What started as a conspiracy theory in 2021 was elaborated in March 2023 in a Danish study with Danish data on 7 million jabs. It turned out that half of the mortality reports could be traced back to no more than 5% of the batches. German scientists have delved further into the numbers. Interestingly, a significant portion of the batches of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine used in the European Union resemble placebos — and Germany's regulatory body, the Paul Ehrlich Institut, has not subjected these batches to quality control testing. Very curious.
The scientists, Dr. Gerald Dyker, Professor of Organic Chemistry at Ruhr University Bochum, and Dr. Jörg Matysik, Professor of Analytical Chemistry at the University of Leipzig, are part of a group of five German-speaking scientists who have publicly raised questions about the quality and safety of the BioNTech vaccine (as the Pfizer vaccine is known in Germany) over the past year and a half.
They recently appeared in german journalist Milena Preradovic's online program Punkt.Preradovic to discuss batch variability. The 48-minute video is at the bottom of this article.
Their starting point was the recent Danish study that showed a huge variation in the side effects of different batches of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, or BNT162b2 as the scientific codename goes. The figure below from the Danish study illustrates this variation.
The graph shows that the batches can be grouped into harmfulness. Each ball represents a batch (see it as a barrel for the idea). The further to the right the sphere is, the more are made with it. The higher the bulb, the more side effects have been reported.
- The yellow batches have produced virtually no reports of side effects. There are batches of 200,000 jabs where no report has been found. This is what a placebo could look like.
- The rightmost green batch stands for approx. 800,000 injections with 2,000 notifications, which means 1 report per 400 injections. All spheres near the green line have approximately this ratio.
- The blue spheres are at a ratio of about 1 report to every 10 injections. We see that no more than 80,000 jabs were ever made of these batches.
How that is possible is unclear. One possible explanation is that these particularly bad batches have been quietly withdrawn from the market by public health authorities, keeping the public unaware of the willingness to vaccinate despite this reported harmfulness.
A second explanation could be that they tried to optimize the production process and that this did not always turn out well after they were put on the market. The most harmful batches have been quietly withdrawn from the market.
Other critics think that the explanation lies in a calculation error: that worldwide reports here are projected on only Danish deliveries so that they would be nonsense numbers. However, the Danish study is already a year and a half old. In the meantime, different scientists have come to similar findings independently of each other, which would mean that they would all make the same silly basic mistake. That is very unlikely. Or am I overestimating the state of science again?
According to Dyker's calculation, the blue batches represent less than 5% of the total number of doses in the Danish study. Nevertheless, they are associated with nearly 50% of the 579 deaths in the sample.
Similarly, scientists are guessing while it is Pfizer that should explain the discrepancies.
The German regulatory agency, the Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI), is basically responsible for the quality control and "release" of all Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines in the EU, according to these scientists.
Dyker and Matysik found that the PEI tested and approved all the very bad 'blue' batches, the vast majority of the not so bad 'green' batches, but almost none of the harmless 'yellow' batches – as if the PEI knew in advance that these batches would not cause any problems. (see the "yes/nein" column)
'Which batches from the Danish study has the Paul Ehrlich Institute tested and approved for release?'
The caption below that table reads "The PEI generally did not consider testing the harmless 'yellow batches' necessary."
And what exactly are they testing for, the scientists are beginning to wonder.
Karl Lauterbach recently proudly tweeted that the PEI tests both effectiveness (Wirksamkeit) and safety (Sicherheit). You would think: a mistake by the sokmed official on duty. But "Wirksamkeit" is also on a poster version of the test protocol, as it hangs in the PEIU lab.
De wetenschappers begrijpen daar helemaal niets van. Hoe kun je nu zonder clinical trial de werkzaamheid testen? (Om over veiligheid maar te zwijgen – maar dat staat niet op de poster)
"In Germany, the Paul Ehrlich Institute is responsible for the authorisation of vaccines, i.e. the assessment of quality, safety and efficacy and pharmacovigilance (drug safety) after authorisation."Website Paul Ehrlich Institut
There are now several questions before the PEI. What does the testing process actually look like? Are the methods up-to-date? Does the PEI carry out random checks in the field or does the pharmaceutical company choose which test samples are sent to the PEI? What standards have been set? Why are the tolerance values so enormous when the quantities are so microscopically close? This also applies to additives that increase the risk of cancer. Requirements and features on websites and package leaflets are deleted and/or added; Where are the dates that justify these changes?
We'll see if anything remarkable comes out of that. They were able to force a response after a letter sent in the Berliner Zeitung. On other letters they were sent bad and outright false information, with the final announcement that no more information would be provided. The institutes there are still regarded as institutions that are there for the citizen. We in the Netherlands are already used to the fact that the State is going to lie down for everything.
Either way, it seems clear that not all vaccinations have the same quality.
From a previous post from April 2023:
The existence of 'bad batches' is certainly not imaginary. Leaked EMA documents talk about impure mRNA, damaged mRNA, too little or too much mRNA. RNA instability is one of the biggest hurdles for researchers developing nucleic acid-based vaccines. Specific regulatory guidance for mRNA-based vaccines has yet to be developed, according to an article inthe BMJ. There is therefore a lack of official quality requirements for mRNA vaccines: they simply do not yet exist. So there is no standard for how much they can differ from each other. Despite this, governments have enforced distribution with amounts reminiscent of bribery and conditions that opened the door to irresponsible production and distribution methods with inadequate output control.
Reason enough to take a closer look at the Dutch batch numbers in relation to the individual mortality rates. Oddly enough, those were not public, which led to a WOO request. The Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport replied that this information is not available, while they have done so in other countries and WOB documents show that this is indeed also registered in the Netherlands.
Postscript July 3, 2023: See a summary of the main criticisms in the Next Post
(update July 6: Meanwhile, John Campbell has also picked up the Danish research.)