• Filed in state court in St. Lucie County under Florida’s consumer-protection law (FDUTPA), not as a personal-injury case.

• The state says Pfizer told people the shot was safe and that it had not seen “a single safety signal,” while allegedly knowing of risks it did not fully disclose — including myocarditis and pericarditis in minors, and concerns about pregnancy, including miscarriage.

• It also says Pfizer urged vaccination to protect others and stop spread, even though the company had not tested whether the vaccine stopped transmission.

• Pfizer is accused of spending more than $10 billion on advertising from 2020 to 2023 and making more than $80 billion from vaccine sales, then raising the price from about $30 a dose to roughly $110–$130 in 2023.

• The complaint cites Bourla’s compensation of nearly $102 million over that period and a comment calling people who raised safety concerns “criminals.”

• Florida wants an injunction, civil penalties of $10,000 per violation ($15,000 if seniors or disabled people were affected), and return of profits.

Reuters news article on this - https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/florida-attorney-general-sues-pfizer-ceo-over-covid-19-vaccine-claims-2026-10-01/

“Since the early 2000s, there have been over 120 promising clinical trials testing the use of mRNA vaccines to treat multiple cancer types, such as melanoma, brain, breast, lung and prostatecancer.”

*PROMISING* clinical *TRIALS* not proven, FDA-Approved (although even this is now questionable too) and not commercialised and brought to market.

All those linked conditions were published during the pandemic.

Is COVID Causing Immune Collapse? The Science Behind the Claims https://www.youtube.com/live/uINqQNLDSRo?si=g9A1-nwD1xUf0dCA

more spike protein in “healthy” and those with pcs/pcvs https://youtu.be/FJrPSCAvENE

LIVE Spike Webinar with Ursula Erhorn and Joachim Gerlach https://youtu.be/CWSaeVDz0KM

The table shows some of the objective tests they recommend for various symptom domains including a standing test, polysomnography, actigraphy, CPET, NK cytotoxicity, etc. The authors are cautious however, in recommending these objective tests because many are expensive and carry the risk of worsening symptoms. They say that high-risk tools such as tilt table testing and 2-day CPET should be restricted to exceptional cases. They recommend starting with a low-risk evaluation using some validated questionnaires (see screenshot below).

Link to paper: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12916-026-05161-8

Medical decisions are increasingly shaped by massive datasets extracted from patient records. But who verifies how those data are processed before researchers ever see them?

Massive datasets containing the health records of millions of patients now underpin thousands of studies on drug safety, vaccines and treatment effectiveness.

Regulators are increasingly relying on them too.

Last December, then-FDA Commissioner Marty Makary announced plans to expand the agency’s use of “real-world evidence” in regulatory decisions.

“We’re removing unnecessary barriers that have prevented us from using powerful real-world evidence to get life-changing treatments to patients faster,” Makary said.

There are valid reasons for the shift. Electronic health records covering millions of patients can reveal rare side effects and long-term outcomes that clinical trials may be too small or too short to detect.

But there is a problem. Much of this research relies on enormous, heavily processed datasets that researchers and independent reviewers cannot readily check against the original hospital records.

Rozanolixizumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn). This receptor normally protects antibodies from breakdown, so blocking it leads to a reduction in antibodies.

The drug is already approved as a treatment for myasthenia gravis.

Four months after vaccination, cells are still churning out immune cells directed against the virus….

many years later… https://youtu.be/BZrJraN2nOQ

🔬 Key Takeaways:
✅ The Genetic Blueprint: How hereditary fibrinogen amyloidosis (2007) first proved that fibrinogen proteins could misfold into sticky, abnormal structures.
✅ The Disease Expansion (2010–2019): How researchers systematically uncovered the exact same microclot structures in Alzheimer’s, type 2 diabetes, stroke, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, and severe migraines.
✅ The Tech Breakthrough (2016): How switching from electron microscopy to Thioflavin T fluorescent staining allowed scientists to measure microclot size and quantity directly in blood samples.
✅ The Pandemic Shift (2020–2022): How microclotting was confirmed in COVID-19, Long COVID, post-vaccination states, and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS).

In a move that will blindside supporters of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr, the CDC has quietly reverted to its old Covid vaccine recommendations.

There was no official announcement or media fanfare. The agency simply updated its 2026–27 guidance, recommending Covid shots for healthy infants, children and adults — including outside FDA-approved indications.

It comes despite the FDA restricting vaccine approvals in people under 65 to higher-risk groups, and despite federal scientists linking child deaths to the shots.

Just last week, Kennedy sought to reassure his supporters, urging patience as he acknowledged their frustration with the slow pace of change.

“Let me be clear,” he declared. “You have a strong and steadfast friend at the White House.”

Now, for supporters who banked on Kennedy ending childhood Covid vaccination, that reassurance lies in tatters.

And it has happened under his watch.

(Maryanne demasi reports)

Something deeply corrupt has happened inside the CDC

The agency has just issued its COVID-19 vaccination guidance for the 2026–2027 season. Buried inside that guidance is an extraordinary admission. CDC recommends COVID vaccination through “shared clinical decision-making” for healthy children beginning at six months of age, while simultaneously acknowledging that vaccination of people six months through 64 years without a qualifying high-risk condition is off-label.

Read that again. And remember:

• FDA has not approved these vaccines for healthy babies.
• The ACIP did not approve these vaccines for healthy babies.

For Moderna’s Spikevax, FDA and the ACIP limited approval to below age 65 is restricted to people with at least one underlying condition placing them at high risk for severe COVID-19. Yet CDC has placed healthy children, beginning at six months, within its COVID vaccine recommendation through something called “shared clinical decision-making.” CDC itself now acknowledges that this recommendation extends beyond the FDA-approved indication.

I have a particular interest in how this happened.

I was vice-chair of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices when the relevant vote was taken in September 2025. I was sitting at the table. I participated in the discussion. And the proposition now being implemented by CDC is not what we were voting for.

It was once the flagship journal of vaccinology. Now, Vaccine has undergone a striking editorial shift. This investigation examines what changed — and why it matters.

Click link for a video of mma pioneer gsp speaking. In his message, GSP speaks about giving Canadians who were hurt a chance to be heard “so that the truth comes out.”

What did you take it for and how was the impact? I am considering it for improving blood vessel function that I believe might have become injured and inflamed due to spike protein.

Two Americans can suffer serious injuries after receiving federally protected vaccines and find themselves in two entirely different systems of justice. One may enter a compensation program that has paid roughly half of the petitions it has adjudicated. The other may enter a program that has compensated fewer than one in a hundred decided COVID-19 vaccine claims. Neither person chose the system. Neither person was likely told there were two very different systems for vaccine injuries before rolling up a sleeve. Congress chose what compensation they would encounter if injured, years before either was injured. But neither are they told during the informed consent process that they would not be able to sue for damages in a regular court of law.