Urgent Covid Pfizer vaccine female infertility concerns: read The FULL Petition

Former Phizer VP employee Ph.D. and German M.D. Filed this Petition to the European Medicine Agency on December 1


Sorry if this has been posted, but I looked everywhere to find the full petition and I am shocked by its content. I doubt it will be available for long.

I wanted to get the full petition on GLP before its scrubbed from the internet as it almost is.

Download the full PDF from this link before its gone:

[link to www.wodarg.com (secure)]


Starting on page 4, starting with section VII…
(Emphasis mine less than 50% quoted)

From the petition:

VII. Petitioner hereby also incorporates the grounds, facts, arguments and opinions stated in the external peer review of the “Drosten-Test” (Exhibit B). Design flaws of certain RT-qPCR tests that are identical to or modeled after what is sometimes called the “Drosten-Test” can lead to false-positive results in trials designed such that PCR results are the primary evidence of infection.
Exhibit B attached hereto shall be incorporated herein and shall be understood to be a part hereof as though included in the body of this petition.

VIII. For a vaccine to work, our immune system needs to be stimulated to produce a neutralizing antibody, as opposed to a non-neutralizing antibody. A neutralizing antibody is one that can recognize and bind to some region (‘epitope’) of the virus, and that subsequently results in the virus either not entering or replicating in your cells.

A non-neutralizing antibody is one that can bind to the virus, but for some reason, the antibody fails to neutralize the infectivity of the virus. In some viruses, if a person harbors a non-neutralizing antibody to the virus, a subsequent infection by the virus can cause that person to elicit a more severe reaction to the virus due to the presence of the non-neutralizing antibody. This is not true for all viruses, only particular ones. This is called Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE), and is a common problem with Dengue Virus, Ebola Virus, HIV, RSV, and the family of coronaviruses. In fact, this problem of ADE is a major reason why many previous vaccine trials for other coronaviruses failed. Major safety concerns were observed in animal models. If ADE occurs in an individual, their response to the virus can be worse than their response if they had never developed an antibody in the first place. This can cause a hyperinflammatory response, a cytokine storm,, and a generally dysregulation of the immune system that allows the virus to cause more damage to our lungs and other organs of our body. In addition, new cell types throughout our body are now susceptible to viral infection due to the additional viral entry pathway. There are many studies that demonstrate that ADE is a persistent problem with coronaviruses in general, and in particular, with SARS-related viruses. ADE has proven to be a serious challenge with coronavirus vaccines, and this is the primary reason many of such vaccines have failed in early in-vitro or animal trials. For example, rhesus macaques who were vaccinated with the Spike protein of the SARS-CoV virus demonstrated severe acute lung injury when challenged with SARS-CoV, while monkeys who were not vaccinated did not. Similarly, mice who were immunized with one of four different SARS-CoV vaccines showed histopathological changes in the lungs with eosinophil infiltration after being challenged with SARS-CoV virus.

IX. There are some concerning issues with the trial designs, spelled out by Dr. Peter Doshi in the British Medical Journal. Dr. Doshi focuses on the two biggest issues. First, none of the leading vaccine candidate trials is designed to test if the vaccine can reduce severe COVID-19 symptoms, defined as: hospital admissions, ICU or death. And, second, the trials are not designed to test if the vaccine can interrupt transmission

[link to www.bmj.com (secure)]

If neither of these conditions is met, the vaccine, in essence, performs like a therapeutic drug, except a vaccine would be taken prophylactically, even by the perfectly healthy, and more than likely carries a higher risk of injury than a therapeutic drug.
If this were to be true, then therapeutic drugs would be superior to any COVID vaccine.

X. In the Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA vaccine candidate, polyethylene glycol (PEG) is found in the fatty lipid nanoparticle coating around the mRNA. Seventy percent of people make antibodies to PEG and most do not know it, creating a concerning situation where many could have allergic, potentially deadly, reactions to a PEG-containing vaccine. PEG antibodies may also reduce vaccine effectiveness. Pfizer/BioNTech is also inserting an ingredient derived from a marine invertebrate, mNeonGreen, into its vaccine. The ingredient has bioluminescent qualities, making it attractive for medical imaging purposes, but it is unclear why an injected vaccine would need to have that quality. mNeonGreen has unknown antigenicity.

XI. Several vaccine candidates are expected to induce the formation of humoral antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. Syncytin-1 (see Gallaher, B., “Response to nCoV2019 Against Backdrop of Endogenous Retroviruses” -
[link to virological.org (secure)]

which is derived from human endogenous retroviruses (HERV) and is responsible for the development of a placenta in mammals and humans and is therefore an essential prerequisite for a successful pregnancy[/b], is also found in homologous form in the spike proteins of SARS viruses.
There is no indication whether antibodies against spike proteins of SARS viruses would also act like anti-Syncytin-1 antibodies. However, if this were to be the case this would then also prevent the formation of a placenta which would result in vaccinated women essentially becoming infertile. To my knowledge, Pfizer/BioNTech has yet to release any samples of written materials provided to patients, so it is unclear what, if any, information regarding (potential) fertility-specific risks caused by antibodies is included.

According to section 10.4.2 of the Pfizer/BioNTech trial protocol, a woman of childbearing potential (WOCBP) is eligible to participate if she is not pregnant or breastfeeding, and is using an acceptable contraceptive method as described in the trial protocol during the intervention period (for a minimum of 28 days after the last dose of study intervention). This means that it could take a relatively long time before a noticeable number of cases of postvaccination infertility could be observed.
XII. It appears that Pfizer/BioNTech have not yet released any samples of written materials provided to patients, so it is unclear what, if any, instructions/information patients/subjects were given regarding ADE and PEG-related issues and (potential) fertility- or pregnancy-specific issues

STAY URGENTLY REQUIRED

I. Petitioner any many EU residents/citizens will suffer irreparable harm because once the EMA approves the COVID- 19 vaccine(s) in question, both governments of EU member states and employers in the EU are most likely going to recommend them for widespread use, and hence without the EMA assuring proper safety trials of the vaccines now, the Petitioner and others will not have the opportunity to object to receiving the vaccine based on deficient clinical trials later.

II. Furthermore, if the vaccines are licensed without an appropriate efficacy review and without improving the accurate determination of primary endpoints, then any potential acceptance or mandate of these vaccines are likely to be based on inaccurate beliefs and data about the vaccines, namely that they will or might stop transmission of the virus from the vaccine recipient to others and/or that it will reduce severe COVID-19 disease and deaths. The trial protocols in question are not currently properly designed to determine whether either of those objectives can be met.

III. This petition is also not frivolous and is being pursued ingood faith as it seeks to increase the scientific integrity and reliability of the trials of the COVID-19 vaccines.”

BTW I am pretty sure these people are real:

Dr. Micheal Yeardon “Former VP of Pfizer”:

“Dr. Michael Yeadon is an Allergy & Respiratory Therapeutic Area expert with 23 years in the pharmaceutical industry. He trained as a biochemist and pharmacologist, obtaining his PhD from the University of Surrey (UK) in 1988.”

“Joining Pfizer in 1995, he was responsible for the growth and portfolio delivery of the Allergy & Respiratory pipeline within the company. He was responsible for target selection and the progress into humans of new molecules, leading teams of up to 200 staff across all disciplinesand won an Achievement Award for productivity in 2008.”

“Under his leadership the research unit invented oral and inhaled NCEs which delivered multiple positive clinical proofs of concept in asthma, allergic rhinitis and COPD. He led productive collaborations such as with Rigel Pharmaceuticals (SYK inhibitors) and was involved in the licensing of Spiriva and acquisition of the Meridica (inhaler device) company.”

“Dr. Yeadon has published over 40 original research articles and now consults and partners with a number of biotechnology companies. Before working with Apellis, Dr. Yeadon was VP and Chief Scientific Officer (Allergy & Respiratory Research) with Pfizer.”

[link to www.aier.org (secure)]


“Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg is a German physician and Health Policy Adviser. He is an Honorary Member of the Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe (PACE) and a Board Member of Transparency International Germany.”

“His European initiatives and reports brought important issues such as "Faked Pandemics", private military companies, the role of media for democracy, palliative medicine or genetic testing and genetically modified organisms on the political agenda.”

“Before getting elected Member of the German Bundestag, Wolfgang Wodarg worked as a ship´s doctor, port health authority and in the Bernhard-Nocht-Hospital for Tropical Diseases in Hamburg, practiced medicine in several clinics and was the director of a public health institute in Northern Germany. He initiated and chaired for ten years the Specialist Committee on Environmental Health of the Chamber of Physicians (FAGUSH) and was a member of the Epidemiology Task Force in his country Schleswig-Holstein.”

“From 1994 to 2009, he was member of the German Parliament, serving on the Health Committee during his five mandates and since 2005 in the Committee for Economic Cooperation and Development.”

“Recently he was rapporteur on "Private military and security firms and the erosion of the state monopoly on the use of force” for the Political Affairs Committee and on "Palliative care: a model for innovative health and social policies” for the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee.”
“Dr. Wodarg is a lecturer at the University of Flensburg and President of the Rheuma-Liga Schleswig-Holstein.” [link to pncp.info]


I am posting to get this petition in the hands of as many people as possible for review. There seems to be a concerted effort to bury this as quickly as possible, which I find offensive, as scientific inquiry is always valuable, particularly when it comes to ensuring the health of many many people.

As always, none of this is intended as medical advice but merely provided for entertainment purposes and especially the purposes of open and free discussion.

Note that only section X (10) refers to the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine, which is the one that is being deployed in the EU, US, Japan. It appears other sections are referring to other vaccine candidates.

I think the bioluminescent aspects of this are interesting. I can think of no reason why they would have accidentally put that in the vaccine.
I know there has been a lot of talk about lucicerfase, but looks like they chose a cousin, mNeonGreen.

[link to blog.addgene.org (secure)]

The petition makes it clear that there is no legitimate reason to have included this in a vaccine unless you want to track it late.

"The ingredient has bioluminescent qualities, making it attractive for medical imaging purposes, but it is unclear why an injected vaccine would need to have that quality. mNeonGreen has unknown antigenicity."

It would be another unnecessary antigen.... surely they have a purpose for it....

so two different fluroescent compounds are being put into different injections.


this has to be part of the quantum dot process where the evidence of your injection is easily observable through a special camera and/or with lights off

Well, they sure don't need bioluminescence to make an effective vaccine, so the reason it is there is obviously to satisfy another agenda.

I was kinda taking all the talk about "markers" in the vaccine with a grain of salt until I read this petition.

Disclaimer: All my posts for entertainment and discussion only, not medical advice.

Read what I wrote in APRIIL

Thread: COVID19 HOLY SH&T A Research Thread

Saved. And thank you.

no actually it is necessary
[link to www.hindustantimes.com (secure)]

it is used to tack how the antibodies react with the virus

no actually it is necessary
[link to www.hindustantimes.com (secure)]

it is used to tack how the antibodies react with the virus

Well, they sure don't need bioluminescence to make an effective vaccine, so the reason it is there is obviously to satisfy another agenda.

I was kinda taking all the talk about "markers" in the vaccine with a grain of salt until I saw this petition in full.

Disclaimer: All my posts for entertainment and discussion only, not medical advice.

Thanks for sharing

If women are dumb enough to take the vax they probably wouldn't make good mothers.