Maddie de Garay is now confined to a wheelchair and uses a feeding tube through her nose:
Canadian COVID Care Alliance is consists of over 500 independent Canadian doctors, scientists, and health care practitioners who are committed to providing quality, balanced, evidence-based information to the Canadian public about COVID-19 so that hospitalizations can be reduced, lives saved, and our country safely restored to normal as quickly as possible.
According to its website, the Pfizer 6 month data shows that Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccines cause more illness than they prevent. Also, an overview of the Pfizer trial flaws in both design and execution.
Now, let’s talk first about the 12 to 15-year-old adolescent trial. According to page 24 of their in-depth analysis, the vaccination for adolescents is really all risk and no benefit. Adolescence are at statistically zero risk of death from COVID-19 and very low risk of severe illness. Among the vaccinated kids in the trial, there’s at least one serious adverse event.
For the adolescents, inoculation is really all risk and no benefit. The trial was severely underpowered. As a study, this small will not reliably show up risk for adverse events. There was an inoculated group of 1,005 and zero of them tested positive for COVID-19 and a placebo group of 978, and 18 of them tested positive for COVID-19.
So Pfizer claimed these were great results, but since adolescence are at statistically zero risk of death from COVID-19 and very low risk of severe illness. In fact, the New York Times said in October of this year that for children without a serious medical condition, the danger of severe COVID is so low that it’s difficult to quantify.
The inoculation is of very little benefit to them, but it does present a very real risk of adverse events. However, the adolescent Pfizer study wasn’t actually designed to find adverse events because a serious adverse event, including death that occurred even in 1 out of 800 kids might not even show up in a sample size of 1,005 people. But in this case, the danger signal did come through. Among the inoculated adolescents, there was at least one serious adverse event, and her name was Maddie De Garay.
Maddie de Garay is a 12-year-old trial participant who developed a serious reaction after her second dose of the inoculation and was hospitalized within 24 hours. She developed gastroparesis, nausea, vomiting, erratic blood pressure, memory loss, brain fog, headaches, dizziness, fainting seizures, verbal and motor ticks, menstrual cycle issues, lost feeling from the waist down, lost bowel and bladder control, and she had to have a feeding tube because she lost her ability to eat.
She’s been hospitalized many times since then, and for the past 10 months she’s been wheelchair-bound and fed via a tube. In their report to the FDA, Pfizer described her injuries as functional abdominal pain, and there’s a link to the FDA report (page 30). This is unconscionable and certainly opens up the possibility that other adverse events have been suppressed or misrepresented.
In terms of the 5 to 11-year-old Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination trial, the Canadian COVID Care Alliance said the vaccination is an unacceptable risk to their health. Even Pfizer acknowledges the vaccine will cause myocarditis in children.
In terms of 5 to 11-year-olds, the inoculation is an unacceptable risk to their health. In this table, Pfizer using predictive modeling, acknowledges that the inoculations will cause myocarditis in children.
See the columns in red, but they optimistically claim that there will be zero deaths from this myocarditis. See the column in yellow, it’s speculation on their part, the low-level evidence of a predictive model. But let’s just say it’s true and there will be no deaths. There’s still no justification for giving children myocarditis. First do no harm should apply here. But the government has now normalized the expectation of heart problems from these inoculations among children to the point that sick kids are actually putting out brochures on how to deal with them.
The way to deal with them is don’t give them products that will harm their hearts because myocarditis is actually very serious. It’s damaged to the heart, and it’s not reversible.
So while Pfizer may be correct in that their inoculations might not cause any immediate deaths, we maintain that a one in five chance of dying in six and a half years is unequivocally, an unacceptable risk for children.
But the FDA says it is an acceptable risk for children. They have actually abandoned the first do no harm principle. Remember, medical interventions are supposed to be proven safe before they’re rolled out in the population. Yet Dr. Eric Rubin, one of the 18 members of the FDA advisory panel who voted to approve the inoculations for children from five to eleven, actually said the opposite and suggested that a population level rollout was an appropriate way to test for adverse events.
A German news site actually put together a list of over 75 known cases of athletes collapsing and even dying in the last five months. These incidents are supposed to be rare and we can’t ignore that they no longer are.
Aaron Siri on Substack: https://aaronsiri.substack.com/p/fda-buries-data-on-seriously-injured