Dr. Clive Dix, who played a key role in helping pharmaceutical firms create the COVID-19 vaccines, told LBC radio on Jan. 16: “The Omicron variant is a relatively mild virus. And to just keep vaccinating people and thinking of doing it again to protect the population is, in my view, now a waste of time.”
Dix said the focus now should be on protecting vulnerable people, such as those over 60, 2 percent of whom remain unvaccinated.
“We should have a highly-focused approach to get those people vaccinated and anybody else who’s vulnerable,” he said.
Though he supports the ongoing booster campaign, he said he has been “critical” of boosting everybody as he is not convinced “it was needed or is needed” for younger people.
Dix said, “I think the thinking of the time was very much to stop infection and transmission where clearly these vaccines don’t do that.”
He said the government needs to be “very focused” on educating itself for the “future vaccination programme” next winter.
He suggested that an “immune status study” should be conducted to “understand exactly where everybody’s immunity is,” so that “by next winter, we can really have a policy of vaccination that’s educated, using the right vaccines at the right time for the right people.”
“We now need to manage disease, not virus spread,” he said. “So stopping progression to severe disease in vulnerable groups is the future objective.”
The UK government’s medical advisers have already acknowledged that it is “untenable” to jab the population every three or six months.
Sir Patrick Vallance, the UK’s chief scientific adviser, said on Jan. 3 that it is not the government’s “long-term view” to give everyone a booster vaccine every few months.
Professor Andrew Pollard, director of the Oxford Vaccine Group and chair of the government’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), told The Telegraph that it’s “not sustainable or affordable” to “vaccinate the planet every four to six months.”
The JCVI said the three doses of the vaccines are still providing “very good protection against severe disease,” and an immediate second booster dose to the most vulnerable would “provide only limited additional benefit against severe disease at this time.”
Lily Zhou and PA Media contributed to this report.
A video shows FAUCI and other HHS officials discussing in October 2019, how a new virus from China could be used to enforce vaccination everywhere.
As many of us have long suspected, this was never about fighting a new virus. Footage from a panel discussion at the Milken Institute has been revealed. It’s about finding a new way to introduce a universal flu vaccine.
Dr. Rick Bright suggested that a novel bird flu virus could break out of China, which could then be used to create a global mRNA vaccine that could be tested on the public.
Top U.S. health officials, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, scrambled in early 2020 to respond to public reporting of a potential connection between COVID-19 and the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.
This response, which included a secret Feb. 1, 2020, teleconference, was loosely detailed in previously released and heavily redacted emails. Those emails strongly suggested that Fauci and a small group of top scientists sought to promote the natural origin theory, despite having evidence and internal expert opinions that pointed to the possibility of a leak from the Wuhan lab.
Unredacted versions of some of the emails made public by lawmakers on Jan. 11 further confirm this.
The newly unredacted emails, released by House Oversight Committee Republicans, confirm and illustrate a pattern of lies and coverup. From the emails, it appears the effort was spearheaded by Fauci himself but also involved his boss, recently retired National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Dr. Francis Collins, as well as Jeremy Farrar, the head of the British Wellcome Trust.
It was previously revealed that at least two scientists, both of whom had received funding from the NIH, had told Fauci during the teleconference that they were 60 to 80 percent sure that COVID had come out of a lab.
The most significant new revelations in the unredacted emails come from two of these scientists, Robert Garry and Mike Farzan, who both noted the difficulties presented by the presence of a furin cleavage site in the COVID-19 virus—a feature that would later be cited as the defining characteristic of the virus.
‘Bothered by the Furin Site’
Farzan, an immunologist who in 2005 discovered the receptor of the original severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) virus, sent his post-teleconference notes to Farrar, who then shared them with Collins, Fauci, and Lawrence Tabak—top officials at the NIH. In those notes, Farzan wrote that he was “bothered by the furin site” and had difficulty explaining it “as an event outside the lab.” Farzan noted that it was theoretically possible the virus’s furin cleavage site could have arisen in nature but that it was “highly unlikely.”
The furin cleavage site is the defining feature that gives COVID-19 the ability to easily infect humans and has long been puzzled over by scientists, since no such site has ever been observed in naturally occurring SARS-related coronaviruses.
Farzan, like scientist Kristian Andersen, who has received funding from Fauci’s NIAID, works at the Scripps laboratory. As was already known from previously released emails, Andersen had privately told Fauci on Jan. 31, 2020 that the virus looked engineered. Andersen would later spearhead Fauci’s efforts to promote a natural origin narrative.
Farzan told the senior members of Fauci’s teleconference group that “a likely explanation could be something as simple as passage SARS-live CoVs in tissue culture on human cell lines” for an “extended period of time,” which could lead to the accidental creation of “a virus that would be primed for rapid transmission between humans.” This mutated virus would likely have specific “adaptation to human ACE2 receptor via repeated passage.”
A recent study in the science journal Nature noted that the COVID-19 virus was uniquely adapted to infect humans, as it “exhibited the highest binding to human (h)ACE2 of all the species tested.”
In layman’s terms, Farzan concluded that the pandemic likely originated from a lab in which live coronaviruses were passed through human-like tissue over and over, accelerating virus mutations with the end result being that one of the mutated viruses may have leaked from the lab. Farzan placed the likelihood of a leak from a Wuhan lab at 60 to 70 percent likely.
The emails indicate that Farzan was cognizant that the Wuhan lab conducted these types of dangerous experiments in Level 2 labs, which have a very low biosecurity standard. This fact was later admitted by the Wuhan lab’s director, Shi Zhengli, in July 2020. Notably, since the start of the pandemic, Farzan has received grants totaling almost $20 million from Collins’s NIH and Fauci’s NIAID.
‘Can’t Figure Out How This Gets Accomplished in Nature’
Further revelations in the newly unredacted emails came from Garry, another scientist funded by Fauci’s NIAID, who told the senior members of the teleconference group in no uncertain terms that “I really can’t think of a plausible natural scenario where you get from the bat virus” to COVID-19.
Garry cited the remarkable sequences that would have to occur naturally, telling the group that “I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature. Do the alignment of the spikes at the amino acid level – it’s stunning.” He noted that a lab-created virus would readily explain the data he was seeing, telling Fauci’s group that “Of course, in the lab, it would be easy to generate the perfect 12 base insert that you wanted.”
Along the same lines of what Farzan had said, Garry was telling Fauci’s group that it was extremely unlikely that the furin cleavage site could have evolved naturally, whereas creating it in a lab was easy.
The primary difference between Farzan’s and Garry’s view lies in whether the lab created the furin cleavage site through serial passage in human-like tissue or through direct insertion of the site. In either case, both scientists thought it was likely that the virus came out of the Wuhan lab rather than having originated in nature.
Scientist’s Private Views Conflicted With Public Statements
Garry’s privately stated view is even more remarkable because only a day earlier, on Feb. 1, 2020, Garry had helped to complete the first draft of the Proximal Origin paper that promoted the idea that the virus had originated in nature. That paper became the media’s and the public health establishment’s go-to evidence for a natural origin for the COVID virus.
It was published online on Feb. 16, 2020, and firmly excluded the possibility of a lab leak.
One of Garry’s co-authors for the Proximal Origin paper, Andrew Rambaut, also is cited in the newly redacted emails. In congruence with the other two scientists, Rambaut told Fauci’s teleconference group that he also was bothered by the unusual furin cleavage site. But unlike Garry or Farzan, he speculated that the virus might have arisen in another animal, a so-called intermediate host.
Two years later, no such host has been identified. In the case of the original SARS virus as well as the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) virus, the intermediate host was found within a few months. Rambaut also recognized immediately the peculiar fact that the furin cleavage site “insertion has resulted in an extremely fit virus in humans—we can also deduce that it is not optimal for transmission in bat species.”
Rambaut lamented the lack of data being shared by Wuhan scientists and concluded that only the Wuhan Institute of Virology knew what had happened.
Fauci’s Group Misleads National Academy of Sciences
The day after these three scientists shared their views with the senior members of the group, on Feb. 3, 2020, Fauci attended a meeting at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). That meeting had been urgently convened at the behest of White House Director of Science and Technology Kelvin Droegmeier, who wrote that he was seeking answers about the origins of COVID-19.
The meeting, which included a presentation by Fauci, was also attended by Peter Daszak–the person through whom Fauci had funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology–and Kristian Andersen. Fauci and his group promoted the natural origin theory to the Academy, despite having just been told on the teleconference and in subsequent emails that a lab leak provided the most likely explanation for the virus.
While they were pushing their natural origin narrative to NASEM, and by extension to the White House, Fauci and his group made no mention of their private discussions—which were taking place at the same time—that the virus most likely originated in a Wuhan lab.
NIH Hiding Behind Unjustifiable Redactions
The new emails fill some of the gaps left by previous redactions, but still only cover a small portion of the many emails that remain redacted. A close examination of the newly unredacted emails reveals that none of the usual justifications for redactions, such as private information about people or threats to sources and methods, apply. Instead, it appears that all of the redactions were made solely on the basis of shielding the NIH from scrutiny over its coverup of the virus’s origins.
These efforts at obfuscation tie in with the fact that we only found out about these new emails after a months-long battle between the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the parent organization of Fauci’s NIH and NIAID, and House Republicans.
In order to obtain this information, House Republicans were forced to avail themselves of a rarely used law from 1928, the so-called Seven Member Rule. Under this law, an executive agency, such as HHS, is required to provide requested information when requested by seven members of the House Committee on Government Operations (now called the Committee on Oversight and Reform).
It isn’t known why Republicans haven’t used this law earlier or with greater frequency.
Eventually, HHS allowed the House Republicans’ congressional staffers to view the unredacted emails in person. The staffers then transcribed what they saw, which is how we came to know about these new revelations.
NIH Silences Dissenting Views
These new emails are crucial in that they confirm that by Feb. 2, 2020, Fauci’s teleconference group had identified evidence pointing to a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. These scientists knew that the virus’s unique furin cleavage site was very likely the result of experiments conducted at the Wuhan lab. Notably, they also knew that these experiments were being conducted in minimum biosecurity Level 2 labs.
These facts presented a major problem for the heads of the NIH, who had funded the experiments.
As the new emails confirm, their response was to cover up the lab leak evidence and push a natural origin narrative.
Then-NIH Director Collins, who would later call for the public “takedown” of the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, asked his group for a “swift convening of experts” in order to prevent the “voices of conspiracy” from doing “great potential harm to science and international harmony…” through public discussion of a lab leak theory.
Collins’s view was mirrored by another participant in Fauci’s teleconference, Dutch virologist Ron Fouchier, who told the group that “Further debate about such accusations would unnecessarily distract top researchers from their active duties and do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular.”
Jeff Carlson co-hosts the show Truth Over News on Epoch TV. He is a CFA-registered Charterholder and worked for 20 years as an analyst and portfolio manager in the high-yield bond market. He also runs the website TheMarketsWork.com and can be followed on Twitter @themarketswork.
Hans Mahncke co-hosts the show Truth Over News on Epoch TV. He holds LL.B., LL.M. and Ph.D. degrees in law. He is the author of numerous law books and his research has been published in a range of international journals. Hans can be followed on Twitter @hansmahncke
World renowned CV19 critical care and pulmonary expert Dr. Pierre Kory says the data is clear the CV19 injections are “not safe, not effective” and shows they are causing a huge number of deaths. It’s going to get much worse if we don’t stop the shots. Dr. Kory warns, “They already broke death records with these vaccines almost a year ago. Now, you are starting to see it in actuarial data with life insurance companies. The life insurance companies have been paying out claims like they never have before, and they are noticing the deaths cannot be explained by Covid. If you look at the actual morbidity and mortality from the CDC . . . 2019, 2020 and 2021 in the ages of 18 to 64 . . . you’ll see in America, starting in quarter two of the year 2021 (when the vaccines started), the mortalities started to rise, and it rose from 120% above normal to 140% above normal, and it’s far exceeded the death rates in 2020. The difference in 2020 and 2021, we had covid in both years. In 2021, we had the vaccines. They know the amount of deaths they are reporting cannot be explained by Covid. . . . There is something else driving a huge and extremely terrifying mortality signal in the U.S. population. To think that it is anything but the vaccines, if we get this wrong and if you keep saying they are safe, that line which is already in a significant and steep incline will continue the more we boost and the more we vaccinate. . . . This has to stop. We have to stop, people are dying.”
Meanwhile, the captured regulatory agencies like the CDC and FDA are trashing and cutting off proven scientific cures for Covid such as Ivermectin. Dr. Kory says Ivermectin has been proven effective in defeating Covid infections, and he says, “It is “one of the safest drugs ever brought to market.” Dr. Kory also says the so-called experimental vaccines “are not safe and not effective.” So, why do government agencies push them anyway? Dr. Kory says, “I have had a front row seat to see this.” . . . And he goes on to say government agencies are suffering from “regulatory capture” by big Pharma. Meaning, the FDA and CDC push ineffective and dangerous vaccines so Big Pharma can make money off them, while disregarding cheaper, safer and more effective drugs like Ivermectin. Dr Kory gives a real-world example during the pandemic and explains, “Prescriptions in this country (for Ivermectin) in August were hitting 90,000 per week. So many doctors were using it for Covid that it spooked the pharmaceutical companies. . . . In response to the massive uptake in the use of Ivermectin by physicians with prescriptions and pharmacists filling them, the CDC went on the attack. They sent a bulletin to every state department of health which was full of propaganda and misinformation screaming the FDA has not approved Ivermectin (for treating Covid) and it’s not a proven drug, and it’s dangerous and there are overdoses and all of these things that were false. It went to all state departments of health. But guess what happened next? The medical boards and the pharmacy boards started sending that to every licensed physician and pharmacist in the land. The average physician and pharmacist, I am sorry to say this, is not well read. They are not keeping up with data. They are overwhelmed and they are easily influenced. That’s why in this country you have a war between the physicians that know that Ivermectin is effective . . . and are at war with the pharmacies. A huge proportion of pharmacists will refuse to fill a decades-old safe drug for Covid because they have been threatened and manipulated by their boards. They are afraid to lose their licenses. It all smoke. It’s all B.S. because you cannot lose your license for use of a safe drug. . . . We need our doctors to do doctoring, and we need our pharmacists to do pharmacy and stop being influenced by propaganda by pharmaceutical companies who don’t want you to use this drug. We have to stand up, and we have to resist on behalf of our patients. We are finding that with compounding pharmacies and small pharmacies we can still get access (to Ivermectin), but it is a battle and you do have to navigate.”
Former Pfizer VP Dr. Michael Yeadon said this week, “Max vaccination is leading to mass death.” Dr. Kory agrees and explains, “It’s not only data from a life insurance company that came out this week that is based on CDC data that can’t be explained by Covid alone, there are huge increases of dying in this country this year. . . . They have done huge analysis of the European mortality data as well as the U.S. mortality data and they controlled for vaccination status. They found that for every age range that they looked at, the all-cause mortality of the vaccinated were increased over the unvaccinated. All-cause mortality and that means that you are more likely to die of something if you are vaccinated. . . . All-cause mortality are coming out of actual databases by credible scientists. You have life insurance companies showing the data, and you have our own federal government showing unexplained large rises in dying. . . . Don’t you think a good scientific question and a good hypothesis to test would be ‘Could these be the vaccines?’ The answer is ‘the vaccines,’ and I cannot find a better fit to answering that hypothesis than that, it’s this mass explosion of this vaccination policy with single, double and booster shots. It’s going like wildfire through the population. If the mortality of the vaccinated is higher than the unvaccinated, you have the data that you can safely and confidently conclude the vaccines are associated with and causing death.”
In closing, Dr. Kory says, “What has happened in the last month or so is the data for adverse reactions and effects are no longer hidden and suppressed. They are coming out on servers . . . and actuarial tables.”
Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with Dr. Pierre Kory, one of the top Pulmonary and Covid Critical Care experts on the planet, who is co-founder of the Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance (flccc.net). (There is much more in the nearly 59 min. interview)
Instead of bringing an end to this pandemic as promised, the widespread rollout of the experimental vaccines has actually caused a sharp increase in Covid-19 cases and deaths across the world, according to a recently published preprint study that looked at data from the 145 of the most vaccinated countries in the world.
The 99-page study titled “Worldwide Bayesian Causal Impact Analysis of Vaccine Administration on Deaths and Cases Associated with COVID-19: A BigData Analysis of 145 Countries” found that in the US specifically, the jab has caused a whopping 38% more Covid cases per million – and an even more astonishing 31% increase in deaths per million.
In total, researchers found that almost 90% (89.84%) of the 145 countries experienced this negative effect from the vaccines after they were made available.
From the study:
“Results indicate that the treatment (vaccine administration) has a strong and statistically significant propensity to causally increase the values in either y1 [variable chosen for deaths per million] or y2 [variable chosen for cases per million] over and above what would have been expected with no treatment.
y1 showed an increase/decrease ratio of (+115/-13), which means 89.84% of statistically significant countries showed an increase in total deaths per million associated with COVID-19 due directly to the causal impact of treatment initiation [vaccines].
y2 showed an increase/decrease ratio of (+105/-16) which means 86.78% of statistically significant countries showed an increase in total cases per millionof COVID-19 due directly to the causal impact of treatment initiation.”
Researchers performed a causal analysis comparing both pre- and post-treatment periods to come up with the difference in cases and deaths since the implementation of the vaccine by analyzing publicly available COVID-19 data to determine the effect of their widespread rollout. After eliminating all results from countries with low vaccination rates or incomplete data, there were 128 countries with sufficient data on deaths (y1) and 103 countries to examine total cases (y2), which comprised a total of 145 unique countries.
Perhaps the most telling part of the study’s results is that the countries which recorded the fewest Covid deaths in 2020 were the ones to experience the largest increases in cases and deaths once the vaccine was introduced, with some of them seeing increases as high as over a thousand percent.
“Countries with few COVID-19 deaths in the year 2020 appear to have fared the worst of all countries after vaccine administration (e.g Thailand, Vietnam, Mongolia, Taiwan, Seychelles, Cambodia, etc.).
The causal impact results from vaccine administration seen in these countries [is] hundreds or thousands of percentage increases in total deaths and cases per million.
we can be most statistically confident in due to the direct increase of COVID-19 associated deaths and cases after vaccine administration, where prior to vaccine administration there were few or none.”
In the study’s conclusion, researchers warned that the substantial increase in deaths and cases should be “highly worrisome” for the policymakers around the world who have been promoting the experimental vaccines as the “key to gain back our freedoms.”
“The statistically significant and overwhelmingly positive causal impact after vaccine deployment on the dependent variables total deaths and total cases per million should be highly worrisome for policy makers. They indicate a marked increase in both COVID-19 related cases and death due directly to a vaccine deployment that was originally sold to the public as the ‘key to gain back our freedoms.’The effect of vaccines on total cases per million and its low positive association with total vaccinations per hundred signifies a limited impact of vaccines on lowering COVID-19 associated cases.
These results should encourage local policy makers to make policy decisions based on data, not narrative, and based on local conditions, not global or national mandates. These results should also encourage policy makers to begin looking for other avenues out of the pandemic aside from mass vaccination campaigns.”
In short, this is just the latest evidence that we have been lied to throughout the entire manufactured pandemic.
These experimental, rushed vaccines have done nothing but make things worse and have only spurred the transmission of new variants that have prevented the world from putting this virus in the rearview mirror.
Several studies have come to similar conclusions as this one, with two recently coming out that confirmed essentially the same thing – these vaccines actually are causing more illness than they prevent.
And that’s just referring to Covid illness, it’s to say nothing of the substantial increase of other ailments and life-threatening conditions that have been sweeping the country.
Hospitals are currently ‘overwhelmed’ with patients that are ‘sicker than ever,’ and it’s not Covid.
‘Think Twice Before You Vaccinate Your Kids,’ Dr. Robert Malone Warns Parents on COVID-19 Shots
By Mimi Nguyen Ly and Jan Jekielek
January 9, 2022Updated: January 10, 2022
Dr. Robert Malone, a virologist and immunologist who has contributed significantly to the technology of mRNA vaccines, issued a strong caution for those who seek to have their children vaccinated against COVID-19.
“Think twice before you vaccinate your kids. Because if something bad happens, you can’t go back and say, ‘whoops, I want a do-over,’” Malone told EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program in an interview, Part 1 of which premiered on Sunday.
He also said, “It is clear that parents should think twice about vaccinating their child,” adding that serious adverse events can occur and can be “so severe that it puts your child in the hospital.”
Malone noted that with regard to myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart, “there’s a good chance that if your child takes the vaccine, they won’t be damaged, they won’t show clinical symptoms—[but] they may have subclinical damage.”
“But the question is, do you want to take that chance with your child? Because if you draw the short straw and your child was damaged, most of these things, if not all of them, are irreversible. There is no way to fix it,” he said. “And I get these emails all the time: ‘Doctor, doctor, what can we do? This has happened.’ And that once it’s happened, there’s … you can’t go back you can’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again.”
“They’re there as links to the VAERS database, and if you click on them, you can see the actual VAERS report that was filed by a physician saying this is what happened,” Malone said. “And you can make your own decision about whether or not you think that that’s vaccine-related. So all of those data are there.”
One page on Malone’s website points to a paper published in the Toxicology Reports journal in which authors noted, using data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), that normalized data on COVID-19 deaths per capita are “negligible in children,” while deaths after COVID-19 vaccination are “small, but not negligible, in children.”
“For children the chances of death from COVID-19 are negligible, but the chances of serious damage over their lifetime from the toxic inoculations are not negligible,” the authors wrote in the paper, titled “Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19?”
Malone’s latest warning comes after he issued a prepared statement in mid-December 2021 aimed at parents, in which he said that with regard to mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, “a viral gene will be injected into your children’s cells” that “forces your child’s body to make toxic spike proteins.”
“These proteins often cause permanent damage in children’s critical organs, including their brain and nervous system, their heart and blood vessels, including blood clots, their reproductive system, and this vaccine can trigger fundamental changes to their immune system.”
Malone is strongly opposed to COVID-19 vaccine mandates for children. He is the chief science officer and regulatory officer for The Unity Project, a movement seeking to resist COVID-19 vaccine mandates for K–12 children.
“The Unity Project’s position is one based on the logic of informed consent versus forced vaccination—that mandates should not happen,” Malone told EpochTV. “The state should not be forcing itself into the family. The decisions belong at the level of parents not at the level of the state or the school board. School boards and schools and teachers have no right to understand and seek out medical information about their students‚ that’s illegal. And yet, it’s being done all the time. And students are being bullied if they haven’t taken vaccine.”
“Mandates are illegal based on the Nuremberg Code, Helsinki Accord, the Belmont Report,” Malone said. “These continued to be unlicensed products, they’re only available through emergency use authorization … These are not licensed products, and they’re being forced on your children, and they have risks. And the media—through its censorship—and Big Tech, is blocking your ability to even learn what those risks are so you can make an informed decision for your children yourself. That is a huge crime in my mind.”
Malone said that people can join a “Defeat the Mandates” rally and march in Washington, D.C., scheduled for Jan. 23, to unite against mandatory vaccinations.
Two mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are currently available in the United States under emergency use authorization (EUA)—one from Pfizer-BioNTech and the other from Moderna.
The only COVID-19 vaccine that has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for people 16 and older is Pfizer and BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine, which is marketed as Comirnaty. Doses are to be produced in the future, according to FDA documents.
A separate, existing supply of COVID-19 vaccines under Pfizer-BioNTech continue to be available under an updated EUA for those over 16. The FDA has also granted an EUA for Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine for those aged 12–15 in May 2021, and for children aged 5–11 in October 2021.
California in October 2021 became the first state to mandate COVID-19 vaccines for children, followed by Louisiana in December 2021. Both states said they will only enforce the mandate if the FDA fully authorizes the vaccines for children.
The Pfizer vaccine remains the only jab against COVID-19 available for people aged under 18 in the United States. The FDA in October 2021 delayed a decision on whether to grant Moderna an EUA for its COVID-19 vaccine for those aged 12 to 17, saying it needs more time to further review the vaccine’s risk for myocarditis in this population.
The Epoch Times has reached out to Pfizer-BioNTech and the FDA for comment.
Editor’s note: This article has been adjusted to clarify that the FDA has only approved future COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech—marketed as Comirnaty.
Bayer in Gene Therapy Collaboration With Mammoth Biosciences
January 10, 2022Updated: January 10, 2022
FRANKFURT—Bayer on Monday struck a partnership deal with Mammoth Biosciences to develop therapeutic tools based on CRISPR/CAS9 gene editing as the German drug maker seeks to widen its cell and gene therapy development efforts.
Unlisted U.S. biotech firm Mammoth will initially receive $40 million from Bayer plus potential milestone payments of more than $1 billion contingent on scientific and commercial achievements.
The initial focus of the collaboration will be liver-based diseases, the companies said in a joint statement on Monday.
Mammoth, headquartered in the San Francisco Bay area, was co-founded by Nobel laureate Jennifer Doudna. She shared the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry with Emmanuelle Charpentier for developing the CRISPR/CAS9 gene editing tool.
Among previous steps to build a cell and gene therapy business, Bayer acquired BlueRock Therapeutics and Asklepios Biopharmaceutical in 2019 and 2020, respectively.
In late 2020, it agreed on an alliance on anti-tumour immune cell therapies with Atara Biotherapeutics.