Pfizer needs to correct the record in answers offered at Inquest
Accurate information is in the Public Interest
In two days’ time, the deadline for submissions to a Coroner in relation to the death of a teenager post covid 19 vaccine will pass.
This article sets out the argument that Pfizer needs to correct the record in relation to evidence submitted by its Vaccine’s Director, Dr Gillian Ellsbury.
As outlined previously, the issue of lab tests at autopsy that can determine whether a covid 19 vaccine played any role in a death, was raised at the inquest of Joseph McGinty (14).
The student, from The Valley, Achill Island, Co Mayo suffered a cardiac arrest and died on the way to hospital on the morning of September 13 2021. Joseph received his first dose of the Pfizer vaccine on August 20 2021.
Dr Ellsbury was asked by the McGinty family’s Senior Counsel, Michael O’Connor and by Coroner Pat O’Connor, if she was aware of any set of tests or protocol that could the ‘rule the vaccine in or out’ at autopsy. She replied that she was not.
Dr Ellsbury provided an extensive statement to the inquiry, amounting to more than 20 pages of evidence, which was read into the public record at Ballina Courthouse on July 20.
The Pfizer executive was ‘adamant’ she would read the statement into evidence herself, according to the pharmaceutical company’s legal representative. Dr Ellsbury gave her evidence under oath, as is standard practice at a Coroner’s inquest.
At the outset, Dr Ellsbury offered condolences to the McGinty family on their loss, on behalf of Pfizer before reading her statement to the court.
The statement tracked the history of Pfizer’s involvement in the case, beginning in November 2022 when the company first became aware that its covid 19 vaccine would form part of the Coroner’s inquiry.
“Through media reports in November 2022 Pfizer became of Mr McGinty’s death; this inquest and that Pfizer Biontech mRNA vaccine would be considered during the inquest,” she said.
On November 30 2022 – Pfizer Ireland’s legal team, the Dublin based firm McCann Fitzgerald wrote to the Coroner. On December 5, the Coroner wrote a reply, asking a number of questions regarding the safety of and background to the vaccine.
Dr Ellsbury gave the following information in her statement, delivered from the UK by video link to Ballina Courthouse, Co Mayo.
“A vaccine is initially tested in a laboratory, followed by testing in clinical trials of increasing size, evaluation of the scientific data by EMA, approval by EC to market the vaccine, scaling up production to meet requirements and ongoing safety review.”
“Safety monitoring is a critical feature,” Dr Ellsbury told the inquest, before offering an explanation of mRNA and the creation of the spike protein in the body.
“Messenger RNA is naturally occurring and is found in all living cells. It works together with DNA as DNA stores genetic information while mRNA carries that information as a set of instructions around our bodies,” she said.
Cells translate the mRNA instruction and can build the spike protein, Dr Ellsbury said.
The mRNA vaccine can be produced faster than other vaccines because the ‘code for a particular virus protein can be written onto the mRNA in a lab,’ Dr Ellsbury said.
The inquest heard that on March 13 2020, two days after the World Health Organisation classified covid 19 a ‘pandemic’ Pfizer offered to share its ‘expertise.’
“Pfizer offered to share its clinical development expertise and manufacturing capabilities in an effort to combat covid 19,” Dr Ellsbury said.
Four days later on March 17, the company signed a ‘letter of intent’ with Biontech. The intention was to ‘co-develop a potential covid 19 vaccine.’
“Further details were announced of the collaboration on April 9 2020, including how the company intended to initiate by the end of April 2020 the first clinical trial of the potential mRNA vaccine subject to regulatory approval of those trials,” Dr Ellsbury said.
Five weeks later, clinical trials got underway.
The first trials began in Germany on April 23 2020 with 60 participants vaccinated. The US followed on May 4 2020 with 45 individuals vaccinated, all 105 trial participants were in the 18-55 age group.
Dr Ellsbury said initial trial results were ‘encouraging’ and were made ‘publicly available’ July 2020.
Next, an expanded study featuring 44,000 participants got underway in Germany, the US, South Africa, Turkey, Argentina and Brazil featuring older adults in the 65 to 85 year age range alongside those aged 18 to 55 years.
Dr Ellsbury told the inquest that on November 18 2020, Pfizer announced ‘the vaccine had met all the large clinical trial goals and requirements’ and it was showing a 95 percent effective rate against covid 19, 28 days post first dose, noting the most common adverse events as fatigue and headache.
“Shortly afterwards the vaccine was authorised for use by regulators in the EU, USA, UK and elsewhere around the world, followed by national roll-out campaigns initially focused on the most vulnerable members of society and healthcare workers,” Dr Ellsbury said.
At the conclusion of her evidence, Coroner Pat O’Connor put two questions to Dr Ellsbury.
The Coroner referred to Pathologist Dr Fadel Bennani’s autopsy report and asked if there was a particular set of tests or a study that pathologists might take into account in conducting an autopsy in cases where a covid vaccine may have contributed to the death.
“There was a question suggested by Mr O’Connor in relation to any other studies that might be available in relation to what pathologists might take into account. Are you aware of any such studies?”
Dr Ellsbury replied “no.”
The Coroner asked if, on the balance of probabilities, noting the timeline of the administration of the vaccine, if Dr Ellsbury had reason to believe the administration of the vaccine either caused or contributed to Joseph’s death.
Dr Ellsbury replied that looking at the available information she had, there was ‘no evidence’ of that.
This Substack previously outlined the existence of autopsy protocols that can differentiate between vaccine induced damage and that arsising from covid infection. In recent days this reporter became aware that such tests can be carried out in Irish labs.
Immunohistochemistry staining can be conducted on organ tissue samples, using antibodies commercially available from pharmaceutical company Roche.
Lab technicians can use conventional methods to test samples for evidence of the spike protein, then differentiate between the spike protein due to covid infection and that resulting from a vaccine. The vaccination should not lead to a positive nucleocapsid proteins (NCP) reaction, whereby a Covid-infection should. This work is routinely conducted at the Burkhardt Pathology Lab in Reutlingen, Germany.
The process is further explained in a presentation by Dr John Campbell (link below).
Given that inquests are a form of public inquiry and much of the costs involved are borne by the tax payer, with a secondary cost to patients needing hospital care (nurses and doctors are often required to give evidence in court) it is imperative that Pfizer, particularly its Vaccine’s Director, be made aware of the existence of immunohistochemistry staining for vaccine damage as a matter of urgency. It should be imperative also, that Pfizer Ireland’s legal representatives, McCann Fitzgerald, take note of this information and include it in their submissions to the Coroner in order to correct the record of evidence in this case.
Legal teams for Mayo University Hospital (MUH) and for the family may also be mindful of the existence of the capabilities of immunohistochemistry staining in finalising their submissions to the Coroner, in light of the questions posed by the Coroner and Michael O’Connor SC for the family to Dr Gillian Ellsbury and her answer supplied under oath, that according to her knowledge, such tests at autopsy do not exist.
The Coroner has asked for submissions in this case by August 11.
A number of verdicts are open to a Coroner at the conclusion of any inquest.
These include:
accidental death
misadventure
open verdict
natural causes (if found at inquest)
unlawful killing (in certain circumstances)
In this case, the Coroner has invited the three legal teams involved (representing Pfizer, MUH and the McGinty family) to make submissions to him of no more than 3,000 words. The Coroner has asked that these submissions form neither a summary of the events or analysis of the facts. The Coroner further indicated that he would not be a proponent of a narrative verdict (which sets out the circumstances of a death) in this instance.
The Coroner asked that the submissions specifically deal with
A) the medical cause of death
B) the verdict he should record
C) the matter of recommendations.
*Warm thanks to those that continue to support my work, it is much appreciated.
View Dr John Campbell’s presentation here.
Readers may be interested to note that in issuing recommendations at a previous inquest linked to Covid 19, Coroner Pat O’Connor asked the Government to establish a review of the State's response to the Covid pandemic. This followed the inquest into the death of Mayo student Sally Maaz (17), at MUH during in the spring of 2020.
To date, this review – which is under the remit of the Department of Health - has not taken place.
And are we really to believe that Phizer was not aware that there were laboratory tests available to determine if the vaccine was the cause?
US normal citizens who do our own research have know of these tests for a long time yet we are to be expected to believe big pharma didn't know about them?
Now that's really taking us for fools.
Thanks louise for your reporting🙏
This autopsy protocol business is key and I'm glad you're following it up, Louise. I note your use of the passive in this delicate matter vis-à-vis the family, when you say:
"It is imperative that Pfizer, particularly its Vaccine’s Director, be made aware of the existence of immunohistochemistry staining for vaccine damage as a matter of urgency. It should be imperative also, that Pfizer Ireland’s legal representatives, McCann Fitzgerald, take note of this information and include it in their submissions to the Coroner in order to correct the record of evidence in this case."
I'm curious how this key information can be notified to the parties within the constraints of the inquest process in such a way that they are obliged to address it with the full legal implications. I suspect that public submissions, even from conscientious journalists like yourself, don't count and I'm sure the coroner is inundated anyway to the extent that much will get lost in the noise.
So I guess it's up to the family, via their lawyer, and we're fast approaching the deadline. If they are not already aware of this hugely pertinent information, I hope anyone who has their ear will pass it on without delay. We cannot assume that they are reading your Substack, Louise, even though it wouldn't surprise me and even the coroner himself might be taking the odd gander when no one is looking, not to mention the other parties.
I'm sure the family are feeling pressure from all sides which is only compounding their grief. On the one hand they will hope that other families can be spared this fate if they push for a certain verdict and set of recommendations. On the other hand, they will fear the implications of increasing vaccine hesitancy given the historical cost-benefit of most vaccines until recent times. It will be a delicate balancing act but I feel they can find the right tenor if they are in command of the material facts.
The coroner seems to be a conscientious type, as most are, and passionately independent within the constraints of his role. Indeed it was coroners across the globe, with a little prodding from people like Prof. Dolores Cahill, who forced a retrospective slashing of PCR-magnified Covid deaths in late 2020 when delayed all-cause mortality data showed that many common causes had disappeared off the charts. Of course, it was too little, too late, since the psychological damage to the populace had already been done. But now things have settled down enough that the coroner's verdict will carry more weight. Even if the mainstream media brushes it under the carpet, families who are suddenly bereaved in this horrible way will feel empowered to push for proper autopsies assuming the coroner's report places great store in this.
Of course, there is longer-term health time-bomb with these jabs outside the scope of this inquest that will open up an even bigger can-of-worms when we finally face up to the alarming trends in excess deaths, especially amongst younger people. As usual, the main barrier is mainstream media who are themselves complicit, so it would be like turkeys voting for Christmas. We must keep chipping away until the disintegrating wall they are still hiding behind comes crashing down around them.