Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine: Unclean, Unwanted Bacteria, More Side effects?
This may only be the tip of the iceberg, and it appears this story is so big, no one wants to get the ball rolling, according to Israeli and German scientists familiar with the situation.
According to a report by Multipolar in Germany, new documents confirm that Pfizer used different methods when they developed the vaccination against COVID-19.
One was clean and expensive and was presented to get emergency authorization for the vaccine in the United States.
The second one was cheap but caused unclean injections and a massive number of side effects. Almost everyone injected with Pfizer received the second unknown and unclean version of the vaccine.
The German Expert Dr. Florian Schilling explains the reason any authorization given by a recipient should be invalid based on these findings.
In a recent video interview published by Radio Munich in Germany, the author said: What we discuss today is so unbelievable and we don’t know the extent of this yet.
Non-published and confidential material by Pfizer explains that this company provided different ingredients for the vaccine for a study that resulted in approval to use, compared to the ingredients given to the public.
Israeli scientists Joshua Guetzkow and Retsef Levi managed to clarify the situation after they went to court again and again and managed to get documents after documents from Pfizer. They were able to secure the documents and send them to the British Medical Journal in May 2023. These documents explaining process 1 (the legitimate process) and process 2 (the other process ) were published in the journal.
Surprisingly the public including the media did not yet react to the finding.
Process 1 explains the procedure the vaccine was developed. 22,000 people received a test shot. Based on the data of process 1, based on the side effects documented for those receiving the vaccine under process 1, the COVID-19 vaccine was approved in an emergency process.
In reality, the vaccine circulated around the globe was not the same approved based on the data of Process 1. They were manufactured using a hidden process “2”
According to Schilling the vaccine using process 2 ingredients had dramatically different data in regards to effectiveness and side effects.
Schilling explains in the interview broadcasted yesterday by Radio Munich:
The procedure used in the registration studies is a sterile procedure. This is purely in vitro. This means that the RNA is amplified here by a machine using PCR. The advantage is that there can be no contamination. We receive a highly pure product that essentially consists of RNA. The other method that was used and circulated for general use to most was based on the fact that the RNA is not copied sterile by machine, but by bacteria.
QUESTION: At the beginning of the vaccination campaign, in February 2021, the German media also reported that the corona preparations were produced with the help of bacteria. A spokesman for the pharmaceutical industry appeared on ARD German TV. He explained about the manufacturing process that the RNA reproduced by bacteria is initially surrounded by “DNA and many other enzymes and other factors” and that it therefore has to be “super cleaned” from these unwanted bacterial substances.
German magazine “Der Spiegel” also explained the process at the time and reassured: “The state-run Paul Ehrlich Institute checks samples and monitors the production facilities.” The RNA is copied with the help of bacteria, what exactly happens?
Florian Schilling: These bacteria are provided with the desired genome. This is implanted into the genome of these bacteria. The division of bacteria can be specifically stimulated, that is the bioreactor we are talking about.
With every division, the target genome is also copied and multiplied. Finally, the bacteria are killed, and lysed, and the desired genome is removed through a purification process.
The disadvantage of the process is obvious: We do not have sterile material from the outset, but rather have to bring this material, which is massively contaminated with bacterial components, to a sterile status. This is extremely complex, especially at the scale we are talking about here, at the scale at which production took place. Clearly, there are significant quality deficits here.
QUESTION: There are documents from the EMA, the European Medicines Agency, which was responsible for approving the preparations at the end of 2020, which show that the EMA knew from the start that there were major problems in this regard.