Report 102: Did Pfizer’s Product Pipeline Knowingly Plan for a Post-Vaccination Rise in Cancers?
Following the rollout of the COVID-19 shots, cancer diagnoses increased significantly.
Doctors are seeing the rise of
more aggressive, harder-to-treat cancers popularly referred to as ‘turbo
cancers.’ Pfizer, one of the major pharmaceutical companies
manufacturing COVID-19 gene therapy products, commonly referred to as
‘COVID vaccines,’ simultaneously introduced many new cancer drugs to its
product pipeline. Did Pfizer purposefully prepare to treat the many
cancers occurring post-COVID vaccination? That appears to be the case.
In this report, we discuss turbo cancers, which many published or under-reviewed papers have documented. Additionally, studies show the disturbing connection between the COVID-19 modified mRNA (modRNA) ‘’vaccines” and the increase of acute cancers and excess cancer mortality.
Is Pfizer Trustworthy and Ethical?
Pfizer Chairman and CEO Albert Bourla points out that “Pfizer …(relies) on facts… providing accurate information – especially about vaccines and medicines… [to] avoid deadly consequences… [and is] committed to doing everything we can to build trust in science and promote accurate science-based information…” In his closing remarks, he states that Pfizer, “…[is] one of Fortune’s ’World’s Most Admired Companies’ and one of the ’World’s Most Ethical Companies.’” [Emphasis added.] [https://www.pfizer.com/sites/default/files/investors/financial_reports/annual_reports/2023/]
Does the Evidence Support Mr. Bourla’s Statements?
In this paper, we consider:
- Why both consumers and investors question Pfizer’s execution of its business model to be the foremost cancer treatment leader.
- Whether or not consumers should be confident in Pfizer’s safety and efficacy claims related to its modRNA product platform.
- Why Pfizer stock has dropped so radically, suggesting investors’ lack of trust in Pfizer’s claims.
- Pfizer’s prior significant ethical lapses.
Pfizer’s net income dropped 93% in 2023 from 2022. [https://www.pfizer.com/sites/default/files/investors/financial_reports/annual_reports/2023/] Such a drop does not seem to align with Mr. Bourla’s statements.
Pfizer’s Record Fails to Engender Trust
Since 2000, Pfizer has paid over
$11.1 billion in fines and penalties for fraud, illegal marketing
practices, safety violations, corrupt practices, and more. [https://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/pfizer] and [https://www.drugwatch.com/manufacturers/pfizer/]
Additionally, a shocking undercover interview with Jordan Trishton Walker, M.D., who has changed his profile to Jordan Lee M.D. [Jordon Lee, M.D. | LinkedIn], Pfizer’s Director of Research and Development, Strategic Operations and modRNA Planning, explained the company’s growth strategy:
“One of the things we’re exploring is, like, why don’t we just mutate it [COVID] ourselves so we could create – preemptively develop new vaccines, right? So, we have to do that. If we’re gonna do that though there’s a risk of, like, as you could imagine – no one wants to be having a pharma company mutating f**king viruses.”
[https://www.projectveritas.com/news/pfizer-executive-mutate-covid-via-directed-evolution-for-company-to-continue] (1:05 mark) It is vital to note Pfizer intentionally refers to this mutating strategy as “directed evolution.” Walker admits that Pfizer is “exploring” creating health problems that it can then solve with products it already has in its pipeline.
This raises the need to understand the differences between gain-of-function research and directed evolution. Both are used in the modification of RNA sequences or structures but differ in how they do that and the objectives. How exactly directed evolution differs from gain-of-function may just be a distraction from the more important issue, which is that they both raise serious concerns over either intended or unintended consequences and the ethical considerations involved with the manipulation of RNA. [https://www.nature.com/articles/nrg.2015.34] The obfuscation of terms is similar to letting consumers assume that ‘mRNA’ means ‘messenger RNA,’ something that occurs in nature, instead of ’modified RNA,’ a synthetic version of messenger RNA
Turbo Cancers and the Rollout of COVID-19 Shots
mRNA clarity matters because science has demonstrated a connection between the COVID-19 modRNA “vaccines,” increasing acute cancers, and increasing excess cancer mortality. Appendix A provides a table of turbo cancer papers and case study references.
Below, we summarize information from professionals across North America, Europe, and Asia about the emergence of a new cancer epidemic.
William Makis, MD, is a
Canadian physician with expertise in radiology, oncology, and
immunology; Michelle Perro, MD, Dhom, is a pediatrician with over four
decades of experience in acute and integrative medicine; and Stefanie Seneff, PhD, is a
senior research scientist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. In the video
linked below, they discuss COVID-19 modRNA vaccine-induced turbo cancers
and more. They conclude there is an unambiguous link between the “vaccines” and turbo cancers.
[https://makismd.substack.com/p/exclusive-interview-drmichelle-perro]
Professor Angus Dalgleish, FRCP, FRCPath, FMedSci, is the Foundation Professor of Oncology at St. George’s University of London and Principal of the Institute for Cancer Vaccines and Immunotherapy. Dalgliesh noticed an unusual increase in cancers in patients who received COVID-19 boosters. In his own words, “…what brought me into this was the boosters…if a vaccine needs a booster, then it doesn’t work…the boosters suppress the T-cells…patients stable for years who suddenly came in [to see me] with a relapse…vicious…all bullied by their GPs [general practitioners] to have a booster just to be safe…a lot coming down with lymphomas, leukemias, all had the boosters…” His message is that what has been done is negligence: “I believe using the messenger modRNA technology for infectious disease is basically gross medical negligence.” [Emphasis added.]
Dr. Masanori Fukushima, Professor Emeritus at Kyoto University and Director and Chairman of the Translational Research Informatics Center (TRI) is a Japanese oncologist with over 25 years of experience engaging in the practice and dissemination of standard cancer treatment. Fukushima notes, “…what’s being called ’turbo cancer’ is a type never previously seen by doctors. By the time it’s discovered, it is already Stage 4, advanced cancer.” Dr Fukushima continues, “Moreover, the results of this analysis show, surprisingly, that specific types of cancer, in relation to the vaccine seem to be experiencing excess mortality…” He condemns the modRNA “vaccines” as “evil practices of science.” [Emphasis added.]
[https://www.aussie17.com/p/japans-most-senior-oncologist-prof]
Did Pfizer Prepare for the Increase in Post-COVID-19 Vaccination Cancers?
As turbo cancers following COVID-19 vaccination become a growing problem, is there an unethical reason Pfizer pivoted toward treating cancer?
Pfizer has strategically shifted away from its COVID-19 products and is now executing its cancer therapies plan with unwavering confidence and commitment. One only needs to take a cursory look at Pfizer’s product pipeline, which includes 57 oncology drugs as of September 11, 2024, as well as its strategy, as discussed in its quarterly financial disclosures and investor presentations, to see this.
Albert Bourla, Pfizer CEO and Chairman, stated, “2023 was also a year of oncology approvals, including new indications in prostate cancer in the U.S. and a new treatment for multiple myeloma in the U.S. and European Union. We have an industry-leading portfolio with over 25 approved innovative cancer medicines and biosimilars across more than 40 indications, and dozens of programs in clinical development.” [https://www.pfizer.com/sites/default/files/investors/financial_reports/annual_reports/2023/]
Pfizer appears to be fully prepared for the extraordinary increase in cancers.
During Pfizer’s February 29, 2024, investor event, its new Chief Oncology Officer, Chris Boshoff, Ph.D., said, “The company aims to have at least eight blockbuster cancer drugs by 2030.”
[https://s28.q4cdn.com/781576035/files/doc_downloads/2024/03/04/2024-Feb-29-PFE-N-140578018967-Transcript.pdf] “We are at an inflection point of our leadership. We expect to impact many more lives of patients with cancer over the next 5 years plus, aiming to double the number of patients treated with our innovative cancer medicines by 2030.” [Emphasis added.] – .” “…as you’ve heard today, we still aim to double the number of patients treated through our innovative oncology medicines in our portfolio by 2030.” – Suneet Varma Pfizer Inc. – Commercial President, Pfizer Oncology [Event Transcript (q4cdn.com)] Pfizer’s new plan is focused on primarily on four cancer types—breast cancer, genitourinary cancer, blood cancer, and thoracic cancer—all of which the company already has commercial products. Some of these drugs are detailed below.
Apparently, the market drivers and the rapid increase in cancers are what have provided Pfizer the validation to “hope” to double the number of patients using its drugs and increase investment accordingly.
Excess cancer mortality and the growth of cancer cases are outlined below and in the list of references.
Oddly, while Pfizer offers hope to address these treatments for cancer something strange happened. Dr. Mikael Dolsten, Chief Scientist and President of Pfizer Research and Development, announced in July 2024 that he will be leaving the company. He is leaving during the important pivot from COVID-19 products to cancer products.
A Record Number of New Cancer Drugs Are in Pfizer’s Pipeline
It seems almost as if Pfizer knew that aggressive, acute cancer would begin to explode starting in 2021.
[https://www.pfizer.com/science/drug-product-pipeline] and
[https://www.pfizer.com/sites/default/files/investors/financial_reports/annual_reports/2023/]
In the recent past, Pfizer referred to their COVID products as their “franchise.” Pfizer now lists several cancer products as “blockbusters.” Some examples include IBRANCE and TUKYSA for breast cancer treatments with a host of small molecule and antibody conjugates in the clinical stage including Atirmociclib and Vepdegestrant and “next generation” inhibitors and endocrine therapy treatments. Hematology – Oncology products include ADCETRIS, BESPONSA, and MYLOTARC as approved antibody-drug conjugates. ELREXFIO is approved as an IO Biologics bispecific antibody, and Bosulif as an approved small molecule medicine. Pfizer characterizes each of the Hematology products as “blockbusters.” As with breast cancer products, Pfizer has several conjugates, antibodies, and even a fusion protein in the clinical stage. The following graphic from Pfizer’s Oncology Innovation Day presentation on February 29, 2024, provides a road map.
Pfizer Oncology Innovation Day, February 29, 2024: [Presentation Title]
Key Potential Growth (Revenue) Drivers.
[https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/us-fda-approves-pfizers-blood-cancer-therapy-2023-08-14/] and
[https://www.drugs.com/newdrugs/pfizer-astellas-xtandi-approved-u-s-fda-earlier-prostate-cancer-setting-6147.html].
Clearly, Pfizer’s new focus is on treating cancers, not COVID-19.
What Does Excess Mortality Have to Do with These Cancers?
We have considered Pfizer’s emerging interest in cancer therapies. We have considered growing concerns in the medical community about the growth in acute, turbo cancers. Let us now consider something very disturbing, the rapid growth of excess mortality since 2020.
Scott Davidson, CEO of OneAmerica Life Insurance, reported in January 2022, that death rates among working-aged people between the ages of 18 and 64 were “up 40 percent over what they were pre-pandemic.” Davidson compared a 10 percent rise in deaths to a once-in-200-year flood.
Ed Dowd is a founding partner with Phinance Technologies, a global macro alternative investment firm. He worked on Wall Street for HSBC Securities, Donaldson Lufkin & Jenrette, and, most notably, at Blackrock as a portfolio manager where he managed a $14 billion growth equity portfolio. He tracks excess mortality and has been seeing some terrifying numbers since 2020. Dowd notes the excess mortality rates are “off the charts.” – [https://vigilantnews.com/post/ed-dowd-reveals-alarming-death-statistic-that-nobody-is-talking-about/]
“We should have seen negative excess deaths (post-COVID), but we didn’t. We saw add-ons and add-ons, and the absolute numbers are kind of stunning. For underlying causes, in 2022, the excess cancer deaths were about 18,000. For multiple-cause [MC], excess cancer deaths with another contributing factor were 29,000. So about [47,000] excess underlying and multiple-cause [cancer] deaths in 2022.” Those numbers are across all age groups. [Emphasis added.] [https://vigilantnews.com/post/ed-dowd-identifies-new-problem-in-cancer-trends/]
Table 1 – Excess MC death rates from neoplasms from 2010 to 2022 for both sexes of ages 15 to 44 in the USA
[https://vigilantnews.com/post/ed-dowd-identifies-new-problem-in-cancer-trends/]
International Classification of Diseases (ICD), Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (CM) is a standardized system used to code diseases and medical conditions (morbidity) data. Healthcare providers use ICD-10-CM codes when diagnosing patients. ICD codes C00-D48 represent malignant neoplasms (cancers) and neoplasms of uncertain behavior.
In 2021, among other excess deaths, COVID-19 deaths flipped to a spike in cancer deaths which can be observed.
Dowd commented on the shift:
“When
investigating different age groups, we observe that excess underlying
cause (UC) death rates from neoplasms started in 2021 and in 2022 it
rose substantially for most age cohorts from age 15 and above (Table 1)…Our
analysis shows that the excess death rates from malignant neoplasms
were zero in 2020, then increased 13% in 2021, and about 43% in 2022.”
[Emphasis added.] Multiple Causes of Death (MC) includes all causes
listed on the death certificate. A death certificate has one underlying
cause and possibly many additional multiple causes.
[Humanity Projects – Projects (phinancetechnologies.com)]
What happened in 2021?
Table 1, above, stunningly shows OVER 16 standard deviations from the norm for excess cancer deaths in the age group 15-44. Note the extraordinary rate of change began in 2020, the year when the novel modRNA “vaccines” received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) and were then rolled out to the public.
Project Humanity
U.S. Death_Trends_for_Neoplasms_ICD_codes_C00-D48_Ages_15-44
[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378869803_US] U.S
U.S. Excess Mortality Methodology
[us_excess_mortality_methodology_paper_preprint.pdf]
Understanding what a high
standard deviation (SD) means is critical to understanding the enormity
of the cancer healthcare catastrophe now happening. Simply put, SD shows
the spread of a set of numbers from its average value – the sum of a
set divided by the count of sets. SD illustrates how much individual
data points deviate from the average value. Standard deviation is commonly used to determine what constitutes a rare event and what does not.
Rare events — like a car wreck, snake bite, or pitching in game seven
of the World Series — are examples of events that may be measured in
this way. A high standard deviation indicates the event has a rare
chance of occurring.
Returning to the standard deviations reflected in Table 1 above, three standard deviations represent about 99.7% of all expected event outcomes. Sixteen standard deviations are more than a rare event; it is a medical catastrophe. Ed Dowd and the Phinance Technologies group are not alone in this conclusion.
Even the American Cancer Society Sounded the Alarm Over the Increase in Cancers
For the first time, the American Cancer Society (ACS) projects over two million new cancer cases in the United States in 2024. ACS also noted that cancer patients are “getting younger.” The society did not, however, speculate on whether COVID-19 vaccines may be a cause.
That may be because ACS promotes COVID-19 vaccination for cancer patients.
The rapid acceleration of cancers is so significant that Japan recently declared a “national emergency over the explosion of cancer cases across the country caused by the modRNA vaccines.” Ovarian cancer, leukemia, prostate cancer, pancreatic cancer, and breast cancer are among the acute turbo cancers cited. [https://www.planet-today.com/2024/04/japan-declares-emergency-over-explosion.html]
What About “The Science”?
Why has the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute of Allergy and Infection Disease (NIAID), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) not raised the alarm about this urgent health issue?
A new manuscript concludes that the
pseudouridine used in the making of the modified mRNA is potentially
cancer-promoting. It states, “…adding 100% of N1-methyl-pseudouridine
(m1Ψ) to the mRNA vaccine in a melanoma model stimulated cancer growth and metastasis…thus suggesting that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines could aid cancer development.” Therefore, pseudouridine (replacement of uracil with m1ψ) potentially renders modified mRNA oncogenic (i.e., a potential cancer promoter). [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38583833/]
A recently published and then
retracted paper found a ‘Significant Increase’ in Cancer Mortality After
Mass Vaccination With 3rd COVID Dose.
This paper was retracted. Since it is unusual for peer-reviewed published articles to be retracted, we thought it important for the reader to read the paper themselves and come to their own conclusion.
Unlike Cureus, the Editor-in-Chief of Clinical Evaluation published “Chronology of Events Surrounding the Publication and Retraction by Cureus Editorial Board of “Increased Age-Adjusted Cancer Mortality After the Third mRNA-Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccine Dose During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan” doi:10.7759/cureus.57860: Authors’ Testimony” in July of 2024. [521_6590eng.pdf’].
Clearly the topic of turbo cancer is of keen interest, over 287,000 people viewed the published paper. First note that there are over one hundred references in the original paper published in Cureus. Though not a topic of this paper an increasing number of experts think the increasing pressure on journals is leading to the censorship of important work. For example, the Defender published this article. Dennis Rancourt, Ph.D., a noted all-cause mortality researcher called the retraction “baseless.” Panagis Polykretis, Ph.D., Institute of Applied Physics, stated, “One more scientific study that challenges the established narrative gets retracted.” Read the original paper linked above – you be the judge.
What Can Be Done Now?
We present that Pfizer is strategically moving their business model to develop products to fight cancer. We also present evidence in Pfizer’s own words how they cast themselves as trustworthy. Contrary to that we present that Pfizer in fact, has a long history of not being trustworthy or ethical. We even include a link to a key Pfizer employee disclosing that they intentionally mutated the COVID-19 virus in order to “preemptively” manufacture new vaccines for the market.
The primary thrust of this paper is to present the reader with overwhelming evidence of the stunning rise in turbo cancers since the rollout of the mRNA COVID-19 “vaccines.” We support this tragic growth with analysis from subject matter experts around the world, it is not a localized problem, though it may be unique to those countries with the highest vaccination rates. We include an exceptionally lengthy list of references below.
We provide evidence on Pfizer’s leadership focus and strategic initiatives to address cancer therapies pointing out that their “franchise” has rapidly changed from COVID to cancer products. Then we look at excess mortality from multiple sources including the American Cancer Society. The significant points are that these are not outlier cases, they are several standard deviations beyond the historic norm, and they begin to grow in number at the onset of the COVID-19 vaccines. Finally, we touch on some of the published material.
At this point in time, we suspect it rare that the reader will not personally know of a family member, friend, or colleague who did have an unexpected cancer or a rapid return of a cancer that had been under control. The reader will know of people who died very quickly after receiving a Stage IV diagnosis after a brief period of time. If you have not, you likely will over the next few years.
- The evidence is overwhelming and growing that the modified mRNA platform should be immediately halted and subject to long-term studies for safety and efficacy.
- All vaccines and especially anything using mRNA must go through long-term human trials that include cancer harms.
- The growing number of excess cancer deaths across all age groups must be investigated now.
Appendix A
Turbo Cancer References
The following papers and cases provide evidence that turbo cancers are connected to the COVID-19 “vaccines.” That the FDA has refused to halt the mRNA products is unconscionable. It is especially important to note that there was no long-term human cancer study as part of Pfizer’s clinical trials of the mRNA BNT162b2 “vaccines” or the subsequent product rollout. Those who were mandated or voluntarily took the shot with no informed consent were effectively volunteers in Pfizer’s study.
An interview with Dr. William Makis describes an explosion of turbo cancers and who is profiting. He is the author of over one hundred peer-reviewed medical publications and compiled recent scientific literature regarding aggressive, acute, turbo cancers occurring after the COVID-19 mRNA “vaccine” rollout, which are listed below.
The oncogenicity studies would have been required if the COVID-19 drugs had been properly labeled as gene therapy products. Pfizer Documents Analysis Project reports:
- Report #95, mRNA COVID-19 Shots – ‘Vaccines’ or Gene Therapy Products? Part 1”,
[ https://dailyclout.io/report-95-mrna-covid-19-shots-vaccines-or-gene-therapy-products-part-1/ ] - Report #96“mRNA COVID-19 Shots – ‘Vaccines’ or Gene Therapy Products? Part 2, [https://dailyclout.io/report-96-mrna-covid-19-shots-vaccines-or-gene-therapy-products-part-2/ ]
- Report
# 98 FDA Selected Its ‘Vaccine Advisory Committee’ – Not Its Gene
Therapy Advisory Committee – to Recommend the COVID Injections for
Emergency Use, to Hide the Fact that the Products Are Not Vaccines But
Gene Therapies,
[https://dailyclout.io/report-98-fda-selected-its-vaccines-advisory-committee-not-its-gene-therapy-advisory-committee-to-recommend-the-covid-injections-for-emergency-use-in-order-to-hide-the-fact-that-the-products/]
Turbo Cancer Literature:
- (2024 Apr, Zhang and El-Deiry) – SARS-CoV-2 spike S2 subunit inhibits p53 activation of p21(WAF1), TRAIL Death Receptor DR5 and MDM2 proteins in cancer cells, https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.04.12.589252v1?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2024 Apr, Rubio-Casillas et al) – Review: N1-methyl-pseudouridine (m1Ψ): Friend or foe of cancer? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38583833/
- (2024 Apr, Gibo et al) – Increased Age-Adjusted Cancer Mortality After the Third mRNA-Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccine Dose During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan, https://assets.cureus.com/uploads/original_article/pdf/196275/20240408-14533-1avkjxd.pdf?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2023 Dec, Angues et al) – SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and the Multi-Hit Hypothesis of Oncogenesis, https://www.cureus.com/articles/209584-sars-cov-2-vaccination-and-the-multi-hit-hypothesis-of-oncogenesis?utm_medium=email&utm_source=transaction#!/
- (2023 Nov, Patrick Chambers) – The CD147 Epitope on SARS CoV2 and the Spike in Cancer, Autoimmunity and Organ Fibrosis, https://www.qeios.com/read/S86J75?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2023 Oct, Speicher et al) – DNA fragments detected in monovalent and bivalent Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna modRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Ontario, Canada: Exploratory dose-response relationship with serious adverse events., https://osf.io/preprints/osf/mjc97?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2023 Sep, McKernan et al) – Sequencing of bivalent Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines reveals nanogram to microgram quantities of expression vector dsDNA per dose, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369967228_Sequencing_of_bivalent_Moderna_and_Pfizer_mRNA_vaccines_reveals_nanogram_to_microgram_quantities_of_expression_vector_dsDNA_per_dose
- (2023 May, Uversky, Redwan, Makis, Rubio-Casillas) – IgG4 Antibodies Induced by Repeated Vaccination May Generate Immune Tolerance to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37243095/
- (2023 May, Eens et al) – B-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma following intravenous BNT162b2 mRNA booster in a BALB/c mouse: A case report, https://archive.ph/2JKUb
- (2023 Apr, Halma, Rose, Lawrie) – The Novelty of mRNA Viral Vaccines and Potential Harms: A Scoping Review, https://www.mdpi.com/2571-8800/6/2/17?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2023 March, Guetzkow et al) – National Academies Committee on Review of Relevant Literature Regarding Adverse Events Associated with Vaccines, https://nationalcitizensinquiry.b-cdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/VT-3tt-Makis-Wiseman-06b-Turbo-Cancer-Paper16-Wiseman.pdf?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2022 May, Jiang et al) – SARS–CoV–2 Spike Impairs DNA Damage Repair and Inhibits V(D)J Recombination In Vitro (Retracted), https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/13/10/2056?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2022 Apr, Seneff et al) – Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs, https://archive.ph/9Jbag#selection-1517.0-1517.110
- (2022 Feb, Alden et al) – Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line, https://archive.ph/xvpk3#selection-4845.1-4845.120
- (2020 Oct, Singh) – S2 Subunit of SARS-nCoV-2 Interacts with Tumor Suppressor Protein p53 and BRCA: an In Silico Study, https://archive.ph/CxBPs#selection-983.0-983.98
Turbo Cancer Cases:
- (2024 Apr, Abdurrahman et al) – Primary Cutaneous Adenoid Cystic Carcinoma in a Rare Location With an Immune Response to a BNT162b2 Vaccine, https://journals.lww.com/jbjscc/abstract/2024/06000/primary_cutaneous_adenoid_cystic_carcinoma_in_a.7.aspx?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2024 Apr, Ueda et al) – Fetal hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis with intravascular large B-cell lymphoma following coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination in a patient with systemic lupus erythematosus: an intertwined case, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25785826.2024.2338594?src=exp-la&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2024 Apr, Gentilini et al) – A Case Report of Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia (ALL)/Lymphoblastic Lymphoma (LBL) Following the Second Dose of Comirnaty®: An Analysis of the Potential Pathogenic Mechanism Based on of the Existing Literature, https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202403.1661/v2?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2023 Sep, Kyriakopoulos et al) – Bell’s palsy or an aggressive infiltrating basaloid carcinoma post-mRNA vaccination for COVID-19? A case report and review of the literature, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10620857/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2023 Apr, Tachita et al) – Newly diagnosed extranodal NK/T-cell lymphoma, nasal type, at the injected left arm after BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12185-023-03607-w?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2023 Jan, Cavanna et al) – Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Developed Shortly after mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination: Report of a Case and Review of the Literature, https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/59/1/157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2022 Sep, Revenga-Porcel et al) – 76M lymphoma after 3rd Moderna mRNA, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jdv.18615?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2022 Aug, Sekizawa et al) – 80F lymphoma after 2nd Pfizer mRNA, https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2022.963393/full?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2022 Jun, Zamfir et al) – 58F 2nd Pfizer, 53M 2nd Pfizer both lymphoma, https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/58/7/874?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2022 Apr, Mitsui et al) – 67M 2nd Pfizer, 80F 2nd Pfizer both lymphoma, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jdv.18136?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
- (2021 Nov, Goldman et al) – 66M lymphoma progression after 3rd Pfizer mRNA, https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2021.798095/full?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Pfizer Let’s Outdo Cancer References [https://cancer.pfizer.com/]
- Understanding cancer. American Cancer Society. [https://www.cancer.org/cancer/understanding-cancer.html.] Accessed January 25, 2024.
- 2024—first year the US expects more than 2M new cases of cancer. American Cancer Society. [https://www.cancer.org/research/acs-research-news/facts-and-figures-2024.html.] Accessed January 26, 2024.
- What is cancer? National Cancer Institute. [https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/understanding/what-is-cancer.] Updated October 11, 2021. Accessed January 25, 2024.
- Crucial catch. American Cancer Society. [https://crucialcatch.cancer.org.] Accessed January 25, 2024.
Pfizer takes enormous pride in
its cancer therapeutic product pipeline. For now, the company’s
financial future is built on the success of those products. However,
storm clouds have formed, and a torrent of evidence, both clinical and
in published articles, is pouring in detailing the growing number of
post-COVID-19 vaccinees developing acute, aggressive, and fatal turbo
cancers all over the world.
Pfizer bills itself as the leader
in oncology drug treatments, and it seems unlikely that that is a
coincidence since, as noted above, a Pfizer executive was caught on tape
explaining the company’s strategy to create virus mutations as well as
therapies to address the harms caused by those mutations. A review of
Pfizer’s stock over the past three years reveals that investors are no
longer buying the alleged promises of modRNA drug therapies.
https://www.financecharts.com/stocks/PFE
Given the scale of excess
mortality that is temporally associated with modRNA COVID “vaccines,” as
well as the many vaccine-related adverse events including cancers
across all age groups, most people now know at least one person who has
been negatively impacted by these products.
Pfizer’s history of raking in
huge profits and then paying fines and penalties which, in comparison to
profits, are a drop in the bucket seems to show an obvious lack of good
faith by the company.
[https://www.drugwatch.com/manufacturers/pfizer/] Pfizer has not tried to rein in its dangerous practices. [https://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/Pfizer]
It is past time for the FDA to fulfill its mission of “…protecting the
public health by ensuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human
and veterinary drugs, biological products, and medical devices…” by
halting all approvals of mRNA products immediately.
No comments:
Post a Comment