And what about the PRECLINICAL studies? I have not heard one word about any that were done anywhere. I worked 37 years as a data technician for MPI Research, and this going straight to human (clinical) testing is simply not done! Before one ever tests anything in humans there is a whole battery of preclinical animal studies that need to be conducted, of varying lengths and in different species, looking at things like carcinogenicity, neurotoxicity, reproductive problems, cardiovascular problems. Where is the data for these studies? Who did them? (Hint: It wasn't MPI!)
What does this speak to but the reality of institutional rot? Individual Substack writers are doing work that the FDA, CDC, NIH, and major news organizations with hundreds of journalists haven't even begun to allow themselves to notice.
Anyway, I can't wait for the moment when a 24 year-old factchecker with a journalism degree spends thirty minutes typing up a piece ruling that questions about Pfizer's clinical trials are disinformation.
"now, anyone who has ever run a clinical trial is already probably jumping up and down like this: bullshit"
I'm going to disagree here. I know a hard leftist who runs clinical drug trials for Pfizer. She was on the C0VID trials in 21. If I asked her about this... which I can't, because she can't be reasoned with, she would say that it was a worldwide health crisis and people stepped up, nothing to see here.
Or she would say that it's incredibly difficult to manage sites, especially with so many people. This is really, REALLY hard work people! REALLY DIFFICULT because of incompetent people on the ground.
If I persisted (I've tried to show her info twice, and ran into an angry, angry wall,) my guess is her next argument would be "Even if mistakes were made, it doesn't matter, because the vaxxine is the only way to save people from dying of c0vid."
She literally believes that unless you get vaxxed, you will DIE of C0VID.
I had a chance once to review the raw data of a pharmaceutical trial. Doing so made it clear that the entire industry was full of fraud. Anyone with an adverse reaction, including death, was held to be "unrelated to the subject medication". What was submitted for approval had been altered so many times that it barely reflected anything in the raw data.
We have had evidence of fraud and malfeasance all along. Even prior to these court ordered data dumps. From the 1st release there we near equal amounts of infections in treatment vs control groups and there was increased all cause mortality. This happened even tho ALL control participants were tested and ONLY those injected that were adjudicated to need to be tested were then tested. IF they had tested ALL injected then there near certainly would have been NEGATIVE EFFECTIVENESS. THEN the Fauci Feign® which is to remove the control group - CASE CLOSED. ANY measure indicating positive efficacy and safety was dubious mathematical gymnastics and or outright concealment of factual data. Spiced with mixing Relative with Absolute reduction. NO DEMOGRAPHIC should receive these injections.
" .... likely invalidate the liability protection granted under EUA ..." - that's key. Fraud vitiates contracts - long standing legal principle. Back in March, Edward Dowd (the renegade ex Blackrock analyst) seemed to be leading the charge on that; or at least, claiming that money interests on Wall St (insurance sector) were going to blow sky high on that claim and take big pharma down. I don't doubt his good intentions and veracity - but we are out almost two months from his initial claims and so far, crickets. It's damnably complex - vax liability protection, I think, rests on more than one shot EUA maneuvers - it is hard written into law for a long period - any litigation would take minimal a decade plus. And meanwhile the "next pandemic" will be on us. Well, the more chirping crickets - the more mice rummaging - the better - keep at it guys! - Thank you!
Saw this yesterday on Steve Kirsch's stack. My only thought is that perhaps, because it is a military hospital that they recruited military personnel - or told them they had to do it - hence the ease of finding so many willing participants so quickly. They would all be fairly young and healthy probably too - which may skew the data - but that is another thing. All sounds a bit fishy to me.... so cats might want to get dug further in then.....
Are you telling me that Big Pharma, who was heavily incentivized with billions of potential profits and no legal liability whatsoever, might have fudged the books on the trials? Well, knock me over with a feather!
moderna mrna went to work for def advanced research program agency (darpa) in 2013..... it did not result in anything discoverable on the www. wondering why!
i entered the azn 2222 trial in usa in nov 2020. my intake took well over 2 hours including the doc doing the physical discovering my functional murmur and almost cutting me, the last step was the injection and 15 minute wait...... second shot in dec 2020. i learned i received the real thing in feb when i could get the shots from the state. seemed this site was doing 3 to 5 subjects in a flow, about 1 hour space.
The entire point of testing or a trial is to study on a small scale what might be too costly or dangerous to study on a large scale. This concept applies to all sorts of things: product marketing, bridge building, chemical reactors, drug testing, etc. While the details differ with each area of study there is nothing fundamentally different about trials in these various areas: Once you set up a proper test you are able to predict with some level of certainty what will happen on a large scale. Regardless of the discipline testing ALWAYS occurs. You can skip the test and watch the bridge collapse when cars finally drive on it. But, this too is a test. Just a very expensive one. From the collapsed bridge you can recover the parts, reassemble the bridge and draw some conclusions why the failure occurred. A "fudged" test might also produce a collapsed bridge and a reassembly will again reveal the cause. If you compare this work with the previously accepted but "fudged" test you have very strong evidence of testing fraud.
Vaccine testing is no different. If what you see when millions of arms have been jabbed does not correlate with the testing results then you have prima facie evidence that the testing was wrong. It could be wrong for only one of two reasons: It was poorly designed or the results were fraudulently reported (or created, same thing). If the testing protocol was sound (on paper, at least) then the only other alternative left is fraud or perhaps praud in this case.
Do you know that famous and well-respected lawyer Robert Barnes who is representing Pfizer whistleblower always mentions your substack articles? This time he mentioned that it’s similar to his whistleblower claims. I just hope and pray your discoveries will help with their lawsuit!
I worked my entire adult life as a medical clinic administrator with some exposure to clinical trials. From the get-go this whole vax scene seemed extremely suspicious, rushed and non-transparent. Thanks you for an amazing and very interesting piece!
are we pfinding pfizer pfraud? (part 1)
And what about the PRECLINICAL studies? I have not heard one word about any that were done anywhere. I worked 37 years as a data technician for MPI Research, and this going straight to human (clinical) testing is simply not done! Before one ever tests anything in humans there is a whole battery of preclinical animal studies that need to be conducted, of varying lengths and in different species, looking at things like carcinogenicity, neurotoxicity, reproductive problems, cardiovascular problems. Where is the data for these studies? Who did them? (Hint: It wasn't MPI!)
That these trials were fraudulent should be the expected outcome given that there has never been evidence of efficacy.
https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/vrbpac-presentation-the-ultimate?s=w
What does this speak to but the reality of institutional rot? Individual Substack writers are doing work that the FDA, CDC, NIH, and major news organizations with hundreds of journalists haven't even begun to allow themselves to notice.
Anyway, I can't wait for the moment when a 24 year-old factchecker with a journalism degree spends thirty minutes typing up a piece ruling that questions about Pfizer's clinical trials are disinformation.
"now, anyone who has ever run a clinical trial is already probably jumping up and down like this: bullshit"
I'm going to disagree here. I know a hard leftist who runs clinical drug trials for Pfizer. She was on the C0VID trials in 21. If I asked her about this... which I can't, because she can't be reasoned with, she would say that it was a worldwide health crisis and people stepped up, nothing to see here.
Or she would say that it's incredibly difficult to manage sites, especially with so many people. This is really, REALLY hard work people! REALLY DIFFICULT because of incompetent people on the ground.
If I persisted (I've tried to show her info twice, and ran into an angry, angry wall,) my guess is her next argument would be "Even if mistakes were made, it doesn't matter, because the vaxxine is the only way to save people from dying of c0vid."
She literally believes that unless you get vaxxed, you will DIE of C0VID.
Pro tip: don't do a web search for "penile vein thrombosis".
(It might cause some, ahem, vaccine hesitancy).
I had a chance once to review the raw data of a pharmaceutical trial. Doing so made it clear that the entire industry was full of fraud. Anyone with an adverse reaction, including death, was held to be "unrelated to the subject medication". What was submitted for approval had been altered so many times that it barely reflected anything in the raw data.
We have had evidence of fraud and malfeasance all along. Even prior to these court ordered data dumps. From the 1st release there we near equal amounts of infections in treatment vs control groups and there was increased all cause mortality. This happened even tho ALL control participants were tested and ONLY those injected that were adjudicated to need to be tested were then tested. IF they had tested ALL injected then there near certainly would have been NEGATIVE EFFECTIVENESS. THEN the Fauci Feign® which is to remove the control group - CASE CLOSED. ANY measure indicating positive efficacy and safety was dubious mathematical gymnastics and or outright concealment of factual data. Spiced with mixing Relative with Absolute reduction. NO DEMOGRAPHIC should receive these injections.
I'll believe nothing until U2 play in the subway in Buenos Aire.
This making pfun of their pfabrications is rather pfrivolous.
" .... likely invalidate the liability protection granted under EUA ..." - that's key. Fraud vitiates contracts - long standing legal principle. Back in March, Edward Dowd (the renegade ex Blackrock analyst) seemed to be leading the charge on that; or at least, claiming that money interests on Wall St (insurance sector) were going to blow sky high on that claim and take big pharma down. I don't doubt his good intentions and veracity - but we are out almost two months from his initial claims and so far, crickets. It's damnably complex - vax liability protection, I think, rests on more than one shot EUA maneuvers - it is hard written into law for a long period - any litigation would take minimal a decade plus. And meanwhile the "next pandemic" will be on us. Well, the more chirping crickets - the more mice rummaging - the better - keep at it guys! - Thank you!
Saw this yesterday on Steve Kirsch's stack. My only thought is that perhaps, because it is a military hospital that they recruited military personnel - or told them they had to do it - hence the ease of finding so many willing participants so quickly. They would all be fairly young and healthy probably too - which may skew the data - but that is another thing. All sounds a bit fishy to me.... so cats might want to get dug further in then.....
Are you telling me that Big Pharma, who was heavily incentivized with billions of potential profits and no legal liability whatsoever, might have fudged the books on the trials? Well, knock me over with a feather!
moderna mrna went to work for def advanced research program agency (darpa) in 2013..... it did not result in anything discoverable on the www. wondering why!
i entered the azn 2222 trial in usa in nov 2020. my intake took well over 2 hours including the doc doing the physical discovering my functional murmur and almost cutting me, the last step was the injection and 15 minute wait...... second shot in dec 2020. i learned i received the real thing in feb when i could get the shots from the state. seemed this site was doing 3 to 5 subjects in a flow, about 1 hour space.
my last blood submission will be nov 2022!
The entire point of testing or a trial is to study on a small scale what might be too costly or dangerous to study on a large scale. This concept applies to all sorts of things: product marketing, bridge building, chemical reactors, drug testing, etc. While the details differ with each area of study there is nothing fundamentally different about trials in these various areas: Once you set up a proper test you are able to predict with some level of certainty what will happen on a large scale. Regardless of the discipline testing ALWAYS occurs. You can skip the test and watch the bridge collapse when cars finally drive on it. But, this too is a test. Just a very expensive one. From the collapsed bridge you can recover the parts, reassemble the bridge and draw some conclusions why the failure occurred. A "fudged" test might also produce a collapsed bridge and a reassembly will again reveal the cause. If you compare this work with the previously accepted but "fudged" test you have very strong evidence of testing fraud.
Vaccine testing is no different. If what you see when millions of arms have been jabbed does not correlate with the testing results then you have prima facie evidence that the testing was wrong. It could be wrong for only one of two reasons: It was poorly designed or the results were fraudulently reported (or created, same thing). If the testing protocol was sound (on paper, at least) then the only other alternative left is fraud or perhaps praud in this case.
Do you know that famous and well-respected lawyer Robert Barnes who is representing Pfizer whistleblower always mentions your substack articles? This time he mentioned that it’s similar to his whistleblower claims. I just hope and pray your discoveries will help with their lawsuit!
I worked my entire adult life as a medical clinic administrator with some exposure to clinical trials. From the get-go this whole vax scene seemed extremely suspicious, rushed and non-transparent. Thanks you for an amazing and very interesting piece!