top of page



So if you’ve not been paying attention, a big brouhaha has erupted over the revelation that Pfizer never checked to see, and has no evidence that the new golden idol would or could PREVENT TRANSMISSION of the virus which must not named. This is of course a huge story, but in another way really shouldn’t be so. By the way, if you are a consumer of certain “news” channels it’s entirely possible you’re not aware of this story. When I search “Pfizer executive admits COVID-19 vaccine was never tested to prevent transmission” on both CNN and MSNBC nothing comes up. When I checked on Google, NO mainstream “news” source came up. Say, did you know that Big Pharma accounts for some 75% of TV ad spending (to the tune of 4.5 BILLION DOLLARS in 2020)? Oh well, moving on…

Anyway, here’s the story (my bold):

“Janine Small, the president of international development markets for Pfizer, testified before the European Parliament's COVID-19 committee Monday on behalf of Pfizer CEO Dr. Albert Bourla, who was summoned by the committee but pulled out of his appointment. During questions, Dutch Member of Parliament Rob Roos, a conservative and opponent of Europe's COVID-19 passports, asked Small whether Pfizer could provide lawmakers with evidence it believed the vaccine would prevent coronavirus transmission before bringing it to market. ‘Was the Pfizer COVID vaccine tested on stopping the transmission of the virus before it entered the market?’ Roos asked. ‘If not, please say it clearly. If yes, are you willing to share the data with this committee?’ In response, Small said Pfizer did not know that the vaccine would prevent transmission before bringing it to market. ‘Regarding the question around, did we know about stopping immunization before it entered the market? No,’ she admitted. ‘These, um, you know, we had to really move at the speed of science to really understand what is taking place in the market. And from that point of view, we had to do everything at risk,’ Small said.”

Where to begin? Let’s start with Rob Roos for King of the World! Then of course there is the answer. No, they did not know if the vax would prevent transmission nor had they even asked that question. They didn’t have time you see. They had to move at the “speed of science” whatever the HELL that means. Also notice the Pfizer exec’s allusion to what was taking place in “the market”. Does that mean Pfizer had to move at the “speed of science” (whatever the HELL that means) because they had to understand what was taking place in “the market” vis-à-vis their competitors bringing a vaccine to “the market” before they could? And how do you feel about Pfizer developing this vaccine (that you were coerced into getting and were assured was both safe and effective) by doing “everything at risk”? I know I’ll sleep better knowing that. By the way, moving at the “speed of science”, one tends to miss things like sperm count reduction, menstrual period irregularities, mRNA in breast milk, and…oh yeah, heart damage to millions of boys and young men. But whatever, HEY LOOK – PUTIN!

Of course the answer was nonsensical but to be honest, nobody should be surprised or agitated by it. The fact is Pfizer NEVER said the vaccine would stop transmission. Everybody’s pocket pal Anthony Fauci said it. “When you get vaccinated, you not only protect your own health and that of the family but also you contribute to the community health by preventing the spread of the virus throughout the community. In other words, you become a dead end to the virus. And when there are a lot of dead ends around, the virus is not going to go anywhere.” (5/16/21) The imbecile Rachel Maddow said it (in her most “I’m smarter than everybody in the room but I really care about you little people” voice). “Now we know that the vaccines work well enough that the virus stops with every vaccinated person. A vaccinated person gets exposed to the virus, the virus does not infect them, the virus cannot then use that person to go anywhere else. It cannot use a vaccinated person as a host to go get more people." (3/29/21) Well that didn’t age well. But Pfizer never said it. Hey remember when Joe Biden told us we needed to protect the vaccinated from the unvaccinated because the unvaccinated could infect the vaccinated who couldn’t get sick because they were vaccinated and also couldn’t spread the virus because they were vaccinated? Good times…

When Pfizer published their original vax trial results in no less than The New England Journal of Medicine way back on December 31, 2020 in a paper entitled “Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine” their stated endpoints of the study were, well, “The primary end points were efficacy of the vaccine against laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 and safety.” No mention of transmission. Hell, no mention about deaths. In fact, at that time some handsome devil (OK, it was me) wrote about it warning you that the “data” was a sham. That it only looked at stopping infection and safety. By the way, as I stated then, contrary to the “95% effective” at stopping infection we all “knew” was true (because Pfizer and Fauci told us so), if you look at the ACTUAL reduction in your chances of getting infected by taking the vax, according to Pfizer’s own data, that reduction was 0.71% or seventy one one-hundredths of one percent. You can go crazy and round that off to seven-tenths of one percent if that makes you fell better, but that’s it. Please understand what I’m saying. If you were one of the roughly 22,000 vaxxed people in the trial, your incidence of being infected (not being hospitalized or dying because they never looked at that) was only 0.71% lower than if you were one of the nearly 22,000 unvaxxed folks. Pfizer was misrepresenting to be sure, but not knowing about transmission wasn’t one of those misrepresentations. So on this particular issue, we really shouldn’t be angry with Pfizer. Fauci yes. Maddow yes. The whole cabal of ne’er-do-wells who have been lying to us from day one? ABSOLUTELY.

Interesting side note. The reason Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla “pulled out of his appointment” to testify is because “Pfizer Chief Executive Albert Bourla has pulled out of an appointment to testify before the European Parliament's special committee on COVID-19, at which he was expected to face tough questions on how secretive vaccine deals were struck. The decision follows an audit report into the EU's vaccine procurement strategy published earlier in the month that raised new questions about contact between Bourla and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen that preceded a multibillion-euro vaccine contract.”

If you’ve been with me for a while you may remember Ursula von der Leyen from when she opened the door to MANDATORY vaccines in Europe. Of course the “fact-checkers” told us in response to those who accused von der Leyen of trying to “dispense with the Nuremberg Code” that that accusation was false. In case you don’t know, the Nuremberg Code is an international document created after World War II which prohibited involuntary, coerced, non-informed consent experimentation on humans. You know, kind of like a certain vaccine that you might have heard of. But what the fact-checkers told us is no, we’re wrong. You see, a vax mandate DOES NOT violate Nuremberg because the vaccine ISN’T EXPERIMENTAL. And we know the vaccine isn’t experimental because the same people telling you that forcing you to get vaxxed isn’t a violation of Nuremberg because the vax is not experimental are the same people telling you the vax is not experimental. See how that works you troglodyte? Ya gotta admire the chutzpah to lie so boldly. Mad props.

Anyway, I wonder what will come of this investigation into Bourla and von der Leyen whispering sweet nothings in each other’s ears before they signed this multi-billion euro vaccine contract. Time will tell.

To all you true believers who still “trust the experts” or “follow the science”, do you get it yet?

30 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page