If I've identified the narrative that will prevail we could see the biggest criminal trial in history. Commenters on NYT journalist Alex Berenson's site have said that Fauci could go down for Remdesivir alone.
Re Covid vaccine trials:
NY based civil rights lawyer Aaron Siri states the FDA buried data on the case of child Maddie de Garay who was paralysed in pfizer's age 12-15 trial in a cohort of only 1,131. I watched a long interview with her mother Stephanie. She publicly stated there was blood in the urine and Maddie's fingertips were white and cold to the touch. These are objective symptoms that were likely recorded during Maddie's frequent hospitalisations. The white fingertips speak to endothelial dysfunction (I have this in my family and have written about it here), the root cause of autoimmune conditions which usually begin in the gut (Maddie's adverse event appears in pfizer's report as 'abdominal') Maddie's case was brought up in both FDA ADCOMs. The email exchange and Aaron Siri's letter can be viewed in the link below. What Dr Nath of the NIH says IMO is very telling.
With respect to how serious adverse effects could be censored, Dr Brian Dressen gives evidence in the public hearing at the FDA ADCOM of his wife's life-changing neurological adverse effect that was censored from the AZ trial because it occurred after one dose. I don't know if that also occurred in the pfizer trial but he refers to meeting up with participants from it.
Aaron Siri has been contacted by Dr Patricia Lee (fully vaccinated herself) who came forward because of the vaccine damage she has seen. She describes 6 case studies as illustrative examples. Her letter says colleagues have also seen such effects and expressed dismay but don't want to speak out either through not wanting to fuel vaccine hesitancy or fear of backlash. Since then, Mr Siri's firm has been contacted by more than a dozen physicians, some of whom experienced debilitating effects themselves. Their sworn declarations are available on the same site. Some describe a climate of bullying, gaslighting and cognitive dissonance. Notably, one physician states that their local children's hospital has seen 15 cases of myocarditis post vaccination and this it IS (my emphasis) extremely rare to have a child admitted for myocarditis following Covid-19.
A subscriber provides links to the FDA and CBER slides listing potential adverse effects of Covid vaccines presented 22/10/2020 (Links below. Note the myocarditis, MIS-C,and autoimmune conditions) and asks if the de Garays were aware of these potential adverse effects, whether they'd have enrolled their children in the clinical trial.
Viral immunologist and computational biologist Dr Jessica Rose was an adviser on the ADCOM for children aged 5-11 and also on the one that voted 16:2 against boosters in the general population. Dr Rose analysed the VAERS data and found a 1000% increase in reports of adverse effects not due to increase in injections and not factoring in under reporting. She says that, in her opinion, the risks outweigh any potential benefit, especially for children. (The FDA ADCOMs and Dr Rose's analysis are on YT. I put a link below to her recent paper on pharmacovigilance). Dr Rose says VAERS is a useful, though imperfect, tool to detect safety signals. She states an odd finding that is perhaps due to a backlog of reports, but also finding an ID but the report is missing. Contrary to what we hear from the MSM, 67% of reports are from health care professionals (as found by Mclachlan et al and is also the case with LAREB) There is significant under reporting, as was found in a study on anaphylaxis after Covid vaccination reported by Blumenthal et al (JAMA)
Dr Tess Lawrie, who produces reports for the WHO and
MHRA
, wrote a report on Yellow Card data that was consistent with Dr Rose's concerns. She commented about this on Twitter and her account was suspended. I accept that cause and effect are difficult to establish but real-world reports are consistent with one another and those listed in the slides. What we know for sure is that these vaccines appear to be a leading cause of coincidence.
Re. pfizer specifically, Marco Suadoni writes in BMJ rapid response that pfizer's own data point to risk outweighing benefit in under 25s. He does the calculations (and also corrected them) and I put the links below for anyone to refute. Mr Suadoni is a practice development nurse and vaccination centre supervisor in the UK.
Statistician Toby Rogers (link below) sets out the evidence for the ten red flags in the FDA's risk-benefit analysis of pfizer's EUA application to inject American children 5-11 with its mRNA product. Aaron Siri says the authorization is illegal because no emergency exists in that age group. He cites the John Hopkins study of 48 000 children that found a mortality rate of zero in those who didn't have a pre-existing condition. He also cites the study by Kostoff et al who ask why we're vaccinating children when they have a negligible risk of serious effects from disease. Kostoff et al question pfizer's safety science.
Speaking at the FDA ADCOM for pfzer aged 5-11, editor-in-chief of the NEJM Eric Rubin said:
"We're never going to learn about how safe the vaccine is unless we start giving it".
Senior editor of the BMJ Peter Doshi says mRNA is qualitatively different from other vaccines and should be seen as a drug. Studies show it doesn't prevent infection or transmission (CDC's own in study in Mass outbreak; the UK study on household transmission published in the lancet; the Oxford study) The vaccinated and unvaccinated can have equal viral loadings, as SI said. CDC head Rochelle Walensky said in a TV interview that the vaccines do not prevent transmission. It's a therapy that benefits only the recipient and Doshi asks therefore why you would insist everyone around you take it?
The answer is always because covid is worse. Yes, I don't deny that. We have to look at the data for the prevention of worse disease.
Put moderna and pfizer data together. Out of approx 74 000 participants, where is evidence of lesser risk of severe disease leading to hospitalisation and/or death?
pfizer 6 month report on all cause mortality: 15 in the vaccine cohort. 14 in the placebo cohort
Real-world data are difficult to interpret because some hospitals count patients as unvaccinated until 14 days after 2nd dose; there are variables such as testing (Public Health Scotland is at least upfront about this) and no distinction between severe and mild cases, as in the pfizer study reported by Tartof et al in the Lancet. It could be the case that those patients who are unvaccinated are more anxious and likely to visit hospital for disease that is relatively mild. Even so, Peter Doshi and others such as Alex Berenson say the UK data contradicts the narrative of the pandemic of the unvaccinated.
Speaking at the FDA ADCOM on boosters, emergency medicine physician Dr Joseph Fraiman says the best way to overcome vaccine hesitancy is to run adequately powered RCTs with severe disease as the PE, so we have no doubt that benefit outweighs potential risk. My view is that it's particularly important that a RCT run by a proven criminal such as pfizer, is transparent with data. Why did so many 'suspected' Covid cases only appear in the FDA report? How could pfizer violate their own study protocol by not reporting 6 month adverse effects?
But in our world today if a product is a vaccine, that means it's science that can't be questioned.
Put what Peter Doshi and Eric Rubin say together and you have a drug that is currently in a clinical trial (where dodgy practices such as data falsification are alleged to have gone on) that California plans to mandate for healthy children (who are being treated like mini adults) with no idea of its safety. You can't claim it's for their own protection because there's no robust data to show that, which means you plan to give it them in the HOPE it will protect high-risk groups who are the ones you should have vaccinated in the first place and allowed safe and effective therapies to support herd immunity.
(20min delay)