The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Pfizer claimed repeatedly in their documents to the FDA that their vaccine would "prevent" COVID-19.
Pfizer knew the injection's adverse effects would increase with more injections of continuing boosters.
Pfizer knew their injections did not stay at the injection site.
Pfizer knew that the vaccinated group reported far more systemic adverse events than the placebo group.
Pfizer knew that the efficacy of the vaccine waned very quickly over time; by as much as 50% in as little as 1 month after the second dose. How come we weren't warned about that???
Pfizer defended VAERS (because they didn't want extra reporting cost burdens).
There are six individuals that signed up for two different clinical trials at two different sites which is really odd.
Pfizer knew vaccinated individuals could still catch COVID-19 and test positive.
There are 1,448 pages comprising 9,704 individual subjects who were excluded from the trials. There isn't enough detail to know why.
Pfizer paid $2,875,842.00 for their application to the FDA. This is more of a point of information for now.
It is troubling that Pfizer redacts information that is not proprietary that would be very helpful in assessing the data such as the number of doses administered in the ADVERSE EVENTS OF SPECIAL INTEREST" (AESI) document (aka the 5.3.6 document).
Pfizer only tests you for COVID if you have at least one symptom. If the vaccine suppresses symptoms (which it apparently does), then it will falsely appear as if the vaccine reduces the number of COVID cases.
How could anaphylaxis not show up in the Phase 3 trial on any of the 44,000 patients, yet show up as a major safety concern in the post-marketing document?!?
Kirsch understands statistics and probabilities, and questions in his article, how could anaphylaxis be completely missing from the Pfizer Phase 3 report, when it's identified as an "important identified risk" in the rest of the report? Not one instance reported, and this defies all logic. As he says:
Anaphylaxis not seen in the trial at all; only seen post-marketing. That's impossible.
So the books are cooked. And this is why Pfizer sued (and lost) to be given 75 years to release these reports. And this is what was presented to FDA for emergency approval. And countless people are still digging through it to make sense of it, yet FDA parsed it all and gave the authorization in record time.
by Frank Schnittger - May 31
by Oui - May 30 50 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 23 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 27 3 comments
by Oui - May 13 66 comments
by Oui - Jun 91 comment
by Oui - Jun 58 comments
by Oui - Jun 257 comments
by Oui - Jun 112 comments
by Oui - May 31118 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 31
by Oui - May 3050 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 273 comments
by Oui - May 2742 comments
by Oui - May 24
by Frank Schnittger - May 233 comments
by Oui - May 1366 comments
by Oui - May 928 comments
by Oui - May 450 comments
by Oui - Apr 30273 comments
by Oui - Apr 2666 comments
by Oui - Apr 8108 comments
by Oui - Mar 19145 comments