Dr. Jessica Rose, whose medical research on Covid vaccination risks for young children has been censored, gave a heated response on Tuesday after an FDA panel’s decision to approve vaccines for children as young as 5 years old.

Dr. Rose’s response followed the Food and Drug Administration’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VBRPAC) meeting, which voted 17-0 to approve the vaccines for children 5-11 with one abstension. The FDA does not need to follow the guidance, but is fully expected to follow the advice of the panel.

Dr. Rose’s outstanding rebuttal followed the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practicioners’ endorsement of the vaccines for children. It can be watched in full below.

“Emergency use authorization of biological agents requires the existence of an emergency, and the non-existence of alternate treatments,” Dr. Rose said. “There is no emergency and Covid-19 is exceedingly treatable.”

Dr. Rose then made pains to point out that 19 times the expected myocarditis events in children are being reported to VAERS following Covid-19 vaccination. She also criticized the targeted censorship of academic journal reporting that highlights the inordinate myocardities and pericarditis events in this age cohort.

Jessica Rose, PhD just had her paper on VAERS analysis of myocarditis rejected after two rounds of review at “Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine.” NO REASON GIVEN. This is scientific misconduct at its finest by the peer reviewers (not the Journal). Jessica is first-rate. pic.twitter.com/gXUNw5Mf6Z

— Steve Kirsch (@stkirsch) September 16, 2021

“Jessica Rose, PhD just had her paper on VAERS analysis of myocarditis rejected after two rounds of review at ‘Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine,” philanthropist Steve Kirsch, founder of COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund (CETF), noted. “NO REASON GIVEN. This is scientific misconduct at its finest by the peer reviewers (not the Journal). Jessica is first-rate.”

“You cannot get any paper published that is anti-vaccine nowadays,” he added. “Academics will ONLY believe what is peer reviewed. So the vaccines are safe because there are no papers saying it isn’t, even though the data shows it isn’t. BUT NOBODY LOOKS AT THE DATA anymore.”

Dr. Jessica Rose has been a vocal critic of ignoring the risks of mass Covid vaccination. An interview with Aga Wilson of News Voice gave a fuller presentation of Dr. Rose’s views.

“Dr. Jessica Rose, who is normally positive about vaccines, says that VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System), the US database for vaccine injuries, has only managed to collect an estimated 1% of the total number of serious side effects from mRNA injections,’ NewsVoice reported. “VAERS is, unfortunately, a weak system when it comes to how side effect data is handled, says Rose. She, therefore, divided adverse reactions and side effects into several categories such as neurology, immunology, reproductive organs, and cardiovascular. In this way, she has created a warning system where it should be easier to see if and in that case how side effects can be linked to the mRNA vaccines.”

“Rose says that the so-called ‘covid vaccines’ are not actual vaccines but rather injections of genetic material,” the report added. “Several studies have been published, despite attempts to censor these, which show that the spike proteins themselves are very toxic to the body. These spike proteins are foreign proteins.”

“The fact that millions of people have been injected with these so-called ‘mRNA vaccines’ is to be considered a crime against humanity, Dr. Jessica Rose believes.”

Dr. Rose also gave a lengthy discussion of the reported side effects of Covid-19 vaccines where informed citizens can review the data.

Dr. Rose reports on the adverse events reportage following injection. Of interest, around day 7 there is a significant spike in post-injection adverse events reportage that gets missed because the FDA and CDC refuse to acknowledge that someone is vaccinated until 2 weeks following injection. This is a “donut hole” in the vaccination side effects reportage. It is reviewed 23 minutes into the above video.

As reporter earlier, there was significant conflict and pushback against the FDA advisery meeting on Tuesday and against sweeping authorizations of Covid vaccination for children 5 to 11 years old. The meeting can be viewed in full below:

“Based on the totality of scientific evidence available, do the benefits of the Pfizer- BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine when administered as a 2-dose series (10 micrograms each dose, 3 weeks apart) outweigh its risks for use in children 5-11 years of age?”

The votes were: Yes: 17; No: 0; Abstain: 1.

“Panel chair Arnold Monto has now tried to get the FDA to change the wording of the question twice — and has been rebuffed by the FDA’s Peter Marks both times,” Stat News reported on the minutes. “Several panelists clearly worry that while they believe the vaccine should be an option, particularly for kids who are at risk, they’re not sure the data exist for a wide approval.

“Help us out in terms of what happens if we vote yes,” Monto said, “and clearly if we vote no the vaccine will not be available to anyone.”

“Marks once again said that he’d like to stick with the question as worded,” Stat News noted. “Amanda Cohn, a CDC representative on the panel, chimed in to say that she thought the panel’s discussion reflected the difficulty of balancing risks and benefits in children. But she said that she believed that, as worded, the benefits of the vaccine clearly outweigh the risks and that the measures for detecting rare side effects will allow the U.S. to change course if myocarditis is more problematic than it appears.”

“To me, the question is pretty clear: We don’t want children to be dying of Covid, even if it is far fewer children than adults and we don’t want them in the ICU,” Cohn said.

But a number of medical health professionals and parents were very concerned about the FDA’s push towards vaccinating children.

Earlier in the discussion, James Hildreth, CEO of Meharry Medical College, said, “This is a really tough one. I do believe children at highest risk do need to be vaccinated, but vaccinating all the children to achieve that seems a bit much to me.”

Michael Kurilla, an NIH researcher, called it “ the toughest decision” and said he resented the “binary presentation” of the question. “But the panel may decide to clear the vaccine, and leave restrictions on the vaccine to the CDC’s ACIP committee,” Matthew Herper of Stat News reported.

The group then continued to pushback on the FDA’s strong-arming of the vote phrasing.

“Based on the totality of scientific evidence available, do the benefits of the Pfizer- BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine when administered as a 2-dose series (10 micrograms each dose, 3 weeks apart) outweigh its risks for use in children 5-11 years of age?”

“The answer is binary, as chair Arnold Monto has informed the group more than once,” Stat News noted. “They are to vote yes or no.”

“It’s clear some people on the committee think the vaccine should be available, but maybe isn’t something all children in this age group need,” appeared to be the working consensus of many.

“Cody Meissner, at pediatrician at Tufts Medical Center, raised concerns that if the vaccine is authorized for this age group, school mandates will follow,” the report said. “Meissner said he opposes them.”

“Ofer Levy, director of Harvard Medical School’s Precision Vaccines Program, asked if the wording of the question could be changed to give the committee some leeway,” the minutes noted.

The childhood population is not statistically at significant risk from COVID-19. This is an empirical fact borne out by the data. The latest CDC data records “542 deaths involving Covid-19” among those under 18 since January 2020. When ruling out 94% of this population due to serious underlying comorbidities, such as heart disease and cardiopulmonary disorders, that results in a case survival rate for healthy children under the age of 18 is 99.99996%.

A new Wall Street Journal report also provided research from the United Kingdom that shows tha event children who were infected have an extremly high case survival rate.

“Children are at extremely slim risk of dying from Covid-19, according to some of the most comprehensive studies to date, which indicate the threat might be even lower than previously thought,” WSJ notes.

“Some 99.995% of the 469,982 children in England who were infected during the year examined by researchers survived,” one study found.

“In fact, there were fewer deaths among children due to the virus than initially suspected,” it continues. “Among the 61 child deaths linked to a positive Covid-19 test in England, 25 were actually caused by the illness.”

The FDA panel also ignores natural immunity, which is highly prevalent among the childhood population. The CDC’s figures estimated that at least 120 million Americans had been infected with Covid-19 by the end of May, thus possessing natural immunity, which is superior to vaccinated immunity. That figure can be projected to be at least 160 million currently, due to the Delta variant wave and the CDC’s estimate there are at least four Covid infections for every case reported.

The Covid-19 vaccines also do not ‘stop the spread,’ according to the CDC’s admission, and their lowering of transmission is not highly effective and wanes quickly. This calls into question whether a vaccine recommendation and predictable subsequent mandates are justifiable on public health grounds.

The FDA’s refusal to widely examine and publicize reports on Covid antibodies among the childhood population, acknowledge natural immunity from prior infection, or the extremely low risk posed to healthy children, should be glaring red flags that the public health agency’s motive is to push the vaccines at all costs, regardless of the medical necessity, the ethics, and the actual science.