New COVID Vaccine Raises Concerns Over Safety and Oversight
Submitted by MAGA
Posted 5 hours ago
In light of recent revelations surrounding a new intranasal COVID-19 vaccine candidate, there is growing concern that the American public is once again being led into potentially dangerous territory without sufficient oversight or accountability.
The vaccine, known as CVXGA1, developed by CyanVac LLC, has sparked heated debate among scientists and health experts after the initial results of its Phase 1 clinical trials.
While the product aims to provide a sprayable alternative to conventional injected mRNA vaccines, researchers have raised alarms about significant safety issues that could mirror the very crises associated with previous vaccine rollouts.
Critics have pointed out fundamental flaws in the trial's design, which only included 72 participants and lacked a control group.
This absence of rigorous scientific methods has led some experts to categorize the study as inadequate, with microbiologist Dr. Karina Acevedo Whitehouse stressing that the lack of a control group "invalidates any interpretation of safety and effectiveness."
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the CVXGA1 vaccine is its method of delivery, which utilizes a live parainfluenza virus vector.
This raises concerns about "viral shedding"—the potential for the vaccine to inadvertently spread genetically modified viral particles to unvaccinated individuals.
Dr. Karl Jablonowski from Children’s Health Defense has noted that this could particularly endanger vulnerable populations, sparking fears reminiscent of the uncertainties surrounding previous vaccines.
Furthermore, the trial's funding has drawn scrutiny, with CyanVac fully backing the study and many researchers involved having financial ties to major pharmaceutical players, including Pfizer and Moderna.
This raises questions about the independence and objectivity of the findings, prompting calls for greater oversight as CVXGA1 advances to the next phase of clinical trials.
As this new vaccine hopes to enter a broader market, the urgency for a transparent evaluation becomes paramount.
The push for unproven medical interventions, especially when they are connected to major financial interests, resonates with a growing skepticism among the public—a skepticism that many Republicans have voiced in opposition to what they deem overly hasty vaccine rollouts.
This is not merely a public health issue; it is fundamentally about personal freedom and informed consent.
As Americans demand transparency and accountability from both pharmaceutical companies and their regulatory overseers, the implications for public health policy could be significant.
It is essential that the lessons learned from past vaccine controversies are applied in evaluating new treatments.
The health of the nation should never be sacrificed for financial gain or political expediency.
As we look toward the future, vigilance and skepticism are not just warranted—they’re necessary to protect the wellbeing of all Americans.
Sources:
naturalnews.com
zerohedge.com
naturalnews.com
The vaccine, known as CVXGA1, developed by CyanVac LLC, has sparked heated debate among scientists and health experts after the initial results of its Phase 1 clinical trials.
While the product aims to provide a sprayable alternative to conventional injected mRNA vaccines, researchers have raised alarms about significant safety issues that could mirror the very crises associated with previous vaccine rollouts.
Critics have pointed out fundamental flaws in the trial's design, which only included 72 participants and lacked a control group.
This absence of rigorous scientific methods has led some experts to categorize the study as inadequate, with microbiologist Dr. Karina Acevedo Whitehouse stressing that the lack of a control group "invalidates any interpretation of safety and effectiveness."
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the CVXGA1 vaccine is its method of delivery, which utilizes a live parainfluenza virus vector.
This raises concerns about "viral shedding"—the potential for the vaccine to inadvertently spread genetically modified viral particles to unvaccinated individuals.
Dr. Karl Jablonowski from Children’s Health Defense has noted that this could particularly endanger vulnerable populations, sparking fears reminiscent of the uncertainties surrounding previous vaccines.
Furthermore, the trial's funding has drawn scrutiny, with CyanVac fully backing the study and many researchers involved having financial ties to major pharmaceutical players, including Pfizer and Moderna.
This raises questions about the independence and objectivity of the findings, prompting calls for greater oversight as CVXGA1 advances to the next phase of clinical trials.
As this new vaccine hopes to enter a broader market, the urgency for a transparent evaluation becomes paramount.
The push for unproven medical interventions, especially when they are connected to major financial interests, resonates with a growing skepticism among the public—a skepticism that many Republicans have voiced in opposition to what they deem overly hasty vaccine rollouts.
This is not merely a public health issue; it is fundamentally about personal freedom and informed consent.
As Americans demand transparency and accountability from both pharmaceutical companies and their regulatory overseers, the implications for public health policy could be significant.
It is essential that the lessons learned from past vaccine controversies are applied in evaluating new treatments.
The health of the nation should never be sacrificed for financial gain or political expediency.
As we look toward the future, vigilance and skepticism are not just warranted—they’re necessary to protect the wellbeing of all Americans.
Sources:
naturalnews.com
zerohedge.com
naturalnews.com
Latest News