Bombshell COVID-19 vaccine batch, testing, and distribution data PROVES criminal intent to harm. No other interpretation is possible.

This was a plan to poison the population.

BS”D

Part 1/3: Just 4.2% of the vaccine batches were associated with the majority of severe adverse events.

Dr. Peter McCullough’s coauthor John Leake wrote a very powerful article on July 12. The implications of these findings absolutely validate the darkest of “conspiracy theories” about intent to kill with this shot.

This is exactly what some of us have been crying - tragically, mostly to deaf ears - for more than two years.

John writes:

From the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccine fiasco, I always sensed that all of the elements were in place for program to be a massive fraud. The program—hastily rolled out under the pressure of a purported emergency, with no proper testing, and with governments such as the European Union pre-purchasing the product for entire populations—promised overnight, windfall profits for the companies involved. Surely, I thought, this created an enormous temptation for Pfizer (which has a long civil and criminal rap sheet) and its venal friends in place like Washington and Brussels to perpetrate a gigantic fraud.

The relentless pressure and coercion applied to us in 2021 raised the suspicion that the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex was desperate to eliminate the control group so that the true results of its massive experiment would never be ascertained.

A few months ago, Dr. McCullough was astonished by the results of a Danish study that revealed massive variations of side effects associated with different batches of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine administered in Denmark.

The Danish study revealed that just 4.2% of the vaccine batches were associated with the majority of severe adverse events. Conversely <1% of these events were associated with 32.1% of the batches. Over dinner one night this spring, he expressed his astonishment that a full third of the vaccines seemed to be associated with almost ZERO side effects, while just 4.2% of the batches were associated with an extremely high number of adverse events. What could account for this stunning variation?

Dr. McCullough was not the only scientist who wondered about this. In Germany, Dr. Gerald Dyker, Professor of Organic Chemistry at the Ruhr-Uni Bochum and Dr. Jörg Matysik, Professor of Analytical Chemistry at the University of Leipzig, were also stunned by the results of the Danish study.

Since the experimental Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine was authorized in the EU in December of 2020, both professors have been concerned about what they perceived to be a lack of proper testing and manufacturing quality control. And so, following the publication of the Danish study, they set about investigating the cause of this huge variation. A natural starting place was the Paul Ehrlich Institute—the German federal agency, medical regulatory body and research institution for vaccines and biomedicines.

Because the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is manufactured by the German company BioNTech—and because Germany is a founding member of the European Union—the Paul Ehrlich Institute is responsible for all quality-control testing of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine distributed throughout the European Union.

As a true crime investigator, I find this arrangement to be inherently and extremely vulnerable to the temptation to commit fraud. That is to say, if the lords at Pfizer-BioNTech wanted to corrupt the process of quality-control testing of their experimental product, all they would have to do is corrupt the guys at the top of one institution.

As Professors Dyker and Matysik presented in a conversation with a German podcaster on June 22, 2023, the Paul Ehrlich Institute was indeed responsible for the quality-control testing of the three vaccine lots that were the subject of the Danish study.

What is astonishing (and almost certainly evidence of fraud) is that the Institute somehow knew in advance that it wasn’t necessary to perform quality-control tests on the 32.1% of the batches that were associated with almost zero side effects. This finding is illustrated with the following graphs:

The first (top) graph is from the Danish study. The top (blue) line plots the high number of adverse events associated with just 4.2% of the batches. The middle (green line) plots the moderate number of adverse events associated with 63.7% of the batches. The lowest (yellow) line expresses the virtually zero number of side effects associated with 32.1% of the batches.

The second (lower) graph was compiled by Professors Dyker and Matysik and is titled “Which Batches from the Danish Study did the Paul Ehrlich Institute Test?”

The left (blue) batches are those associated with the extremely high rate of adverse events. The Paul Ehrlich Institute tested ALL of these batches and apparently found nothing defective about them.

The middle (green) column displays the batches that were associate with a moderate number of adverse events in the Danish study. The Paul Ehrlich Institute tested all but two these batches and found nothing defective about them.

The right (yellow) column displays the batches that were associated with virtually zero adverse events. The Paul Ehrlich Institute only deemed it necessary to test ONE of these batches. WHY?

As the professors state in their interview, these findings raise the “first suspicion” (German: Anfangsverdacht) that the Paul Ehrlich Institute knew in advance that the batches in the yellow column would not produce any side effects.

It is hard to overstate the significance of the professors’ findings. How could the Paul Ehrlich Institute have known, a priori, that it needn’t bother testing precisely the batches associated with virtually zero side effects?

And what are we to make of the fact that the Paul Ehrlich Institute did test the 4.2% of the batches that WERE associated with a high number of adverse events and released them anyway?

As the professors state in their interview, they sent a letter to the Paul Ehrlich Institute in which they requested an explanation, but as of June 23, when their podcast interview was conducted, the Institute still hadn’t replied.

It seems to me that their findings should be regarded as grounds for launching a major criminal investigation. The professors’ findings raise the suspicion that—at some point in the rollout of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine program in Europe—a decision was made to deliver 1/3 of the product that did NOT contain the so-called vaccine’s active ingredient.

This in turn raises the suspicion that Pfizer-BioNTech and its captured regulator friends realized that their novel product was causing too many adverse events. Instead of simply taking the product off the market (which Dr. McCullough long ago called upon them to do), the key decision-makers decided to deliver a third of their product without its active (and dangerous) ingredient. This action would ensure that a full third of the population remained free of adverse events, and thus strongly inclined to believe (from their own experience) that the entire program was safe.

(BW: I believe this was their plan from the beginning.)

I just performed a German language Google Search for the full names and titles of the two professors who performed this investigation.

“Dr. Gerald Dyker, Professor für organische Chemie an der Ruhr-Uni Bochum und Dr. Jörg Matysik, Professor für analytische Chemie an der Universität Leipzig.”

The search yielded their recent podcast appearance and a Tweet about this podcast, but NO major report in the German mainstream media.

In the United States, fellow Substack author Sasha Latypova and a few others have posted about it. The Daily Skeptic published a thorough report on this story at the end of June. However, apart from these few reports about what could be the greatest scandal in European history ...crickets.

Link to John Leake’s article:

Were 1/3 of Pfizer Shots in the EU "Placebos"?

Part 2/3: Spread the deaths out so people won’t realize the truth

On July 16, the Expose wrote a scathing piece showing that specifically the deadly vials of covid vaccine were spread out thinly over a wide area - to avoid clusters of deaths raising an alarm.

I included only parts of the lengthy article (see full article at link below.)

The Expose:

BREAKING: Government Reports prove Pfizer & Moderna purposely manufactured Deadly Batches of the Covid-19 Vaccines

An investigation of official U.S. Government data, provided by the Centers for Disease Control, has revealed that extremely high numbers of adverse reactions and deaths have been reported against specific lot numbers of the Covid-19 vaccines numerous times.

This means the deadliest batches of Covid-19 vaccine have now been identified but Medicine Regulators have refused to withdraw them and they are still being administered to the public.

But what’s perhaps more concerning is that the small minority of “deadly” lots were distributed widely across the United States, while other “benign” lots were sent to just a few locations.

The investigation of VAERS data found that specific batches of the Pfizer and Moderna Covid-19 vaccines which were distributed to between 13 and 50 states across the USA had an unusually high number of adverse event reports and deaths compared to lots that were distributed to 12 states or less across the USA.

As you can see from the above table, 4,289 different lots of Pfizer vaccine were distributed to 12 states or less across the USA, recording 9,141 adverse event reports against them alongside 99 deaths and 657 hospitalisations. This equates to an average of 2 adverse event reports per lot and 0 deaths and hospitalisations.

However, a further 130 different lots of Pfizer vaccine were distributed to between 13-50 states across the USA, recording 166,170 adverse event reports, 2,799 deaths, and 14,155 hospitalisations. This equates to an average of 1,278 adverse event reports per lot number, alongside 22 deaths and 109 hospitalisations.

This data, therefore, shows that each lot from the 130 different lot numbers of Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine distributed to more than 13 states, harmed on average 639 times more people, hospitalised on average 109 times more people, and killed on average 22 times more people.

The above chart on the left shows the number of adverse event reports by lot number sent to 13 or more states across the USA. This chart has identified the actual lot numbers of Pfizer vaccine that have caused the most harm in the USA. The most harmful of which is lot number ‘EK9231’; causing over 3,500 adverse event reports.

The above chart on the left shows the number of deaths reported as adverse reactions to the Pfizer vaccine by lot number sent to 13+ states across the USA. This chart has identified the actual lot numbers of Pfizer vaccine that have caused the most deaths in the USA. The deadliest of which is lot number ‘EN6201’ causing almost 120 deaths.

The above chart on the left shows the number of adverse event reports against the Moderna vaccine by lot number sent to 13 or more states across the USA. This chart has identified the actual lot numbers of Moderna vaccine that have caused the most harm in the USA. The most harmful of which is lot number ‘039K20A’; causing over 4,000 adverse event reports.

The second most harmful batch of Moderna vaccine was assigned lot number ‘041L20A’, and media reports show that it was actually recalled by the Orange County Healthcare Agency in January 2021 following reports of allergic reactions.

Source

The above chart on the left shows the number of deaths reported as adverse reactions to the Moderna vaccine by lot number sent to 13+ states across the USA. This chart has identified the actual lot numbers of the Moderna vaccine that have caused the most deaths in the USA. The deadliest of which is lot number ‘039K20A’ causing almost 100 deaths.

For comparison

To further demonstrate the extreme irregularity of the distribution of a single vaccine lot to more than 12 states, the Expose analyzed the lot distribution of flu shots:

The above chart shows the number of states within the USA a specific log number of the influenza vaccine was distributed to.

The VAERS data shows that 44% of the lots (219 / 494) were sent to just a single state within the USA, whilst a further 17% (86 / 494) were sent to 2 states, 10% (50 / 494) were sent to 3 states, 5% (24 / 494) were sent to 4 states, 3% (17 / 494) were sent to 5 states, 2% (11 / 494) were sent to 6 states, and just 0.4 (2 / 494) were sent to 12 states within the USA.

All of the above data was then used as a control dataset to compare against VAERS data for the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA Covid-19 vaccines.

Full Expose article here: https://expose-news.com/2023/07/16/pfizer-deadly-batches-of-covid-vaccine/.

Part 3/3: On the topic of batch variability, Sasha Latypova wrote a very informative piece on July 6:

Was it 30% placebo?

Remember that placebo does not mean saline.

Here is much of her fascinating article:

Click the link below to watch the video.

Sasha says:

Historical Background:

The first issue that I addressed in public statements was vax lot variability analysis in 2021. I was not the source of the idea - that came from a person who wishes to stay anonymous. He alerted me to the fact that VAERS had the lot numbers and that the data looked extremely variable. He made the first online lookup tool to check the lot numbers vs the number of adverse events and deaths reported for those lots. I downloaded VAERS data in September and October 2021 and did about 20 hrs of analysis in clunky Excel. I could not believe what I was seeing: the variability batch-to-batch was enormous - few reports in most batches and thousands in a smaller sub-group. I wrote the analysis up the best I could, in Powerpoint slides, and I contacted several alt media journalists. I also contacted Mike Yeadon and his media collaborator Robin Monotti on Telegram. Both responded. My analysis was published in a small news media outlet in the UK, and got picked up by a few alternative news channels. Craig Paardekooper, a British pharmacy student who was forced to leave his studies due to vaccination mandates, saw it and did his own analyses and found the now famous data clustering - deaths by alphabet. The batches were not just hugely variable, the variability was not random. No typical demographic and other data adjustments ever explained this variability. Age of the vax recipients, frequently cited by the detractors of the lot variability evidence, at best, explains about 30% of variability. And one should point out that median age of severe adverse events and deaths, even in early roll out was about 15 years below life expectancy - these were not “just old people”.

The conclusion I and my colleagues arrived early on meant it was likely not just sloppy manufacturing, but pointed at the intent to harm. Of course since then, this conclusion has been validated by numerous pieces of evidence: regulatory documentation, direct vial testing, interviews with insiders, and most importantly legal basis under which EUA Countermeasures are exempt from cGMP rules.

Craig made many analytical discoveries in VAERS lot data and started the “How Bad is Your Batch” website dedicated to this issue.  We collaborated for some time on the website content, and our group included a variety of data analysts from several countries, including at some point Max Schmeling and his colleagues from Denmark. The website became an invaluable resource for all questions related to injection batches and by the end of 2022 received over 100 million visitors from all over the world.

I would like to point to this video that my colleagues and I posted on Bitchute in February 2022 showing that batch variability is a real factor and is not explained by “normal” data adjustments like the age of the vaccinated.

Recently several news outlets and podcasts have published this story - discussing that approximately 30% of the vials distributed (at least in EU) were “placebo”. Here is a good article on this on Brownstone.

(Here Sasha had a segment on the Danish study and the evidence from Germany, which I left out because I included that information earlier, in John’s article.)

Please watch this video where this information from Germany is discussed. The video is in German with English subtitles. The authors discussed that the color scheme corresponds to the analysis from Denmark, and turns out that mysteriously, Paul Ehrlrich Institute in Germany (German CDC) did not test on release the yellow (low toxicity) batches, but did test the blue and green ones. There is no explanation why.

Does this prove the “yellow” batches are placebo?

Not really. Caution is required when interpreting these data. The German authors did not say these are placebo, but rather that they look “something like placebo”. They also noted that in vaccine studies “placebo” can contain all adjuvants and other “inactive” ingredients. We know from declared ingredients on vax labels those are completely novel lipids not properly disclosed (proprietary), and actually harmful substances (such as PEG). My own guess is that the yellow vials might have contained “empty” hydrogel formulations (or LNPs, which might be the same thing), and the green and blue - some combinations of nucleic acid based materials added, including plasmid DNA “contaminants” and endotoxins. Many vials tested by the independent groups found a variety of contaminants - most frequently toxic metals and objects from nano- to macro-scale. Some groups state they found graphene oxide, and I am not a specialist in this analysis to confirm their findings. In any case, this requires more verification.

The journalists and podcasters that spread the message changed that to a more definitive statement of “placebo” which is unfortunately not accurate.

These batches show up in adverse event reports, so they were associated with at least some adverse events. Therefore they are not saline. Furthermore, no pure saline vials have been found in the independent vial testing that I am aware of. So, caution is warranted. The “yellow” batches appear to be less toxic overall, but we still do not have a full picture on the vial contents, and a full transparent investigation is needed.

Overall, this proves the conclusion about fraudulent, non-compliant manufacturing, various formulations in different batches, and adulteration of batches with more toxic ingredients - pointing to the intentional act of mass poisoning with these shots.

Sasha’s full article:

Was it 30% placebo?