Discussion about this post

User's avatar
TAM's avatar

In other words, Pfizer did NOT run any chronic (6 months or longer) clinical studies on their vaccines. If I recall correctly from my days at the research lab, a 90-day (three month) study was considered subchronic. Also, I have not heard anything at all about the types of studies that were conducted either by Pfizer or the other manufacturers. Specifically, I would want to know about studies (either clinical or preclinical) involving reproductive and fertility parameters, oncogenicity, carcinogenicity, neurotoxicity, cardiovascular and pulmonary parameters, safety and efficacy, among other things. What kind of long-term effects are we looking at? Even in short-lived species like rats, 90 days isn't enough to determine this sort of thing, you want at least a two year study. As I said I spent nearly 4 decades in the business; if someone wants to talk vaccine safety with me, then they'd better be able to demonstrate they know and understand the terms I just used above, and that includes my present employer. Don't just quote something you got off the CDC website, show me you know your stuff.

Expand full comment
MarianneK's avatar

What I understand so far:

1. The PCR test was never intended to be a method to diagnose COVID.

2. Using this test to dx COVID yields a 90% False Positive rate.

3. The PCR test cannot distinguish between COVID or any other coronavirus or the flu.

Bearing this in mind, how can variants possibly be diagnosed from a PCR test? How can any coronavirus or flu be eliminated as the cause of the person's illness?

I think this is a bigger hoax than people realize.

Expand full comment
156 more comments...

No posts