Shocking Video: US Advisory Committee Approves Vaccine After Admitting It Has No Safety Testing
Despite that the vaccine compensation scheme has paid out close to $3.8 billion dollars, you might not be aware that the process for suing is completely different to normal pharmaceutical drugs. In fact the way that vaccine court is carried out is quite shocking. It can often take up to ten years to receive compensation, and it’s said to be a very stressful process to go through. There are hundreds of thousands of families who say they have received not a penny for their child’s vaccine injury, despite going through vaccine court. Most cases are turned down.
Vaccines receive far less scrutiny on the way their studies are carried out. Normal drugs go through much more rigorous testing and it’s harder to get them approved by the FDA in comparison. However, we must not ignore that it’s been discovered in a Yale study that 1 in 3 drugs have safety issues even after the FDA approved them.
We must therefore know what we are getting into before we agree to have a vaccine. The vaccine inserts are absolutely vital to read, and videos like the one below must be seen.
The public has to see how easily it is for vaccines to be added to the schedule and that the people in charge admit the safety data is really only done when the vaccine has been put out into the population.
I strongly urge you to view this video to see with your own eyes how things are discussed, the shocking replies that were given, and how quickly it took for everyone to vote yes to put this vaccine through.
The questions in this clip are basically as follows:
Q: Is it dangerous to use this new vaccine with other vaccines?
A: We have no data on that. Once it’s approved, it will be given along with other vaccines but we have no clue whether that is safe or not.
Q: Do we at least have any data from other countries that have already used this vaccine in combination with other vaccines?
After hearing this, 100% of the committee members immediately all voted yes.
Only after they voted, one man voiced his concern over heart attack deaths in the trials and advised that the ‘post marketing data should be watched carefully’.
Does this not sound like the public is therefore being tested on?