The TGA are so arrogant with their lies.
Watch as the TGA squirm over the lack of testing they did in regard to the Covid vaccine.
The idea, as one of the staff says, that there is a large body of evidence proving the vaccines are safe is wrong.
There is next to no evidence the jabs are safe or effective.
It now appears that there is a risk that the vaccine might enter the nucleus as well.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Community Affairs Legislation Committee
07/11/2024
Estimates
HEALTH AND AGED CARE PORTFOLIO
Therapeutic Goods Administration
Senator RENNICK: Thanks very much. Professor Langham, I have a study here that says, in regard to the duration of the spike protein:
In reality, clinical studies now report that modified SARS-CoV-2 mRNA routinely persist up to a month from injection and can be detected in cardiac and skeletal muscle at sites of inflammation and fibrosis, while the recombinant spike protein may persist a little over half a year in blood.
Would you like me to give you a copy of that on notice?
Prof. Langham : Thank you.
Senator RENNICK: That is the June 2024 study by Laszlo Boros and others. I thought you might like to know that. That’s what the studies are saying now. Given that study, have the TGA ever actually conducted any tests themselves—histology testing or pathology tests, for example—to determine how long a spike protein lasts in the blood or what tissues or organs the spike protein enters?
Prof. Lawler : Before I go to Professor Langham, can I just clarify? Senator, do you mean: has the TGA commissioned its own study of human histology?
Senator ROBERTS: Yes, or done pathology testing to determine how long the spike protein from the vaccine remains in the body.
Prof. Langham : The TGA does not do research. It doesn’t commission research of this nature. The TGA has a very robust process for ensuring safety, quality and efficacy of vaccines, and all of this information, as presented to us by the sponsors throughout the course of the registration process, would have been evaluated and deemed suitable.
Senator RENNICK: The product assessment report said you didn’t do longitudinal studies, carcinogenic testing, genotoxicity studies or testing of people who are immunocompromised—
Prof. Langham : Again, we do not test—
Senator RENNICK: I’m not saying you should have done it. It said in the product assessment report that the sponsor, Pfizer, didn’t do that testing. You haven’t contacted the people who put in adverse injury reports, and you’re not aware of contemporary studies that show that spike protein lasts a long time. Can you understand why I’m sceptical when you say that the testing is thorough, because I’m struggling to see the evidence for that?
Prof. Langham : On that huge wealth of evidence supporting the safety, quality and efficacy of these vaccines, I am intrigued as to why one particular publication which I have not seen and whose scientific robustness I have not had the opportunity to evaluate would overwhelm or definitely negate any of the other incredible body of research.
Senator RENNICK: Well, it doesn’t have to be—we know the biochemistry.
Prof. Langham : I’m sorry. I shouldn’t have tried to finish.
Prof. Lawler : Senator, I might also add—I’m not suggesting that you’re implying this, but one might infer that we are not interested in genotoxicity of this vaccine—that it is entirely in keeping with international guidelines determined by the World Health Organization that genotoxicity studies are not conducted on non-clinical evaluation of vaccines. There were no structural alerts for genotoxicity of the two lipids using the Pfizer vaccine. The lipids in the Moderna vaccine were not genotoxic in bacteria or mammalian cell assays. Further, the human dose of the lipids is very low and below the threshold of toxicological concern. Given that the mRNA in the vaccines does not enter the nucleus of cells and is not integrated into the genome, it does not cause genetic damage. These are elements that we do actually undertake in line with appropriate, internationally accepted mechanisms of medicines evaluation.
Senator RENNICK: Yes, that’s right.
