I don't even know if they tracked AE's and deaths that long after vaccination.... there is something about it in the trial protocol but I don't remember off the top of my head.
"In the Phase 2/3 portion of Study 2, based on data accrued through November 14, 2020, approximately 44,000 participants 12 years of age and older were randomized equally and received 2 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine (30 mcg modRNA) or placebo separated by 21 days. Participants are planned to be followed for up to 24 months, for assessments of safety and efficacy against COVID-19."
You might be interested to know that the Australian Health Minister outright called the rollout “the largest global vaccination trial ever.” Sounds about right.
Great work exposing the frauds of the trial. I've been pondering how removing the liability shield from these jabs is going to have to revisit those trials. I think back to the Vioxx settlement and note how they caught them because of the trial data which showed elevated heart risks. The Pfizer jab trial did everything to hide bad data on adverse events but if they had even a rate of severe adverse events of 1 in 1000, when you extrapolate that out to the billions of doses given out, it would mean they knew there would be harms associated with hundreds o thousands of people. I wonder how those trial participants are doing now?
To honor their sacrifices for the science (TM) Pfizer will give anybody with an adverse reaction 100 FTT tokens that you can exchange at the FTX exchange for money, o hodl and become even richer.
I read that the FTX exchange was responsible for the trial that discredited ivermectin as a treatment for Covid. I'm not sure if that's satire or not...
Yes, there are. I guess we can't know for sure if placebo subjects ended up getting vaccinated after March 13, but if they haven't gotten a real dose 3+ weeks after unblinding I think we can assume pretty safely that they aren't planning on getting it.
There are 1,082 placebo subjects who fit the bill, of whom 972 had never tested positive on a PCR test (somebody who got the virus might well decide to not get vaccinated). There are some people who got a different vaccine, and that happened more frequently among the placebo group. But I don't have those numbers at the tip of my fingers...
Yes, ok, this answers some questions. My feeling was that there was a certain biased to follow up with an actual vaccine had one gotten a placebo since they believed in science enough to be in the trials to begin with.
Yes, they combined phase 2 and 3, so this was done during that. Pfizer now defines it as an 'open label' study, except at least 89% of placebo recipients had already received the real vaccine by mid-March, 2021. So effectively there is no "Phase 3." You can' t compare the remaining unvaccinated placebo subjects because of selection bias -- they are a select group who didn't get vaccinated so any comparison between (remaining) placebo and (original) treatment group will be biased. They are just going through the motions at this point.
It's a SAS-export file for the SAS package. I use STATA, which can open SAS export files, but STATA is expensive. I know it can be opened in the open source statistical analysis software called R, but I haven't done that.
Still unclear to me, what was the trigger in December 2020 for the unblinding? As soon as we get to xx people with Covid symptoms and positive PCR test we unblind and see how we did? Was that number xx stated in advance? O/w don't you have to explain to the FDA why you want to unblind?
"unblind, but we haven't even got to 200 yet"
"well, you see.....after two months ....waning..."
That Pfizer unblinded over 55s more quickly than the up to 55s may not be that significant - but only because over 55s were under-represented. The company excluded so many morbidities from the vaccine group that the death rate was a sixth that of the normal population.
Pfizer trial participants had a death rate of 17/19 per 21,921/6 per 6 months, whereas the general US population had a death rate of 111.2 per 21,923 per 6 months. So Pfizer trial participants were over 6x less likely to die than the general public.
Thanks for the link. You said the vax group was generally healthier, but I guess that was a typo -- you meant the trial subjects. It's interesting though because according to David Healy many sites scraped the bottom of the barrel in terms of recruitments.
If the expose analysis doesn't correct for the age stratification tending to be younger then of course the overall mortality rate will be lower than in the general population.
The trial subjects and the vax group are one and the same, selected from the healthier population to minimise potential adverse effects. Nonetheless, more people died among those who took the vaccine. The whole exercise was a fraud, both in its implementation and in the way it was reported.
I’ve read that they were so completely selective that basically only crunchy, Superman types made the cut wherever possible, which would of course help their (Pfizer’s) cause but I can’t remember the stack.
I don't even know if they tracked AE's and deaths that long after vaccination.... there is something about it in the trial protocol but I don't remember off the top of my head.
Phase 2 was required to do follow ups for 24 months after initial injection.
Required, reshmired...
"In the Phase 2/3 portion of Study 2, based on data accrued through November 14, 2020, approximately 44,000 participants 12 years of age and older were randomized equally and received 2 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine (30 mcg modRNA) or placebo separated by 21 days. Participants are planned to be followed for up to 24 months, for assessments of safety and efficacy against COVID-19."
https://www.fda.gov/media/153713/download
Right. Thank you for explaining.
You might be interested to know that the Australian Health Minister outright called the rollout “the largest global vaccination trial ever.” Sounds about right.
https://rebekahbarnett.substack.com/p/the-largest-global-vaccination-trial
Yeah, once they start distributing meds to the public they call it 'phase 4.'
In Israel, the PM and the media, along with Bourla, were delighted to unironically refer to us as the world's largest laboratory.
What a time to be alive. I’m grateful to be in the control group (albeit no placebo) for this trial…
Ditto
Great work exposing the frauds of the trial. I've been pondering how removing the liability shield from these jabs is going to have to revisit those trials. I think back to the Vioxx settlement and note how they caught them because of the trial data which showed elevated heart risks. The Pfizer jab trial did everything to hide bad data on adverse events but if they had even a rate of severe adverse events of 1 in 1000, when you extrapolate that out to the billions of doses given out, it would mean they knew there would be harms associated with hundreds o thousands of people. I wonder how those trial participants are doing now?
To honor their sacrifices for the science (TM) Pfizer will give anybody with an adverse reaction 100 FTT tokens that you can exchange at the FTX exchange for money, o hodl and become even richer.
I read that the FTX exchange was responsible for the trial that discredited ivermectin as a treatment for Covid. I'm not sure if that's satire or not...
...and laundered money through the Ukraine to the Dems.
Let's see what the interwebs digs out next.
When you no more can distinguish between satire and reality you are living in clown word.
Sit back and enjoy.
I am not enjoying clown world
97 days. Oh no!
Does this mean they did not see the peak in deaths 5 months after the jabs?
Shocking I say, shocking.
Great detective work, thank you.
So 3 months.... Didn't I read somewhere that people die around 5 months after, if they get past the first 2 weeks?
Excellent piece of work👌
Obviously, a terrible Pfizer-style science exposed. Again.
If they have unblinded, and then eliminated their control group, doesn't that technically negate the entire trial???
Who does science like this????
Good point and good question!
We’re there any people in that study who chose to remain unvaccinated after the unblinding? Do we know that number? Anyone tracking them?
Yes, there are. I guess we can't know for sure if placebo subjects ended up getting vaccinated after March 13, but if they haven't gotten a real dose 3+ weeks after unblinding I think we can assume pretty safely that they aren't planning on getting it.
There are 1,082 placebo subjects who fit the bill, of whom 972 had never tested positive on a PCR test (somebody who got the virus might well decide to not get vaccinated). There are some people who got a different vaccine, and that happened more frequently among the placebo group. But I don't have those numbers at the tip of my fingers...
Yes, ok, this answers some questions. My feeling was that there was a certain biased to follow up with an actual vaccine had one gotten a placebo since they believed in science enough to be in the trials to begin with.
Hi Josh,
Which phase was the unblinding done in? The way I'm reading the above, it was done in the stacked 2/3 phase?
And what implications does this have for Phase 3, which is still in progress?
Yes, they combined phase 2 and 3, so this was done during that. Pfizer now defines it as an 'open label' study, except at least 89% of placebo recipients had already received the real vaccine by mid-March, 2021. So effectively there is no "Phase 3." You can' t compare the remaining unvaccinated placebo subjects because of selection bias -- they are a select group who didn't get vaccinated so any comparison between (remaining) placebo and (original) treatment group will be biased. They are just going through the motions at this point.
Hi thank you, what program do you need to open the pfizer documents please from the first link?
It's a SAS-export file for the SAS package. I use STATA, which can open SAS export files, but STATA is expensive. I know it can be opened in the open source statistical analysis software called R, but I haven't done that.
Seems appropriate to drop this here. FYI, I'll never charge to sub to my stack, this info needs to be spread wide:
Covid 19 vaccine damage repair protocols:
https://davenarby.substack.com/p/covid-19-vaccine-damage-repair-protocol
The jab probably potentiates cancer, so:
Vitamin D for cancer:
https://starpower.substack.com/p/new-real-hope-for-those-with-cancer
Microphage treatment for cancer:
https://knowledgeofhealth.com/what-if-cancer-was-already-cured/
Thank you!
"In the Phase 2/3 portion of Study 2, based on data accrued through November 14, 2020, approximately
44,000 participants 12 years of age and older were randomized equally and received 2 doses of
Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine (30 mcg modRNA) or placebo separated by 21 days. Participants are
planned to be followed for up to 24 months, for assessments of safety and efficacy against COVID-19."
https://www.fda.gov/media/153713/download
Still unclear to me, what was the trigger in December 2020 for the unblinding? As soon as we get to xx people with Covid symptoms and positive PCR test we unblind and see how we did? Was that number xx stated in advance? O/w don't you have to explain to the FDA why you want to unblind?
"unblind, but we haven't even got to 200 yet"
"well, you see.....after two months ....waning..."
"oh. well go ahead then"
That Pfizer unblinded over 55s more quickly than the up to 55s may not be that significant - but only because over 55s were under-represented. The company excluded so many morbidities from the vaccine group that the death rate was a sixth that of the normal population.
60% were 16-155 and 40% were 55+
If you wanted to keep that proportion equal over time as you unblind, you would unblind an equal proportion from each group, but they didn't do that.
I haven't seen anything showing co-morbidities were lower among the vax group.
Thanks. See:
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04368728
https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/04/peter-doshi-pfizer-and-modernas-95-effective-vaccines-we-need-more-details-and-the-raw-data/
According to the analysis here:
https://expose-news.com/2021/11/13/pfizer-trial-data-suggests-covid-19-vaccine-causes-aids/
Pfizer trial participants had a death rate of 17/19 per 21,921/6 per 6 months, whereas the general US population had a death rate of 111.2 per 21,923 per 6 months. So Pfizer trial participants were over 6x less likely to die than the general public.
Thanks for the link. You said the vax group was generally healthier, but I guess that was a typo -- you meant the trial subjects. It's interesting though because according to David Healy many sites scraped the bottom of the barrel in terms of recruitments.
If the expose analysis doesn't correct for the age stratification tending to be younger then of course the overall mortality rate will be lower than in the general population.
The trial subjects and the vax group are one and the same, selected from the healthier population to minimise potential adverse effects. Nonetheless, more people died among those who took the vaccine. The whole exercise was a fraud, both in its implementation and in the way it was reported.
I’ve read that they were so completely selective that basically only crunchy, Superman types made the cut wherever possible, which would of course help their (Pfizer’s) cause but I can’t remember the stack.
Fantastic summary! Thank you!