TEN THOUGHTS TO PONDER REGARDING THE COVID-19

EXPERIMENTAL VACCINES
Christian Elliot, modified by AFLDS staff

#1: VACCINE MAKERS ARE IMMUNE FROM LIABILITY

Vaccine manufacturers are the only industry in the world that bear no liability for injuries
or deaths resulting from their products. First established in 1986 with the National
Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, and reinforced by the PREP Act, vaccine makers cannot be
sued, even if they are shown to be negligent.

The covid-vaccine makers are allowed to create a one-size-fits-all product, with no or

limited testing on sub-populations (i.e. people with specific health conditions), and yet they

1 of 6
are unwilling to accept any responsibility for any adverse events or deaths their products
cause.

If a company is not willing to stand behind their product as safe, especially one they rushed
to market, buyer beware.

#2: THE CHECKERED PAST OF THE VACCINE COMPANIES

The four major companies who are making these covid vaccines are/have either:

1. Never brought a vaccine to market (Moderna and Johnson & Johnson).

2. Are serial felons (Pfizer, and Astra Zeneca).
3. Are both (Johnson & Johnson).

Moderna had been trying to "Modernize our RNA" (thus the company name)--for years, but
had never successfully brought ANY product to market – meaning they never made any
money – but in 2020 received a major cash infusion from the taxpayers to keep trying.

In fact, all major vaccine makers have paid out tens of billions of dollars in damages for
nonvaccine products they sold despite knowing those products would cause injuries –see
Vioxx, Bextra, Celebrex, Thalidomide, and opioids as a few examples. If these drug
companies made the cost/benefit choice to sell harmful products even when they could be
sued, it is illogical to believe their products would be safer when they cannot be sued.

• Johnson & Johnson has lost major lawsuits in 1995, 1996, 2001, 2010, 2011,
2016, 2019 (For what it's worth, J&J's vaccine also contains tissues from
aborted fetal cells, perhaps a topic for another discussion)
• Pfizer has the distinction of the biggest criminal payout in history. They have
lost so many lawsuits it's hard to count. Maybe that's why they are
demanding that countries where they don't have liability protection put up
collateral to cover vaccine-injury lawsuits.
• Astra Zeneca has similarly lost so many lawsuits it's hard to count. Here's
one. Here's another...you get the point. And in case you missed it, the
company had their covid vaccine suspended in at least 18 countries over
concerns of blood clots, and they completely botched their meeting with the
FDA with numbers from their study that didn't match.
• Oh, and apparently J&J (whose vaccine is approved for "Emergency Use" in
the US) and AstraZeneca (whose vaccine is not approved for "Emergency
Use" in the US), had a little mix up in their ingredients...in 15 million doses.
Oops.

Given the liability exemption and the checkered past of these companies, it is illogical to
assume vaccines are safe for all people. If an automobile manufacturer had a reputation for

2 of 6
sometimes having an engine malfunction, then manufactured a new car where the
government said the car is great but if it’s not, you cannot not sue them … no thank you.

#3: THE SCIENTIFIC FAILURE OF PRIOR CORONAVIRUS VACCINES

SARS-CoV-2 is the seventh coronavirus and there has never been a successful and safe
vaccine against any of the other six. For the past 20 years, they all ended in failure because
the animals in the clinical trials got very sick and many died. The vaccine for its namesake
cousin, which is ~80% identical, SARS-CoV-1 was an abysmal failure in 2005.

You can read a summary of this history/science or the individual scientific studies:

• In 2004 attempted vaccine produced hepatitis in ferrets

• In 2005 mice and civets we're became sick and more susceptible to
coronaviruses after being vaccinated
• In 2012 the ferrets became sick and died. And in this study mice and ferrets
developed lung disease.
• In 2016 this study also produce lung disease in mice.

The typical pattern is that the children and the animals produced a strong antibody
response after being vaccinated, and the scientists would give the green light. But when the
vaccinated children and animals were later exposed to the wild version of the virus, instead
of being protected, paradoxically they got much sicker or died due to massive cytokine
storm. This Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE) occurs when the vaccinated person’s
immune system over-reacts to the virus instead of protecting the person from the virus.

There are many real-world examples of this, including the very recent 2016 criminal
rollout of Dengvaxia vaccine in the Philippines, for which the head public health doctor was
indicted for “reckless imprudence resulting [in] homicide.” Sanofi Pharmaceutical spent 20 years
and nearly $2 billion to develop the Dengue vaccine and they decided to give it to hundreds of
thousands of children. Later when the children were exposed in the wild, thousands became
severely ill and 600 children died.

In the 1960's, scientists attempted to make an RSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) vaccine
for infants. In the end in turned out that the vaccinated infants got much sicker than the
unvaccinated infants when exposed to the natural virus. 80% of the vaccinated infants
required hospitalization and two died, which is totally unacceptable for a virus which
causes trivial symptoms in healthy infants.

Because this same dangerous Antibody Dependent Enhancement effect has been seen with
coronavirus vaccines, MERS (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome) virus vaccine, RSV vaccine,
Dengue Fever vaccine, the current concern is that the vaccine makers have not presented
any data to suggest their rushed vaccines have overcome the problem of ADE. I would not
assume this deadly problem has been overcome.

3 of 6
#4: NO LONG-TERM SAFETY TESTING

Obviously, with products that have only been on the market a few months, we have no
long-term safety data. In other words, we have no idea what this product will do in the
body months or years from now.

Given the risks that all pharmaceutical products have and the specific risks of the unknown,
and against the backdrop of an incredibly nonlethal virus, would it not be prudent to
fill the "data gaps" before we try to give this to every man, woman, and child on the planet?

To have that data, they need to test it on people, which requires informed consent.

#5: NO INFORMED CONSENT HAPPENING IN THE REAL WORLD

The most cursory discussion with people who have taken the vaccine reveals that almost
none are aware that these are still in clinical trials, meaning anyone who gets the shot is
now part of the experiment. Those who do not take it are part of the control group. Time
will tell how this experiment works out. As long as persons are receiving informed consent
and the choice is wholly voluntary that is legal. However, that is not what is happening.

#6: UNDER-REPORTING OF ADVERSE REACTIONS AND DEATH

Even prior to COVID, it was well known that less than 1% of all adverse reactions to
vaccines are actually submitted to the National Vaccine Adverse Events Reports System
VAERS (page 6).

Even with the massive underreporting problem, VEARS still reports over 2,300 deaths from
the current covid vaccines in less than four months, as well as over 70,000 adverse
reactions and 620 cases of Bell's Palsy. (For comparison consider that there have been less
than 20 deaths temporally related to the influenza vaccine.) 1% reporting equates to
somewhere around 110,00 to 220,000 deaths from the vaccines to date, and an incalculably
high number of adverse reactions.

#7: THE VACCINES WERE NOT APPROVED BASED UPON REDUCING VIRAL
TRANSMISSION AMONGST PEOPLE, NOR BY REDUCING HOSPITALIZATION OR DEATH

The reason Americans are being given conflicting messages about needing to practice
social distancing and wear masks AFTER we get a vaccine is because these products were
never approved as medications that stop transmission, hospitalization or death. The
vaccines were approved based solely lowering your symptoms. This is why many scientists

4 of 6
put the word “vaccines” in quotes - because it’s not the common understanding of what the
word vaccine means.

#8: THE OVERALL DEATH RATE FROM COVID IS NEGLIGIBLE

According the CDC, covid has a 99.74% survival rate even with no treatment at all. It is
illogical to take a risk on a product, that doesn't stop infection or transmission, to help you
overcome a virus that has a .26% chance of killing you. And it is unethical to even consider
giving the vaccines to people with a 0.003% chance of killing them - your kids.

#9: THE INFLATED COVID DEATH NUMBERS

Never before in the history of death certificates has our own government changed how
deaths are reported. Death certificates are legal documents that must be filled out precisely but
this year we changed the rules. Persons who die with covid in their body are classified as
Covid deaths, as opposed to the real cause of death which is the multiple (average of 2.6)
serious co-morbidities that led the person to be at the brink.

It is well known that a person with the common cold will not typically die but that a frail
elderly person with diabetes, on dialysis and a failing heart or lungs, easily can die from
complications from a cold. No physician would ever have written “common cold” on such a
person’s death certificate. Because everyone knows it wasn’t the cold but the person’s
inability to fend off the cold.

Until covid, coronaviruses (common colds) were never listed as the primary cause of death
when someone died of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, auto-immune conditions, or any
other major co-morbidity. The disease was listed as the cause of death, and a confounding
factor like flu or pneumonia was listed on a separate line.

Bizarrely, both the W.H.O. and the C.D.C. changed their guidelines such that those who are
suspected or probable (but were never even confirmed!) of having died of covid, are also
included in the death numbers. If we are going to do that then should we not go back and
change the numbers of all past cold and flu seasons so we can compare apples to apples
when it comes to death rates?

According to the CDCs own numbers (scroll down to the section "Comorbidities and other
conditions") only 6% of the deaths being attributed to covid are instances where covid
seems to be the only issue at hand. If you reduce the death numbers you see on the news by
94%, you have what is likely the real numbers of deaths from just covid.

5 of 6
#10: CENSORSHIP...AND THE COMPLETE ABSENCE OF SCIENTIFIC DEBATE

Did you enjoy all those robust debates put on by public health officials and broadcast
everywhere? Wasn't it great hearing from the best minds in medicine, virology,
epidemiology, economics, and vaccinology from all over the world as they vigorously
debated things like:

• Lockdowns
• Mask wearing
• Social-distancing
• Vaccine efficacy and safety trials
• How to screen for susceptibility to vaccine injury
• Therapeutics, (i.e. non-vaccine treatment options)

Wasn't it great seeing public health officials intelligently defend their conclusions on the
above? Wasn't it great seeing the FDA publicly question vaccine makers in prime time as
they answered tough questions about products of which they have no liability?

You never saw those debates because they never happened.

What happened instead was heavy-handed censorship. With so much at stake, why are we
fed only one narrative...shouldn't many perspectives be heard and professionally debated?
Why did anyone who disagrees with the WHO, or the CDC get censored so heavily?

And if the world’s leading vaccinologist, who has spent his entire professional career
overseeing the development of vaccines, is shouting from the rooftops that we have a major
problem, I really want to hear it.

BONUS QUESTION: ISN’T IT WEIRD TO VACCINATE PEOPLE WHO ALREADY HAD

COVID?

Never before in medical science have scientists recommended a person get a vaccine for a
specific virus after a person has naturally recovered from the viral illness. Consider chicken
pox, measles, mumps, hepatitis B etc.: natural immunity has always been the most superior
version of immunity possible. Why is this suddenly different?

People who argue that you could contract COVID-19 again are being disingenuous, as after
hundreds of millions of COVID-19 cases worldwide, there have been a handful of persons
who have had the illness twice, none seriously. Historically there is nothing better than the
body’s own defenses and SARS-CoV-2, an ordinary coronavirus, is no exception. It’s very
odd that all that history is suddenly disregarded.

6 of 6