Et tu Moderna? You are as criminal as Pfizer? You want to push your harmful vaccine on kids like Bourla's Pfizer when children have near '0' risk, the vaccine confers no benefit, & are even harmful?

Consider kids already immune! the vaccine is causing 'VACCINE HESITANCY'; The Lancet estimated the infection fatality rate of children (due to COVID) under 18 at between 0.0023% and 0.0085%

Moderna pushing death to kids (6 months up to 6 years and includes toddlers and infants) despite very questionable trial results in kids up to 6 years old. Moderna plans to seek EUA from the FDA, while the study shows there is no basis to get that EUA.

See study calculating risk in children: Variation in the COVID-19 infection–fatality ratio by age, time, and geography during the pre-vaccine era: a systematic analysis

What is the point? Well, the trial results were weak, the reported methods like for all the other COVID trials were garbage and sub-optimal, and there is no need. Children have near ‘0’ statistical risk and DO NOT need this vaccine, PERIOD! If children had severe underlying illnesses or were morbidly obese, then thats another discussion and still I WILL advise, IMO, against these harmful, safety untested vaccines.

For example, it was reported that the vaccine yielded similar immunological responses as those observed in adults aged 18 to 25 who received two doses of Moderna’s adult Covid vaccine. Yet this is junk methods for 2 reasons: 1) immune response e.g. antibodies, is not a proper or useful measure of immunity 2) comparing infant data to adult data is misleading and sub-optimal and wrong.

“Given the need for a vaccine against COVID-19 in infants and young children we are working with the U.S. FDA and regulators globally to submit these data as soon as possible,” Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel said in a statement. This is a huge bunch of utter garbage and duplicity. There is no need for such a vaccine in infants and young children given COVID’s very low risk and the potency of the INNATE immune system of children (IL-17 A, interferon-gamma immune molecules that are in far greater numbers in children than adults). Bancel lied like how Boural lies.

“There were no severe cases, hospitalizations, or deaths in the studies, so the company could not estimate how protective the vaccine was in young children against those outcomes.” This again is BS garbage research and reporting and the need is for patient-important outcomes and not the non-informative outcomes used in these bogus trials. The risk of death is 0 and thus how do you power a study when the baseline risk is near 0? Unless you vaccinate everyone. How do you show a lower risk than zero? You cannot. See the fraud as to why they study ‘antibody’ levels in children compared to adults?

Are we to trust Pfizer and Moderna with this study when then lied, defrauded us with their 95% relative risk reduction trial reports in the initial studies? The 95% relative risk reduction (RRR) was more like 0.7% absolute risk reduction. The lied to us all and should be investigated. They removed 3400 participants and did not use these in the analysis. When we crudely re-establish the 3400 in the 2 trial arms, the 95% RRR drop to 19%. A recent Pfizer study in children showed that the vaccine essentially fails (Pfizer Covid vaccine is less effective in kids 5 to 11, study finds).

Study is not peer-reviewed yet.

The key issue is that we must consider our children already immune, already vaccinated, given the powerful biological-molecular reasoning and evidence I present below:

1.) The virus uses the ACE 2 receptor to gain entry to the host cell, and the ACE 2 receptor has limited (less) expression and presence in the nasal epithelium in young children (potentially in upper respiratory airways); this partly explains why children are less likely to be infected in the first place, or spread it to other children or adults, or even get severely ill; the biological molecular apparatus is simply not there in the nasopharynx of children as reported eloquently by Patel and Bunyavanich. By bypassing this natural protection (limited nasal ACE 2 receptors in young children) and entering the shoulder deltoid, this could release vaccine, its mRNA and LNP content (e.g. PEG), and generated spike into the circulation that could then damage the endothelial lining of the blood vessels (vasculature) and cause severe allergic reactions (e.g. here, here, here, here, here).

2) Recent research (August 2021) by Loske deepens our understanding of this natural type biological/molecular protection even further by showing that pre-activated (primed) antiviral innate immunity in the upper airways of children work to control early SARS-CoV-2 infection…resulting in a stronger early innate antiviral response to SARS-CoV-2 infection than in adults.”

3) When one is vaccinated or gets infected naturally, this drives the formation, tissue distribution, and clonal evolution of B cells which is key to encoding humoral immune memory. There is recent research evidence by Yang published in Science (May 2021) that blood examined from children retrieved prior to Covid-19 pandemic have memory B cells that can bind to SARS-CoV-2, suggestive of the potent role of early childhood exposure to common cold coronaviruses (coronaviruses). This is supported by Mateus et al. who reported on T cell memory to prior coronaviruses that cause the common cold (cross-reactivity/cross-protection). 

4) Weisberg and Farber et al. suggest (and building on research work by Kumar and Faber) that the reason children can more easily neutralize the virus is that their T cells are relatively naïve. They argue that since children’s T cells are mostly untrained, they can thus immunologically respond more rapidly and nimbly to novel viruses.

5) Risk: There is an emerging discussion that with approximately 570 Covid injection deaths registered in VAERS in children, and the CDC reporting approximately 350 deaths in children since the inception of the emergency (Feb/March 2020), then the vaccine is killing more children than the virus/disease itself (Steve Kirsh, personal communication, September 2nd 2021).

6) A Yale University report (Yale and Albert Einstein College of Medicine report Sept. 18, 2020 in the journal Science Translational Medicine) indicates that children and adults display very diverse and different immune system responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection which helps understanding why they have far less illness or mortality from COVID. “Since the earliest days of the COVID-19 outbreak, scientists have observed that children infected with the virus tend to fare much better than adults…researchers reported that levels of two immune system molecules — interleukin 17A (IL-17A), which helps mobilize immune system response during early infection, and interferon gamma (INF-g), which combats viral replication — were strongly linked to the age of the patients. The younger the patient, the higher the levels of IL-17A and INF-g, the analysis showed…these two molecules are part of the innate immune system, a more primitive, non-specific type of response activated early after infection.”

7) Dowell et al. (2022) recently published and commented on antibody and cellular immunity in children (aged 3-11 years) and adults. Their findings confirm a biological basis for why SARS-CoV-2 infection is generally mild or asymptomatic in children. They reported that antibody responses against spike protein were elevated in children and seroconversion “boosted responses against seasonal Beta-coronaviruses through cross-recognition of the S2 domain. Neutralization of viral variants was comparable between children and adults. Spike-specific T cell responses were more than twice as high in children and were also detected in many seronegative children, indicating pre-existing cross-reactive responses to seasonal coronaviruses.” Very key in the findings were that children maintained and preserved “antibody and cellular responses 6 months after infection, whereas relative waning occurred in adults. Spike-specific responses were also broadly stable beyond 12 months. Therefore, children generate robust, cross-reactive and sustained immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 with focused specificity for the spike protein.”

What can be concluded? Pulling these emerging research findings together strengthens the case that children are not candidates for the Covid vaccines and are to be considered already “fully and completely Covid-vaccinated.” Furthermore, as lucidly outlined by Whelan, it is potentially disastrous to children if we move forward with vaccines without proper study of the possible harms to them. Vaccine developers failed to conduct the proper safety studies and for the duration that would unravel any harms.