279 Comments

Aaron thank you for fighting this war for all of us.

Expand full comment

4 months to produce the vaccines, 75 years to tell us how they determined they're "safe."

Expand full comment

I work for a company that has a platform that allows large organizations to perform eDiscovery and redactions on large datasets. I know for a fact that, with pattern search and export we could process the entire workload of 500,000 documents in less than 24 hours. Then have reviewers spend about a week ensuring proper redaction, then export the dataset in less than a day. The fact that they do not have technology in place that can do this is phenomenal. I guarantee Pfizer has an eDiscovery platform for these types of defensive discoveries. If they miss production of requested Discovery product they can be fined, daily, until they do.

Expand full comment

Aaron, I'm extremely grateful for what you are doing. As an independent scientist, this is UNACCEPTABLE!

From the Australian Nonclinical Evaluation Report and the biodistribution study:

“Parturition: One ~ in the BNT162b3 group was euthanised on LDl showing hunched posture, pale, marked piloerection, bleeding at the vulva, distended/purple abdomen. One ~ each in the BNT162bl and BNT162b3 groups were euthanised due to all stillborn pups or total litter death. No macroscopic findings were noted in maternal necropsy.”

Fetal malformations/variations were found in the pups of dams in the treatment groups.

Also of concern:

Genotoxicity

No genotoxicity studies were conducted for the vaccine

Carcinogenicity

Carcinogenicity studies were not conducted.

2-[(Polyethylene glycol)-2000]-N,N-ditetradecylacetamide (ALC-0159) and ((4-

hydroxybutyl)azanediyl) bis(hexane-6,1-diyl)bis(2-hexyldecanoate) (ALC-0315) are novel excipients

and are not listed on the TGA' s ingredient database.

ALC-0315 (the ester formulation) was minimally metabolized and only 1% was excreted

ALC-0159 (the amide formulation) was more completely metabolized and only 50% was excreted

These novel LNP have very long elimination half-lives, especially ALC-0315 (the ester formulation), which is extremely concerning.

These data prove that the LNP are distributed systemically, not broken down efficiently, and stay in the body for a long period of time. Not only that, but the spike (S) protein expression can occur anywhere in the body, reaches high levels of expression, and may be of long duration (possibly mimicking the length of time antibody titers remain elevated.)

The biodistribution study is also very alarming because it shows that these LNPs accumulate not only at the injection site but also immediately to the liver, spleen, kidneys, and lymph nodes with rising concentrations (at 48 hours, the longest timepoint measured) in the ovaries, bone marrow, thyroid gland, pituitary gland, heart, and lungs. I have not had time to curve fit and mathematically extrapolate the tissue concentrations to further timepoints.

We need more data to better evaluate the safety of these experimental products before they even think of mandating them for children. Please contact the Washington State Board of Health and voice your concerns. https://zanaacarverphd.substack.com/p/mandates-for-children

Expand full comment

I would think that Pfizer would be proud of it's pet project and want the public to know as much as possible about their novel creation in order to stimulate more demand.

Huh, kinda weird that a company that has been bragging about their "life-saving invention" would want to hide their genius from us.

Although I'm gonna have to lean towards Pfizer just wanting to sweep this info under the rug in order to maintain a well-earned proprietary advantage rather than wanting to hide falsification of data, rigging of trials and colossal corruption.

They wouldn't do that would they?

Expand full comment

So well written --it is a pleasure to read. Sadly, delay is the name of the game, especially because buying time is of the utmost priority to these criminals. And next time, they will make sure they have the courts in line. No one could fight this better than you.

Expand full comment

Please keep up the good work. This FDA behavior is criminal, dishonest and shows a complete disrespect for the American public.

Expand full comment

Any chance this delay is related to the bill announced a few days ago to get the COVID vaccines on the childhood schedule in California? Rushing that through before the data gets out?

Expand full comment

These documents were WRITTEN and, supposedly, reviewed (I would hope THOROUGHLY) in less than 6 months, probably far less. But, now, they need 75 years to review and release. Hmmm, yeah, sounds legit. These guys KNOW the vaxxes are killing and permanently injuring millions of people - THAT is what they are desperately trying to hide.

Expand full comment

Why do they need to review the documents? Don't they need to just release them?

Am I missing something?

Expand full comment

I have a family member who used to work for Pfizer, he said they follow the money not the science

Expand full comment

Pfizer is a criminal organization, and has been for a very long time. Take a look at the 'research' they conducted in East Germany in the 1980's. The new business model is even better: governments use tax dollars to buy the experimental product and then mandates the public to take it or be shut out of society. They have the taxpayer paying to be a forced guinea pig!

All the while Pfizer hides behind government liability waivers and fights to keep the truth quiet.

Expand full comment

You are an awesome attorney

Expand full comment

It’s all so astounding. The fact that they (Pharma, FDA, government) not only approved, but mandated these injections, we are ‘terrorists and criminals’ if we don’t want to take them, or even simply talk about them negatively, and in reality they are the criminals, corrupt on the grandest scale possible

Expand full comment

Thank you Aaron. God bless you, your work and your entire team.

I have one question. This appears to be evidence that no one who was injected was properly consented. Can the injured and survivors of the dead sue because of this lack of consent?

Expand full comment