such evidence is not available, it must be expected that during expression of the vaccines’ nucleic acids, peptides derived from the spike protein will be presented via the MHC I — pathway at the luminal surface of the cells. Many healthy individuals have CD8-lymphocytes that recognize such peptides, which may be due to prior COVID infection, but also to cross-reactions with other types of Coronavirus. We must assume that these lymphocytes will mount an attack on the respective cells. We request evidence that this probability was excluded in preclinical animal models with all three vaccines prior to their approval for use in humans by the EMA. 
4. If such evidence is not available, it must be expected that endothelial damage with subsequent triggering of blood coagulation via platelet activation will ensue at countless sites throughout the body. We request evidence that this probability was excluded in preclinical animal models with all three vaccines prior to their approval for use in humans by the EMA.
5. If such evidence is not available, it must be expected that this will lead to a drop in platelet counts, appearance of D-dimers in the blood, and to myriad ischaemic lesions throughout the body including in the brain, spinal cord and heart. Bleeding disorders might occur in the wake of this novel type of DIC-syndrome including, amongst other possibilities, profuse bleedings and haemorrhagic stroke. We request evidence that all these possibilities were excluded in pre-clinical animal models with all three vaccines prior to their approval for use in humans by the EMA.
6. The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein binds to the ACE2 receptor on platelets, which results in their activation. Thrombocytopenia has been reported in severe cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Thrombocytopenia has also been reported in vaccinated individuals [8]. We request evidence that the potential danger of platelet activation that would also lead to disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) was excluded with all three vaccines prior to their approval for use in humans by the EMA.
7. The sweeping across the globe of SARS-CoV-2 created a pandemic of illness associated with many deaths. However, by the time of consideration for approval of the vaccines, the health systems of most countries were no longer under imminent threat of being overwhelmed because a growing proportion of the world had already been infected and the worst of the pandemic had already abated. Consequently, we demand conclusive evidence that an actual emergency existed at the time of the EMA granting Conditional Marketing Authorisation to the manufacturers of all three vaccines, to justify their approval for use in humans by the EMA, purportedly because of such an emergency.

The post 12 Prominent Scientists and Doctors to EU Regulators: Address ‘Urgent’ Safety Concerns or Halt COVID Vaccines appeared first on Children’s Health Defense.

Read More

Vaccine administrators are required under law to inform you of potential side effects and long-term health complications associated with vaccines, including the new COVID-19 vaccines.

But what about the potential impact on your financial health and well-being if you or a family member are injured by a COVID vaccine?

Traditionally, informed consent forms for vaccination, such as the one used by Walgreens, do not provide disclosure or statistics related to financial costs of possible injury, disability or death. They also don’t explain the impact on family time, resources and wealth — including reduced career potential, divorce or the impact on siblings’ education or other future plans.

Enter the “Family Financial Disclosure Form for COVID-19 Injections,” a downloadable form families can use to assess the potential financial risks of being injured by a COVID vaccine.

The form was created by Catherine Austin Fitts, president of Solari, Inc. (which publishes the Solari Report), and managing member of Solari Investment Advisory Services. The form’s purpose is to help families communicate about and prepare for the family-wide financial impact of adverse events, if any, resulting from a COVID-19 injection.

“This family financial form was inspired by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who asked me to write about the absence of information in informed consent disclosure on the potentially devastating financial impacts of adverse events related to vaccinations in general, including COVID-19 injections,” Fitts told The Defender.

“Transparency is a powerful tool,” Fitts said. “I hope this form increases people’s power and effectiveness in making wise choices for their families and the children they love.”

As stated on the form, it “is provided to facilitate effective family due diligence, communication and planning. It is essential that each person and each family take responsibility to identify and access the information they believe to be most relevant to their situation and decisions, and take responsibility to assess and manage their individual and collective risk as they believe best.”

COVID vaccines, rushed to market, are still considered experimental by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which approved them under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Since the first EUA COVID vaccine was rolled out in the U.S. in mid-December, at least 25,212 total adverse events, including 1,265 deaths and 4,424 serious injuries, had been reported as of Feb. 26 to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

Examples of adverse events from COVID-19 injections include COVID-19 infection, anaphylaxis, neurological disorders, autoimmune disorders other long-term chronic diseases, blindness and deafness, infertility, fetal damage, miscarriage and stillbirth, and death. (See Table 1 in the form for examples).

Vaccine injury compensation — an uphill climb

In the U.S., vaccine makers already enjoy full indemnity against liability for injuries occurring from COVID or any other pandemic vaccine under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP).

If you’re injured by a COVID vaccine,  you have to file a compensation claim with the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP). CICP is funded by U.S. taxpayers via congressional appropriation to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).

CICP is similar to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), which applies to non-pandemic vaccines, but is even less generous when it comes to compensation. For example, while the NVICP pays some of the costs associated with any given claim, the CICP does not. This means that if you’re injured, you will also be responsible for attorney fees and expert witness fees.

The CICP is administered within the DHHS, which is also sponsoring the COVID-19 vaccination program. This conflict of interest makes the CICP less than likely to find fault with the vaccine.

If your claim is denied, your only route of appeal is within the DHHS, where your case would simply be reviewed by another employee. The DHHS is also responsible for making the payment, so the DHHS effectively acts as judge, jury and defendant.

As reported by Dr. Meryl Nass, the maximum payout you can receive — even in cases of permanent disability or death — is $250,000 per person. But you’d have to exhaust your private insurance policy before the CICP gives you a dime.

Employers that mandate COVID vaccines for their employees are also indemnified from liability under CICP — those claims have to go through worker’s compensation claims.

The CICP also has a one year statute of limitations, so you have to act quickly. That’s a problem because, at this point, no one really knows what injuries might arise from the COVID-19 vaccines — or when.

Fitts hopes that the form she and Solari have created will help families conduct their own due diligence before agreeing to take a COVID vaccine.

Download the Family Financial Disclosure Form for COVID-19 Injections

The post COVID Vaccine Injuries — What’s the Financial Risk? appeared first on Children’s Health Defense.

Read More

A 39-year-old woman from Ogden, Utah, died Feb. 5, four days after receiving a second dose of Moderna’s COVID vaccine, according to CBS affiliate KUTV.

Kassidi Kurill died of organ failure after her liver, heart and kidneys shut down. She had no known medical issues or pre-existing conditions, family members said.

KUTV uncovered the death as part of its investigation into COVID vaccine side effects. The investigation involved looking into reports submitted by Utah residents to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

According to The Salt Lake Tribune, there were four deaths in Utah reported to VAERS in January and February, including Kurill’s.

KUTV reported that doctors at Intermountain Medical Center recommended Kurill’s family request an autopsy, and the family agreed.

The medical examiner could not say whether the autopsy would be automatically forwarded to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Dr. Erik Christensen, Utah’s chief medical examiner, said proving vaccine injury as a cause of death almost never happens. “Did the vaccine cause this? I think that would be very hard to demonstrate in autopsy,” Christensen told KUTV.

Christensen could think of only one instance where a vaccine as the official cause of death would be seen on an autopsy report. That would be in the case of immediate anaphylaxis where someone received a vaccine and died almost instantaneously.

“Short of that, it would be difficult for us to definitively say this is the vaccine,” Christensen said. “A more likely result would be a lack of answers or an incomplete autopsy.”

An autopsy can provide answers to a family when no disease or red flags are found, or rule out other competing causes of death, Christenson explained. The lack of answers may help a family “understand if the vaccine was a possible cause.”

Christiansen said vaccine deaths are possible and do happen. “Just about every vaccine or anything you do [to] treat someone, when you inject something has a potential for a negative outcome. I’m sure VAERS can verify other vaccines have led to death.”

After her first shot, Kurill, a surgical tech for local plastic surgeons, experienced a sore arm but no other side effects. The day of her second shot she had gone shopping and was fine until she started feeling “not so great that evening,” said her sister Kristin.

According to Kurill’s father, she “got sick right away” after receiving the second shot. She had soreness at the injection site, started to get sick and complained “she was drinking fluids but couldn’t pee.”

Kurill went to the emergency room and was later transported to Intermountain Medical Center for a liver transplant. Both parents were willing to donate portions of their liver to save their daughter, but Kurill died within 30 hours of arriving at the ER.

Kurill’s obituary states that she died from “apparent complications due to the second COVID-19 vaccination.”

Between December 14, 2020, and Feb. 26, 2021, VAERS had received reports of 1,265 deaths after COVID vaccination.

Although the CDC says on its website that CDC and FDA physicians review each reported death as soon as notified, it does not appear that autopsies were ordered in any of the other reported Utah cases, according to KUTV.

Last month The Defender reported on a 58-year-old woman who died hours after getting her first dose of the Pfizer vaccine. State and federal officials said they were investigating her death but had not performed an autopsy.

On Feb. 5, officials said that they did not know the cause of Keyes’ death or any underlying conditions that could have contributed to her death, but there was “no evidence it was tied to the vaccine,” reported NBC News.

According to The Virginian Pilot, a public records request related to Keyes’ death revealed concerning emails. State Health Commissioner Norman Oliver told public information officers in a Feb. 5 email that if reporters asked whether an autopsy was done on Keyes, they should say “a full autopsy was not needed in order to ascertain whether the death was related to the vaccination.”

The public records request also revealed that officials inside and outside the health department were “concerned the death of Keyes, who is Black, could worsen vaccine hesitancy among minorities,” reported The Virginian Pilot.

When the health department spokespeople crafted a statement following Keyes’ death, they included Gov. Ralph Northam’s press secretary and another Northam staffer in the editing process. The wording regarding timing of the death after the vaccine went from saying there may appear to be a relationship, “But that is not necessarily the case,” to the timing “is not evidence of it being related,” highlighting their focus on deterring speculation, according to The Virginian Pilot.

The family was forced to get their own private autopsy. Keyes’ daughter said that even before state officials had her mother’s postmortem preliminary test results, the medical examiner’s office told her they would not perform an autopsy. They told her “nothing could be gleaned from an autopsy that would relate the vaccine to her death.”

State officials didn’t answer how medical examiners could thoroughly rule out other potential causes of death triggered by or linked to the shot without an internal examination of the body.

The CDC says no deaths have been attributed to COVID-19 vaccines. However, according to the latest data available from VAERS — which includes reports submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and Feb. 26, 2021, a total of 1,265 deaths following COVID vaccines have been reported to the system.

Dr. Sheffield with Intermountain explained the difference in numbers of deaths reported and the CDC’s statement of “no vaccine deaths,” saying it comes down to what can and can’t be proven.

“You have to look at what it (the numbers) are saying,” Sheffield told KUTV. “Is it saying the vaccine caused the deaths, or there were deaths in people who received the vaccine? And those are two very different things.”

As The Defender reported last month, the CDC is investigating the death of a 36-year-old doctor in Tennessee who died Feb. 8, about one month after receiving the second dose of a COVID vaccine.

News reports at the time didn’t identify which brand of vaccine the doctor received, though at the time, only the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines were approved for emergency use in the U.S. Dr. Barton Williams’ death was attributed to multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-A) caused by asymptomatic COVID, though he never tested positive for the virus.

In January, The Defender reported on the death of baseball legend Hank Aaron from an “undisclosed” cause 18 days after receiving his first dose of the Moderna vaccine. The New York Times implied that Aaron’s death was unrelated to the vaccine, however no autopsy was conducted.

Children’s Health Defense urges anyone who suffers any reaction to any vaccine to report it following these steps.

The post 39-Year-Old Woman Dies 4 Days After Second Moderna Vaccine, Autopsy Ordered appeared first on Children’s Health Defense.

Read More

Los Angeles schools plan to reopen next month — and when they do, every child will be required to have a COVID-tracking app that will be scanned daily before they can enter the classroom.

The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) last month announced the launch of Daily Pass, a COVID tracking system developed by Microsoft. The app will scan children in schools, using a barcode, to coordinate health checks, COVID tests and vaccinations.

The Daily Pass generates a unique QR code — each day, for each student and staff member — that authorizes entry to a specific Los Angeles Unified location. An individual must have a negative test result for COVID, show no symptoms and have a temperature under 100 degrees in order to gain entry to class.

All data gathered by the app will be reported as required to health authorities. Anonymized data from Daily Pass will be used by Los Angeles Unified’s research and healthcare collaborators — Stanford University, UCLA, The Johns Hopkins University, Anthem Blue Cross, Healthnet and Cedars Sinai — “to provide insights and strategies” to implement in safe school environments, school officials said.

Students without the barcode will be barred from going into school.

LAUSD is the first school district in the nation to adopt the Daily Pass technology. In a statement, officials called Daily Pass a critical component of the district’s “Safe Steps to Safe Schools” reopening plan.

“Sort of like the golden ticket in ‘Willy Wonka,’ everyone with this pass can easily get into a school building,” Superintendent Austin Beutner told the Los Angeles Times. “We’ll know the status of everyone in the building,” he said.

Mary Holland, president of Children’s Health Defense, said parents should be concerned. “If data is the new gold, then LAUSD’s new Daily Pass is providing a lot of gold to Microsoft and other institutions,” Holland said.

Holland said LAUSD is “compromising the students’ privacy and freedom of movement” and segregating children based on unreliable testing. “Parents should be asking a million questions and demanding answers,” she said.

John Whitehead, constitutional law attorney, author and founder of The Rutherford Institute, said parents should ask why entities want all of this data, what they’re doing to do with it, where it is going and whether it should be given to government agencies.

Whitehead said the COVID Daily Pass is about control, not safety. He warned:

“We are moving into a total surveillance state and an entire generation of young people are acquiescing to the police state. Privacy as we know it will be deleted and no one will be overlooked.”

The Daily Pass will not catch people who are asymptomatic carriers of COVID, but officials hope to address that issue through weekly coronavirus testing of students and staff.

The app will be available to all LAUSD employees, students 13 and older and family members on computers and mobile phones, reported the Los Angeles Times.

The district released a video about the Daily Pass to help parents and their children understand how the app works, what steps children must take to get their “entrance ticket” and to ease fears about returning to school.

“The Daily Pass sets the highest standard possible for school safety,” said LAUSD Beutner. The school district has upgraded air filters in every school, requires COVID testing for all students and staff at least every week — and now has Daily Pass.

Students will also be required to socially distance, wear masks, receive regular temperature checks and undergo additional surveillance and screening testing, according to the “COVID-19 and Reopening In-Person Instruction Framework & Public Health Guidance for K-12 Schools in California, 2020-2021 School Year.”

Whitehead said schools should be doing everything in their power to bring parents into these discussions and parents need to come together and start speaking out against measures like Daily Pass before it’s too late.

“The government can accomplish many things with a ‘compelling state interest and a pandemic is just that,” Whitehead said. “But the school needs to provide an alternative for parents who do not want their children to participate in these measures — whether it’s a virtual learning option or a separate building.”

Microsoft, creator of the COVID Daily Pass, was founded by Bill Gates. Though he stepped down from Microsoft’s board in March of last year, he remains one of the top shareholders in the company, according to The Universal Science.

In a statement released by the billionaire last March, Gates said he intended to “remain active at the company and would work closely with Satya Nadella, Microsoft’s chief executive.”

“Microsoft will always be an important part of my life’s work and I will continue to be engaged with Satya and the technical leadership to help shape the vision and achieve the company’s ambitious goals,” wrote Gates. “I feel more optimistic than ever about the progress the company is making.”

United Teachers Los Angeles, the union representing the district’s teachers and school personnel, said that no staff should return to work until they are fully immunized.

Beutner said LAUSD would begin offering childcare, one-on-one and small-group instruction and services for students with special needs, and would also return to athletic conditioning beginning this week.

The post LA Schools to Track Every Kid Using Microsoft’s ‘Daily Pass’ COVID App appeared first on Children’s Health Defense.

Read More