Towards the end of the 699-page document release in the toxicology section, it is stated that mRNA-1273, as the company calls the drug, lead to "significant increases in the number of F1 rats with 1 or more wavy ribs and 1 or more rib nodules."
"Wavy ribs appeared in 6 fetuses and 4 litters with a fetal prevalence of 4.03% and a litter prevalence of 18.2%," the section continues. "Rib nodules appeared in 5 of those 6 fetuses." (Related: Pfizer's covid injection is also linked to birth defects and infertility.)
While Moderna acknowledges the connection between these changes and its drug, the company claims that the structural changes observed in the bone structure of test rats "do not impact development or function of a developing embryo."
"Maternal toxicity in the form of clinical observations was observed for 5 days following the last dose ([gestation day] 13), correlating with the most sensitive period for rib development in rats (GDs 14 to 17)," the company says.
All of this directly contradicts the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which in its authorization for "Spikevax," another name for the Moderna shot, claimed that there was "no vaccine-related fetal malformations or variations and no adverse effect on postnatal development."
Sasha Latypova, a former pharmaceutical executive with 25 years of experience in clinical trials and regulatory approvals, reviewed the documents and discovered the disparity between what Moderna's clinical trials actually show and what the FDA claims about the drug.
It turns out that the results of many clinical trials are blatantly misinterpreted by government regulators – if they even get submitted to the government for review in the first place.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) says the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is failing to do its job by ensuring that drug and vaccine companies meet the necessary requirements for federally funded trials.
More than half of the 72 trials that were supposed to be submitted and posted to ClinicalTrials.gov in calendar year 2019 and 2020 were either never submitted at all (25) or were submitted late (12).
Further, half were conducted internally while the other half were conducted externally – the external ones having a worse compliance rate than NIH scientists.
Rather than deal appropriately with all this, the NIH "took limited enforcement action when there was noncompliance," we are told. At the same time, the NIH continued to fund "new research of responsible parties that had not submitted the results of their completed clinical trials."
What this means is that pertinent information about adverse events is not making its way through the appropriate channels, resulting in the FDA and other agencies issuing false information about questionable drugs and vaccines being "safe and effective."
According to Stanford University medical professor Jay Bhattacharya, co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration, negative trial results never get published in journals because of this.
"So when the NIH doesn't follow the rule, essentially, it's painting an incomplete, biased picture" of how taxpayer money is being spent and what it is supporting, Bhattacharya contends.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is also complicit in the racket, having most recently removed information from its website falsely claiming that mRNA spike proteins leave the body after just a few days. It turns out that they persist inside the body for a long time.
Want to learn more about the dangers and ineffectiveness of covid jabs? Visit VaccineInjuryNews.com.
Sources for this article include: