Source: COVID Vaccine Safety Concerns • Children’s Health Defense

How Will We Know That a COVID-19 Vaccine is Safe?

by Dr. Liz Mumper and Children’s Health Defense team

Children’s Health Defense has created a video of Dr. Liz Mumper’s presentation titled “How Will We Know That a COVID-19 Vaccine is Safe?” This presentation is the result of a collaborative effort between Dr. Mumper and the team of doctors, scientists, and researchers affiliated with CHD.

Dr. Mumper carefully provides detailed answers to two questions often asked by the public: “What does a safe and effective vaccine look like?” and “How will we know that a COVID-19 vaccine is safe?” She reviews many of the reasons why vaccines, as they are currently produced, are not safe, and explains that every year there are tens of thousands of adverse events, many of them resulting in serious conditions or even death.

Dr. Mumper reviews the scientific community’s numerous concerns about the safety of a COVID vaccine and its ingredients, providing information about each of the top COVID vaccine candidates. Lastly, she discusses the legality of mandatory vaccination in a free republic which proclaims to defend the rights of “we the people.”

Video Presentation

Read video transcript.

PowerPoint Presentation

To view the presentation:

• Desktop computer – mouse over the slide and arrows will appear on the right and left, or click on the circles.
• Mobile devices – simply swipe from left to right.

This presentation can also be downloaded as a pdf (175.2MB) which has links to resources and citations.

COVID Vaccine Concern Facts

Download fact sheets.

About Dr. Mumper

Elizabeth Mumper M.D., FAAP, Pediatrician, President and CEO of The Rimland Center and CHD Scientific Advisory Committee Member

Dr. Mumper is President and CEO of The RIMLAND Center, established to mentor clinicians interested in children with neurodevelopmental problems. Her general pediatrics practice is Advocates for Children. Advocates for Families is devoted to the care of children with autism and other neurodevelopmental problems.

She attended the Medical College of Virginia, did residency training at the University of Massachusetts and University of Virginia, and she served as Chief Resident of Pediatrics at UVA.

Her clinical experience has included five years in pediatric practice, over a decade as Director of Pediatric Education in a Family Practice Residency Program, 16 years as clinical faculty at the University of Virginia, and five years as Medical Director of the Autism Research Institute. She is currently on the faculty of MAPS (Medical Academy for Pediatric Special Needs).

Other Helpful Resources

• Leading COVID Vaccine Candidates Plagued by Safety Concerns
• Pathologist Petitions FDA to Halt Pfizer Emergency Use Authorization Until Vaccine Efficacy Confirmed
• RFK, Jr. Warned FDA Three Months Ago About Ingredient in Pfizer COVID Vaccine That Likely Caused Life-Threatening Reaction in Two UK Healthcare Workers
• Breaking: CHD Responds to News of Life-Threatening Reaction to Pfizer COVID Vaccine. Will Regulators Take Action?
• RFK, Jr. Urges FDA to Slow Down COVID Vaccine Approval Process
• Protecting Individual Rights: Can COVID Vaccines Be Mandated?
• FDA Whitewashes Warnings About Coronavirus Vaccine Trials

Source: TIFFANY DOVER DEAD – Another Vaccine Casualty

Source: WHO (finally) admits PCR tests create false positives — Health & Wellness — Sott.net

Kit Knightly
OffGuardian
Fri, 18 Dec 2020 06:58 UTC

The World Health Organization released a guidance memo on December 14th, warning that high cycle thresholds on PCR tests will result in false positives.

While this information is accurate, it has also been available for months, so we must ask: why are they reporting it now? Is it to make it appear the vaccine works?

The “gold standard” Sars-Cov-2 tests are based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR). PCR works by taking nucleotides – tiny fragments of DNA or RNA – and replicating them until they become something large enough to identify. The replication is done in cycles, with each cycle doubling the amount of genetic material. The number of cycles it takes to produce something identifiable is known as the “cycle threshold” or “CT value”. The higher the CT value, the less likely you are to be detecting anything significant.

This new WHO memo states that using a high CT value to test for the presence of Sars-Cov-2 will result in false-positive results.

To quote their own words [our emphasis]:

Users of RT-PCR reagents should read the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is necessary to account for any background noise which may lead to a specimen with a high cycle threshold (Ct) value result being interpreted as a positive result.

They go on to explain [again, our emphasis]:

The design principle of RT-PCR means that for patients with high levels of circulating virus (viral load), relatively few cycles will be needed to detect virus and so the Ct value will be low. Conversely, when specimens return a high Ct value, it means that many cycles were required to detect virus. In some circumstances, the distinction between background noise and actual presence of the target virus is difficult to ascertain.

Of course, none of this is news to anyone who has been paying attention. That PCR tests were easily manipulated and potentially highly inaccurate has been one of the oft-repeated battle cries of those of us opposing the “pandemic” narrative, and the policies it’s being used to sell.

Many articles have been written about it, by many experts in the field, medical journalists and other researchers. It’s been commonly available knowledge, for months now, that any test using a CT value over 35 is potentially meaningless.

Dr Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize for inventing the PCR process, was clear that it wasn’t meant as a diagnostic tool, saying:

with PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody.”

And, commenting on cycle thresholds, once said:

If you have to go more than 40 cycles to amplify a single-copy gene, there is something seriously wrong with your PCR.”

The MIQE guidelines for PCR use state:

Cq values higher than 40 are suspect because of the implied low efficiency and generally should not be reported,”

This has all been public knowledge since the beginning of the lockdown. The Australian government’s own website admitted the tests were flawed, and a court in Portugal ruled they were not fit for purpose.

Even Dr Anthony Fauci has publicly admitted that a cycle threshold over 35 is going to be detecting “dead nucleotides”, not a living virus.

Despite all this, it is known that many labs around the world have been using PCR tests with CT values over 35, even into the low 40s.

So why has the WHO finally decided to say this is wrong? What reason could they have for finally choosing to recognise this simple reality?

The answer to that is potentially shockingly cynical: We have a vaccine now. We don’t need false positives anymore.

Notionally, the system has produced its miracle cure. So, after everyone has been vaccinated, all the PCR tests being done will be done “under the new WHO guidelines”, and running only 25-30 cycles instead of 35+.

Lo and behold, the number of “positive cases” will plummet, and we’ll have confirmation that our miracle vaccine works.

After months of flooding the data pool with false positives, miscounting deaths “by accident”, adding “Covid19 related death” to every other death certificate…they can stop. The create-a-pandemic machine can be turned down to zero again.

…as long as we all do as we’re told. Any signs of dissent – masses of people refusing the vaccine, for example – and the CT value can start to climb again, and they bring back their magical disease.

Source: Media Blackout: Moderna’s FDA Report Lists 13 Total Deaths, 6 In The Vaccine Group 7 In The Placebo

Source: BREAKING NEWS! NURSE WHO TOOK COVID VACCINE DIES HOURS LATER!

First published at 20:03 UTC on December 16th, 2020.

Also,

Source: Official Government Report: Australian Covid Vaccines Spread HIV