from Your News:
New peer-reviewed research critiques the development and regulatory approval of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
A recent peer-reviewed study, coauthored by Dr. Peter McCullough, has called for an immediate moratorium on the use of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, citing significant gaps in testing and safety evaluations during their development. The study, which analyzed data obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, claims Pfizer’s submission to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was incomplete and would likely have been rejected for other medicinal products.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
Key Findings of the Study
The research, which focuses on Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine but extends its findings to Moderna’s mRNA shots and adenovirus vector vaccines like AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson, critiques the lack of traditional safety and pharmacological studies.
“For any other medicinal product, the regulatory submission would have been considered incomplete and most probably rejected. Therefore, a moratorium on the use of Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines and boosters should be enacted at minimum, but ideally, they should be removed from the market,” the study states in its conclusion.
Concerns Over Vaccine Mechanism
Unlike traditional vaccines, which contain a known antigen to stimulate an immune response, mRNA vaccines rely on the body to produce the viral spike protein. The study describes these vaccines as “prodrugs,” noting that the immune response depends on the body’s ability to produce the spike protein. This variability, according to the research, makes the vaccines fundamentally different from those used successfully in the past.
“Injected individuals may produce variable amounts of spike protein for variable durations of time based on their genetics, age, hormonal and nutritional state, athletic condition, and batch of vaccine they receive,” the researchers noted.
Lack of Genotoxic and Carcinogenic Testing
The study underscores a failure to test for potential genotoxic (DNA-damaging) and carcinogenic (cancer-causing) effects of the vaccines. While traditional vaccines are not expected to pose these risks, the spike proteins produced in response to mRNA vaccines have known toxic effects.
“Although BNT162b2 might not [be] expected to have genotoxic or carcinogenic potential, the encoded spike protein that is produced does. Therefore, these studies should have been performed. They were not,” the study claims.
Regulatory Oversight and Misclassification
The study criticizes the decision to classify mRNA vaccines as traditional vaccines rather than gene therapy products, a designation that excluded them from stricter regulatory guidelines. It alleges that the lack of pharmacokinetic and biodistribution studies, particularly of the spike protein, has led to incomplete safety evaluations.
“Pfizer/BioNTech assumed that the modRNA vaccine resides at the injection site, concluding there is no need to measure the spike protein in the blood. This conclusion is incorrect,” the study states.
Impact on Reproductive Health
Further critiques highlight inadequate reproductive and developmental toxicity studies. The use of Wistar Han™ rats, deemed inappropriate for such studies, left significant gaps in understanding the vaccine’s effects on pregnancy, breastfeeding, and male fertility.
Call to Action
The authors of the study argue that regulatory agencies must reassess the approval and continued use of mRNA vaccines. They stress that it should be the responsibility of pharmaceutical companies, not independent scientists, to ensure product safety before approval.
