Pfizer, Oxford and other Vaccines

Unspecified

1,410

Brother

706

#91 [Permalink] Posted on 20th February 2021 22:17

This post has been reported. It could be due to breaking rules or something as simple as bad use of bbcodes which breaks the page format. We will attend to this soon.

Blocked from replying in this thread.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

mkdon101

6,700

Brother

944

#92 [Permalink] Posted on 20th February 2021 23:05

mkdon101 wrote:

View original post

PM sent. Please fix your post.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

I am not a Mufti

Unspecified

1,410

Brother

706

#93 [Permalink] Posted on 21st February 2021 17:07

Asaaghir wrote:

View original post

well thats the problem. how will u determine if the jab caused it or not. be it 5 10 15 or 20 years, the skeptics will insist jab caused it regardless or all over variables

Blocked from replying in this thread.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

mkdon101

Spinistan Throne

1,137

Brother

748

#94 [Permalink] Posted on 21st February 2021 17:58

mkdon101 wrote:

View original post

True. Hence the gamble of the unknown and the question of experimental vaccines.

Vaccines take an average of 8 years to develop. Not months.

Well, time will tell if we are still around.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Asaaghir

Spinistan Throne

1,137

Brother

748

#95 [Permalink] Posted on 21st February 2021 18:01

Will there be a second dose of the Pfizer vaccine in some countries, including Western nations?

If not, you heard it here first.

The competition or monopoly will determine so many factors.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Asaaghir

Unspecified

811

Brother

1,555

#96 [Permalink] Posted on 21st February 2021 22:04

mkdon101 wrote:

View original post

What other variables?

How is anything determined? Do you think they have machines that you plug a dying person into and it prints the results of causes? That's not how it works. The first stage is correlation, cause and effect. When there's enough consistency in reports, they do lab tests according to the reactions reported. Here, the vaccine sellers are ademant that they are safe.

How blind does a person have to be not to notice that this is a global human trial. It's literally in their statements. Up to January 2023. VAERS has already received as of today, 16,003 adverse effects out of which 1,827 are deaths, life threatening and permanent disability. This doesn't even include the estimated number of reports withheld or not submitted. This is called "data" - Data is analysed and conclusions are drawn from available data. That's how it works. When a death is reported, did you know they investigate with family members as well if it's not clear how they died. All the way down to asking what they ate. This is "data".

What we're observing in REALITY is that if a person dies of underlying conditions then they died of Covid. And if a person dies from the covid vaccine then they died of underlying issues. This is nothing new. If you don't know this you need throw your TV out of the window.

The hypocrisy of pro-vaxers and the narrative abiding flock is almost laughable. When people had flu in 2020, with no methods, no measuring system and no way to determine that it's the so called "covid" they believed it in a heartbeat although every single symptom is that of the flu according to their own NHS web site, you were ready to believe it's another disease. But when someone uses data and evidence to say otherwise you ask for measures and ways to determine something you didn't do yourselves. The blindness is mind boggling.

Tell us please, enlighten us as to what other variables skeptics are dismissing? If you can't answer anything else, just answer this. "the skeptics will insist jab caused it regardless or all over variables" - What other variables? Give an actual example of something that occurred. That there's a record of.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Stuck fast to the truth

BOYCOTT IzraHell | InMinds

London

27,452

Brother

9,578

#97 [Permalink] Posted on 22nd February 2021 01:38

In other news:

Quote:

A scientific adviser to the government said today that the UK's coronavirus cases are falling "impressively fast" but that is "primarily the lockdown and not the vaccine programme".

Quote:

Dr. Anthony Fauci said that it is possible Americans will still be wearing masks in 2022.

Quote:

Israel is reported to have agreed to fund Covid-19 vaccines for the Syrian regime as part of a Russian-brokered prisoner exchange deal between the enemy states

Quote:

The head of the World Health Organization has appealed to Tanzania to take "robust action" to combat Covid-19 in the country, where the president has long played down the virus.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Actions are judged by intentions, so each man will have what he intended.
ابو محمد

Eraf

1,328

Brother

413

#98 [Permalink] Posted on 22nd February 2021 04:48

From the VAERS website:

Quote:

Are all adverse events reported to VAERS caused by vaccines?

No. Some adverse events might be caused by vaccination and others might be coincidental and not related to vaccination. Just because an adverse event happened after a person received a vaccine does not mean the vaccine caused the adverse event.

VAERS accepts reports of adverse events following vaccination without judging the cause or seriousness of the event. VAERS is not designed to determine if a vaccine caused an adverse event, but it is good at detecting unusual or unexpected patterns of reporting that might indicate possible safety problems that need a closer look.

Blocked from replying in this thread.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Informative x 1

Iqra (Read).

6,700

Brother

944

#99 [Permalink] Posted on 22nd February 2021 11:38

abuzayd2k wrote:

View original post

It could mean some are, some aren't, none are or all are.

The important thing here is to understand "THEY DON'T KNOW" which is why it's so scary to see the bandwagon claiming how safe it is and Imams encouraging it as if safety is guaranteed.

As far as I have seen, social media and vaccine manufactures are the only ones to claim that every adverse effect is coincidence and not related to vaccination before any test is done.

Only those who have lost the ability to critically think for themselves using logic will be unable to see that there really is a very serious pandemic and it's not Covid.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

I am not a Mufti

Spinistan Throne

1,137

Brother

748

#100 [Permalink] Posted on 22nd February 2021 21:22

mkdon101 wrote:

View original post

Personal question.

Would you ever get inoculated by a vaccine made by a company that never made any vaccine in its history?

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Asaaghir

Unspecified

1,410

Brother

706

#101 [Permalink] Posted on 23rd February 2021 00:02

This post has been reported. It could be due to breaking rules or something as simple as bad use of bbcodes which breaks the page format. We will attend to this soon.

Violating Rules - Please accept our warnings

Blocked from replying in this thread.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

mkdon101

#102 [Permalink] Posted on 23rd February 2021 01:39

Please stick to the current topic. Irrelevant posts, posts inciting a debate or disrespect towards another member will be removed without notice. Jazakumullah

Please only post relevant issues to the current topic, otherwise please start a new topic. Jazakumullah

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Muftisays Admins, Authorizers & Moderators
Please respect the rules in order for us to provide a peaceful and informative online community.

London

27,452

Brother

9,578

#103 [Permalink] Posted on 25th February 2021 00:35

www.statnews.com/2021/02/23/federal-law-prohibits-employe...

Federal law prohibits employers and others from requiring vaccination with a Covid-19 vaccine distributed under an EUA

Ever since the Food and Drug Administration granted emergency use authorization for two new vaccines, employers, schools, and other organizations are grappling with whether to require Covid-19 vaccination.

While organizations are certainly free to encourage their employees, students, and other members to be vaccinated, federal law provides that, at least until the vaccine is licensed, individuals must have the option to accept or decline to be vaccinated.

Knowing what an organization can or cannot do with respect to Covid-19 vaccines can help them keep their employees, students, and members safe and also save the them from costly and time-consuming litigation.

Much remains unknown about the safety and efficacy of the vaccine

Even though the FDA granted emergency use authorizations for the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines in December 2020, the clinical trials the FDA will rely upon to ultimately decide whether to license these vaccines are still underway and are designed to last for approximately two years to collect adequate data to establish if these vaccines are safe and effective enough for the FDA to license.

The abbreviated timelines for the emergency use applications and authorizations means there is much the FDA does not know about these products even as it authorizes them for emergency use, including their effectiveness against asymptomatic infection, death, and transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes the disease.

Given the uncertainty about the two vaccines, their EUAs are explicit that each is “an investigational vaccine not licensed for any indication” and require that all “promotional material relating to the Covid-19 Vaccine clearly and conspicuously … state that this product has not been approved or licensed by the FDA, but has been authorized for emergency use by FDA” (emphasis added).

EUAs are clear: Getting these vaccines is voluntary

The same section of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act that authorizes the FDA to grant emergency use authorization also requires the secretary of Health and Human Services to “ensure that individuals to whom the product is administered are informed … of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product.”

Likewise, the FDA’s guidance on emergency use authorization of medical products requires the FDA to “ensure that recipients are informed to the extent practicable given the applicable circumstances … That they have the option to accept or refuse the EUA product …”

In the same vein, when Dr. Amanda Cohn, the executive secretary of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, was asked if Covid-19 vaccination can be required, she responded that under an EUA, “vaccines are not allowed to be mandatory. So, early in this vaccination phase, individuals will have to be consented and they won’t be able to be mandatory.” Cohn later affirmed that this prohibition on requiring the vaccines applies to organizations, including hospitals.

The EUAs for both the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines require facts sheets to be given to vaccination providers and recipients. These fact sheets make clear that getting the vaccine is optional. For example, the one for recipients states that, “It is your choice to receive or not receive the Covid-19 Vaccine,” and if “you decide to not receive it, it will not change your standard of medical care.”

What this means in practice

When the FDA grants emergency use authorization for a vaccine, many questions about the product cannot be answered. Given the open questions, when Congress granted the authority to issue EUAs, it chose to require that every individual should be allowed to decide for himself or herself whether or not to receive an EUA product. The FDA and CDC apparently consider this fundamental requirement of choice important enough that even during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic they reinforced that policy decision when issuing their guidance related to the Covid-19 vaccines.

This means that an organization will likely be at odds with federal law if it requires its employees, students or other members to get a Covid-19 vaccine that is being distributed under emergency use authorization.

State law often prohibits retaliating against an employee for refusing to participate in a violation of federal law. Organizations that require Covid-19 vaccination in violation of federal law may face lawsuits under these state laws not only to block the policy but also for damages and attorneys’ fees. Such potentially costly lawsuits can be avoided by refraining from adopting policies that require vaccination or penalize members for choosing not to be vaccinated.

Organizations are free to encourage vaccinations through internal communications, through educational events, and through other measures to urge employees to be vaccinated. They can take these measures so long as: (1) they are not viewed as coercive, (2) the organization makes clear the decision regarding whether to receive the vaccine is voluntary, and (3) the measures comply with the requirements in the EUAs and the related regulations for these products.

People across the world have had their lives upended during the last year. The urgency to return to normalcy is felt deeply by many. As decision-makers at organizations decide on their Covid-19 vaccination policy, they should be careful to not let this passion lead the organization to run afoul of the law.

Aaron Siri is the managing partner at Siri & Glimstad LLP, a complex civil litigation firm with its principal office in New York City. This article is not intended to provide legal advice but to offer broad and general information about the law.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Informative x 1

Actions are judged by intentions, so each man will have what he intended.
ابو محمد

London

27,452

Brother

9,578

#104 [Permalink] Posted on 25th February 2021 14:27

It was mentioned in a post that people off the street could just go to a vaccine centre and get the vaccine and this was disputed.

www.muftisays.com/forums/37-news-articles/13872-facebook-...

It was said that when vaccines were left at the end of the day, they could be offered to those not eligible, staff could call their families over.....

Here is further evidence!

www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/clinical-areas/immunology-and-v...

GP practice facing investigation into how it used up leftover Covid vaccine
Vaccine wastage investigation

24 February 2021

A GP practice is under investigation for administering leftover doses of the Pfizer Covid vaccine to patients outside current eligible cohorts.

NHS Derby and Derbyshire CCG held an investigation last week into a Derbyshire practice’s decision to vaccinate a local football player to avoid vaccine wastage in the last week of January.

The CCG told Pulse it was not a ‘formal’ investigation but that it has shared the report with NHS England, and the practice is expecting an outcome of the investigation.

It comes as NHS England last week updated its guidance to confirm that coronavirus vaccines should not be given to patients outside eligible cohorts.

Previously, it had said that GPs could offer Covid jabs outside the eligible priority cohorts if there is a ‘risk’ of vaccine wastage.

In a statement shared on its website earlier this month, Stubley Medical Centre in Dronfield said it ‘stands by’ its decision to vaccinate patients outside the cohorts as a ‘last resort’ to avoid vaccine wastage.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Actions are judged by intentions, so each man will have what he intended.
ابو محمد

London

27,452

Brother

9,578

#105 [Permalink] Posted on 26th February 2021 00:34

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/02/25/angela-merkel-will-no...

Angela Merkel refuses Oxford jab amid calls to 'lead by example'

Chancellor says AstraZeneca vaccine is not recommended for her age group as her country struggles with trust

25 FEBRUARY 2021

Angela Merkel has dismissed suggestions she should ignore her government’s guidelines and take the Oxford-AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine.

There have been calls for Mrs Merkel to “lead by example” and be vaccinated on camera in order to dispel German public fears over the jab. But the AstraZeneca vaccine is currently only approved for under-65s in Germany, and Mrs Merkel is 66.

“I do not belong to the recommended age group for AstraZeneca,” Mrs Merkel told Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper. She also rejected suggestions she take the rival Pfizer jab, arguing it was “well accepted” by the German public.

Mrs Merkel and other German leaders have been reluctant to be seen as jumping the queue for the vaccines, preferring to wait their turn. But there have been calls for them to set an example as widespread public resistance to the AstraZeneca jab stalls the country’s rollout.

“AstraZeneca is a reliable vaccine, effective and safe, approved by the European Medical Agency and recommended in Germany up to the age of 65 years. All the authorities tell us that this vaccine can be trusted,” Mrs Merkel told Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung .

Germany is one of a number of European countries where the AstraZeneca vaccine is not currently approved for over-65s. The German independent Standing Committee on Vaccinations ruled there was not enough clinical data on its effectiveness in older people.

But the jab has also met with resistance from younger people, and according to health officials, so far Germany has only been able to administer 240,000 of the 1.54 million doses AstraZeneca has delivered.

There are widespread reports of people cancelling their appointments or simply not turning up when they learn they are to get the AstraZeneca vaccine.

The reluctance comes against a backdrop of scepticism over vaccines in general in Germany. The country has a large anti-vaxxer movement and a recent poll found 34 per cent of Germans say they don’t want to take any vaccine against the coronavirus.

Resistance has focused on the AstraZeneca jab in part because it is being offered to younger essential workers who are more likely to refuse, while the rival Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are currently being given to over-80s and those most at risk because of existing illnesses.

The fact the vaccine is slightly less effective than its rivals also appears to play a role, despite assurances from experts it prevents most serious courses of illness. Sceptics have also focused on reports of flu-like side effects, although these are generally harmless and disappear within a few days.

Meanwhile, British tourists were offered some hope for holidaying on the continent this year after Ms Merkel said digital vaccination certificates will probably be available before the summer.

“Everyone agreed that we need a digital vaccination certificate,” Mrs Merkel said, adding that the EU Commission would need around three months to create the technical basis for such documents.

However Mrs Merkel said that not enough people had been vaccinated for restrictions on non-essential travel to be lifted, while Mr Macron said a vaccine passport would be unfair on young people who are at the back of the queue for jabs.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Actions are judged by intentions, so each man will have what he intended.
ابو محمد

Pfizer, Oxford and other Vaccines

Font Size

Font Weight

Violating Rules - Please accept our warnings