Posted on 11/18/2023 7:12:45 AM PST by george76
During the trials of its Covid vaccines, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer found that sudden deaths doubled after people had been injected with the mRNA shots.
The disturbing findings were revealed in a new analysis of Pfizer’s trial data.
Researchers found that sudden deaths were twice as high in the vaccine group of the original Pfizer clinical trial when compared those who received a placebo.
The researchers behind the new analysis are now raising the alarm about the safety of the novel mRNA drug.
Pfizer hasn’t made the data public, however, and has been battling in court to keep it sealed.
The data, from the original randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the vaccine, was released as part of legal action in Texas.
Researchers at the Health Advisory and Recovery Team (HART) found four more sudden deaths in the vaccine group than in the placebo group.
All of the sudden deaths occurred after the first 60 days of being injected.
Many assurances of vaccine safety assume that any damage will be seen within 28 days of vaccination, meaning signals after 60 days would be missed.
In total, there were 12 sudden deaths with no underlying cause: eight in the vaccine group and four in the placebo group.
Three occurred in each group during the first 60 days; subsequently, five occurred in the vaccine group but just one in the placebo group.
...
Even more concerning, the researchers warn, is that these four additional sudden deaths in the vaccine group account for the whole difference in the total number of deaths between the two groups: 20 in the vaccine group versus 16 in the placebo group.
By contrast, the six reported Covid deaths in the placebo group did not result in an excess of non-sudden deaths in the placebo group, as there were 12 non-sudden deaths in each group.
...
This suggests that while the vaccine did not prevent non-sudden deaths from causes such as Covid, it did cause sudden deaths.
However, while these figures from the trial are clearly a red flag that warrants urgent further investigation, the relatively small numbers involved mean the results are not statistically significant.
Statistically speaking, we can’t be more than 95% confident they did not occur by chance.
This is despite the trial involving 44,000 people.
If this rate of death occurred across the whole population it would equate to a vaccine mortality rate of around one per 5,000 people.
Such a signal must not be ignored, even if it falls below the significance threshold in this trial.
What it signals is a need for further investigation to confirm or rule out the risk.
The researchers note that the six Covid deaths in the placebo group amount to 38% of the 16 total deaths in that group.
The number is an extraordinarily high proportion that calls into question how the Covid deaths were identified.
The HART researchers also found evidence of potential bias in what was supposed to be a blinded trial.
The average length of time taken to report deaths in the vaccine group was two to three times longer than in the placebo group.
Tellingly, perhaps, the longest delays in the reporting of vaccine-group deaths occurred ahead of the critical interim report on which the vaccine’s emergency approval was based.
In that period, vaccine-group deaths took an incredible 18 days on average to report, while placebo-group deaths in the same period took just five days.
Mysteriously, vaccine-group death reporting then spent up to seven days on average, once the key interim data deadline had passed.
The HART team also drew attention to dubious classification decisions.
One example was a 65-year-old man from Texas whose death 11 days after receiving a Covid vaccine was categorized as unvaccinated.
He was marked as unvaxxed because, after unblinding, he had received the Moderna vaccine.
Since many of these apparent biases favor the vaccine, any estimate of harm should be understood as a lower bound.
Sudden deaths being twice as high in the vaccine group than the placebo group of a clinical trial should have rung alarm bells among regulators right from the start.
The fact that it didn’t only adds to the wider scandal around these experimental injections.
But the infallible one said:
“The vaccine is one of the greatest achievements of mankind.”
“I came up with a vaccine, with three vaccines all are very, very good.”
“I was able to get something approved that, you know, that has proven to have saved a lot of lives. Some people say that I saved 100 million lives worldwide.”
While I think there is no choice but Trump for this time, the fan boys and fluffers on FR sure are good at compartmentalism and judging others by for far less offensives.
“Well, you weren’t supposed to SEE this data until 75 years after the mandatory shots”
I thought they hid the ingredients in the shot for 75 years? Is that the data also? Or maybe I was confused
While your point is completely valid, I think we should at least consider that the Deep state had surrounded Trump with a bunch of lying traitorous advisors from the get-go. And he trusted these advisors, see where that got him?
But the infallible one said:
“The vaccine is one of the greatest achievements of mankind.”
T was either fooled or in on it. Notice he quit bragging about it as soon as the rally crowds started booing. He needs to admit he was fooled. Otherwise, if the vax issues get worse and it becomes obvious to everybody, then 1/2 blames T and 1/2 blames B. The transition from Warp Speed to mandates coincided with the transition of power. (kind of like the W/BO housing crisis).
Admitting you are wrong is hard. Admitting you were fooled is harder. Having evidence against the ones who fooled you is the only way out. Not only for T but for individuals who can’t admit to themselves they were fooled.
Hang the *****r ******s, after the fair trial.
OK, you win the prize for posting the MOST idiotic statement of the day, bad enough to warrant my first response in close to a decade:
“Three occurred in each group during the first 60 days; subsequently, five occurred in the vaccine group but just one in the placebo group.”
To which you responded:
IOW, since four of those deaths in the vaccine group were not caused by the vaccine, then there was no difference between the vaccine and the placebo groups.
So I assume that, being the fount of ALL knowledge about EVERYTHING, you have firmly established that correlation exists UP TO 28 days and ceases to exists AFTER 60 days. Since you omitted the state of affairs between those two ARBITRARY dates, we obviously should probably just ignore that issue as irrelevant.
Congrats to Grey Whiskers, he nailed your post 100% accurately. BTW, What’s with the “Dugway” part of you moniker? Are we supposed to be impressed that you are somehow associated with Dugway Proving Grounds and thereby are some sort of Technical Expert on BioChemical Matters???
You are kinder than I.
Surprise, surprise (not). Thanks for the ping nully. I suspect, in the near future, there will be more people with anecdotal evidence of people/family members they know that “died suddenly” or had aggressive cancer come on suddenly post vaccine(s).
Thanks for the kind words.
I am embarrassed that you live in my state. Your insistence in denying information, data … in your defense of a defective product is inexcusable. The lies in regard to almost all the data around these product is growing continuously. The reality is obvious at this point but like a moth to the flame you run in with so much misinformation, lies and BS. By your definition that post 60 days it’s not related would clear thalidomide.
They had a small number of people dedicated to reviewing the data requested by the court; such that, it would take an estimated 75 years before it all got released to the public.
Given that Pfizer made a LOT of money (one source here on FR quoted it as $120 BILLION) they could easily afford to hire a few more people out of mere pocket change.
This is what skeptics call a “FOAFtale”— Friend Of A Friend. Should be taken with a healthy grain of salt.
More likely to be true than anything the CDC/FDA have to say these days.
“They had a small number of people dedicated to reviewing the data requested by the court; such that, it would take an estimated 75 years before it all got released to the public.”
Oh okay thank you. I definitely never heard that one. I think what I heard was they could seal something for 50 years, perhaps the ingredients.
wgmalabama wrote: “I am embarrassed that you live in my state. Your insistence in denying information, data … in your defense of a defective product is inexcusable. The lies in regard to almost all the data around these product is growing continuously. The reality is obvious at this point but like a moth to the flame you run in with so much misinformation, lies and BS. By your definition that post 60 days it’s not related would clear thalidomide.”
I am embarrassed that so many anti-vaxxers live in my state.
Their insistence in denying information, data, in their attacks on a product which has saved millions of lives inescusable. The anti-vaxxer lies in regard to almost all the data around these product is growing continuously. The reality is obvious at this point but like a moth to the flame their anti-vaxxers leap to any conclusion consistent with ther anti-vaxxer narrative spreading their misinformation, lies and BS.
Not my definition.
CanuckYank wrote: “OK, you win the prize for posting the MOST idiotic statement of the day, bad enough to warrant my first response in close to a decade.”
Pointing out the inaccurate assumptions and conclusions isn’t idiotic. What is idoitic is attacking a vaccine that has saved millions of lives.
CanuckYank wrote: “So I assume that, being the fount of ALL knowledge about EVERYTHING, you have firmly established that correlation exists UP TO 28 days and ceases to exists AFTER 60 days. Since you omitted the state of affairs between those two ARBITRARY dates, we obviously should probably just ignore that issue as irrelevant.”
I’ve never claimed any special expertise other than an ability to read an article, an expertise sorely lacking among the anti-vaxxers trying to advance their agenda.
CanuckYank wrote: “Congrats to Grey Whiskers, he nailed your post 100% accurately. BTW, What’s with the “Dugway” part of you moniker? Are we supposed to be impressed that you are somehow associated with Dugway Proving Grounds and thereby are some sort of Technical Expert on BioChemical Matters???”
I spent approximately 16 months at Dugway working as a chemical warfare decontamination analyst. During the time I was there, the biolab was shutdown.
CanuckYank wrote: “How many Have You Had???”
Why are you so consumed with how many shots I’ve had?
grey_whiskers wrote: “You’re a troll. You don’t deserve substantive replies.”
Substantive replies must be beyond your abilities.
null and void wrote: “OK, Dud, If I sold asbestos and told everyone that asbestos is perfectly safe, while knowing all along that it caused mesothelioma, would I be responsible for the deaths and suffering?”
Since we’re not discussing asbestos, you’re analogy is irrelevant.
DariusBane wrote: “The article says that due to erroneous assumptions adverse events after 60 days would be missed.”
The authors provided no compelling evidence that this assumption was flawed. (Other than looking for something to advance their agenda.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.