From Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder to COVID Vaccines for Newborns, Infants, and Children…
Today’s article focuses on Johnson & Johnson’s new one-dose COVID vaccine, details J&J’s criminal history, provides the latest VAERS data on adverse events, hospitalizations, ER visits, and life-threatening events since their vaccination program began March 2nd; *social media accounts of deaths of two young J&J vaccine recipients [*death and injury reports on social media are unconfirmed], and updates on COVID vaccine trials in pediatric populations.
By Dawn Amittai
From Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder to COVID Vaccines for Newborns, Infants, and Children…
On February 27th, the FDA issued an EUA for J&J’s one-dose COVID-19 vaccine for use in individuals 18 and older. J&J’s COVID vaccine is the third to receive an EUA from the FDA. J&J uses Ad26, a genetically-engineered human adenovirus combined with the SARS CoV-2 spike protein. It does not contain the new mRNA technology like the Moderna and Pfizer shots do.
J&J’s vaccine is designed to be given as a single dose — versus Pfizer and Moderna’s two-dose series taken three to four weeks apart. It can be stored at refrigerator temperatures for up to three months, making it far easier to store and ship than the other two vaccines, which require remaining frozen during shipping and storage.
J&J’s new experimental COVID-19 vaccine made the news recently when the Archdiocese of New Orleans issued a statement that it uses an “abortion-derived cell line in development and production of the vaccine as well as the testing.” Catholics were advised to avoid taking it, calling it “morally compromising” because it uses a fetal retinal cell line to produce and manufacture the vaccine. These fetal cell cultures, called “PER.C6” were isolated from the retina of an aborted fetus in 1985. The Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities, a committee within the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, has asked Catholics to receive the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines instead, stating, “Neither Pfizer nor Moderna used an abortion-derived cell line.” However, a fetal cell line was used to test the efficacy of both vaccines. As an aside, the AstraZeneca-Oxford COVID injection also uses an abortion-derived human embryonic cell line to propagate its adenovirus called HEK-293, that comes from the kidney of a fetus aborted in about 1972.
The FDA requires that all EUA vaccines have a COVID-19 Vaccine Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) Fact Sheets for Recipients and Caregivers. These are specific to each authorized COVID-19 vaccine, are developed by each vaccine manufacturer, and authorized by the FDA. Although the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine EUA Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers lists vaccine ingredients, the abortion-derived fetal cell line, PER.C6, is not included (see screenshot):
Please note the Janssen/J&J vaccine ingredients include polysorbate-80. This is used in brain cancer to help chemotherapy drugs cross the blood-brain barrier, posing a concern for vaccine recipients, as the vaccine ingredients or other substances circulating in the blood can reach the brain.
One day after the FDA gave J&J’s new COVID injection its EUA, Johnson & Johnson announced its plans to test the investigational vaccine on infant children (including newborns), pregnant women and people with compromised immune systems. J&J’s planned COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials will be the first to include infants; AstraZeneca in partnership with Oxford University has been conducting clinical trials on children ages 6 to 17. Moderna’s Phase II/III pediatric KidCOVE study started vaccinating children in the US and Canada between the ages of 6 months and 11 years old on March 16th, and plans to enroll approximately 6,750 subjects. Pfizer’s pediatric study will begin in June at Kentucky Pediatric/Adult Research in Bardstown, planning to recruit children in the 5-11-year-old age group; they intend to eventually enroll children younger than 5. We covered the risk-benefit of administering COVID shots to children in the previous article 6 of 6 published February 22nd. It’s unclear why children would need COVID shots at all, since they have a statistically zero risk of dying from COVID, and the COVID shots were not shown to prevent COVID, prevent death from COVID, and have not been tested to prevent-to-person transmission. For these reasons, it is unconscionable to use children as pawns in some fantasy strategy to protect a higher risk group, like the elderly.
J&J’s Criminal Rap Sheet
In 2018, a St. Louis jury awarded nearly $4.7 billion in total damages to 22 women and their families who claimed that asbestos in Johnson & Johnson’s Baby Powder contributed to their ovarian cancer. Mark Lanier, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, said in a statement, “Johnson & Johnson had covered up evidence of asbestos in their products for more than 40 years.”
A Reuters examination of Johnson & Johnson documents, as well as deposition and trial testimony, revealed that from 1971 to the early 2000’s, the company’s raw talc and finished powders sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos, and that company executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors and lawyers worried about the problem and how to address it, while failing to disclose it to regulators or the public. In 1976, as the FDA was weighing limits on asbestos in cosmetic talc products, J&J assured them that no asbestos was “detected in any sample” of talc produced between December 1972 and October 1973. They deliberately concealed from them the fact that at least three tests by three different labs from 1972 to 1975 had found asbestos in its talc – in one case at levels reported as “rather high.”
J&J has been sued more than 13,000 times for failing to inform consumers that its baby powder contained asbestos — the primary cause of malignant mesothelioma. More than $5 billion has been awarded to plaintiffs involving Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder… and that is only ONE of the many major J&J lawsuits and recalls for faulty products. To mention just a few, they were fined $7.5 million in 1995 for a cover-up of wrongful marketing of Retin-A acne cream, $860 million in a class action lawsuit over misleading customers about 1-Day Acuvue soft contact lenses in 2001, $81 million for misbranding their epilepsy medication Topamax in 2010 and $85 million for similar illegal practices for their heart drug Natrecor in 2011 — and more. And penalties of $572 million for their role in contributing to the opioid crisis, and $70 million penalty for foreign bribery. With so many acts of deception, bribery, and outright fraud — including the forty plus years of concealing evidence of asbestos in their baby powder — should we trust them to test their experimental COVID vaccines on our newborn babies and children?
Another highly significant point, is that vaccine manufacturers have no liability for injuries or deaths from any of these experimental COVID vaccines. The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act), enacted by Congress in February 2020, clearly states that if the new technology in COVID-19 vaccines injures or kills us or our loved ones, vaccine manufacturers have blanket indemnity — they cannot be sued. In the U.S., the only possibility for receiving any compensation for casualties from these investigational products is to file a claim with the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICV), which Congress created to cover any liability related to pandemics. Sadly, according to CNBC the CICV “…is difficult to use and rarely pays. Attorneys say it has compensated less than 6% of the claims filed in the last decade.”
With this knowledge in mind, how can vaccine manufacturers — especially those corporations with criminal histories — be held accountable for the safety of their products? Knowing that they have blanket immunity from the law, what will motivate them to produce “safe and effective” vaccines? This is a company with a long criminal record of deception, bribery, and outright fraud — one clearly lacking in ethical standards — why would we expect them to suddenly change their unscrupulous behavior, especially when they know they cannot be held accountable?
As of March 20, 2021, 2,150,109 doses of the J&J COVID vaccine have been administered in the US — in less than three weeks. We are just beginning to see reports of vaccine recipients experiencing side effects — primarily in social media — and there have already been reports of school closures following J&J vaccine clinics. Colchester Elementary School in Connecticut was closed Monday, March 8th, due to a lack of substitute teachers to fill in for those experiencing adverse effects after receiving the J&J one-dose shot at a vaccination clinic over the weekend.
VAERS Reports Following Johnson & Johnson’s One-Dose Vaccine Rollout
The most recent upload of reports to VAERS occurred on March 12th, providing — at most — about 10 days of reports of adverse events since its rollout began. Thus, we would not yet expect to see many cases reported to VAERS, processed, and uploaded to their system. A search of VAERS most recent data related to adverse events reported following this new vaccine are shown here (see VAERS reports):
Adverse Events Entered in VAERS by March 12th for the J&J Vaccine: 305
Since the J&J COVID-19 vaccine rollout began March 2nd, there have been a total of 305 adverse events which were reported to and entered in VAERS by March 12th. As always, please keep in mind that these numbers represent fewer than 1% of all the actual vaccine adverse events and only 1-13% of serious events/deaths…
Serious Adverse Events Entered in VAERS by March 12th for the J&J Vaccine: 6
Since the J&J COVID vaccine administration began March 2nd, a total of 6 serious adverse events were reported to and entered in VAERS by March 12th (see VAERS report).
Examples of the serious adverse events reported are.
- 41-year-old male from Virginia who developed symptoms the day after receiving the shot: “Woke up around 5:30AM having to go to the bathroom. Went to flush the toilet and passed out on the floor. My wife found me unresponsive but breathing on the floor. My wife called 911 and was at the hospital around 6:15AM.”
- 80-year-old male from Ohio with onset of symptoms the day after receiving a J&J shot: “Patient’s wife stated he had symptoms similar to COVID and was admitted into the hospital.”
- 49-year-old female from Connecticut developed symptoms on the same day she received a J&J shot: “High blood pressure, jaw pain 10/10, headache, nausea, involuntary leg movement. We are deeply concerned about getting patient the care she needs. There is a lack of urgency on the part of the hospital staff in acknowledging a connection to her receipt of vaccine and onset of adverse symptoms.”
- 50-year-old female from Indiana who developed symptoms right after the vaccine was given: “Immediate rash in chest and face. 20 minutes later entered ER with swollen eye and throat. 14 hours later re-entered ER with rash on chest and face, swollen tongue and throat.”
- 45-year-old from Florida developed symptoms 2 days after the shot: “Initially fever, fatigue, joint pain. 2 days later pain in right abdomen, diagnosed with appendicitis and had emergency appendectomy performed.”
Events Outcomes Entered in VAERS by March 12thfor the J&J Vaccine
Since the J&J vaccine program began on March 2nd, there have been a total of 32 emergency room visits, 5 hospitalizations and 1 prolongation of an in-patient hospitalization, 2 life-threatening events, and 9 office visits (see VAERS report).
Although no “official” reports of deaths following the J&J experimental COVID vaccine have yet been published by VAERS or mainstream media, there have been two posted in *social media over the last few days [*death and injury reports from social media are unconfirmed].
One tweet dated March 18th, was posted by Jeff Shipley, a friend of 32-year-old Benjamin G. Goodman who had worked with him in the entertainment industry for years. Jeff expressed sadness over the death of his friend, who apparently died on March 14th from sudden heart failure, less than 24-hours after receiving an experimental J&J COVID vaccine (see post).
The tweet included a message from his parents, dated March 14th 2021 — the day that he passed — relating that on Saturday, March 13th — just days after his 32nd birthday — he had received a J&J vaccine at a Walgreens in Chelsea NYC. Apparently, he was feeling ill by the evening, and awakened his fiancée at 1 am with fever and chills, began having seizures at 4 am, and went into cardiac arrest just minutes later. She called 911, and they tried to revive him in his apartment, transferred him to Mount Sinai Hospital, where he was declared dead at 6:05 am. His parents related that their son knew about the possibility of vaccine injuries, but thought, “it won’t happen to me.” They related his incentive for taking the experimental shot was “having a travel pass will make things easier.” They added, “Nothing can make things easier unless you’re alive and living it.” The post did not include information on how Benjamin qualified to receive the COVID vaccine at the age of 32 (i.e., no co-morbidities were mentioned).
The second report was of Desiree Penrod, a 25-year-old from Danielson Connecticut who died on March 17th some days after taking an experimental J&J COVID vaccine (see post). Her last Facebook post on March 11th, shared, “The vaccine is killing me today. My arm hurts, beyond exhausted, headache, stomach cramps and earaches. Multiple people told me that I looked pale today. Yesterday I was fine but today it’s taking its toll on me.” Desiree was a graduate of Johnson State College in Vermont, who majored in psychology, and her obituary states, “Desiree loved teaching children and worked for Killingly Memorial School…” It is likely that Desiree received the J&J COVID shot because she was a teacher — a Phase 1b essential frontline worker.
Should we simply continue trusting health authorities and agencies who tell us these experimental COVID vaccines are “safe and effective” — like Benjamin and Desiree did— and put our lives and those of our loved in their hands? Should we trust companies with a rap sheet like Johnson and Johnson’s, who lied to us for more than 40 years about the safety of their products? Should we trust a company with a long criminal record of deception, bribery, and outright fraud to test their investigational injectables on our newborns, infants, and children — especially when they have a statistically zero risk of dying from COVID?
This article contains a growing list of deaths and serious injuries that occurred after the experimental COVID vaccine was administered. The death and serious injury reports are culled from the media and from social media, as well as from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Death and injury reports from social media are unconfirmed. Although the deaths and serious injuries are temporally related to the COVID vaccination, Children’s Health Defense – California Chapter cannot claim the COVID vaccine definitively caused the deaths or serious injuries. That said, the symptom patterns and timing are highly suspicious, and tend to follow patterns of adverse events widely recognized to occur after other vaccinations. The death reports serve as anecdotes that may soon establish a pattern. Children’s Health Defense – California Chapter is providing regular updates on newly reported deaths that occur after COVID vaccination. As always, Children’s Health Defense – California Chapter supports fully informed consent and no medical mandates. This is not medical advice. Please share this information with, and consult your doctor.