Over 10,000 categories of nearly 1.6 million adverse events – many of them serious and debilitating – brought to you by Pfizer!
You might not have heard it in the news, but in recent months, Pfizer’s pharmacovigilance documents requested by the European Union’s drug regulator, the European Medicines Agency, have been released. They show that Pfizer knew about a sickening level of injury early on. An August 2022 document shows that the company already had observed the following scope of vaccine injury:
- 508,351 individual case reports of adverse events containing 1,597,673 events;
- One-third of the AEs were classified as serious, well above the standard for safety signals usually pegged at 15%;
- Women reported AEs at three times the rate of men;
- 60% of cases were reported with either “outcome unknown” or “not recovered,” so many of the injuries were not transient;
Highest number of cases occurred in the 31-50 year age group, and 92% did not have any comorbidities, which makes it very likely it was the vaccine causing such widespread, sudden injury.
These numbers alone suggest that all COVID shots should be defunded and Congress must immediately remove liability protections from the manufacturers. But a more recent document released by the Europeans is even more devastating, because it breaks down the 1.6 million adverse events observed by Pfizer by category and subcategory of ailment and injury.
The 393-page confidential Pfizer document, dated Aug. 19, 2022, shows that Pfizer observed over 10,000 categories of diagnosis, many of them very severe and very rare. For example:
- Pfizer was aware of 73,542 cases of 264 categories of vascular disorders from the shots. Many of them are rare conditions.
- There were hundreds of categories of nervous system disorders, totaling 696,508 cases.
- There were 61,518 AEs from well over 100 categories of eye disorders, which is unusual for a vaccine injury.
- Likewise, there were over 47,000 ear disorders, including almost 16,000 cases of tinnitus, which even Mayo Clinic researchers observed as a common but often devastating side effect early on.
- There were roughly 225,000 cases of skin and tissue disorders.
- There were roughly 190,000 cases of respiratory disorders.
- Disturbingly, there were over 178,000 cases of reproductive or breast disorders, including disorders you wouldn’t expect, such as 506 cases of erectile dysfunction in men.
- Very disturbingly, there were over 77,000 psychiatric disorders observed following the shots, lending credence to Dr. Peter McCullough’s research observing case studies showing psychosis correlating with vaccination.
- 3,711 cases of tumors – benign and malignant
- Of course, there were almost 127,000 cardiac disorders, running the gamut of about 270 categories of heart damage, including many rare disorders, in addition to myocarditis.
- There were over 100,000 blood and lymphatic disorders, for both of which there’s a wealth of literature linking them to the spike protein.
When reading what Pfizer knew early on juxtaposed to independent studies, it’s clear that nobody could have mistaken most of these AEs for mere incidental ailments. Here is a list of 3,129 case studies chronicling vaccine injury in every organ system observed in this Pfizer document.
What is so jarring is that there are hundreds of very rare neurological disorders that reflect something so systemically wrong with the shots, a reality that was clearly of no concern to the manufacturers and regulators alike.
One of the infamous cases of vaccine injury was Maddie de Garay, an Ohio teen who became disabled for life immediately after participating in the Pfizer clinical trial. Her story is chronicled in chapter 16 of my book. I checked this confidential document and found that they knew of 68 cases of her rare diagnosis, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy.
The broad scope of injuries affecting every single organ system is simply extraordinary. Yet to this day, the FDA continues to criminally label the Pfizer shot as safe and effective. To this day, the label indicates the shot is a fully protective vaccine and also fails to mention all of these side effects, as required by law.
Recently, Peter Doshi, editor of the British Medical Journal, wrote a letter to the FDA requesting that the agency update its labeling to reflect the reality of what we’ve learned about the shots.
Specifically, he asked that they include the following side effects on the label:
- multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children,
- pulmonary embolism,
- sudden cardiac death,
- neuropathic and autonomic disorders,
- decreased sperm concentration,
- heavy menstrual bleeding, and
- detection of vaccine mRNA in breast milk.
The causal relationship of all these AEs to the vaccine is backed by substantial research, surveys, and adverse event reporting systems.
Unfortunately, the FDA denied the causal relationship between any of these side effects and the COVID shots. Even with regard to the request that officials clarify on the label that the shots don’t stop transmission, the FDA replied, “We are not convinced that there is any widespread misconception about this.”
“Product labeling should be informative and accurate, not promotional. The law requires it, and following the law shouldn’t be optional,” bemoaned Doshi and the other authors in a piece at TheHill.com.
The question is whether Republicans in the House will force the FDA to comply with the law by using the leverage of the appropriations bills for the FDA and HHS. So far, there has been no reckoning for their false marketing and the devastating human toll it has cost. Oh, and that is just the short-term human toll.
Annex: Periodic Safety Update Report # 3 for COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine (BNT162b2)
Below is the confidential document Pfizer Periodic Safety Report December 2021 to June 2022.
These adverse events undoubtedly serve as the reasons behind the company’s request for governments worldwide to bear the litigation costs, in addition to providing them with guaranteed immunity from lawsuits that may arise during the utilization of their experimental vaccines.
The company is also relying on the apathy of many surviving victims, recognizing that initiating a legal case entails substantial financial burdens and a protracted and arduous process.
Ultimately, this leaves the issue concerning the pandemic unresolved, with the potential for a recurrence in the future.
