Skip to main content

Fact Check: Pfizer Confirms Covid-Vaccinated People Can “Shed” Spike Protein and Can Harm the Unvaccinated (Debunked!)

Image
By
 +
JMJ



 

A member of the SuscipeDomine forum (link to post) repeated a claim that:

 Pfizer Confirms Covid-Vaccinated People Can “Shed” Spike Protein and Can Harm the Unvaccinated October 4, 2021 https://www.algora.com/Algora_blog/2021/10/04/pfizer-confirms-covid-vaccinated-people-can-shed-spike-protein-and-can-harm-the-unvaccinated

I really like claims like this because they are relatively easy to fact-check.  First, the document that was tweeted was a small section of the clinical trial protocol, that can be found here: https://cdn.pfizer.com/pfizercom/2020-11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020.pdf.  The title for section 8 includes Study Assessments and Procedure and the quotation was from section 8.3.5 starting on page 67.

I noticed that everything in that section is centred around the "Study Intervention".  After some review the "study intervention" is the shot that was provided.  Given this is a blinded clinical trial, that two shots contained either the vaccine (dose #1 & #2) or Saline Placebo.


So looking at the section intro section we read:
Exposure to the study intervention under study during pregnancy or breastfeeding and occupational exposure are reportable to Pfizer Safety within 24 hours of investigator awareness.

First observation: This is contact with the vaccine or placebo and says nothing about 'shedding' spike protein.

Second observation: No where does it support the claim that exposure to either the vaccine or placebo harms the unvaccinated.

Third observation: Environmental exposure by inhalation or skin contact is not by 'shedding'
Examples:
  1. I am a male healthcare provider and a vial of vaccine or placebo spills on my pant leg.  My wife / mom / sister could come into contact with the vaccine  or placebo by either skin contact or inhalation.
  2. I am a female healthcare provider and a vial of vaccine  or placebo spills on my pant leg or I inhale some of the fumes from the vials (they're kept really cold and there would be off gassing when warming).
  3. I am a male healthcare provider and a vial of vaccine  or placebo spills on my pant leg.  My wife and I have intercourse.  It is considered an exposure.
These are reportable events and are included in the protocol for are reason. The vaccine at that point is being tested for adverse reactions and they need to keep tabs on everyone who is exposed. Also to maintain the double blind status they have the same requirements for both situations (vaccine vs placebo).

The last part is occupational exposure and it focused on direct contact with the 'study intervention'.

Quote
8.3.5.3. Occupational Exposure: An occupational exposure occurs when a person receives unplanned direct contact with the study intervention, which may or may not lead to the occurrence of an AE.
So nope the actual document doesn't support the claim that:
Covid-Vaccinated People Can “Shed” Spike Protein and Can Harm the Unvaccinated

It is talking about contact with either the vaccine or placebo and does not mention harm anywhere in that section.
 
This conspiracy theory is debunked - - - but people will believe what they want to believe even if the facts don't support it.
 
P^3
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Count Capponi - RIP

By
+ JMJ I had heard of Count Capponi over the years and was happy to hear a voice crying in the wilderness. I suspect that his conscience was clearer than many. This part of the article caught my attention: Capponi defended the right of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to continue his work without the label “schismatic,” which term Capponi rejected, saying: “You cannot apply the standards of the new code of canon law and the mentality of the old code. According to the new code, Lefebvre could do what he did with a Catholic intention, and he did what he did in ‘sincerity’ and invoked the ‘state of emergency’ argument, which the new code permits. You might not like the new code, but it’s what governs the Church.” I know a few people who tried to stir up a fuss when the SSPX cited the New Code in one of the documents with Rome.  Yet, the truth is what it is --- the New Code was promulgated by a reigning Pope and flawed as it is ... there are some benefits to its liberality. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

By
+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment.  Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid.  No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein.  Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse?  The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin.  Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service.  It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized ma...
Post a Comment
Read more

Those who return to the past are not outside the Church - Rorate Caeli

By
+ JMJ I had been thinking about putting together a post explaining some of the history of how the SSPX has arrived at its current position. Now I see that Rorate has posted a translated editorial that shows the roots of the SSPX principles. In reading these words, I see patterns and themes that were put forward by Archbishop Lefebvre decades ago. Perhaps his sight was clearer than most. P^3
Post a Comment
Read more

Fr. Burfitt on Fr. Pfeiffer's Attempted Consecration

By
 + JMJ   Amidst the shadows cast by the publication of Traditionis Custodes, I am working on a map of the 'resistance' splinters to put their reaction in contrast with that of the SSPX.  In the midst of this, I just came across Fr. Burfitt letter on the attempted consecration. Breaking it down (see below)  items 2 and 3 are key.  Just as the consecrating bishop is 'doubtful', even if he hadn't muffed the first attempt, Fr. Pfeiffer remain doubtful and therefore this impacts those men is attempts to 'ordain'. There were rumours that Fr. Pfeiffer was seeking episcopal consecration for years as he cast about for various bishops (also doubtful) to help him achieve this goal. I wonder how he convinced the 'doubtful' bishop to provide (twice) the doubtful consecration. What a mess!  This creates a danger to the souls of his followers and wonder where it will end. Will he go full sede and have himself 'elected' pontiff as others have done before him...
Post a Comment
Read more

SSPX Transfers

By
+ JMJ Eponymous flow posted the following list of transfers etc. Source: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2020/04/castling-of-leadership-at-sspx.html The departures Bishop Bernard Fellay, the third Superior General until 2018, leaves the General House in Menzingen and moves to the Seminary of St. Thomas Aquinas in the USA. Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, suffering from ill health, is being referred to the Seminary of St. Pius X in Ecene as a retreat. Fr. Christian Thouvenot, until now Secretary General of the General House, becomes a professor at the seminary in Ecene. Fr. Franz Schmidberger, until now Rector at the Seminary of the Heart of Jesus in Zaitzkofen, moves to the district of Germany. Fr. Jürgen Wegner, until now district superior of the DISTRICT USA, moves to the district of Austria. Fr. Philippe Brunet, until now Superior of the Autonomous House of Spain-Portugal, becomes professor at the Seminary U.L.F. and co-saviour of La Reja in...
2 comments
Read more