COVID-19 Vaccines: What They Are, How They Work, and Possible Causes of Injuries
US Senate Roundtable Wednesday December 7, 2022
By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH
I arrived in Washington DC late at night to see the lit Dome of Capital building in the immediate skyline and prepare for the next two days.
This will be my third and for some experts their fourth set of Senate sessions on COVID-19. These are precious moments to bring truth to the American people and to have it all recorded for history in the Senate record. Please join the livestream on Wednesday December 7, 2022 at noon EST. You should be able to find it readily on the internet.
*** MEDIA ADVISORY*** Sen. Johnson to Lead Roundtable on COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy and Safety
U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) will lead a roundtable discussion, COVID-19 Vaccines: What They Are, How They Work, and Possible Causes of Injuries, to shed light on the current state of knowledge surrounding the vaccine and the path forward. Medical experts and doctors who specialize in COVID-19 vaccine research and treatment will join Sen. Johnson at the roundtable.
*** MEDIA ADVISORY*** Sen. Johnson to Lead Roundtable on COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy and Safety
https://darachi.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Wodarg_Yeadon_EMA_Petition_Pfizer_Trial_FINAL_01DEC2020_signed_with_Exhibits_geschwarzt.pdf
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg & I wrote one of the earliest, if not the earliest, detailed scientific critique of the gene-based treatments which claimed to be vaccines. Importantly, our petition, filed as an open letter to the European Medicines Agency, dated December 1st 2020:, predated the first Emergency Use Authorisation of any such product.
Though we did not at that time include all sources and mechanisms of toxicity (because we had not yet thought of them), we included enough that any reasonable person would know that these would inevitably express toxicity and be totally unsuitable as public health interventions.
All of the leading agents caused the recipients bodies to manufacture known-toxins, coronavirus “spike protein”, to do so in uncontrolled amounts, for unknowable amounts of time & potentially anywhere in the body. Both direct (spike protein plus nanolipids plus gene sequences) & indirect (autoimmunological) unwanted effects were inevitable, the pivotal question being to what extent & with what consequences.
This open letter was additionally filed with hundreds of news gathering organisations, using the same method I’d used a few years earlier as CEO of a biotech, *Ziarco. There was almost total suppression of this important information. Only two small, independent organisations picked this up (Highwire & Children’s Health Defense). We know that many other organisations received the letter, for smearing and personal attacks multiplied ten-fold, including by our respective national broadcasters. I for example was called a disgusting & dangerous anti-vaxxer by the BBC & in a program called Women’s Hour, the host followed these offensive remarks with an interview with a midwife from the Royal College of Midwifery, who told the audience, replete with concerned women of child-bearing potential, that these agents were completely safe for them and their developing babies. No reproductive toxicology packages had at that time been completed (they still haven’t). So those statements had no evidentiary basis. This fraudulent advice almost certainly cost young, healthy women at no risk of “Covid19”, their health, even their lives as well as that of their unborn children.
I filed a formal complaint with the BBC about their factually incorrect statements. They’d attributed to me several things I’d never said & which were reputationally damaging. I challenged them to produce authentic sources for such claims, else withdraw them & apologise. Within 24 hours, they deleted the entire segment, which had been billed as the centrepiece of this particular show. No apology was ever received. A former BBC journalist made me aware of the broadcasting code. They are required to make reasonable efforts to contact a person who they intend to malign under the right of reply. They claimed on this occasion to have “forgotten” to do so. My email address was well known & I was also reachable via professional social media (eg LinkedIn). This is not believable. Professional journalists like Emma Barnett don’t “forget” basic rules like this. No, it’s logical to infer that this was a policy decision, to enable them to damage me. Had they contacted me, the testimony I would have provided would have destroyed their deliberately & severely misleading broadcast.
A few months after this letter, an organisation of which we were both part, Doctors4CovidEthics, wrote repeatedly to Emer Cooke of the EMA & Charles Michel, President of the European Commission, this time focussing on thromboembolic toxicities. Its was already clear that these agents were causing blood clots & bleeding, sometimes fatal, across the world. Again, total repression of the filed letters. https://doctors4covidethics.org/press-release-urgent-open-letter-to-ema-from-doctors-scientists-regarding-vaccine-safety-concerns/
Nothing that’s happened was a “mistake”. The very design by all leading manufacturers could not but result in toxicity, because they cause the bodies of recipients to manufacture known-toxic coronavirus spike protein. Among other things, spike was known to initiate blood coagulation processes & the preparations were known to leave the injection site & not only disperse around the body but, in the case of the mRNA / lipid nanoparticle formulations, accumulate in various tissues including the ovaries. The pharmaceutical companies knew all this and, in the case of ovarian accumulation, a peer reviewed paper from 2012 explicitly warned about an unevaluated reproductive toxicity risk from LNP formulations. I am a scientific & career peer of those who led R&D in those companies, having myself led global respiratory new drug research at Pfizer until 2011 & subsequently was a **board level consultant to 30 biotechs as well as founded & lead to a trade sale, my own biotech. I know three of the four heads of research in the companies manufacturing these gene-based agents. They did not respond to my approaches of concern from a former professional senior colleague. I am willing at any time to give evidence under oath that these senior staff - and many others - must have known what we outlined. These are beginners’ considerations for those working in “rational drug design”. Don’t allow anyone to tell you otherwise. The absolute basic questions here included, but we’re not limited to, is the preparation plausibly likely to bring the benefits sought without unacceptable unwanted effects?
It is long passed time that the public be told that groups of individuals conspired to introduce into their bodies material purporting to be vaccines, which were inherently dangerous, being toxic-by-design, poorly developed, shoddily manufactured, essentially inactive against their original intent and coerced into billions of arms.
There’s a lot more to say. Governments & public health officials everywhere have relentlessly lied to their largely trusting populations. As a result, millions of people have died avoidable deaths & the economies of these countries seriously damaged, the repercussions of both of which are yet to be fully realised. Good luck to those taking part in the sessions in Washington.
*Here is an article describing the story of Ziarco. I did not request it. The author spontaneously proposed it. Dr John LaMattina was formerly President & head of Pfizer Global R&D. This is a board level position. I have little doubt that, had John still been at Pfizer, that company would not have involved itself in this extraordinary, global crime against humanity. Perhaps I’m a naive optimistic, but I always found Dr LaMattina to be a demanding, encouraging scientific leader who is very smart.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnlamattina/2017/03/15/turning-pfizer-discards-into-novartis-gold-the-story-of-ziarco/?sh=609af0d87572
**I routinely describe myself as “a recently retired former senior R&D professional scientist”. My wife disagrees vehemently, reminding me that I had several biotech clients in my consulting business as of mid-2020. Each of those CEOs terminated me “because of my controversial remarks in relation to the pandemic”. While not unexpected, those brief conversations were among the most bitterly disappointing of my life because, as I listened to people I’d previously regarded highly, I determined that they lacked insight or courage or both. For a professional biologist, it was not at all difficult to discern, from the earliest statements by politicians and officials, that we were being lied to.
John, if it suits you to do so, would you kindly “pin” the long post of mine? (Not this one, unless you want to….I don’t want to hog your comments section!)
Thank you :)
I’d like as many people as possible to see it, since I cannot travel to Washington to give evidence in person.
I have been in regular contact with Senator Ron Johnson for some considerable time. I hold him in high regard. I’ve learned that it can be extraordinarily difficult to bring to the attention of those who simply do not want to hear it the kind of expert testimony I have given & continue to give. It’s very easy to evoke the “conspiracy theorist!” label. How I wish it was but a theory.
There’s a conspiracy alright, nothing theoretical about it.
Accordingly, Sen. Johnson has had copious input from me. He’s a smart person and I know he’s doing all an individual in Washington can.