Pfizer still as dodgy as ever

Here is a presentation taken from the Canadian Covid Care Alliance showing just how dubious the process was. Some info has been paraphrased below, but the 38 minute doco is an eye opener to say the least. Pdf data sheet also placed at the bottom of the post for all references..

  1. 95% Efficacy 

Remember the pitch that the vaccine provides you 95% protection?

This is a bit of sleight of hand trickery designed to get everyone to embrace the effectiveness of the vaccine, regardless of what the real risk and risk reduction is.

This really shows just how much Pfizer will keep us all in the dark and feed us bullshit.

There were 43,548 people entered into the initial Pfizer stage II trial and the idea was these people would be split into two groups, one being the test group that didn’t receive the vaccine, and the group that did receive the jab. Neither was to know who received a vaccine or the placebo, which is referred to as a blind study.

The groups where then followed up till one week after the second dose, about 2 months of time in all, to see who got Covid and who didn’t.

This resulted in Pfizer telling the world their vaccine had a 95% efficacy rate.

How did they calculate the 95%?

This is where the trick begins

In the group with 18,198 people, who received the vaccine, 8 developed COVID which is 0.04%

In the group that was jabbed with a placebo, 18,325 in total, 162 got COVID being 0.88%

So by far the majority of both the jabbed and the placebo group avoided COVID. Which means in that time frame, regardless of your vaccination status, you had less than 1% chance of being infected. So how does Pfizer get the 95% efficacy from this?

Easy, 0.04% is 95% less than 0.88%, this is called Relative Risk Reduction (RRR)

A more ethical way of presenting the risk reduction would be what is called Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) this figure gives you a risk reduction of 0.84% which is 0.88 – 0.04. This is the number the FDA recommends using rather than RRR to avoid confusing stats like say… Pfizers 95% efficacy claim.

  1. Trial Period changed to avoid comparable safety data

The trial period was meant to be a blind study for 3 years in the phase III trial. The plan was meant to be to have roughly 21,000 people in each group. A placebo group and a vaccinated group, with no one knowing which group they were in. The period of this trial was set for between July 27, 2020 through to May 2, 2023.

At the end of this 3 year trial, the groups would be unblinded and the placebo group would be offered a vaccine if the trial proved to be effective.

What really happened.

Rather than doing this planned process, Pfizer decided to unblind the groups after 2 months. They then offered the Placebo group the Jabs. Most took up the offer which decimated the control group. This removed the ability to get meaningful comparable safety data.

  1. The six month report

By now Pfizer was boasting 91% efficacy. What they were a little more quiet about was the adverse events, over 5,200 Related Adverse Events in the inoculated group. These are investigated events that are found to be directly related to the Jab.

Severe Adverse Events were 262 and Serious Adverse Events were 127.

However the interesting statistic from the trial, before they unblinded the groups, were that the Placebo Group had experienced 14 deaths, where the Vaccinated Group had 15 deaths. After offering the placebo group the jab another 5 of them also died.

When you look at the deaths from COVID, 2 died in the placebo group and 1 in the inoculated group. When you look at cardiac bases deaths 5 were in the placebo group and 9 in the jabbed group.

  1. Normal vaccine development protocols versus Pfizer

So let’s compare the usual process for a vaccine trial versus Pfizer’s

The normal process of a vaccine development sees the following process followed

3 years of In Vitro and Animal Models

2 years of trials in a small group of humans which is phase I

2 years of human trial II with an expanded group of people

3 years of human trial III which focuses on safety and efficacy.

The fastest has been, 

1 year of In Vitro and animal models

1 year of Phase I

1 year of Phase II

2 years of phase III

The Pfizer vaccine had all these steps done inside of the year 2020. They skipped Animal Models, phase II/III were combined and emergency use was authorized after 2 months.

  1. Misleading Demographics in the trial

As we know from the pre-vaccine days, that the COVID-19 disease mostly effected the elderly with co morbidities. The average was 4 co-morbidities per fatality with an average age of circa 82 years old. That is regardless of whether they died from or with COVID.

The trials on the other hand where conducted on healthy people. Only 21 % had a pre-existing condition. There was a list 3 pages long of conditions that were specifically excluded, such as 

Pregnant or breastfeeding mothers, people with allergies, people with Psychiatric conditions, people who were immune compromised, people with bleeding disorders, people who had previously tested positive to COVID, people who had recently taken prescribed steroids.

There is no safety data for these people yet they have not been excluded from mandates.

6. Adolescents

Hardly tested is the only way to describe this group. Only about 1,500 adolescent children were tested in the end and only for efficacy. The tests are ridiculously wanting.

Unless an adolescent has existing issues, there is virtually no chance of children having serious health issues with COVID-19. The New York Times even published that the danger to children is so low it is difficult to quantify.

1,005 was the starting size of the inoculated group, which had zero cases of COVID and the placebo group had 978 where 18 got COVID. Pfizer claimed this was a brilliant result. Yet we know that there is virtually zero risk of children dying, so it should have been adverse effects that was the focus of the study.

It is difficult to get meaningful adverse events in a study this small, but it did occur. In the 1,005 jabbed group at least one child had an adverse reaction, a 12 year old called Maddie de Garay was hospitalised within 24 hours of her second jab.

Here was her Adverse Events

  • Gastroperesis
  • Nausea
  • Vomiting
  • erratic blood pressure
  • Memory loss
  • Brain Fog
  • Headaches
  • Fainting
  • Dizziness
  • seizures
  • verbal and motor ticks
  • menstrual cycle issues
  • lost feeling from the waist down
  • lost bowel and bladder control
  • she had to be fed through a feeding tube as she lost her ability to eat
  • she has been in and out of hospital and has been in a wheel chai for at least 10 months

Here is the kicker, Pfizer described her condition to the FDA as functional Abdominal Pain. How many other events were down played. How keen would you be to give your kids a jab knowing that there was such a small group and adverse events were played down like this.

Pfizer have also normalised heart conditions such as myocarditis, they even have brochures now on how to deal with it. they seem to fail to mention that the chances of death within 6 years of serious myocarditis is 1 in 5. Is that acceptable risk?

There is so much more that is detailed in the presentation below including 84% pf the Pfizer report Authors had conflicts of interest.

CCCA More Harm Than Good


Loading spinner
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x