YET, THEY BOTH CAUSE CLOTS: Pfizer Officially Preferred Over AstraZeneca for Australians Under-50 (Due to Clots)
PANDEMIC WRITINGS, Melbourne, Australia (2020-2022): piece originally published April 19, 2021
Today, in a courageous ruling, the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) advised the Federal Government that, ‘…the use of the Pfizer vaccine is preferred over the AstraZeneca vaccine in adults aged less than 50 years…’1
Australia’s Chief Medical Officer, Paul Kelly, while flanked by Prime Minister Scott Morrison, conceded: ‘we’ve taken very rapid decisions to look at the data carefully and to make the decision that has been made today.’
The truth is finally flowing… or, as it is, fatally clotting.
The slow accumulative media trickle of previously deniable ‘blood clot’ correlation, has finally given way to an undeniable cascade of ‘blood clot’ causation.
It is now as official as Officialdom is ever likely to declare: AstraZeneca directly causes ‘very rare blood clots’ in young adult recipients.
However, it should not necessarily be assumed that the alternative mRNA offerings from Pfizer and Moderna are safe, and exempt from inducing similar side effects.
Or the exact same…
Indeed, The New York Times recently published a couple of articles that focused on individuals who developed “rare” autoimmune disease after receiving their vaccination. It seems that numerous individuals after receiving both the Moderna and the Pfizer mRNA vaccines, have subsequently been treated for immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) — a life-threatening blood disorder.
The exact same thrombocytopenia, that has just forced Australia to officially decree that the AstraZeneca jab (the Federal Government’s vaccine manufacturing partner for the Asia Pacific Region) is unsuitable for under 50-year olds — due to blood clots.
A Florida doctor, Dr. Gregory Michael died 15 days after getting the Pfizer vaccine of a brain haemorrhage resulting from his immune system attacking platelets essential for clotting. Dr. Jerry L. Spivak, an expert on blood disorders at John Hopkins University, declared that it was a ‘medical certainty’ that the Pfizer vaccine contributed to Michael’s death.2
He was killed by a blood clot that was caused by Pfizer’s offering.
‘In a statement provided to the Times, Pfizer said it was aware of ITP cases in vaccine recipients and that the company is “collecting relevant information” to share with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
The vaccine maker added, however, “at this time, we have not been able to establish a causal association with our vaccine.”’
AstraZeneca was also adamant and unwavering in their official certainty that their vaccine product did not have a 'causal association' with blood clots, despite the accumulating evidence.
And then it did.
It is evidential that both vaccines contribute to “rare” blood clots, but the question remains: Why Pfizer over AstraZeneca, why promote the truly experimental and unknown mRNA technology over the tried-and-true traditional ‘viral vector’ offering of AstraZeneca?
Only one is potentially reversible. Only one does not permanently alter an individual’s DNA.
And that one is not the one that has just been officially discouraged (effectively shunted aside) for Australians under-50.
Exact same ‘clotting’ problem; exactly zero media attention.
Why?
______________________________