Hello, been reading this site for awhile now, have some info that might be helpful.

So, if Pfizer & Moderna do something similar to other pharma company batch #'s I've seen then for Pfizer the first letter is likely the year and the second letter corresponds to the month. So "E" would be 2020 and the letters later in the alphabet would be later in the year, with "F" as 2021 and we see "A" "B" "C" likely corresponding to Jan/Feb/Mar.

Likewise for Moderna we can see the "20" vs "21" and the letter preceding likely goes to month as well (the "21A" batches have early letters, etc.). The "A" at the end of the Moderna batch # may just be a way to differentiate between drug substance and drug product batches.

There is a major quality control issue. There were leaked emails from European Medicines Agency, or EMA, discussing this. I bet that's what we are seeing in the VAERS data.

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n627

Quote:

As it conducted its analysis of the Pfizer-BioNTech covid-19 vaccine in December, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) was the victim of a cyberattack.1 More than 40 megabytes of classified information from the agencys review were published on the dark web, and several journalistsincluding from The BMJand academics worldwide were sent copies of the leaks. They came from anonymous email accounts and most efforts to interact with the senders were unsuccessful. None of the senders revealed their identity, and the EMA says it is pursuing a criminal investigation.

The BMJ has reviewed the documents, which show that regulators had major concerns over unexpectedly low quantities of intact mRNA in batches of the vaccine developed for commercial production.

EMA scientists tasked with ensuring manufacturing qualitythe chemistry, manufacturing, and control aspects of Pfizers submission to the EMAworried about "truncated and modified mRNA species present in the finished product." Among the many files leaked to The BMJ, an email dated 23 November by a high ranking EMA official outlined a raft of issues. In short, commercial manufacturing was not producing vaccines to the specifications expected, and regulators were unsure of the implications. EMA responded by filing two major objections with Pfizer, along with a host of other questions it wanted addressed.

----------

Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything. - Joseph Stalin

Tickerguy said :

Quote:

The best-fit hypothesis is that there is no way to control manufacturing at-scale when the product causes the body to produce a pathogenic thing via a biological process.

Exactly,

Something as small as variances in the metabolism of different people could have a huge effect on the rate of replication and the body's antibody response to such an event. Now imagine variations in response between ethnic groups, sex, age, or co-morbidity groups.

Different people can respond differently in fashion to common drugs. Now imagine one where the body's machinery itself is invoked and is self-tailoring - uncertainty just massively increased.

----------

"Mass intelligence does not mean intelligent masses."

***A few thoughts***

Could varying degrees of additional ingredients be introduced into certain batch numbers - for experimental purposes?

With saline solutions seemingly mixed into batches, would this perhaps lower many/most batch deadliness?

Knowing Gates and his buggy OS's. Knowing that the spike codes are computer-generated. Any chance Winblow$ OS, or software was being used?

I was searching a bit based on this, and stumbled on this:

https://www.ocbj.com/news/2021/jan/19/oc....

Orange County, CA, pulled a Moderna lot based on a very high number of "allergic reactions". When did this happen? Late Jan. 2021. I had not heard of this. I had heard of Japan discovering contamination in a couple of Moderna lots.

Sounds like there were indications of this "bad lot" problem very early on.

I looked at my wifes vaccination card (Dont ask, I told her not to)

Both her 1st and 2nd shot are on the list of high death rates list for Pfizer.

1st shot EW0172 (April) 18 deaths
2nd shot ER2613 (May) 48 deaths

Is this all due to quality issues or like Karl was said before the risk get exponentially worse on 2nd shot?

Heres my stupid question of the day; did you correct for the number of jabs/lot?

Sorry, had to ask. Maybe I missed that in there.

----------

All The News That Fits, We Print.

New York Times

Dosing of pharmaceuticals in a pill or injection is a very technically complicated thing. When you swallowed a pill in the 1970s, a significant portion of the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) was destroyed by stomach acid before it ever made it into the body to do what it is intended to do. If your API is wildly expensive this is especially bad. There is an entire industry of excipients that are used to deliver the API in a protective way in current pharma industry. They design it so it delivers most of its cargo in the intestines.

Maybe the delivery system with mRNA is the issue. You are wrapping it in a PEG-LNP sphere otherwise the RNA is instantly destroyed. Cells take up the spheres. Some of those mRNA bundles will burst and degrade before they ever get to the cell. Maybe their calculations were off on how much wouldn't make it into the cell so they grossly overloaded it, but the mRNA bundles survived at higher rates. Or maybe the risk was in overloaded lots in conjunction with shots that make it into the blood stream.

It is also possible all 3 companies had other contamination issues in their production systems.

But I think Gen is right, this at first blush sounds more like a dosing issue to me. And Pods is quite correct too.

----------

I'm not letting my ship get shot out from under my ass! Open fire! - Captain Lindemann

Anyone remember the heparin recall 10 or 15 years ago? (GOD, I'm old)

I am the one that got the call from manufacturer...early evening at work.
Sure as shit, yep.
We still had bad lot numbers in our inventory.
Heparin shortage ensued.

We were all witnessing random reactions at different facilities.

Not everyone receives heparin and some that did, no reaction.
Couldn't narrow it down.
Water cultures out the wazoo, etc.
Nothing.

It took them a bit of time, but the recall occurred.

We had no deaths, one gal I believe would have, but I refused to return her blood after she had a reaction to heparin bolus.
My boss didn't argue with me, but was surprised at my call. I was unmoveable.

Did not know it was heparin.
Coulda been dialyzer reaction, water issue...nothing made sense until the recall.

THESE FUCKERS KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HAS HAPPENED.

----------

'Keep pushing fuckers, you'll find the trip wire eventually'
~ Quik49

'This is the part where you find out who you are'

OUT- "F"IN- STANDING!!!! The Master= KD

Question for all: this is extremely complex to those away/unfamiliar with TF... so, in 1-2 sentences, how do you explain this to the masses?

Karl, again kudos!!!

And... cue the METAL:
Now facing one another
The stand-off eats at time
Then all at once a silence falls
As the bell ceases its chime
Upon this sign the challengers
With shrieks and cries rush forth
The knives fly out like bullets
Upon their deadly course
Screams of pain and agony
Rent the silent air
Amidst the dying bodies
Blood runs everywhere
The figure stands expressionless
Impassive and alone
Unmoved by this victory
And the seeds of death he's sown
Sworn to avenge
Condemn to Hell
Tempt not the blade
All fear the Sentinel - Judas Priest

----------

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that."- George Carlin
USA= ... and... GO DAWGS!!!

I'd just like to take a timeout to point out that while excellent work... WHY THE HELL DO *YOU* NEED TO DO THIS AT ALL?!

Isn't this something that the regulatory bodies were created to do - specifically to notice this kind of bullshit and act in the country's best interest to protect us from same!?

We have failed. The Republic has failed. There is no Rule of Law, only the Law of the Jungle - especially for peons like us here. Every action you take from this moment on should bear this in mind. I have never been a "Fuck the fucking fuckers before they fuck you!" type of person, because I am just plain not wired that way. I HATE having to become such.

----------

We're fucked. There will be no happy ending here; there is no going back to 'normal.'. There are only bad outcomes and worse outcomes. And we don't get to choose those, either.

Tonythetiger said

Quote:

This is the ignored cost of fucking with the body's RNA/DNA replication process.

If it were only that, the adverse events would have been more evenly dispersed.

----------

I will have NO survivor's guilt, except a bit of shame for all my Schadenfreude.

@Publius - The lot CA pulled is one of the "worst" ones.

So yeah, they knew and intentionally ignored it.

----------

This gets down to the basic fact that there was not enough time allotted to testing at all stages. I have part of a patent on an actual physical device. Chemical and biological non-living molecules can be considered devices for our discussions. All of the testing ends with the testing of whether something can be reproduced consistently. With molecules and even physical devices very large production runs over varying periods of time exist merely to test manufacturing consistency with the product never being considered for end-use, tested extensively and ultimately discarded. These are not dry runs. These are actual wet products with full production staff under normal working conditions.

I don't care whether it is a new car model, electric razor (or disposable for that matter) or paint or molecule. One finds problems that could not be modeled in any simulation that are only revealed once actual production starts.

Then the sample production runs are tested to validate what the original testing on volunteer and animal subjects produced.

Guaranteed that some asshole chemists and biologists sat at their computers and did some molecule modeling and simulations, created a few quick and dirty batches and then spun up medium production runs repurposing existing facilities and equipment. Even if the latter two were to be done, extensive testing for appropriateness was not done.

This is all due to the process being violated at many steps from the beginning. No amount of money or personnel no matter how competent could have performed this in such a short period of time. The hard limit cannot be hacked by concurrent efforts. It is only a sequential process.

Sounds like a lot of the BS that we are subjected to in the computer world which also found its way into cars lately. Release some concurrently but not sequentially product development crap and then pull back or re engineer or re code problems during the production runs and during end use. Not a good way. A proper product is essentially locked for the production cycle.

We decided to shortcut the shortcuts.

The test of any good manufacturer of anything is how consistent and reliable the products are over time.

Guaranteed that they are modifying this shit on the fly which will frustrate any efforts to document what was problematic. Guaranteed that not necessarily for malice or subterfuge records of the changes are not being kept.

A lot of seat-of-the-pants decisions are being made here. This is what the data and Karl's excellent analysis says to me.

----------

"This guy is fantastically annoying to listen to, but he has some interesting info..." -- Rangeisshot April 26, 2023

Several weeks ago during episode 970 of The Daniel Horowitz podcast, he interviewed Dr. Jane Ruby, a scientist with over 20 years of experience with the FDA regulatory process. At one point during the interview she pointed out that the drug companies have been conducting dosing studies simultaneously with a number of other testing phases that are normally separated and sequential rather than being conducted all at the same time. Ruby said this is unprecedented.

So the obvious question is whether those dosing studies are ongoing. Horowitz wondered aloud whether some people were getting jabbed with very low doses and others with much higher doses as a way to determine tolerance and ideal outcomes.

If we assume that the drug companies actually want their "vaccines" to be effective, they would seek to inject the highest possible dose without killing the jabee. Lower doses might not do anything while too high will kill people. The trials were not long enough to determine the proper dosing.

IMO, the "lot problem" could be a QC problem or something related to incompetence. Personally I doubt the drug companies are intentionally trying to kill people - they probably don't want that outcome. Occam's Razor: they are using the global population as test subjects. The FDA dude just admitted this WRT jabbing children.

They don't care if it takes a few broken eggs to make an omelette. They desperately want the mRNA delivery system to work - but they haven't yet figured out how. As such, the testing on the general populace will continue.

----------

Wonder what percentage of deaths or maiming was actually reported to Vaers?

I tweet this. More analytical minds need to be prodded this way and start asking questions.

This is my simple explanation:
Initially they started reporting all AEs in VAERS and there was an o sh*t moment and since then TPTB instructed CDC to limit the reported deaths to fewer per lots (purge the database until it shows what you want).

Ive read somewhere the VAERS DB is managed by a mil contractor with limited medical staff to vet the reports so there is that.

I know it sounds terrifying and maybe tin.

Isn't one of the factors all three manufacturers have in common is that the spiked protein RNA was sourced from the same Chinese source? It makes me what else may have been present and not just individual biology issues.

If something else is present could it be completely ignored by current testing protocols?

----------

"Mass intelligence does not mean intelligent masses."

TG - based off this work you did - great stuff BTW - I pulled the data this morning and somewhat duplicated your efforts in Excel (I have a GIS system at work with mongo memory in it - and speedy processors), I merged some of the data from the tables into one and did some pivot tables running the same reports. My numbers are a little higher than what is presented here - not by much. Enough to validate (not that it's needed) there are issues in certain lot numbers....

Again, I pulled the data this morning, I don't know when TG pulled his but the numbers are quite problematic.

I'm going with the idea that all three companies put out lots that had different strength levels.
This was to figure out the problem of rapidly waning antibody levels that they obviously knew about.
They used Vaers feedback to gauge which batch was causing problems so they could adjust production and continue onwards.
The masses became the experiment, in fact nobody is hiding the fact we and our kids are the experiment.
Any other explanation would probably be so complex that occams razor would bring us back to this.

@Fdprefect, Dr Jane Ruby is on The Stew Peters show (Rumble) quite often. She was talking about this very subject last night.

@Fdprefect
"IMO, the "lot problem" could be a QC problem or something related to incompetence"

All three manufacturers all made the exact same mistake at three different locations that led to the exact same outcomes. I wouldn't bet much on that Sir.

TG, do we know for certain that each lot contained the same number of jabs?

----------

I will have NO survivor's guilt, except a bit of shame for all my Schadenfreude.