Skip to main content

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

 +
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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent ...

News Roundup: April 30, 2026

 + JMJ I just realised that I haven't posted the latest Roundup ... and there is a lot in the roundup as the media storm around the SSPX continues! I also just noticed this article: European Conservative: Why the SSPX Bishop Decision Matters Far Beyond Church Politics (link) .  P^3 === Popes Past Present and Future Papal News and Views Cardinal Fernandez maintains that Francis is not dead- metaphorically Pope Leo XIV Reopens Amoris Laetitia File | FSSPX News Pope Leo: “We Do Not Agree with the Formalized Blessing of …Homosexual Couples” - OnePeterFive RORATE CÆLI: How Pope Leo is Reshuffling the Curia: Musical Chairs and Power Games RORATE CÆLI: A Giant Leap: The meaning of Cardinal Eijk’s Pontifical High Mass and the Rebirth of Dutch Catholicism RORATE CÆLI: A Sign of Continuity with the Pre-Francis Papacy: Pope to Wash Feet of Twelve Priests RORATE CÆLI: Vatican Blocks Continuity of Procedure of Beatification and Canonization of Argentine Bishop -- no new Satanellis Pope Leo...

Rome and SSPX - Version 2026 Part 2

 + JMJ Part 2 Detailed Synopsis and Timeline (ChatGPT) At this point, I took the shortcut of uploading all of my previous links and the latest SSPX and Rome links to ChatGPT. This way we’ll see how ChatGPT interprets the world as presented on the internet. P^3 Briefing Memo Subject: Rome–SSPX Relations and Planned Episcopal Consecrations (July 1, 2026) Prepared for: Ecclesial / Academic / Media Briefing Date: February 2026 Issue Overview The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has announced its intention to consecrate new bishops on July 1, 2026 , potentially without a papal mandate . The Holy See has acknowledged ongoing talks with the SSPX and stated its desire to avoid rupture, but has not granted approval nor outlined canonical consequences. The situation revives unresolved tensions dating to 1988 and raises questions about schism, authority, and doctrinal continuity. Background Founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX seeks to preserve pre-Vat...

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5 - How Did We Get Here???

 + JMJ This is the fifth in this series and I think it may require a part b to show the controversial documents and teachings of the Pope post V2. P^3 Part 5 How Did We Get Here??? Introduction My family became ‘Traditional’ in early 1980’s and I didn’t realise until years later how early we entered the Fray. So the SSPX was slightly over a decade old when we started going to Mass. That is a young organization, as someone said at the consecrations “Aren’t you a little young to be a bishop?”, the response was, “That is something that time will change.” 1970: SSPX founded with diocesan approval (Abp. Marcel Lefebvre) 1974–1976: Vatican II disputes escalate; Lefebvre suspended a divinis 1988: Illicit episcopal consecrations → excommunications declared 2000: SSPX Jubilee pilgrimage to Rome (signals openness to talks) 2009: Excommunications lifted by Pope Benedict XVI 2011–2012: Doctrinal talks with CDF collapse 2015–2017: SSPX granted faculties for confessi...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3