FDA Limits Use of J&J Vaccine Over Blood Clotting Disorder, But Experts Say Pfizer, Moderna Shots Pose Similar Risk

In this May 6, 2022 article for The Defender, Julie Comber reports on the recent statement released by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) severely limiting the use of Johnson & Johnson (J&J) citing “rare and potentially life-threatening” blood clots.

In the updated Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for J&J, people who can still get the Janssen shot include:

  • Those who had a severe allergic reaction to the Pfizer/BioNTech or Moderna mRNA vaccine.
  • Those with personal concerns about the mRNA vaccines would remain unvaccinated unless they can choose the Janssen vaccine.
  • Those with limited access to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

Comber, however, goes on to say that several experts are questioning the FDA’s decision saying that only 7.7% of fully vaccinated individuals have received the J&J shot. Dr. Pierre Kory, founder and president of Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, said, “My only hypothesis is this action is some attempt for the FDA to be able to claim that they took at least some action to protect the safety of the public, akin to ‘virtue signaling”.

Comber adds that there is mounting evidence showing that the Pfizer and Moderna shots were causing similar adverse reactions.

Editor’s Note: Why would the FDA not make a similar review of the Pfizer and Moderna shots when recipients of these shots are also reporting the same side effects? [Read CDC Endorses Pfizer, Moderna Vaccines Over J&J, Citing Blood Clot Risk — But Data Show All Three Carry Similar Risk, AAPS: Blood clots happen with all COVID vaccines, “Vaccines” are Premeditated Murder. MSM Snubs Massive Proof, Pfizer’s Assassin Vaccine, Covid Vaccines are Bioweapons for Mass Genocide, ew York Times: Some recipients of experimental COVID vaccines developing rare autoimmune disease after jab].

If the J&J vaccine was proven to be life-threatening, why would the FDA still consider giving it to people? Why is the FDA only “limiting” the use of the shot when they have already proven that it is dangerous?

Read Original Article

Read Online

Click the button below if you wish to read the article on the website where it was originally published.

Read Offline

Click the button below if you wish to read the article offline.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *