Now that Big Pharma is firmly in bed with the Food and Drug Administration, children’s COVID vaccines don't need to hit even the low 50% efficacy targets anymore. The FDA’s de facto regulator-in-chief Peter Marks suggested this when he spoke to Congress in a May 6 briefing.
Marks told Congress they would probably authorize the vaccines anyway, despite the fact that in pediatric vaccine trials, both Pfizer and Moderna appear not to have cleared even the 50% bar which is the FDA’s minimum efficacy standard for vaccinations. The FDA briefing actually states that they “were open to less than 50% efficacy” for the COVID vaccines for the smallest children.
That 50% efficacy was a standard that the FDA set early on, a standard that is ridiculously low.
A recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study shows the shot is not necessary for children, as they already statistically have a zero death risk from COVID and a 75% or higher zero prevalence rate.
But as we know, when it comes to big pharma, science doesn’t really matter as much as profit. They will figure out a way to suggest parents care about their children if they “vaccinate” them, even though children don’t need those vaccines in the first place.
Originally, the FDA efficacy target of 50% was against the 94% that was originally being reported among adults, who were actually at risk with COVID-19.
We now know that the efficacy rate has gotten lower and lower and lower and booster shots wane faster and faster, while blood clots and strokes, likely due to the shot, have increased. We also know from studies that natural immunity is superior. What if your blood pressure medicine had an efficacy rate of 50% or less?
The CDC has recently released a study showing more than 50% of people in the U.S had antibodies for COVID-19 by the end of February this year.
But children, according to the same study, had antibodies detected in 75% of the largely unvaccinated population.
The LA Times reported, “In the study, the CDC examined blood samples taken from all age groups, testing for specific antibodies that develop only after Covid infection. The increase in Covid was most significant in kids: from 44.2% in December to 75.2% in February among children ages 11 and younger, the CDC report found. The percentages were almost identical for kids ages 12 to 17.”
But the amount of money that pharma can make getting on the childhood vaccine schedule is just too tempting, not to mention the release of all potential liability that comes with it from the damage and death to children, as reported in the CDC VAERS (adverse events records kept by CDC). This is also despite the outcry of parents who were pro-vaccination enough to risk getting their children the experimental shots but now are speaking out against the COVID vaccines because they have severely damaged children.
Taking a child under the age of five who's already had and recovered from COVID and trying to make them better off with a vaccine against the original Wuhan ancestral strain just doesn’t make sense, especially since hospitalization is super low for children and once children have it and recover from it, they generally do pretty well. If they get it again, they do better than they did the first time.
Lowering the regulatory standards for vaccine products is not the direction the FDA should go. It is irresponsible and quite simply, unacceptable. The FDA needs to be upholding the standards they've set and raising them, not lowering them. What will the standard be going forward? Will we enter a scenario where we talk about a yearly children's vaccine with no threshold of efficacy below which we don't accept? It doesn't make sense, except to make money for the pharmaceutical companies and the payments the federal regulators and scientists receive.
We know the moment that the FDA pulls the trigger on an Emergency Use Authorization, no matter what the CDC does, they'll be able to issue some guidance on how to implement it.
Even if they don’t make it mandatory, there will be many preschools who will be zealous and won’t make exceptions for superior natural immunity and will demand that children get an experimental shot with very low efficacy which isn’t needed in more than 75% of the child population. A population that has already recovered safely from the flu-like symptoms.
In New York State, data from age five to 11, vaccine effectiveness is being reported as low as 11%. So how far are we willing to go before the effectiveness is too low? Like so much of this COVID mess, this just doesn’t make sense.
Parents should protect their children, even if it is unpopular to do so. Think critically and do your own research. Don’t believe the propaganda and the advertising, especially the ads you see on TV, like the ones for HPV that pull on your heartstrings and make you believe you are more responsible if you give your children a shot they don’t need in the first place. It’s not worth it.