Here’s another new preprint that you might like - it shows the lies about the bivalent - I was just reading it...


Expand full comment
Apr 26·edited Apr 26

Anandamide, I presume you were given the link to the document with the picture of the bivalent plasmid that Pfizer gave to the EMA? It looks like Pfizer gave them a lot more information than just the diagramme because it says:

Quote - - Page 7: "The functional elements of the Omicron plasmid are sufficiently described in graphic and tabular formats and the sequence is included. The source and generation of the Omicron plasmid are not clearly documented. However, as the plasmid used in the manufacture of the original vaccine was generated using the same procedure, included in the original dossier, and as the nucleotide differences between Omicron and the original plasmids are located only within the gene encoding the spike sequence, the information provided is considered sufficient."

So Pfizer gave them that for both the monovalent, and the bivalent.... But I've not yet found the diagramme or complete detail for the monovalent.

For those who haven't seen the bivalent document with the vector picture, it's this one:

Comirnaty-H-C-005735-II-0140 : EPAR - Assessment report - Variation (PDF/9.32 MB)


First published: 07/12/2022



Have to wonder if it's worth an FOIA from the German laboratory to get more complete information?

Expand full comment

I can't find anything on the monovalent vaccine plasmid and vector, other than on page 16, 17, and 32 of this 19 February 2021 document is some discussion of the change from beads to plasmids and more "detail" that they don't specify in the paper

Comirnaty : EPAR - Public assessment report (PDF/3.75 MB)


First published: 23/12/2020

EMA/707383/2020 Corr.:


Expand full comment

Thank you.

Expand full comment