728 x 90

‘Anecdotals’ Movie Gives Voice to the V*ccine Injured

‘Anecdotals’ Movie Gives Voice to the V*ccine Injured

Documentary filmmaker Jennifer Sharp got the Pfizer COVID vaccine in March 2021. Driving home from getting the shot, she couldn’t focus. While sleeping that night, she drenched the bed with sweat. She awoke the next morning and couldn’t feel the left side of her face.

Her symptoms lasted unabated for weeks, so she chose not to get the second Pfizer shot. She has since gotten help through a wholistic health doctor, but she’s still not completely recovered.

Despite all this, Jennifer has turned her pain into a creation meant to bind us together, not pour salt in our wounds. The result is her film Anecdotals, which aims to set a table of dialogue where all sides of this debate are invited to gather.

“This movie provides a glimpse into the lives of the Anecdotals–those of us whose lives have been changed drastically by taking the vaccine,” explains the film’s website. “It also reflects on the division and politics that prevents us from getting much needed care. Anecdotals is a personal journey that focuses on questions, not answers, and people, not politics.”

With the health problems she’s had since getting the vaccine, Jennifer sought fellowship with others through the vax-injured support group React19. Her film is another step in offering such fellowship to others and follows her own vaccine injury.

“It was stress and pain that drove me to make the film,” she said. “I was having arguments [over the issue] with people who are really close to me. … As an artist, making the documentary became my therapy.”

Despite the public acrimony regarding the question of whether these vaccines are safe or effective, Jennifer is hopeful. “We need to come together,” she said. “I made the movie in part because I wanted to explore this issue without making it divisive or political.”

Her aim is to focus on the humans who have been injured by the vaccine. There are many vaccine-injured people who need help right now, Jennifer noted. And she believes that we should look at the facts regarding vaccine-injured people and put preconceived notions and politics aside.

“My goal is to get us to agree on the questions,” she said. “Why are the vaccine injured being censored? That’s a question worth asking. I made this movie so people can ask the questions we need to ask to get to the bottom of this and help all these people who are suffering.”

While doing research for her 80-minute documentary, Jennifer learned some things that were quite shocking.

“One of my biggest surprises was when I was investigating the clinical trials for the vaccines. I learned that the pharmaceutical companies oversee their own trials!” she said. “Pfizer oversees their own trials and then presents data to the FDA. So really, [their vax] was approved because Pfizer said it should be.”

Moreover, she learned that some Food and Drug Administration officials have a conflict of interest with the pharmaceutical companies. “FDA employees often retire and then work for millions of dollars for pharmaceutical companies,” she said.

As demonstrated with vaccine trial whistleblower Brook Jackson and others, allowing the fox to guard the henhouse in this way has enabled at least some of those clinical trials to be compromised. Even so, the FDA approved these drugs on an emergency use basis in a scenario where pharmaceutical companies cannot be held liable if the vaccines injure people.

Even with nearly 70 percent of the U.S. population vaccinated against COVID-19, estimates for how many Americans have been injured by the vaccine are muddy. More than a million people have reported their COVID-19 vaccine injuries to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), but this data is rather mercurial because these injuries are likely underreported.

It seems obvious to even a casual, objective observer that these poorly tested vaccines have injured so many people. But the CDC continues to say adverse reactions are rare and push the vaccines. It’s also been revealed that the federal government worked with Twitter to squelch the viewpoints of those who disagree.

“What I found interesting while making the film is that the people being interviewed want to be heard,” Jennifer said. “And they always thanked me. People want to be heard, and it was great to interview them because it was helpful to them to tell their story to me.”

Image credit: Flickr-Matthew Perkins, CC BY-NC 2.0


Jonathan Barnes
Jonathan Barnes

Leave a Comment

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


  • Avatar
    March 21, 2023, 12:17 am

    Clinical trials for medical devices and medicines are carried out at the expense of and under the close scrutiny of the FDA. The data aren't just accepted because pharma says so. It is evaluated carefully by an independent panel of experts for approval. There is a carefully followed paper trail from data collection to analysis.
    However how this EUA was conducted is a concern.

    • Avatar
      Rudy @Rudy
      March 21, 2023, 12:20 am

      It is at the expense of the company and under scrutiny of the FDA. I wasn't clear on that

    • Avatar
      March 21, 2023, 1:38 pm

      Boy, you certainly see things through rose colored glasses. Now tell us how the Federal Reserve has all of our best interests at heart. Good grief.

    • Avatar
      March 21, 2023, 1:39 pm

      "independent panel of experts"

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! My God, man. Wake up. What does this even mean? Oh, independent you say? With no bias, no connection, no agenda, right? You're delusional in the extreme.

  • Avatar
    March 21, 2023, 1:43 pm

    "Clinical trials for medical devices and medicines are carried out at the expense of the people."

    There, fixed it for you. And what I mean by this is that we all pay unnecessary and ungodly costs for medical treatment and this is just ONE of the reasons.

    The FDA is just as biased, and just as filled in fallible people as any other group, including big pharma – in fact, I would argue that ANY politically connected group (of which the FDA is), is far more corrupt than any private organization.

    "The data aren't just accepted because pharma says so. "

    And how do you know this? Oh, because the FDA says so? You might want to look up the term "begging the question."

    "There is a carefully followed paper trail from data collection to analysis."

    And? So what? A paper trail is meaningless if the data is concocted, twisted, misleading, lied about, or downright made up.

    • Avatar
      March 21, 2023, 1:44 pm

      "and just as filled in fallible people"

      That should be "..filled WITH" fallible people…


Posts Carousel

Latest Posts

Frequent Contributors