It's highly unusual for drug companies to use saline (which Pfizer allegedly did in their covid vax trial) so there are virtually no double-blind placebo-controlled trials for any vaccine. All results are skewed because of this.
I am listening to your conversation with Doc Malik as I type. Around the 33 (sorry about the use of that number, but it is what it is) mark, you asked Malik to talk about the different phases of clinical trials.
I would just like to point out that Malik's description of the phases was simply wrong. No humans are used in either phase 1 or phase 2.
It would be nice if people (Malik in this case) didn't make shit up when they don't know the answer to a question they are asked.
While I find it annoying that only paid up subscribers can comment, i can see why some people do this. What really gets me about is, well, everything about him. I just find his whole "I'm just Jenny from the Bronx" shtick and his tone of voice and his love of seriously dodgy characters like Robert Malone unbearable.
His patter stinks, for sure. His humour comes across as forced/false.
There was also his spat with MiriAF, regarding which I am totally with her. I am pretty sure she can back up what she ultimately had to say about him.
I watched his interview with the Irish doctor who is running for MEP yesterday. In that conversation, he totally stole MiriAf's points she raised in her article about voting. It was almost word-for-word what she had said.
I wouldn't be surprised if he steals ideas from others.
I know you shouldnt idolise, but I make exception for Miri. If she isn't the real deal, then we may as well all pack up and go home. The likes of Malik are no comparison and quite pointless in their existence, other than to distract to from the real deals.
From a statistical standpoint - the adverse events associated with "placebo" ideally just represent the baseline of said. There could factors that influence that during the study period - but that is splitting hairs. The data shows with no uncertainty - that those who got the jab had more adverse events - in fact it is such a statistical anomaly tis no wo wonder they decided to "call it quits", but to try to stifle the results is insidious and wrong. I'm curious and maybe I need to read more closely who setup and conducted this study, because they must of been rock-solid determined to conduct a study fairly as much as possible and then "let the chips fall where they will".
I suspect if there are similar studies done on both the Pfizer and Moderna jabs - that the outcome would be similar.
Thank you Ken, I will hopefully post the article I've been working on soon. It's been such a deep dive which I hope will explain everything, based on what I now understand.
According to The Lancet Journal, placebo was vaccine for meningococal conjugate (MenACWY), - using a previous version, or, if none, another approved vaccine can be used. Only allowed with vaccine trials, not any others. Obviously hides AE for new ones as old ones also bad! www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIISO140-6736(20)31604-4/fulltext
I wonder why the placebo was just nothing but a saline jab - this seems to bias the results from the get-go - but even so, the results are statistically proof that the "jabs of harm" indeed cause more harm then good....as if that was still a question. Regardless, the study results speak for themselves even though the placebo should have been a saline solution for a proper study to determine baseline.
Hi Ben and Markker. They used Saline as part of the study design. I am sorry I didn't reply so far, I am trying to end the updated AZ article, but there is just so much and too much to go over. I'll do a Data Cut Off hahaha.
And yes - it was designed to be used against Saline, NOT anything else like in other studies.
Were you talking to some Ben or was that in response to something I typed? If it was in response to something I typed, to set the record straight - my name is "Ken".
Still at the end of the day, I went to UNC-Chapel Thrill (School of Public Health - Master in Public Health (MSPH) when Public Health actually meant something - and walked the Halls with Baric there - what an SOB he has turned out to be), I know how to interpret data - you do as well I'm sure - and really - it is more than evident. So I think the time for justice is upon us - whether it is in a court of law proper - or by virtue of the jungle - one way or the other justice must be served.
Of course it helps to use another vaccine or any adjuvant so they can easily say "as safe as......" Disgusting truth is the previous vaccine was tested exactly the same and on and on - all clearly spelled out in book, Turtles all the way down. They reclassified these gene "therapies" as vaccines too which let them off toxicity, cancer, harm to reproduction and next generation studies, critical for a new product. The billions who took these are the lab rats. The trials were a sham to get public onside and noone cared what happened to any that got injured or died in them then and, as now, since they got emergency use authorisation on falsified data. None would ever receive full approval on lack of safety and efficacy.
It's highly unusual for drug companies to use saline (which Pfizer allegedly did in their covid vax trial) so there are virtually no double-blind placebo-controlled trials for any vaccine. All results are skewed because of this.
Regarding the use of placebos in vaccine trials, the book *Turtles All The Way Down* is a must read - absolutely shocking!
Yes, it is “Turtles all the way down”, and still going!
Hi Ehden, the 'placebo' used in the AZ trials was the meningitis vaccine. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-9-2020-005248_EN.html
It's highly unusual for drug companies to use saline (which Pfizer allegedly did in their covid vax trial) so there are virtually no double-blind placebo-controlled trials for any vaccine. All results are skewed because of this.
There were 11 AZ studies. This one used Saline.
The lawyer Brigitte Röhring thinks the same as you and that it was due to the long therm safety data being due https://t.me/RA_Roehrig/7578
Besides, as AZ used a miningococcus jab as placebo, which hase quite some SAE, the data looks even worse.
Hi, As I wrote to others, in this study they used Saline.
I am listening to your conversation with Doc Malik as I type. Around the 33 (sorry about the use of that number, but it is what it is) mark, you asked Malik to talk about the different phases of clinical trials.
I would just like to point out that Malik's description of the phases was simply wrong. No humans are used in either phase 1 or phase 2.
It would be nice if people (Malik in this case) didn't make shit up when they don't know the answer to a question they are asked.
Malik interviews some good people, but there is something very off about him. I wouldnt trust that egotistical turd as far as I could throw him.
It is noteworthy that he only allows paid subscribers to post comments on his page. I wonder what he's worried about?
While I find it annoying that only paid up subscribers can comment, i can see why some people do this. What really gets me about is, well, everything about him. I just find his whole "I'm just Jenny from the Bronx" shtick and his tone of voice and his love of seriously dodgy characters like Robert Malone unbearable.
His patter stinks, for sure. His humour comes across as forced/false.
There was also his spat with MiriAF, regarding which I am totally with her. I am pretty sure she can back up what she ultimately had to say about him.
I watched his interview with the Irish doctor who is running for MEP yesterday. In that conversation, he totally stole MiriAf's points she raised in her article about voting. It was almost word-for-word what she had said.
I wouldn't be surprised if he steals ideas from others.
I know you shouldnt idolise, but I make exception for Miri. If she isn't the real deal, then we may as well all pack up and go home. The likes of Malik are no comparison and quite pointless in their existence, other than to distract to from the real deals.
From a statistical standpoint - the adverse events associated with "placebo" ideally just represent the baseline of said. There could factors that influence that during the study period - but that is splitting hairs. The data shows with no uncertainty - that those who got the jab had more adverse events - in fact it is such a statistical anomaly tis no wo wonder they decided to "call it quits", but to try to stifle the results is insidious and wrong. I'm curious and maybe I need to read more closely who setup and conducted this study, because they must of been rock-solid determined to conduct a study fairly as much as possible and then "let the chips fall where they will".
I suspect if there are similar studies done on both the Pfizer and Moderna jabs - that the outcome would be similar.
Thanks so much for calling attention to this.
Regards,
BK
Thank you Ken, I will hopefully post the article I've been working on soon. It's been such a deep dive which I hope will explain everything, based on what I now understand.
According to The Lancet Journal, placebo was vaccine for meningococal conjugate (MenACWY), - using a previous version, or, if none, another approved vaccine can be used. Only allowed with vaccine trials, not any others. Obviously hides AE for new ones as old ones also bad! www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIISO140-6736(20)31604-4/fulltext
I wonder why the placebo was just nothing but a saline jab - this seems to bias the results from the get-go - but even so, the results are statistically proof that the "jabs of harm" indeed cause more harm then good....as if that was still a question. Regardless, the study results speak for themselves even though the placebo should have been a saline solution for a proper study to determine baseline.
Regards,
BK
Hi Ben and Markker. They used Saline as part of the study design. I am sorry I didn't reply so far, I am trying to end the updated AZ article, but there is just so much and too much to go over. I'll do a Data Cut Off hahaha.
And yes - it was designed to be used against Saline, NOT anything else like in other studies.
Were you talking to some Ben or was that in response to something I typed? If it was in response to something I typed, to set the record straight - my name is "Ken".
Still at the end of the day, I went to UNC-Chapel Thrill (School of Public Health - Master in Public Health (MSPH) when Public Health actually meant something - and walked the Halls with Baric there - what an SOB he has turned out to be), I know how to interpret data - you do as well I'm sure - and really - it is more than evident. So I think the time for justice is upon us - whether it is in a court of law proper - or by virtue of the jungle - one way or the other justice must be served.
Regards,
Buffalo_Ken
Of course it helps to use another vaccine or any adjuvant so they can easily say "as safe as......" Disgusting truth is the previous vaccine was tested exactly the same and on and on - all clearly spelled out in book, Turtles all the way down. They reclassified these gene "therapies" as vaccines too which let them off toxicity, cancer, harm to reproduction and next generation studies, critical for a new product. The billions who took these are the lab rats. The trials were a sham to get public onside and noone cared what happened to any that got injured or died in them then and, as now, since they got emergency use authorisation on falsified data. None would ever receive full approval on lack of safety and efficacy.
At the top I think you meant it is going to be effective may 5 2024 not 2020..
Hi Ehden, the 'placebo' used in the AZ trials was the meningitis vaccine. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-9-2020-005248_EN.html
It's highly unusual for drug companies to use saline (which Pfizer allegedly did in their covid vax trial) so there are virtually no double-blind placebo-controlled trials for any vaccine. All results are skewed because of this.
Have you had a chance to look at any clinical trial documents for Novavax by any chance?
If not, definitely worth doing and I suspect your findings will be similar to what you uncovered with AstraZeneca.
https://geoffpain.substack.com/p/novavax-nuvaxovid-shock-withdrawal
Happy to help sifting through the data but I need your experience to know where to start.
Many thanks.
Kill them alllllllllll……anyone who was pro vax …..just fuck em up
Sanofi Pasteur also requested the withdrawal of the marketing authorisation for their Covid 19-vaccine "VidPrevtyn Beta" in March 2024.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/public-statement/public-statement-vidprevtyn-beta_en.pdf
How many people got "VidPrevtyn Beta"?
They used another jab as placebo I think some meningococcus jab: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/23/oxford-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-has-some-advantages-over-its-peers.html