Pfizer changed formulation for children five to 11, three days after US Food and Drug Authorization (FDA) granted the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). The Expose reported this on November 1, 2021.
According to the report, a document prepared for the FDA Advisory Committee meeting, in which members voted seventeen to zero in favor of giving emergency use authorization for the administration of the Pfizer Covid-19 injection to children aged 5 to 11, confirms that Pfizer modified the formulation of their injection for children to include an ingredient that reduces the acidity of the blood and is used to stabilize people who have suffered a heart attack. [This information on new formulation is buried on page 14 of the FDA documenthttps://www.fda.gov/media/153447/download. It says —the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 Vaccines for use in children five-11 of age uses tromethamine (Tris) buffer instead of the phosphate-buffered saline (PBS)— See the image below for that particular part.]
The Expose also stated that if Pfizer believes that their vaccine was safe, why have they changed the formulation? The authorization for the EUA being requested is not for the formulation that had been tested in the clinical trials, what has been requested is “a modified formulation of the Pfizer‑BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine.”
Editor’s Note: How is this practice legal? We must remember that the vaccines are still in an experimental stage. Why is the FDA allowing modified, untested versions of the vaccine to be released to children when it has no record of safety? If the original vaccines were experimental and dangerous, these new formulations are even more so, because the FDA has not done its due diligence. [See pages 6 to 7 of https://www.fda.gov/media/150386/download, to see how they have determined the ‘safety’ of this new formulation].
The FDA should never have authorized the rollout of the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine to children as young as 5 to 11 years old [see FDA Panel Recommends Pfizer’s Low-dose Covid Jab for Young Children Ages Five to 11 Without the Safety Data]. However hard we try to understand why the FDA would allow this kind of practice, we simply cannot stand the negligence from a regulatory agency, not when it is children’s lives that are at stake. [Are we still surprised by Pfizer and the FDA’s actions? They have been caught manipulating data several times, see Pfizer Manipulated Study Data to Get Emergency Use Authorization 12-to-15 Year-olds. Also read FDA Committee Members Reviewing Pfizer Vaccine For Children Have Connections with Pfizer, to understand how Big Pharma and the FDA colluded to profit and push their own agenda.]
Pfizer reasoned that they changed the formulation to preserve the vaccine, therefore FDA should revoke the EAU and demand another trial of the new formulation from Pfizer to ensure its safety, rather than injecting the doses to children which, at their original formulations, already has known side effects [see Singapore acknowledges dangers of vaccinating children and teenagers; Journal article confirms younger males at higher risk of myocarditis following COVID vaccination, VAERS cases, “just the tip of the iceberg”; 16-Year-Old Girl Develops Vulvar Ulcers After Pfizer Vaccine; Journal censors article showing high incidence of heart inflammation following Pfizer vaccination; Dr. Charles Hoffe: mRNA vaccines will kill most people through heart failure, 62% already have microscopic blood clots; AstraZeneca and Pfizer jabs associated with serious new side effects; Guillian-Barre Syndrome after COVID vaccination more common than previously reported; Peer-reviewed research shows mRNA vaccines can cause neurodegenerative diseases]. FDA’s negligence puts millions of young children at grave risk.
However, it is alarming to note that Pfizer has proven what they are doing is an experiment. This time, they are after younger children aged five to 11. Why would you allow your very young kids to be treated like lab rats?
Read Original Article
Click the button below if you wish to read the article on the website where it was originally published.
Click the button below if you wish to read the article offline.