Connect with us


Johnson & Johnson Announces Plan to Pause Vaccine Production to Focus on More Profitable, Non-Covid Vax




The only Johnson & Johnson facility that is currently making the single-shot coronavirus vaccine announced it has halted production, at least temporarily. Based in the Netherlands, the plant will be focusing on a more profitable vaccine “aimed at a non-Covid virus” people familiar with the situation told the New York Times.

One source said the halt could reduce the supply of the vaccine by hundreds of millions of doses. CNBC reports that while it is unclear whether vaccine supplies have been affected by the decision, the J&J Leiden plant anticipates restarting production for the vaccination in March.

J&J spokesman Jake Sargent told CNBC in a statement that the company is “focused on ensuring our vaccine is available where people are in need” and added “we currently have millions of doses of our Covid-19 vaccine in inventory.”

CNBC writes how polls signify Americans are skeptical towards the J&J vaccine, which has been the only one approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. However, last year the FDA recommended pausing the use for J&J because of reports of recipients developing rare blood clots.

The fact that it was the only vaccine where one dose was needed instead of two made it initially more intriguing for people to get the vaccine. It also made transport and distribution easier as one dose can be stored without a freezer.

You may like

Continue Reading


  1. David Carson

    February 12, 2022 at 5:38 pm

    I thought J&J was being sent to Africa and poorer nations

  2. Stephane

    February 14, 2022 at 6:36 pm

    There is nothing more TRUE than the PROFITEER saying the truth about its goal: MAKE MONEY HAND OVER FIST!
    Stop that crap for only Billions= MAKE HUNDREDS of Billions! For something that will NOT WORK, anyway!
    Trying to stop a cold?
    Everyone and their cousins have tried. AND FAILED!
    Now, what is it they want to eradicate?

  3. TellTheTruth-2

    February 15, 2022 at 5:43 pm

    LOL .. Slinking into the night .. hoping to avoid lawsuits.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Prestigious Science Journals Confirm Censored Views: Masks at Best Don’t Reduce COVID Infection



Screen Shot 2021 05 18 at 12.58.58 PM scaled

Just The News reports that a prestigious science journal has confirmed what was highly censored among social media regarding the novel coronavirus pandemic: “the best-case scenario for one of the most common COVID-19 interventions may be that it has no measurable effect on infection.”

A systematic review of studies of mask mandates for children, published Saturday in the British Medical Journal‘s Archives of Disease in Childhood, found “no association” with infection or transmission in 16 of the 22 observational studies and “critical” or “serious” risk of bias in the six countervailing studies. It got the attention of Elon Musk, owner of X, formerly Twitter.

Emails turned over under public records requests show that National Institutes of Health officials were privately questioning the effectiveness of cloth masks and forthcoming vaccines just a month after then-NIH Director Francis Collins appeared to plot with colleagues to organize a “quick and devastating take down” of the anti-lockdown Great Barrington Declaration.

Self-reported SARS-CoV-2 infection was higher the more often people said they wore masks, according to a Norwegian study accepted for publication Nov. 13 in the Cambridge University Press journal Epidemiology and Infection.

An analysis published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on Nov. 20 suggests that “scientific censorship is often driven by scientists” and not just “authoritarian officials with dark motives, such as dogmatism and intolerance,” as popularly believed.

The paper, co-authored by dozens of scholars known for challenging orthodoxies in their fields, cited “self-protection, benevolence toward peer scholars, and prosocial concerns for the well-being of human social groups” as motives for censorious scientists.

Heterodox COVID scholarship may suffer hard-to-prove “camouflaged censorship” by way of “double standards” applied to such research, the paper states.

The findings cast further doubt on the practice of not only public health authorities but scientists themselves in demonizing science-based skepticism of the effectiveness of COVID interventions, particularly in relation to their potential medical, mental and social harms.

“Masking recommendations appear to be entirely based on mechanistic and observational data,” they wrote, noting that a much broader systematic review of mask RCTs by the research collaborative Cochrane concluded masks make “little to no difference” against flu or COVID.

(Cochrane unilaterally reinterpreted the study to downplay its findings, over the authors’ objections, after facing media scrutiny.)

You may like

Continue Reading