If Your Health is Ruined Since the COVID Vax, How to Look Up the Deadliness of Your Batch. Did You Draw the 5% of "Hot Lots?"

[SweetSue92]

You are whining about an amazing product that saved millions on millions from dying.

Wait til we take over and the secret things are made public.

 

[PeterPilot]

And you probably never made a VAERS report. I did not take the jab myself, but I have several family members that did, and also had various adverse reactions. None of them were reported to VAERS (even though they should have been).

This is the problem with using VAERS data to draw conclusions. Plus a lot of those batches were also distributed overseas, and most countries have their own monitoring systems that don't interface with VAERS.

There need to be proper cohort studies done to assess the AE's in a controlled way, but apparently that is not a funding priority...

I did not take the shot, and thus have never filled out a VAERS report. However, numerous doctors and patients have written about the VAERS experience. The consensus is that the federal form is VERY user unfriendly and difficult to use. I can relate to that charge because several federal forms I've used online, mostly FAA, are exactly that.

The result of that is the VAERS data vastly under reports adverse effects. So matching batch numbers with adverse events is a good idea and valid, but is not completely representative of what happened to people.

 

[initforme]

There's no mention of the virus itself ruining people's health. And the facts are a good many people are struggling with the after effects of getting the virus. Instead we focus on the overblown overhyped rhetoric of how bad the economic damage was.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Very simply, almost all the "adverse events" SO FAR in the CDC's "Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System" (VAERS) are associated with just 5% or so of the Pfizer and Moderna batches put out from 2021 - 2023. Long-term safety still unknown since there were obviously no long-term clinical safety trials, but turbo cancers in young people are on the rise.



View attachment 1047106


Turbo cancers:

How COVID Vaccines Can Lead to ‘Turbo Cancers’

Most turbo cancers are Stage 3 or 4 by the time they’re diagnosed, yet symptoms only arose days or weeks ago. They grow and spread so rapidly, that many patients die before treatment can even begin. Most turbo cancers are also resistant to conventional treatment.

childrenshealthdefense.org

Every vaccination card has the batch number you received, for each shot. We are talking mostly about the Pfizer and Moderna primary two-shot series. Some of the batches have appalling numbers of death and disability reports to VAERS associated with them, in the double digits. Use the drop-down box to find your batch, then you can see what other people who were given the same batch have experienced.


LOOK UP YOUR BATCH IN How Bad is My Batch

How Bad is My Batch?

VAERS Reports

Search Results from the VAERS Database

Top killer batches
View attachment 1047108
View attachment 1047109

Expose News

BREAKING: Government Reports prove Pfizer & Moderna purposely manufactured Deadly Batches of the Covid-19 Vaccines - The Expose

An investigation of official U.S. Government data, provided by the Centers for Disease Control, has revealed that extremely high numbers of adverse reactions and deaths have been reported against specific lot numbers of the Covid-19 vaccines numerous times. This means the deadliest batches of...

expose-news.com

Government Reports prove Pfizer & Moderna purposely manufactured Deadly Batches of the Covid-19 Vaccines

"An investigation of official U.S. Government data, provided by the Centers for Disease Control, has revealed that extremely high numbers of adverse reactions and deaths have been reported against specific lot numbers of the Covid-19 vaccines numerous times.

This means the deadliest batches of Covid-19 vaccine have now been identified but Medicine Regulators have refused to withdraw them and they are still being administered to the public.

The figures reveal that every single death reported as an adverse reaction to the Covid-19 injections has been caused by just 4 to 5% of the batches of Pfizer and Moderna Covid-19 vaccines produced.

But what’s perhaps more concerning is that the small minority of “deadly” lots were distributed widely across the United States, while other “benign” lots were sent to just a few locations."...

Vaccine injured testimonies, video censored by Youtube


“Over 1,000 Peer-Reviewed Medical Papers of COVID Vaccine Injuries.”

The problem isn't the acute effects, it's what happens 20 years down the road that, when you go to the doctor, they won't be able to point to covid shots as the cause and you'll be in the hook for massive medical bills

 

[WEATHER53]

Long covid is really long vax.

It’s a two year bad reaction to the forced experiment
Lose weight, food bland, tired, doldrums , get angry easy , stomach on edge constantly , vision poor upon occasion causing inability to drive,
History will view this as hideous treatment of Americans

 

[luiza]

If you can't understand the limitations inherent in the VAERS reporting, why do you comment?

A single batch of vax can be distributed to multiple States and sometimes other countries, and administered in a wide variety of settings. It is NOT consistent. The reporting is NOT consistent.

If you draw conclusions with the illusion that it IS consistent, your conclusion will be WRONG.

This is NOT a difficult concept to grasp.

The early batches were prioritized to older people, and people in institutionalized settings. This is already a higher risk population, and they are in settings where AE's are more likely to be reported. If the reported AE's were fewer in those batches, that would be a mystery- not the other way around...

Query the database on those "hot" batches, drill down and read the individual reports. I have spent hundreds of hours doing that. It is not what you think.

Even the allowable variation from one jab to another is large- +/- 50% of a dose is allowable. A large portion of the mRNA is destroyed in the act of inoculating the person - it is not a stable molecule to being with. Some of the jabs did almost nothing, others were almost "overdoses". Same batch, differences in administration.

Also I DO NOT advocate for the jab. I did not receive it myself. I do not advise others to get it.

At the same time, I will push back on disinformation, because people need to make their own decision based on the best available information, not bullshit analyses.

Your arrogance might impress yourself so I will indulge in a little myself and tell you that I have forgotten more about VAERS than you probably will ever know .
You need more of a Para Chute than Para Bellum .

 

[para bellum]

I did not take the shot, and thus have never filled out a VAERS report. However, numerous doctors and patients have written about the VAERS experience. The consensus is that the federal form is VERY user unfriendly and difficult to use. I can relate to that charge because several federal forms I've used online, mostly FAA, are exactly that.

The result of that is the VAERS data vastly under reports adverse effects. So matching batch numbers with adverse events is a good idea and valid, but is not completely representative of what happened to people.

I agree wrt the under-reporting. The problem with comparing batch numbers is that we only have the numerator. We know the batch ID, and we have a total number of AE's associated with that batch ID.

We do not know the total doses in the batch, and we don't know the percentage of any given batch that was administered in the US, and how much was sent to some other country that doesn't report to VAERS.

Think about how it was rolled out- the initial production was distributed to people over 65, and people in institutional settings like nursing homes. Once that population was mostly vaccinated, it expanded to people that were over 55, and that cohort was vaccinated, etc. Initial production was low, and it ramped up. There are multiple facilities on all continents producing it now, but it didn't start out that way- it started out slow.

By the time you get to mid-year, it is being administered in pharmacies and walk-in clinics everywhere, to a younger population that is less likely to have AE's, or to report them when they are mild.

Do you think it's a reasonable assumption that all batches had the same number of doses, and 100% of any given batch was administered in the US? I don't think that's a reasonable assumption at all. I certainly wouldn't claim some definitive conclusion based on an assumption I can't support.

And if you look at those "hot batches" in VAERS, what you see is the AE's are all over the place. A lot of older patients and in those cases where the AE results in a death, the cause of death is usually some other existing condition that the patient was already being treated for, and happened months after the patient was vaccinated. There is very little to connect the AE's with the vaccine with any degree of confidence.

I agree that it is possible that some batches had more AE's than others- after all, it is an experiment in progress- I would expect the manufacturers to adjust their formulations over time. The vaccines they are producing today are not the vaccines they were producing in January 2021.

But the only people with sufficient data to make a proper analysis are the manufacturers themselves, and they don't make that information public (btw, they should be forced to).

VAERS is just not adequate to draw any firm conclusions, because it is not possible to correct for the variables. We have the numerator, and that's all. It sucks, but that's the way it is.

 

[para bellum]

So matching batch numbers with adverse events is a good idea and valid, but is not completely representative of what happened to people.

I looked at this question of "hot lots" back when it was first brought up in early 2022. I spent a lot of time doing queries on VAERS trying to validate the claim.

In the end, I concluded what I already stated here- there is just not enough information to reach a meaningful conclusion about any particular lot.

Since I am back on the subject, I went back in my archives to find some information relating to the lot size problem that I was talking about.

This pdf is from a Pfizer report on particulate contamination. The file is too large to post in it's entirety, so I just extracted one page.

I am posting it to illustrate how much variability exists in the lot sizes. This table has lot numbers, date and location of manufacture, and the number of vials in each manufacturing lot. You can see there is no consistency in the lot sizes (e.g. the denominator when you try to compare AE's from one lot to the next).

 

[munkle]

I agree wrt the under-reporting. The problem with comparing batch numbers is that we only have the numerator. We know the batch ID, and we have a total number of AE's associated with that batch ID.

We do not know the total doses in the batch, and we don't know the percentage of any given batch that was administered in the US, and how much was sent to some other country that doesn't report to VAERS.

Think about how it was rolled out- the initial production was distributed to people over 65, and people in institutional settings like nursing homes. Once that population was mostly vaccinated, it expanded to people that were over 55, and that cohort was vaccinated, etc. Initial production was low, and it ramped up. There are multiple facilities on all continents producing it now, but it didn't start out that way- it started out slow.

By the time you get to mid-year, it is being administered in pharmacies and walk-in clinics everywhere, to a younger population that is less likely to have AE's, or to report them when they are mild.

Do you think it's a reasonable assumption that all batches had the same number of doses, and 100% of any given batch was administered in the US? I don't think that's a reasonable assumption at all. I certainly wouldn't claim some definitive conclusion based on an assumption I can't support.

And if you look at those "hot batches" in VAERS, what you see is the AE's are all over the place. A lot of older patients and in those cases where the AE results in a death, the cause of death is usually some other existing condition that the patient was already being treated for, and happened months after the patient was vaccinated. There is very little to connect the AE's with the vaccine with any degree of confidence.

I agree that it is possible that some batches had more AE's than others- after all, it is an experiment in progress- I would expect the manufacturers to adjust their formulations over time. The vaccines they are producing today are not the vaccines they were producing in January 2021.

But the only people with sufficient data to make a proper analysis are the manufacturers themselves, and they don't make that information public (btw, they should be forced to).

VAERS is just not adequate to draw any firm conclusions, because it is not possible to correct for the variables. We have the numerator, and that's all. It sucks, but that's the way it is.

Former Chief Science Officer and VP at Pfizer for 16 years says batch deadliness COULD NOT have been an accident.

 

[para bellum]

Former Chief Science Officer and VP at Pfizer for 16 years says batch deadliness COULD NOT have been an accident.

I read what Mike Yeadon had to say about it back then, and I don't discount his statements. Pharma companies have a history of doing that sort of thing.

I tried to prove his assertions with VAERS, and I couldn't do it.

The numbers of AE's in any given lot cannot tell you about the lot if you don't cannot correct for the variables.

Lot A can have 500 AE's and Lot B can have 50 AE's, and Lot A looks 10x worse at first glance. But if Lot A had 300,000 doses and 20% of the AE's were reported, and Lot B had 30,000 doses and 10% of the AE's were reported, which one was really worse?

 

[PeterPilot]

para bellum

I think that because it was an experiment, the only people who know the parameters of the experiment are the perpetrators. The public does not know the terms, and thus are like blind mice examining the elephant.

That some batches are more toxic than others seems logical, all things considered. The perps could not begin with the most toxic batches exclusively, because a bunch of deaths early in the program would have scared the herd into not taking it, so they had to have some placebo types to keep the herd somewhat calm.

 

[para bellum]

para bellum

I think that because it was an experiment, the only people who know the parameters of the experiment are the perpetrators. The public does not know the terms, and thus are like blind mice examining the elephant.

That some batches are more toxic than others seems logical, all things considered. The perps could not begin with the most toxic batches exclusively, because a bunch of deaths early in the program would have scared the herd into not taking it, so they had to have some placebo types to keep the herd somewhat calm.

I can't prove it didn't happen that way, nor can I prove that it did.

When I do know is that all the secrecy created big knowledge holes, that in many cases were filled by some pretty outrageous conspiracy theories. Graphene and 5G activated nano-chips in the vax, global depopulation conspiracies, and so on.

 

[PeterPilot]

I can't prove it didn't happen that way, nor can I prove that it did.

When I do know is that all the secrecy created big knowledge holes, that in many cases were filled by some pretty outrageous conspiracy theories. Graphene and 5G activated nano-chips in the vax, global depopulation conspiracies, and so on.

Do you know that Graphene was first found in the serum by a Spanish University of some sort with an electron microscope? That independent individuals have demonstrated the self-assembling nano structures do actually respond to 5G emf?

The wildest conspiracy theory (if you want to call it that) was that the shots were safe and effective.

 

[para bellum]

Do you know that Graphene was first found in the serum by a Spanish University of some sort with an electron microscope? That independent individuals have demonstrated the self-assembling nano structures do actually respond to 5G emf?

There are no self-assembling anythings in the vaccines other than the RNA that is intentionally placed there for it's purpose, and any graphene would turn the vaccine brown at very low concentrations.

The wildest conspiracy theory (if you want to call it that) was that the shots were safe and effective.

I am skeptical about the vaccines due to the absence of any long-term data on them. I don't think they are very good at what they are intended to do, but again that is data driven, and I don't have all the data.

Secrecy breeds mistrust.

 

[PeterPilot]

There are no self-assembling anythings in the vaccines other than the RNA that is intentionally placed there for it's purpose, and any graphene would turn the vaccine brown at very low concentrations.

I am skeptical about the vaccines due to the absence of any long-term data on them. I don't think they are very good at what they are intended to do, but again that is data driven, and I don't have all the data.

Secrecy breeds mistrust.

Yes, secrecy absolutely breeds mistrust, and cognitive dissonance is a factor in most human calculations.

Bad news for you sir, Dr. Ana Milhalcea (probably misspelled) and a few others have pictures of the self-assembling nano structures, but that does not mean that every bottle of serum contained them, the heart of the point regarding the disparity in batch quality and experimental status.

 

[para bellum]

Yes, secrecy absolutely breeds mistrust, and cognitive dissonance is a factor in most human calculations.

Bad news for you sir, Dr. Ana Milhalcea (probably misspelled) and a few others have pictures of the self-assembling nano structures, but that does not mean that every bottle of serum contained them, the heart of the point regarding the disparity in batch quality and experimental status.

There are many different vaccines of all types produced, and they all attempt to do the same thing- to produce an immune response to the S protein in the virus.

Every country has their own testing labs that are completely independent of the producers of the vaccines, and it's just not credible that something is slipped into the vaccines at any kind of large scale.

There are many people that claim to have pictures of stuff in the vaccines, and they are the only ones who have made the claims. No one is able to replicate their findings in any kind of credible scientific setting. Unless their claims can be independently verified, they have to be dismissed.

"Self-assembling nano-structure" is a buzz phrase. Exactly what is being "self-assembled"? What is the function? How does it function? What kinds of things can we create with these "nano-structures"? You can take any liquid, and zap it with electromagnetic energy and something will happen. It doesn't mean anything, it's just the nature of electromagnetism. MRI's work by exciting the water molecules in your body with a strong magnetic field...

You ever hear the phrase "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit"?

Approach every claim with skepticism, and make the claimant prove themself. (That includes the authorities, btw)

 

[WEATHER53]

We know they were ineffective from the get go
How safe they are continues to be disproven

 

[initforme]

It’s a two year bad reaction to the forced experiment
Lose weight, food bland, tired, doldrums , get angry easy , stomach on edge constantly , vision poor upon occasion causing inability to drive,
History will view this as hideous treatment of Americans

There are hundreds of thousands of unvaxxed people suffering from getting the virus as well. It's beyond horrific. It's no ordinary virus. People should not have to use sick days to cope with it.

 

[Dean F]

never took it

 

[PeterPilot]

There are many different vaccines of all types produced, and they all attempt to do the same thing- to produce an immune response to the S protein in the virus.

Every country has their own testing labs that are completely independent of the producers of the vaccines, and it's just not credible that something is slipped into the vaccines at any kind of large scale.

There are many people that claim to have pictures of stuff in the vaccines, and they are the only ones who have made the claims. No one is able to replicate their findings in any kind of credible scientific setting. Unless their claims can be independently verified, they have to be dismissed.

"Self-assembling nano-structure" is a buzz phrase. Exactly what is being "self-assembled"? What is the function? How does it function? What kinds of things can we create with these "nano-structures"? You can take any liquid, and zap it with electromagnetic energy and something will happen. It doesn't mean anything, it's just the nature of electromagnetism. MRI's work by exciting the water molecules in your body with a strong magnetic field...

You ever hear the phrase "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit"?

Approach every claim with skepticism, and make the claimant prove themself. (That includes the authorities, btw)

Do you hold the government to that standard regarding the shots? Hint, they are neither safe nor effective.