[
link to www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]
They can only deceive you under the Emergence Use Authorization (EUA)!
If you consented to be part of the experiment.
Did you comprehend what you consented to? They won’t even tell you what it is! It is a trade secret!
Were you fully informed?
A few things you should know listed below, Please read the whole document!
Read the linked information below
Informed consent disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of risk of COVID19 vaccines worsening clinical disease (nih.gov)
International Journal of Clinical Practice
Published online 2020 Dec 4.
[
link to www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]
Informed consent disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of risk of COVID19 vaccines worsening clinical disease
Aims of the study
Patient comprehension is a critical part of meeting medical ethics standards of informed consent in study designs. The aim of the study was to determine if sufficient literature exists to require clinicians to disclose the specific risk that COVID19 vaccines could worsen disease upon exposure to challenge or circulating virus.
No way CNN said it was safe! Published literature was reviewed to identify preclinical and clinical evidence that COVID19 vaccines could worsen disease upon exposure to challenge or circulating virus. Clinical trial protocols for COVID19 vaccines were reviewed to determine if risks were properly disclosed.
But CNN MSNBC CBS said it would save us all! Results of the study
COVID19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated.
Panic Or Denile? Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved,
But irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID19 disease via antibody dependent enhancement (ADE).
What is this science stuff! This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials. The intentionally left some shit out!
The specific and significant COVID19 risk of ADE should have been and should be prominently and independently disclosed
WTF this ADE shit again? You better figure it out! As it very bad!!!
after vaccine approval, in order to meet the medical ethics standard of patient comprehension for informed consent.
Kinda like we will tell after you take it! If we are forced to! A recent study revealed mediated acute lung injury in vivo in macaques infected with SARS that correlated with a vaccine elicited, neutralising antibody response. Inflammation and tissue damage in the lung in this animal model recapitulated the inflammation and tissue damage in the lungs of SARS infected patients who succumbed to the disease.
They all died! The time course was also similar, with the worst damage occurring in delayed fashion in synchrony with ramping up of the immune response. Remarkably, neutralising antibodies controlled the virus in the animal, but then would precipitate a severe, tissue‐damaging, inflammatory response in the lung. This is a similar profile to immune complex‐mediated disease seen with RSV vaccines in the past, wherein vaccinees succumbed to fatal enhanced RSV disease because of the formation of antibody‐virus immune complexes that precipitated harmful, inflammatory immune responses.
They all died! When infected to another variant! Thus, a finite, non‐theoretical risk is evident place vaccinees at higher risk for more severe COVID19 disease when they encounter circulating viruses.
They all died! When infected to another variant! vaccinated animals resulting in immunopathologic lung disease. vaccine candidates, commonly exhibited ADE associated with high inflammatory morbidity
They all died! When infected to another variant! unknown variable is how long this tissue damage lasts, possibly resulting in permanent morbidity (eg, diabetes from pancreatic damage ).
How long? Thus, the absence of ADE evidence in COVID19 vaccine data so far does not absolve investigators from disclosing the risk of enhanced disease to vaccine trial participants, and it remains a realistic, non theoretical risk to the subjects.
It is real! Signed consent forms from the COVID19 vaccine trials are not publicly available because of privacy concerns. All three protocols mention the risk of disease enhancement by the vaccine, but all three list this risk last or next to last in the list of risks, after risks from the Ad26Cov2 vector, adenovirus vectors in general, risks of vaccination in general, risks for pregnancy and birth control (which are said to be “unknown”), risks of blood draws and risks from collection of nasal swab samples (for the Johnson and Johnson vaccine), after allergy, fainting, local site injection reaction, general systemic adverse reactions and laboratory abnormalities for the Moderna vaccine and after local site injection reactions and general systemic adverse events for the Pfizer vaccine. In addition, both Moderna and Johnson and Johnson term the risk of vaccine‐elicited disease enhancement as “theoretical.” Finally, in citing the risk, Pfizer and Moderna note prior evidence of vaccine‐elicited disease enhancement AstraZeneca form clearly discloses the specific risk of ADE,
Well they did mention it! patient comprehension of the specific risk that receiving the COVID19 vaccine could convert a subject from someone who experiences mild disease to someone who experiences severe disease, lasting morbidity or even death is unlikely to be achieved by the informed consent procedures planned for these clinical trials.
Medical ethics standards required that, given the extent of evidence in the medical literature reviewed above, the risk of ADE should be clearly and emphatically distinguished in the informed consent
Based on the published literature, it should have been obvious to any skilled medical practitioner in 2019 that there is a significant risk to vaccine research subjects that they may experience severe disease once vaccinated.
Did they tell you about this? They knew and are knowingly doing this now! while they might only have experienced a mild, self limited disease if not vaccinated.
What WTF.
The consent should also clearly distinguish the specific risk of worsened COVID19 disease from generic statements about risk of death and generic risk of lack of efficacy of the vaccine.
I am sure you understood this! 3.CONCLUSION
Given the strong evidence that ADE is a nontheoretical and compelling risk for COVID19 vaccines and the “laundry list” nature of informed consents, disclosure of the specific risk of worsened COVID19 disease from vaccination.
And you understand this! And are fully informed and have consented!Sandman1!
United States
Australia
Canada
Latvia
Romania