If you haven’t heard the news already, the CDC unanimously voted (15-0) to add the COVID-19 “injection to the “Vaccines for Children (VFC)” Program. This is a free distribution for low-income children that does not affect the childhood vaccine schedule.
But the vote on the vaccine schedule, aka the child immunization schedule revisions, occurs on October 20th, which poses the risk of C19 vax mandates to attend public school on a per-state basis. You can leave a public comment and let your voice be heard here — of which they have already received 86,799 comments and counting.
But with all the piling evidence and negative data on the shots, how could they possibly be voting in such a unanimous fashion?
The 15 to 0 vote to recommend them isn’t in spite of the work the War Room posse and volunteers and Dr. Malone and all of us have done — I think it’s because of it. Because what Dr. Malone is pointing out, and I’ll just say it more boldly, is that these people are voting to not go to jail when they vote to put it under a category that gives them this legal protection, gives the manufacturers this legal protection. So I think it’s an act of self-interest and kind of legal desperation that doesn’t, of course, make any kind of medical sense.
When viewing the CDC slide deck, “a couple of things really horrifyingly leapt out,” said Naomi.
1.) “They just don’t link to any data.”
As Dr. Malone pointed out, there’s no data. And with digital products, there’s no reason not to link to the data. They just don’t do it.
2.) “They’re claiming that there’s a signal of myocarditis for young men and boys that is a certain number per 1 million, according to VAERS.”
But as I understand it, that’s not how the VAERS works. It’s not per million. So that seems already right there — one of the many examples of the CDC torturing the presentation of data basically to lie with it.
3.) And the last thing that’s most alarming of all — is the horrifyingly-high recommended doses for children.
The other thing that really is even much more serious is that the micrograms that they’re recommending are devastatingly dangerous. … They’re recommending 25 micrograms for 12 and under for Pfizer, and that’s almost an adult rate – currently – which is 30 micrograms for Pfizer. And they’re recommending 100 micrograms for 12-year-olds and under from Moderna. That’s an adult rate of micrograms that the Pfizer documents showed — Pfizer considered to be toxic or that had to be withdrawn due to its ‘reactogenicity.’ We have a report on this by the volunteers, the experts, the 3500 War Room/Daily Clout experts, showing that there are increased adverse events for the 100 microgram dose in adults versus the 30 microgram dose. So they’re giving it to little kids! They’re recommending giving that dosage to little kids. And I don’t see any way that that’s not a murderous decision.
Unbelievable. 100 mcg doses for kids. It’s hard to believe they came up with that without any sinister intentions.
And thank you for making it all the way to the end.
Red Voice Media would like to make a point of clarification on why we do not refer to any shot related to COVID-19 as a "vaccine." According to the CDC, the definition of a vaccine necessitates that said vaccine have a lasting effect of at least one year in preventing the contraction of the virus or disease it's intended to fight. Because all of the COVID-19 shots thus far available have barely offered six months of protection, and even then not absolute, Red Voice Media has made the decision hereafter to no longer refer to the Pfizer, Moderna, or Johnson & Johnson substances as vaccinations.