Hearsync said:
12 countries and counting have already suspended the AstraZeneca vaccine due to blot clot related deaths after being given the vaccine. I'm sure we'll start to see the number of countries rise banning/suspending the AstraZeneca vaccine:
Oh goys look, it is only the AstraZeneca (latin for killing stars) vaccine who is bad, the other 3 backed by Billy, with fancy new experimental mRNA technology are all fine take them.
And please do not, I repeat do not look after this so called german vaccine without any serious side effects without mRNA and Billy invested money:
[caution no one should be vaccinated with any vaccine. But if the sheep urgently want a vaccine, they should please take the one with the lowest risk.]
"The German magazine Der Spiegel gave Winfried Stöcker, a physician and entrepreneur from the northern city of Lübeck, quite a lot of publicity in early April 2020. The report tells the story of an ingenious inventor who developed an effective vaccine against the coronavirus in his private laboratory. He had already vaccinated about 100 volunteers with it, he told the magazine.
The vaccine showed no side effects, the report claimed. It was also apparently 97% effective in those vaccinated. This, the report stated, had been proven in serological tests. The vaccine could, reportedly, easily be produced in large quantities and it would soon be possible to vaccinate everyone in Germany.
But instead of receiving the necessary support from German regulatory authorities, they filed formal criminal charges against him. And that's how they "thwarted him," according to the Spiegel report.
So is Stöcker an unrecognized genius inventor whose work has been hampered by inflexible bureaucracy or is he an irresponsible Dr. Frankenstein? In any case, the doctor's actions have caused outrage among medical experts.
Stöcker had simply skipped countless steps mandated for the protection of patient safety, they argue. DW explains the most important points about the so-called "Lübeck vaccination."
Why should he not have administered the vaccine to volunteers?
Stöcker did not present any information on approval, study protocol and preclinical validation before administering the vaccine. It appears that the vaccine went straight from his lab to the volunteers, violating formal protocol.
[Smal reminder the other vaccines did already kill many elderly even if it is not offical reportet in most cases]
The approval of drugs, including vaccines, is a complicated and lengthy process. After laboratory tests on cell cultures, it then includes toxicological tests on animals. In order to even be allowed to carry out such tests, drug manufacturers must go through elaborate approval procedures.
The same applies to the next step towards the first clinical trials in humans in phase 1, which is then followed by the further phases of drug development. A prerequisite for each individual clinical trial is also approval from the responsible regulatory authority. In Germany, this is the Paul-Ehrlich-Institute (PEI).
A basic scientific principle that Stöcker violated is that those who manufacture drugs themselves, or even their employees, are excluded from participating in trial series as test subjects. It serves to exclude the possibility of bias on the part of test subjects and ensures the objectivity of the studies.
It was one reason why even the inventors of the BioNTech-Pfizer vaccine had not received the vaccine themselves, as CEO Ugur Sahin told DW at the end of 2020. Stöcker, on the other hand, boasted that he administered the vaccine to his family and staff.
[he did take it by him self, how evil of him]
As a doctor, administering an unapproved drug can be ruled to be bodily harm. It also represents a breach of the doctor's duty of care. In this respect, Stöcker may also have to face sanctions from the respective medical association.
What kind of vaccine is it? [killing elderly with bad side effects from vaccines is totaly fine]
According to Stöcker, his vaccine is based on a "recombinant antigen that can be produced easily and cheaply in a test tube." It is comparable to existing vaccines for hepatitis A and B, he said. Since the antigen, unlike mRNA or vector vaccines, is already amplified outside the body, namely in the laboratory, "there is no need to fear an uncontrolled spread of genetic information introduced into the human organism," he argues.
In fact, such so-called subunit vaccines have been known for a long time and are also used, for example, against influenza or human papillomaviruses (HPV).
Stöcker's vaccine is not as unique as the Spiegel report suggests, even as a COVID-19 vaccine. One of the vaccines that are currently at an advanced stage of development is also based on this principle, namely NVX-CoV2373 from Novavax.
What are the risks to volunteers?
In a German language blog post, Austrian veterinarian Petra Falb lists a whole series of points that Stöcker does not provide any information on but which are relevant to the safety and, above all, the health of his test subjects.
For example, Falb emphasizes that Stöcker does not comment on the question of possible contamination of his vaccine with viruses or mycoplasma - very small bacteria.
However, checking for possible contaminations is "a delicate point in vaccine development," she points out, because the antigens in the vaccine are produced in the laboratory by an expression system — usually a virus — on a cell line. And materials of animal origin are also used. If the cell line contains retroviruses, there is a risk that the vaccine could later cause cancer.
The information on additives, so-called adjuvants, in Stöcker's report is also "completely inadequate," Falb notes.
How effective is the active ingredient really?
Stöcker cannot substantiate his claim that the vaccine achieves 97% efficacy. In fact, there has not been a single published study on his vaccine in a
reputable journal.
[billy did invest in, lol]
So far,
he has only conducted serological tests showing that antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 virus were produced in his trial paticipants.
However, in the context of a vaccine approval, many other aspects have to be taken into account, such as the immune response of the T-cells.
The actual efficacy - i.e., how many of the vaccinated individuals became infected with COVID-19 in a given period after vaccination compared to a placebo group - is also crucial for approval.
Typically, this is assessed at the conclusion of phase 3 in vaccine development. But Stöcker apparently has not even passed the first in a long series of necessary steps."
https://www.dw.com/en/german-coronavirus-vaccine-inventor-being-investigated/a-56828943
From the offical site:
"The Lübeck Anti-Covid-19 Vaccine
is based on a trivial recombinant antigen that can be easily and cheaply produced in a retort. It induces high levels of virus-neutralizing antibodies in 97% of vaccinees and has not caused any weighty side effects in the first hundred patients.
Externally supplied recombinant antigens, such as those used here, have long been proven effective in vaccination against hepatitis A and B, for example, and vaccination is virtually risk-free. Vaccination is carried out with an already synthesized peptide; there is no risk of infection as with microencapsulated RNA, attenuated or killed viruses or vector viruses. Since the vaccine antigen is produced outside the body, there is no need to fear the uncontrolled spread of genetic information introduced into the human organism.
The Lübeck Anti-Covid-19 vaccine hardly causes any allergic reactions, certainly not to polyethylene glycol, which is used by the Biontech company to microencapsulate the mRNA, and in contrast to the vaccines already approved in Germany, none of the more than one hundred vaccinated persons reported sick, but continued to work without interruption. Any physician can legally administer the vaccine in his or her practice.
Three times 15 micrograms of recombinant RBD (receptor-binding domain, Arg319-Phe541) of the spike protein S1 subunit are vaccinated per person. Alhydrogel from InvivoGen serves as the adiuvant. The vaccine can be easily produced in large quantities. Excellent for mass vaccination. A single 2000-liter reactor can produce 35 g of antigen per day, which would be enough for 1 million people. A high-density culture system can produce five times that amount. Within a quarter of a year, vaccine for 80% of the population of Germany could be produced in a medium-sized laboratory.
The vaccine is shipped in a freeze-dried state at room temperature and stored in a refrigerator at 4°C in the doctor's office. Unlike m-RNA-based vaccines, the Luebeck antigen does not require continuous freezing.
We hope to soon find a manufacturer who will offer the antigen to the public - after all, it is not yet a vaccine that he would have to approve. Because approval would take too much time, certainly years in Germany. But in the current catastrophic situation, there is no need for lengthy double-blind trials to pinpoint differences in efficacy. One inoculates the first thousand test persons (best with the Lübeck method), and makes them immune immediately. If that goes well, ten thousand people get it, and then the rest.
Figure: The antigen construct used, enriched with four important new mutants.
February 2021, Winfried Stöcker"
https://www.winfried-stoecker.de/blog/luebeck-impfung-gegen-corona-zusammenfassung
The only thing which makes me wonder is this:
Since 1999
he is professor of the Tongji Medical University in Wuhan
![Alexandros Iowno [JG]](/data/avatars/m/21/21004.jpg?1723141422){kind=avatar}
![The Alchemist7 [JG]](/data/avatars/m/1/1057.jpg?1704756197){kind=avatar}
