Je gebruikt een verouderde webbrowser. Het kan mogelijk deze of andere websites niet correct weergeven. Het is raadzaam om je webbrowser te upgraden of een browser zoals Microsoft Edge of Google Chrome te gebruiken.
Nou, ik had het wel degelijk nagekeken voordat ik het postte, anders had ik dat niet gedaan, ook naar aanleiding van de comments onder het artikel. Het staat er echt wel degelijk in, ik heb alleen niet met zekerheid kunnen vaststellen of het rapport echt is maar het ziet er behoorlijk echt uit.
Nou, ik had het wel degelijk nagekeken voordat ik het postte, anders had ik dat niet gedaan, ook naar aanleiding van de comments onder het artikel. Het staat er echt wel degelijk in, ik heb alleen niet met zekerheid kunnen vaststellen of het rapport echt is maar het ziet er behoorlijk echt uit.
Dat is idd scenario 3, het hele onderzoeksrapport is fake. Doe ons een lol en zoek even de relevante passage(s) op en citeer deze in een post, scheelt weer een hoop uitzoekwerk. Vervolgens kun je in pubmed op zoek naar dit rapport om te zien of het echt is en gepubliceerd. Indien dit niet het geval is, waarom zou een dergelijke studie dan in de openbaarheid worden gebracht via allerlei dubieuze alternatieve kanalen? Wie heeft dat dan gelekt en waarom? Vooralsnog ga ik nog steeds uit van een bewuste tactiek om ons te splijten en dit mogen we niet laten gebeuren!
het document beschrijft hoe de studie wordt uitgevoerd
Hier zijn de gewraakte passages :
8.3.5. Exposure During Pregnancy or Breastfeeding, and Occupational Exposure Exposure to the study intervention under study during pregnancy or breastfeeding and occupational exposure are reportable to Pfizer Safety within 24 hours of investigator awareness. 8.3.5.1. Exposure During Pregnancy An EDP occurs if: • A female participant is found to be pregnant while receiving or after discontinuing study intervention. • A male participant who is receiving or has discontinued study intervention exposes a female partner prior to or around the time of conception. • A female is found to be pregnant while being exposed or having been exposed to study intervention due to environmental exposure. Below are examples of environmental exposure during pregnancy: • A female family member or healthcare provider reports that she is pregnant after having been exposed to the study intervention by inhalation or skin contact.
• A male family member or healthcare provider who has been exposed to the study intervention by inhalation or skin contact then exposes his female partner prior to or around the time of conception. The investigator must report EDP to Pfizer Safety within 24 hours of the investigator’s awareness, irrespective of whether an SAE has occurred. The initial information submitted should include the anticipated date of delivery (see below for information related to termination of pregnancy). • If EDP occurs in a participant or a participant’s partner, the investigator must report this information to Pfizer Safety on the Vaccine SAE Report Form and an EDP Supplemental Form, regardless of whether an SAE has occurred. Details of the pregnancy will be collected after the start of study intervention and until 6 months after the last dose of study intervention. • If EDP occurs in the setting of environmental exposure, the investigator must report information to Pfizer Safety using the Vaccine SAE Report Form and EDP Supplemental Form. Since the exposure information does not pertain to the participant enrolled in the study, the information is not recorded on a CRF; however, a copy of the completed Vaccine SAE Report Form is maintained in the investigator site file. Follow-up is conducted to obtain general information on the pregnancy and its outcome for all EDP reports with an unknown outcome. The investigator will follow the pregnancy until completion (or until pregnancy termination) and notify Pfizer Safety of the outcome as a follow-up to the initial EDP Supplemental Form. In the case of a live birth, the structural integrity of the neonate can be assessed at the time of birth. In the event of a termination, the reason(s) for termination should be specified and, if clinically possible, the structural integrity of the terminated fetus should be assessed by gross visual inspection (unless preprocedure test findings are conclusive for a congenital anomaly and the findings are reported). Abnormal pregnancy outcomes are considered SAEs. If the outcome of the pregnancy meets the criteria for an SAE (ie, ectopic pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, intrauterine fetal demise, neonatal death, or congenital anomaly), the investigator should follow the procedures for reporting SAEs. Additional information about pregnancy outcomes that are reported to Pfizer Safety as SAEs follows: • Spontaneous abortion including miscarriage and missed abortion; • Neonatal deaths that occur within 1 month of birth should be reported, without regard to causality, as SAEs. In addition, infant deaths after 1 month should be reported as SAEs when the investigator assesses the infant death as related or possibly related to exposure to the study intervention.
Additional information regarding the EDP may be requested by the sponsor. Further follow-up of birth outcomes will be handled on a case-by-case basis (eg, follow-up on preterm infants to identify developmental delays). In the case of paternal exposure, the investigator will provide the participant with the Pregnant Partner Release of Information Form to deliver to his partner. The investigator must document in the source documents that the participant was given the Pregnant Partner Release of Information Form to provide to his partner. 8.3.5.2. Exposure During Breastfeeding An exposure during breastfeeding occurs if: • A female participant is found to be breastfeeding while receiving or after discontinuing study intervention. • A female is found to be breastfeeding while being exposed or having been exposed to study intervention (ie, environmental exposure). An example of environmental exposure during breastfeeding is a female family member or healthcare provider who reports that she is breastfeeding after having been exposed to the study intervention by inhalation or skin contact. The investigator must report exposure during breastfeeding to Pfizer Safety within 24 hours of the investigator’s awareness, irrespective of whether an SAE has occurred. The information must be reported using the Vaccine SAE Report Form. When exposure during breastfeeding occurs in the setting of environmental exposure, the exposure information does not pertain to the participant enrolled in the study, so the information is not recorded on a CRF. However, a copy of the completed Vaccine SAE Report Form is maintained in the investigator site file. An exposure during breastfeeding report is not created when a Pfizer drug specifically approved for use in breastfeeding women (eg, vitamins) is administered in accord with authorized use. However, if the infant experiences an SAE associated with such a drug, the SAE is reported together with the exposure during breastfeeding. 8.3.5.3. Occupational Exposure An occupational exposure occurs when a person receives unplanned direct contact with the study intervention, which may or may not lead to the occurrence of an AE. Such persons may include healthcare providers, family members, and other roles that are involved in the trial participant’s care. The investigator must report occupational exposure to Pfizer Safety within 24 hours of the investigator’s awareness, regardless of whether there is an associated SAE. The information must be reported using the Vaccine SAE Report Form. Since the information does not pertain to a participant enrolled in the study, the information is not recorded on a CRF; however, a copy of the completed Vaccine SAE Report Form is maintained in the investigator site file.
het document beschrijft hoe de studie wordt uitgevoerd
Hier zijn de gewraakte passages :
8.3.5. Exposure During Pregnancy or Breastfeeding, and Occupational Exposure Exposure to the study intervention under study during pregnancy or breastfeeding and occupational exposure are reportable to Pfizer Safety within 24 hours of investigator awareness. 8.3.5.1. Exposure During Pregnancy An EDP occurs if: • A female participant is found to be pregnant while receiving or after discontinuing study intervention. • A male participant who is receiving or has discontinued study intervention exposes a female partner prior to or around the time of conception. • A female is found to be pregnant while being exposed or having been exposed to study intervention due to environmental exposure. Below are examples of environmental exposure during pregnancy: • A female family member or healthcare provider reports that she is pregnant after having been exposed to the study intervention by inhalation or skin contact.
• A male family member or healthcare provider who has been exposed to the study intervention by inhalation or skin contact then exposes his female partner prior to or around the time of conception. The investigator must report EDP to Pfizer Safety within 24 hours of the investigator’s awareness, irrespective of whether an SAE has occurred. The initial information submitted should include the anticipated date of delivery (see below for information related to termination of pregnancy). • If EDP occurs in a participant or a participant’s partner, the investigator must report this information to Pfizer Safety on the Vaccine SAE Report Form and an EDP Supplemental Form, regardless of whether an SAE has occurred. Details of the pregnancy will be collected after the start of study intervention and until 6 months after the last dose of study intervention. • If EDP occurs in the setting of environmental exposure, the investigator must report information to Pfizer Safety using the Vaccine SAE Report Form and EDP Supplemental Form. Since the exposure information does not pertain to the participant enrolled in the study, the information is not recorded on a CRF; however, a copy of the completed Vaccine SAE Report Form is maintained in the investigator site file. Follow-up is conducted to obtain general information on the pregnancy and its outcome for all EDP reports with an unknown outcome. The investigator will follow the pregnancy until completion (or until pregnancy termination) and notify Pfizer Safety of the outcome as a follow-up to the initial EDP Supplemental Form. In the case of a live birth, the structural integrity of the neonate can be assessed at the time of birth. In the event of a termination, the reason(s) for termination should be specified and, if clinically possible, the structural integrity of the terminated fetus should be assessed by gross visual inspection (unless preprocedure test findings are conclusive for a congenital anomaly and the findings are reported). Abnormal pregnancy outcomes are considered SAEs. If the outcome of the pregnancy meets the criteria for an SAE (ie, ectopic pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, intrauterine fetal demise, neonatal death, or congenital anomaly), the investigator should follow the procedures for reporting SAEs. Additional information about pregnancy outcomes that are reported to Pfizer Safety as SAEs follows: • Spontaneous abortion including miscarriage and missed abortion; • Neonatal deaths that occur within 1 month of birth should be reported, without regard to causality, as SAEs. In addition, infant deaths after 1 month should be reported as SAEs when the investigator assesses the infant death as related or possibly related to exposure to the study intervention.
Additional information regarding the EDP may be requested by the sponsor. Further follow-up of birth outcomes will be handled on a case-by-case basis (eg, follow-up on preterm infants to identify developmental delays). In the case of paternal exposure, the investigator will provide the participant with the Pregnant Partner Release of Information Form to deliver to his partner. The investigator must document in the source documents that the participant was given the Pregnant Partner Release of Information Form to provide to his partner. 8.3.5.2. Exposure During Breastfeeding An exposure during breastfeeding occurs if: • A female participant is found to be breastfeeding while receiving or after discontinuing study intervention. • A female is found to be breastfeeding while being exposed or having been exposed to study intervention (ie, environmental exposure). An example of environmental exposure during breastfeeding is a female family member or healthcare provider who reports that she is breastfeeding after having been exposed to the study intervention by inhalation or skin contact. The investigator must report exposure during breastfeeding to Pfizer Safety within 24 hours of the investigator’s awareness, irrespective of whether an SAE has occurred. The information must be reported using the Vaccine SAE Report Form. When exposure during breastfeeding occurs in the setting of environmental exposure, the exposure information does not pertain to the participant enrolled in the study, so the information is not recorded on a CRF. However, a copy of the completed Vaccine SAE Report Form is maintained in the investigator site file. An exposure during breastfeeding report is not created when a Pfizer drug specifically approved for use in breastfeeding women (eg, vitamins) is administered in accord with authorized use. However, if the infant experiences an SAE associated with such a drug, the SAE is reported together with the exposure during breastfeeding. 8.3.5.3. Occupational Exposure An occupational exposure occurs when a person receives unplanned direct contact with the study intervention, which may or may not lead to the occurrence of an AE. Such persons may include healthcare providers, family members, and other roles that are involved in the trial participant’s care. The investigator must report occupational exposure to Pfizer Safety within 24 hours of the investigator’s awareness, regardless of whether there is an associated SAE. The information must be reported using the Vaccine SAE Report Form. Since the information does not pertain to a participant enrolled in the study, the information is not recorded on a CRF; however, a copy of the completed Vaccine SAE Report Form is maintained in the investigator site file.
OK, dus de studie is echt. Jarenlang waren we met z'n allen wantrouwend naar pharmabedrijven als Pfizer omdat ze 'studies' naar hun hand zetten, vaak door zaken te verzwijgen. Waarom zouden we deze studie dan wel serieus nemen? Omdat ze deze keer dingen niet verzwijgen maar juist expliciet benoemen? Maakt dit een bedrijf als Pfizer ineens wel betrouwbaar in hun informatievoorziening, alleen omdat sommige kanalen in 'onze' alternatieve wereld hier mee aan de loop gaan, kanalen die vaak SENSATIONALISTISCH van aard zijn gebleken in het verleden? Is dit niet gewoon een BEWUSTE strategie van Pfizer om meer verdeeldheid te brengen in de alternatieve wereld en ons alvast te laten wennen aan een parallelle samenleving waarin gevaccineerden en niet-gevaccineerden elkaar wantrouwen en vermijden en andersom?
Waarom zou Pfizer zoiets in een studie vermelden? Jarenlang verzwijgen ze allerlei ernstige neveneffecten en nu schrijven ze deze ineens in een studie? Bovendien hebben ze allang geregeld dat ze immuun zijn voor rechtsvervolging, mocht er sprake zijn van schadelijke en/of dodelijke bijwerkingen, dus waarom dit vermelden? It doesn't make sense. De enige legitieme reden die ik kan bedenken is dat dit satanische bedrijf ons alternatievelingen in dezelfde angstgreep wil lokken van bang zijn voor niet-bestaande 'beestjes' afkomstig van MEDEMENSEN die we mogelijkerwijs binnen nu en 2 jaar toch al moeten gaan missen, gezien de levensverwachting van mensen die geinjecteerd zijn met dit levensgevaarlijke, experimentele 'vaccin'. Laten we alsjeblieft nog genieten van de tijd die we met deze goede, maar naieve mensen kunnen doorbrengen!
Mijn eigen broer laat weten in augustus naar Engeland op vakantie te willen, omdat dan 'het hele gezin is gevaccineerd'. Ik kan hem met geen mogelijkheid op andere gedachten brengen, een gevoel dat velen van jullie zullen herkennen. Moet ik hem dan de komende 2 jaar gaan mijden als de pest? Hebben deze satanisten niet al genoeg sociale en maatschappelijke schade aangericht? Gaan we nu ook 'melaatsenkolonies' creeren binnen onze eigen gelederen? Jezus begaf zich wel onder hen, dus waarom zouden wij zo laf en ongevoelig zijn? Maak hierin je eigen keuzes maar ik laat me hierdoor totaal niet afschrikken, integendeel. Het doet denken aan de AIDS-hysterie van begin jaren '80. Contact met gevaccineerden zal nagenoeg onmogelijk worden dus ik ga me hier ook niet druk over maken, dat laat ik over aan hysterische vrouwen op Facebook.
WEHL - Verpleeghuis De Heikant in Wehl is getroffen door een uitbraak van corona. Van de 29 bewoners zijn 12 besmet geraakt, terwijl het merendeel van de bewoners gevaccineerd is. Sensire laat weten dat de meeste besmette bewoners milde klachten hebben.
Adverse effects en Serious adverse effects hoeven maar een halfjaar gemonitord te worden. Zo komen we niet achter de langetermijneffecten.
SAEs will be collected from the time the participant/parent(s)/legal guardian provides informed consent to approximately 6 months after the last dose of study intervention (Visit 8 for Phase 1 participants, and Visit 4 for Phase 2/3 participants).
Investigators are not obligated to actively seek AEs or SAEs after the participant has concluded study participation (blz 65-66 https://blazingpress.com/wp-content...Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020_Pfizer_BioNTech.pdf)
Idd. Al die vaccins zijn nog steeds een proef. Waar zijn deze studies op gebaseerd? Op al die mensen die gevaccineerd zijn. Is daar de conclusie uit getrokken? Ik geloof helemaal niet in de echtheid van deze studie. De bevolking zal dit misschien wel snel geloven en ernaar handelen in het voordeel van wat ze willen. Afstand.
En dat allemaal in een periode van de trial die tot 2023 duurt.
Ik vind deze keer wel dat Vrijland een lint heeft. Wie weet is het juist een voordeel dat deze studie naar buiten komt ongeacht bij wie het vandaan komt. Het geeft stof tot nadenken bij mensen die twijfelen over die vaccinatie. Dit bericht kan er wellicht aan bijdragen het niet te nemen. Trouwens, over de bijwerkingen:
A: Een miskraam krijgen,
B: spontaan aborteren,
C. een baby vergiftigen via haar moedermelk,
D: baby’s krijgen met cognitieve problemen (geheugen- en concentratieproblemen).
Dit is met de griepprik ook zo en word voor gewaarschuwd. Lijkt wel overgenomen.
stel dat Pfizer dit niet naar buiten heeft gebracht, dan horen we vanzelf dat het nep is als het goed is. Degene die het wel naar buiten brengt wil misschien wel mensen behoeden voor dat vaccin. In dat laatste geval zal het natuurlijk verworpen worden door de media.
Die EU hat die Mammutaufgabe übernommen, die Voraussetzungen für einen europäischen Impfpass zu schaffen. Gelingt das zum Stichtag 1. Juni, ist das eine Meisterleistung. Wie weit ist Brüssel, und was muss noch passieren? Die wichtigsten Fakten im WELT-Check.
clinicaltrials.gov
www.gelderlander.nl
