How Pharma and Media Lied About Covid Risks to Children for Maximum Profits

Last Updated on November 19, 2021 by Shaun Snapp

Executive Summary

  • The risks to children from covid are infinitesimal.
  • This has not stopped pharma and establishment media from lying about this risk.

Introduction

The establishment media and pharmaceutical companies have embarked on a truly ridiculous program to convince parents of something which is completely false, namely the need for children to be vaccinated. In this article, we will expose this science fraud and demonstrate clear collusion between the establishment media and big pharma to perpetuate something that can only be called a hoax.

Our References for This Article

If you want to see our references for this article and related Brightwork articles, visit this link.

How Establishment Media Communicated The Need for Vaccinating Children

The following videos illustrate how the establishment media has promoted covid vaccination for children.

This is a very standard piece on the coverage by the establishment media. Children have essentially zero risk from Covid 19, and none of this is brought up in the segment. There is no opposing viewpoint and no explanation or analysis of the vaccine. 

This is another advertisement for vaccines that does zero analysis explaining that there are no studies in children. 

This video follows the same pattern. In this segment a mother says “she believes in science, and I believe the facts are there,” However, there is still no study on children, so how are the facts there?

  • Also isn’t the fact that children have a near-zero risk from Covid 19 also a fact, and also part of science?
  • Why is a woman who knows nothing about clinical trials being interviewed in this segment? How is a mother’s ill informed concern introduced as evidence for viewers.

Why was the following study left out of the establishment media coverage of covid and children?

Schools do not play a major role in spreading the coronavirus, according to the results of a German study released on Monday.

The study, the largest carried out on schoolchildren and teachers in Germany, found traces of the virus in fewer than 1 per cent of teachers and children.

Scientists from Dresden Technical University said they believe children may act as a “brake” on chains of infection.

Prof Reinhard Berner, the head of pediatric medicine at Dresden University Hospital and leader of the study, said the results suggested the virus does not spread easily in schools.

“It is rather the opposite,” Prof Berner told a press conference. “Children act more as a brake on infection. Not every infection that reaches them is passed on.” – Yahoo

The Reality of the Transmissibility from Asymptomatic Carriers

One reason for this is that an asymptomatic carrier are very unlikely to spread the virus, which is explained in the following video. However, this did not stop asymptomatic carriers from being used to scare people into arguing everyone must be vaccinated, including children that are at both low risk and rarely transmit.

The article continues.

The study tested 2,045 children and teachers at 13 schools — including some where there have been cases of the virus. But scientists found antibodies in just 12 of those who took part.

“This means that the degree of immunization in the group of study participants is well below 1 per cent and much lower then we expected,” said Prof Berner. “This suggests schools have not developed into hotspots.”

The study was carried out at schools in three different districts in the region of Saxony. – Yahoo

This is reinforced by the following quotation.

Asymptomatic transmission of COVID-19 is not real. An oft-cited rationale for vaccinating individuals who are not themselves at risk of severe disease is the need to induce “herd immunity:” the few who are at high risk should be protected by preventing the spread of the virus in the general population. A subtext of this rationale is the idea of “asymptomatic spread”—persons who have been infected but who show no signs of it other than a positive PCR test are assumed to transmit this infection to other susceptible individuals. If we accept the idea of such asymptomatic spread, then preventative mass vaccination might indeed appear as the only means of reliable protection of those at risk. It has, however, been unambiguously determined that such asymptomatic transmission does not occur. In a large-scale study which involved almost 10 million Chinese residents, no new infections could be traced to persons that had tested positive for SARSCoV- 2 by PCR, but who did not exhibit any other signs of infection [34]. – Doctors for Covid 19 Ethics.

However, the fact that asymptomatic transmission barely exists did not stop the pharmaceutical industry and others from pressing those that had infinitesimal risk from covid from getting a dangerous vaccine.

The Low Risks to Children and the Young from Covid

This is well explained in the following quotation.

Vaccination” against Covid has proven to be more dangerous than Covid for approximately 99% of all humans. As documented by Johns Hopkins, in a study of 48,000 children, children are at zero risk from the virus. Your own data shows that children who are at no risk from the virus, have had heart attacks following vaccination; more than 15,000 have suffered adverse events – including more than 900 serious events. At least 16 adolescents have died following vaccination in the USA. As you are aware, just around 1% are being reported. And the numbers are increasing rapidly as we write. – Holocaust Survivors and their Descendants

And this quotation.

The case fatality rate of COVID-19 in the general population is low. The vast majority of all persons infected with COVID-19 recovers after minor, often uncharacteristic illness. According to world-leading epidemiologist John Ioannidis [1, 2], the infection fatality rate of COVID-19 is on the order of 0.1% to 0.2% across all age groups, with a very strong bias towards old people, particularly those with co-morbidities. This rate does not exceed the range commonly observed with influenza, against which a vaccination of adolescents is not considered urgent or necessary. 1.1.2 COVID-19 has a particularly low prevalence and severity in adolescents. A review by Rajapakse et al. [3] states that, internationally, children and adolescents up to 18 years have accounted for only 1-2% of all confirmed clinical cases of COVID, and that severity was generally low. It has also been reported that children and adolescents only rarely transmit the disease to adults living in the same households; transmission in the opposite direction is far more common [4].

Figure 1 compares the mortality and the infection fatality rates of different age groups. Panel A very clearly shows that adolescents—the age group for which Moderna is seeking use authorization—have vanishingly small mortality; in fact, mortality in this age group is lower than in all others. As of July 2021, the German Robert Koch Institute reported a total of only 11 fatalities in those between 10 and 19 years of age—not even two in a million. To contemplate mass vaccinations with an experimental vaccine in the face of such low overall mortality is not justifiable. – Doctors for Covid Ethics

This interview with a doctor has the doctor making false claims about the risks to children. This illustrates that it is difficult to differentiate between doctors and pharmaceutical reps. 

Comparing Sweden Versus Finland

This is a study of school closures in Sweden versus Finland.

STOCKHOLM (Reuters) – Sweden’s decision to keep schools open during the pandemic resulted in no higher rate of infection among its schoolchildren than in neighbouring Finland, where schools did temporarily close, their public health agencies said in a joint report.

The report, which has not been peer-reviewed, found that during the period of February 24 to June 14, there were 1,124 confirmed cases of COVID-19 among children in Sweden, around 0.05% of the total number of children aged 1-19.

Finland recorded 584 cases in the same period, also equivalent to around 0.05%.

“In conclusion, (the) closure or not of schools had no measurable direct impact on the number of laboratory confirmed cases in school-aged children in Finland or Sweden,” the agencies said in the report, published last week.

The report showed that severe cases of COVID-19 were very rare among both Swedish and Finnish children aged 1 to 19, with no deaths reported. A comparison of the incidence of COVID-19 in different professions suggested no increased risk for teachers.

Children made up around 8.2 percent of the total number of COVID-19 cases in Finland, compared to 2.1 percent in Sweden.

Sweden’s death toll of 5,572, when compared relative to population size, far outstripped those of its Nordic neighbours, although it remains lower than in some European countries that locked down, such as Britain and Spain.

State epidemiologist Anders Tegnell of the health agency, who has devised Sweden’s response to the epidemic, has said there is little evidence linking the death toll to the absence of a lockdown, pointing instead to conditions at nursing homes, a decentralised health care system and travel patterns.

Separate studies by Sweden’s Karolinska Institutet (KI), an independent medical research institute, and the European Network of Ombudspersons for Children and Unicef, showed that Swedish children fared better than children in other countries during the pandemic, both in terms of education and mental health.

Therefore, the school lockdowns hurt children and retarded their education at no health benefit.

Big Media/Pharma Must Hide True Risks to Children from Covid

The reason the establishment media has hidden the extremely low risk faced by children is not hard to guess — they need to push whatever is profit maximizing for pharmaceutical companies who are their media partners. There is a large built-up fear regarding covid for children, so all studies and logic that show the true risk to children from covid must be hidden from the public. 

Health Information — Brought To You By Pfizer

Establishment media entities only have a profit-maximizing function. Pharmaceutical companies will advertise liberally on establishment media as a way of buying their allegiance — as long as they serve as their proper marketing function for these companies.

Input From Physicians on the Big Pharma Payroll or Otherwise Financially Connected to Big Pharma

Later in the segment, a doctor, who can’t really argue the vaccine protects children, then states that kids spread the coronavirus. So then the vaccine is not for children but for others? It would be very interesting to find out if this physician has financial ties to one of the vaccine-producing pharmaceutical companies. Was she recommended by a pharmaceutical company to the segment producer by Pfizer or AstraZeneca to be a pretend neutral voice? Did the segment producer even check the financial relationship between the vaccine manufacturers and this physician? Does anyone realize how easy it would be for a pharmaceutical company to “make it worth” the doctors while to appear on a program like this that would influence millions of viewers to be pro-vaccine?

She then says even though there have been no completed studies on the effect of studies on children, she is confident the vaccines will work well and be save in children. Why not wait until the studies are complete before saying this?

Next, the segment discusses the mental health issues of the lockdowns on children, with the idea that the children can then go back to school if they take the vaccines. However, this is a government policy, and it was never necessary. Therefore what this segment points to is a government policy, that the government could lift at any time, and actually never should have instituted (see this article on the lack of evidence for lockdowns) not something actually directly related to the coronavirus.

Then a second doctor appears to entirely misrepresent the studies performed by each of the pharmaceutical companies. Both AstraZeneca and Pfizer in particular censored and under-reported and otherwise obscured the adverse reactions from its vaccine. However, this likely financially connected doctor has no problem declaring the vaccine as safe. And a number of vaccines developed in the past have had adverse reactions. This segment could just as well have been produced by Pfizer.

Drug companies have twisted themselves into pretzels to try to promote the concept of “long covid.” The establishment media companies in the US entirely bent to what the pharma companies wanted — DW, a German-supported media entity, was one of the few I found to give a balanced view. However, once again, this doctor claimed that the vaccines were “safe.” Again, this does not match the studies. 

The following quote explains the misleading nature of long covid. This is explained in the following quotation.

Most Common Symptoms of Covid

The most common symptoms in people with long COVID defined in the study is still having symptoms after four weeks or fatigue, 98% and intermittent headaches 91% these are both extremely nonspecific symptoms, there is nothing about them that is specific for COVID.

In fact, there are some of the most commonly reported symptoms of post viral syndrome, suggesting that long COVID and post viral syndrome are to a large part, one in the same. First, long COVID is rare, around one in 50 people still have symptoms at the 12 week mark and since a number with symptoms drops significantly, at one two and three months it is likely that the reduction continues after 12 weeks and that is a tiny fraction that still has symptoms at six months. – Why Most of What You Know About Covid is Wrong

Long covid is critical in scaring the population into scaring parents into vaccinating children.

Add on Big Tech

Pharma not only has the establishment media on their side, they also have Big Tech. Google and Facebook have consistently censored search results and de-platformed YouTube content creators who have released articles and content that were not profit-maximizing to pharmaceutical companies or questioned the forecasts coming from governments. Big Tech’s censorship began with conservative voices, however, it has now extended to those that question the official story on covid. This is explained in the following quotation.

From my preliminary work I can show Google is influencing the results for vaccinations and autism information on COVID and vitamin supplements. This, as they say, is the tip of the iceberg. from others. I’m hearing they’re demoting people in the natural health industry. Google is expanding its influence well beyond censoring conservatives. Conservative websites like Breitbart, and The Daily Caller by cutting their appearance in the search results. Google has reduced Breitbart search results by 99.7%. Any voter using Google on the internet for news and information will no longer be shown conservative opinions and news stories because Google is darkening conservative websites like Breitbart. It’s only a matter of time before Google has its programmers modify its Google Trends output to sync with its auto completion at that point, its manipulation will be thoroughly hidden. And undetectable. – Brainwashed: How the Media and Government Misread, Misinformed and Mismanaged the COVID-19 Virus

The argument by Big Tech has been that they are protecting the public from “misinformation.” However, as these censored voices have proven to be more accurate than the information coming from the establishment, it looks like Big Tech is mindlessly supporting the establishment. According to Big Tech, misinformation is fine, as long as it comes from an establishment source.

This video shows the lies by a doctor who has financial conflicts with Pfizer. 

This video, shows pharma and media lying about the covid risk to children and the CEO of Pfizer desiring the criminalization of those spreading information that contradicts Pfizer. 

Conclusion

The collusion between Big Media/Big Pharma is clear and obvious. These videos are evidence that the media assiduously reported exactly what the pharmaceutical companies wanted them to report. Big Media, when presenting health information, can be viewed as simply a marketing front end for Big Pharma. Big pharma not only controls the content of the ads they run on establishment media, they also control the content on health matters which airs between the commercials.