Dr Rose. I've managed to find an unredacted safety summary for BNT162c2.
TL;DR: I can see why they discontinued it at the time and tried to redact. I read that they advise not administering near a nerve, but the deal breaker is that 2 of the 12 (young) participants had severe local reactions, even at the lower dose.
They also reported poor immunogenicity in rats and NHPs, non human primates.
* * *
6.1.1.2.4 BNT162c2 - Summary of safety
BNT162c2 has been tested at doses of 0.1, 0.3, and 1 μg. Minimal reactogenicity was
reported with any local reactions (chiefly pain) being mild or moderate and present in 4, 7,
and 11 subjects in each dose cohort respectively. Systemic reactions showed little dose
dependency overall with 7, 7, and 8 subjects reporting any systemic reaction by respective
dose cohort. 2 subjects each in the 0.3 and 1.0 μg cohorts reported severe local reactions.
All reported events were self-limiting or simply managed. No SAEs were reported and no
subjects have withdrawn due to an AE. At the time of preparation of this summary, the
overall assessment of safety data following dosing with BNT162c2 has not changed.
...
7.2 Posology and method of administration
The BNT162 vaccines are intended for IM administration in the upper arm (deltoid muscle)
using two doses 21 day apart (P/B regimen).
For BNT162c2, optionally a single dose
regimen is also under investigation. The vaccine should not be injected into areas where there may be a major nerve trunk
The "fly in the ointment" is the LNPs that can cross the blood brain barrier. ARCT-154 utilizes the Venezuelan Equine ENCEPHALITIS Virus (VEEV) "RdRP/Replicon".
It remains a SERIOUS mystery to me why they would choose VEEV as the RdRP/Replicon of choice for a SARS-2 antigenic Spike particle. I'm not certain if there is something about that VEEV replicon that renders it more efficacious within the brain, potentially increasing the chance of CJD spongiform encephalitis, but it's pretty odd.
Why not use an actual SARS-1 RdRP/replicon? OR a benign influenza RdRP/Replicon? They are all pretty much the same, "unifying" them, perhaps with minor differences (according to what RALPH BARIC implied (see Author's Summary)
"Positive-stranded RNA (+RNA) viruses include many important pathogens. They have evolved a variety of replication strategies, but are UNIFIED in the fact that an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) functions as the core enzyme of their RNA-synthesizing machinery."
hi folks be aware the pandemic treaty is far from dead in the water as many wrongly believe in fact its coming back much sooner than we think...for the details check out the james roguski substack..also go to citizengo.org and scroll through till you find a petition stop the who,s accelerated push to finalise the pandemic treaty...its a worldwide petition it can be signed and reshared widely worldwide from any country in the world INCLUDING JAPAN [SUBTLE HINT]...that said when resharing it dont bother using you tube/twitter/gestapo book who you can be sure will suppress it....it currently has over 238000 signatures
God bless you for using your talents in service to your fellow companions on this Earth. You are a treasure.
Best wishes for your talk in Japan! Thank you for All that you do…. We so appreciate you! Eileen
You are a Blessing to the world Jessica. So grateful for your work.
God bless you for your good work
Lost me on the "...compendial standard non-adherence..." I will wait for the comic book version, more my level of comprehension on this subject. LOL
Dr Rose. I've managed to find an unredacted safety summary for BNT162c2.
TL;DR: I can see why they discontinued it at the time and tried to redact. I read that they advise not administering near a nerve, but the deal breaker is that 2 of the 12 (young) participants had severe local reactions, even at the lower dose.
They also reported poor immunogenicity in rats and NHPs, non human primates.
* * *
6.1.1.2.4 BNT162c2 - Summary of safety
BNT162c2 has been tested at doses of 0.1, 0.3, and 1 μg. Minimal reactogenicity was
reported with any local reactions (chiefly pain) being mild or moderate and present in 4, 7,
and 11 subjects in each dose cohort respectively. Systemic reactions showed little dose
dependency overall with 7, 7, and 8 subjects reporting any systemic reaction by respective
dose cohort. 2 subjects each in the 0.3 and 1.0 μg cohorts reported severe local reactions.
All reported events were self-limiting or simply managed. No SAEs were reported and no
subjects have withdrawn due to an AE. At the time of preparation of this summary, the
overall assessment of safety data following dosing with BNT162c2 has not changed.
...
7.2 Posology and method of administration
The BNT162 vaccines are intended for IM administration in the upper arm (deltoid muscle)
using two doses 21 day apart (P/B regimen).
For BNT162c2, optionally a single dose
regimen is also under investigation. The vaccine should not be injected into areas where there may be a major nerve trunk
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/19736_S0369-dsur-22apr2020-21apr2021.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjShJDqgNKIAxUfVUEAHbVRFzMQFnoECCEQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0TZp0EVu4C-dQ80t1oZ0l_
excellent work!
The "fly in the ointment" is the LNPs that can cross the blood brain barrier. ARCT-154 utilizes the Venezuelan Equine ENCEPHALITIS Virus (VEEV) "RdRP/Replicon".
Bottom of Page 6:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.07.13.23292597v1.full.pdf
It remains a SERIOUS mystery to me why they would choose VEEV as the RdRP/Replicon of choice for a SARS-2 antigenic Spike particle. I'm not certain if there is something about that VEEV replicon that renders it more efficacious within the brain, potentially increasing the chance of CJD spongiform encephalitis, but it's pretty odd.
Why not use an actual SARS-1 RdRP/replicon? OR a benign influenza RdRP/Replicon? They are all pretty much the same, "unifying" them, perhaps with minor differences (according to what RALPH BARIC implied (see Author's Summary)
"Positive-stranded RNA (+RNA) viruses include many important pathogens. They have evolved a variety of replication strategies, but are UNIFIED in the fact that an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) functions as the core enzyme of their RNA-synthesizing machinery."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2973827/
But VEEV has a history both in the US and USSR bioweapons programs prior to 1975, so that has me asking a lot of questions.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559332/#:~:text=Enzootic%20VEEV%20exists%20continuously%20in,from%20small%2Dvolume%20aerosolized%20samples.
Thanks Jessica. Looking forward to the next video. Keep up the great work!
thank you for your contribution to humanity..
Thank you Jessica! You are a blessing!
Jessica, if you aren't married this slide deck may get you some proposals :)
Wonderful work !
Certainly makes more sense than the cover up brigade !
How could they possibly think they would get away with such corruption and distortion of mind ???
Thanks. It looks like an interesting lesson for me. I like those.
hi folks be aware the pandemic treaty is far from dead in the water as many wrongly believe in fact its coming back much sooner than we think...for the details check out the james roguski substack..also go to citizengo.org and scroll through till you find a petition stop the who,s accelerated push to finalise the pandemic treaty...its a worldwide petition it can be signed and reshared widely worldwide from any country in the world INCLUDING JAPAN [SUBTLE HINT]...that said when resharing it dont bother using you tube/twitter/gestapo book who you can be sure will suppress it....it currently has over 238000 signatures
Other potentially crucial info on this topic is in the comment I just posted, before I read yours
Thank you for sharing this with all of us. May God keep and protect you. Take care.
Thank you!
Crushed I can't be there in the flesh - hopefully next time. Thank goodness for streams, so we can still check out your talk :)