In my article, Our Social Atmosphere and The Inception of COVID “Vaccines,” I delved into the social environment of fear created around SARS-CoV-2 as well as death rates, and treatment. Now that vaccine mandates have been introduced around the world, it’s important to look at some of the reasons that can cause COVID-19 “vaccine” hesitancy. Previous posts dealt with vaccine safety, medical effectiveness, medical ethics, big pharma, mandates, incentives, and Fauci. Now let’s explore the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) statute.
We must understand that the mandates imposed over the past two years are out of the ordinary. Many of these rulings violate the constitution but were able to be set in place under the emergency use authorization (EUA). Let’s analyze if COVID-19 “vaccines” fall under its umbrella.
What is the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA)?
According to the FDA, the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) allows the use of unapproved medical products under the Public Health Service Act. The use of a medical countermeasure or biological product (product) – including a vaccine – is authorized even if it hasn’t been FDA approved or licensed for commercial distribution when there is a state of emergency in place.
A state of emergency is present if:
- the Secretary of Homeland Security declares that “there is a domestic emergency, or a significant potential for a domestic emergency, involving a heightened risk of attack with a biological, chemical, radiological, or nuclear agent or agents.”
- the Secretary of Defense declares that “there is a military emergency, or a significant potential for a military emergency, involving a heightened risk of biological, chemical, radiological, or nuclear agents that threaten military forces.”
- Or the Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary) deems that “there is a public health emergency, or a significant potential for a public health emergency, that affects, or has a significant potential to affect, national security or the health and security of US citizens.”
In this case, the Director of the National Institutes of Health and the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention must conclude that there is an agent that can cause serious or life-threatening disease or condition – in this case, the virus – and based on scientific evidence, including data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, it is reasonable to believe that:
- a product may be effective in diagnosing, treating, or preventing a disease or condition; or a serious or life-threatening disease or condition
- the known and potential benefits of the product outweigh the known and potential risks of the disease or condition
- there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives to the product for diagnosing, preventing, or treating such disease or condition
- an assessment of the available scientific evidence has been made concerning the safety and potential effectiveness of the product in diagnosing, preventing, or treating such diseases or conditions
Additional conditions need to be in place when there is the emergency use of an unapproved product:
- the Secretary must find it necessary or appropriate to protect the public health
- when the extent of the benefits and risks of an unapproved product are unknown, there has to be the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks
- there must be appropriate conditions for the monitoring and reporting of adverse events associated with the emergency use of the product
Do COVID-19 Vaccines Fall Under the EUA’s Umbrella?
🛑 First and foremost, there must be a major health emergency in order to qualify for EUA
➡️ It has been almost two years since authorities proclaimed the presence of a “pandemic.” And data shows us that we are not in a state of emergency despite what health officials say. Now we know that most individuals under age 69 have a survival rate of 99% when treated early and appropriately, and those over age 70 have a survival rate of 95%, which is similar to that of the seasonal flu.
➡️ Plus it’s important to highlight that the CDC has recognized that 94% of COVID-19 deaths involved three additional co-morbidities and health officials confirmed those facts. The huge numbers reported about people dying from the virus were misrepresented. At the time of death, only 6% of those who died, died from COVID; the others tested positive for the virus at the time of death. The current state of affairs can’t be categorized as a health emergency.
When dealing with experimental and unapproved products, there are certain conditions that must be fulfilled under the EUA statute ⤵️
🛑 The product (“vaccine”) should be effective in diagnosing, treating, or preventing a disease or condition; or a serious or life-threatening disease or condition
➡️ Right now, we know that the “vaccine” hasn’t been tested or proven to prevent infection or transmission. Plus, studies of 68 countries and 2,947 American counties show that locations with high rates of vaccinated people have higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection. For instance, Vermont where 74% of the population is fully vaccinated has huge numbers of coronavirus infections and hospitalizations.
➡️ COVID-19 shots can ameliorate symptoms in some individuals if they contract the virus later on. However, others are experiencing pathogenic priming or antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). This is an overstimulation of the immune system in which “antibodies generated during an immune response bind to a pathogen,” creating complications and amplifying the infection in those who have been vaccinated. The vaccinated, when later exposed to SARS-CoV-2, can experience a more severe case.
➡️ The “vaccine” is not effective in diagnosing, treating, or preventing the virus.
🛑 The known and potential benefits of the product should outweigh the known and potential risks of the disease or condition
➡️ A report from Pfizer dealing with side effects consists of 9 pages of adverse events. Information from Pfizer clinical trials shows that 1223 participants who received the vaccine died and numerous participants experienced multiple adverse reactions – 19,582 participants are still recovering, 11,361 haven’t recovered from them, 520 recovered with sequela, and it is unknown what happened to 9,400 participants after they reported adverse events.
➡️ According to VAERS (the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System), as of December 31, 2021, there have been 1,876,973 people who have suffered adverse reactions and over 21,382 have died soon after receiving the shot. As alarming as this may be, it is estimated that the numbers reported in the system are not totally accurate; they are underreported by a factor of at least 5 according to a whistleblower.
➡️ When taking into consideration the countless adverse effects and deaths from the COVID-19 “vaccine,” the “vaccine” benefits do not outweigh the known and potential risks of the virus. In this case, the cure is worse than the disease.
🛑 There should be no adequate, approved, and available alternatives to the product for diagnosing, preventing, or treating such disease or condition
➡️ There is irrevocable evidence that there are numerous adequate and available treatments that have been successful at treating SARS-CoV-2. Fortunately, some ethical doctors have been using repurposed inexpensive drugs to help people despite pressure from hospitals and health authorities to treat with their approved drug, remdesivir – a drug that increases mortality by 26% in COVID-positive patients. We have studies showing multitherapy treatment protocols and studies supporting diverse SARS-CoV-2 treatments that are highly successful in dealing with high-risk SARS-CoV-2 infection.
🛑 Given that the benefits and risks of the unapproved product are unknown, there should be the option to accept or refuse administration of the product
➡️ The EUA gives individuals the right to accept or refuse the administration of the “vaccine.” Forcing or coercing people to take the vaccine is not only medically unethical but violates the emergency use authorization statute.
Are You Hesitant to Get COVID-19 “Vaccines”?
If you are hesitant to get a COVID shot, you may be right to be. A reason why you should be concerned to get COVID-19 “vaccines” is because of the premise of using these “vaccines” under EUA and the countless violations of the emergency use authorization statute.
The non-FDA-approved COVID-19 “vaccines” shouldn’t be used under the EUA statute since currently there is no national emergency. Besides, the benefits of the shot don’t outweigh the risks of the virus. They are causing more harm than the “emergency” itself. Plus, SARS-CoV-2 shots don’t prevent infection or transmission of the virus, only lower symptom severity in some.
COVID-19 “vaccines” shouldn’t continue to be used under EUA since there are successful treatments available. People should be allowed to get the treatment protocols of their choosing, without having to risk their health or life with experimental products that haven’t gone through animal testing or years of proper clinical trials.
Lastly, people are entitled to refuse these experimental “vaccines” and shouldn’t be coerced in any way or form. Even if these “vaccines “ were safe and effective, procedures in the rollout of the vaccine under emergency use have been sketchy. It’s time to give these violations a serious look so we can bring integrity into the American system.
To a Fitter Healthier You,
The Fitness Wellness Mentor