Pfizer clinical trial data: not good at all

[ddavis_1313]

Accusing me of being a domestic terrorist is typical of a leftist trying to infringe on my first amendment rights. Also your name is Newtosavage. Mine Is Yoder, which is my actual name. I'm vaccinated. Half my family is vaccinated. All I'm saying is there are drugs that may help treat covid and may prevent you from getting covid. I never said don't get vaccinated. I could care less if anyone gets vaccinated. I really think it doesn't matter either way. Also I'm 99.9% sure nobody is losing their life because of this. Fun fact, Tylenol is more dangerous than Ivermectin. Look it up. If you want real domestic terrorists just turn on CNN or listen to anything Faucci says.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[trophyhill]

Please tell me you're not taking medical advice from Rumble.com

Im not taking medical advice from Rumble or Fauci. Those infected with the Coof as of last week are made up of 79% vaxed and boosted with experimental drugs. Some vaxed multiple times, boosted and masked and still test every week or even multiple times a week. These people are unhinged paranoid schizophrenics. I'll make my decision based on the science after it all unfolds in a few years and we've seen whether it is safe or not. I will not participate in the experiment! As it stands right now, Fauci and the NIH have been exposed as liars. The whole purpose of getting vaxed was to keep you from getting the coof! Funny how the narrative has changed to the vax will make your coof symptoms less worse and keep you from being in the hospital. And they wonder why people are hesitant to get vaccinated. You can thank Fauci and Brandon for that!

 

[fwafwow]

[snip]

Now you say "isn’t somewhat accurate numbers, then we are either being experimented on with the vaccine or lied to about true risks that are involved" but that's a false choice. There can be reasonably accurate numbers. There could be risks well documented that, like the risks of NSAIDS and other vaccines you just aren't aware of because there's not a political campaign to make you fear them. There can be decently accurate figures that lag population. There can be accurate estimates that you aren't privvy to. Inserting "we're being experimented on" just doesn't follow at all, logically. There have already been experiments, followed by limited clinical trials, followed by full clinical trials, followed by (for the PFizer vaccine) full approval by the FDA.

Well said, and I appreciate your level of detail.

When people say something along the lines "we are all being experimented on" - I don't really disagree. But it is my understanding that many pharmaceutical trials are relatively small (in comparison to the expected patient population), and short in duration. As a result, there are sometimes side effects (including serious ones) that may not be known until a larger group of people take the medication. Is this typically intended as an extended "experiment"? I don't think so, but I think the result can be viewed as the same. So if that's what's going on now with the vaccine, is it much different from other drugs?

 

[qwerksc]

Cigarettes are good for you.

 

[trophyhill]

Just about any generic argument for or against getting vaccinated can be used by those with the opposite opinion, you just modify the usage/phrasing of the argument.

Let’s get back to discussing things that will get us somewhere (like hunting) vs sinking in quicksand. No one is going to convince anyone of anything in this thread, although several will try…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Im certainly not going to try and convince anyone 1 way or another. You want the vax? Get the vax. You dont want the vax? Dont get the vax. Here is the only advice i can give and its mentioned in the Bible. Ready? "Don't let yourself be decieved"

 

[lif]

Alright so again, we have a series of things to deal with here.

First, this is not a new process across the board. The Janssen ("J&J" one-shot vaccine) is not an MRNA vaccine. It is a "traditional" inactivated virus vaccine, like the ones used for flu shots. I don't know why nobody acknwoledges that in these discussions, but in my opinion it serves only to muddy the discussiona dn undermines the legitimacy of the discussion to discuss "the vaccine" as though it's monolithic.

Secondly, MRNA vaccines are not new. The first was tested on mice in 1995. You cna go read about it by searching for "MRNA vaccine history" in the search engine of your choice. There's a good Nature article on the full history, from the discovery of MRNA in the 70s onward. The first clinical trials of an MRNA vaccine were in 2015, following about 3 years od DOD research and funding. This is never brought up because it flies in the face of the "it was rushed, it's untested" narrative.

If you want to learn about the process for FDA approval you can read about it on the FDA's website, or there's no shortage of articles. Start here: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/development-approval-process-drugs

Now you say if you take advil at the recommended dose you know it's 100% safe. Only you don't know that, and you are in fact wrong about that.

Can ibuprofen increase the risk of heart attack?

Common pain medicines such as ibuprofen or naproxen sodium may increase the risk of heart attack and stroke.

www.mayoclinic.org

FDA agrees. That's over and above the risks of ulcers, nausea, vomiting, diarhea, etc. It's printed on the side of the bottle, but you don't read that. You assume it's perfectly safe, you pop an ibuprofen, and you go about your day. Injuries and deaths stemming from NSAIDS are reported to the FDA and there's ongoing monitoring.

Next up, other vaccines. MMR is 97% effective against measles and rubella and 88% against mumps according to clinical data, not 100%. the smallpox vaccine is only about 95% effective at preventing infection, and only for 3-5 years before your titers drop significantly. Tetanus is a wild pull, because it takes 6 shots and you need a booster after exposure, famously, to achiev 95% protection against diptheria and 80% against pertussis, with near-100% protection against tetanus only achieved in conjunction with a post-exposure booster within 48 hours. All of this easily researched on the search engine of your choice, and yet you were certain each of these gave you 100% protection and the COVID vaccines were somehow different rather than being pretty well on par with the ones you mentioned for efficacy.

Now you say "isn’t somewhat accurate numbers, then we are either being experimented on with the vaccine or lied to about true risks that are involved" but that's a false choice. There can be reasonably accurate numbers. There could be risks well documented that, like the risks of NSAIDS and other vaccines you just aren't aware of because there's not a political campaign to make you fear them. There can be decently accurate figures that lag population. There can be accurate estimates that you aren't privvy to. Inserting "we're being experimented on" just doesn't follow at all, logically. There have already been experiments, followed by limited clinical trials, followed by full clinical trials, followed by (for the PFizer vaccine) full approval by the FDA.

You say you know for a fact "original numbers that have been reported on infections and deaths of the disease were definitively inaccurate." How do you know that? What lead you to that and how did you confirm that? To which original numbers are you referring when you say that?

With that said, have you already reviewed the clinical trial data, the safety and risk sheets provided by the manufacturers and the FDA, or the third party reviews submitted and peer-reviewed inn journals like Nature, New England Journal of Medicine, etc? If so, what did you find. If not, why? All of those resources come up when I use google to search for covid vaccine safety information.

First of all, that was a lot of rebuttal to some stereotypical metaphors I was using explain our comfort levels of historical medications and vaccines we all know of. Second of all, I know the original numbers of cases and deaths were inaccurate because my wife saw the misreporting first hand multiple times at her hospital. Including once that brought her to tears because it was a patient she took care of who died of a massive heart failure at 84 years old in the hospital and was reported as a Covid death on the hospital paperwork and the death certificate. I have a cousin who is a doctor in another state he told me that cases were being conveniently reported as died with Covid after dying from different causes. I have another cousin in a third state that almost quit his job as a nurse because he witnessed deaths being reported as Covid deaths that were clearly not. Also add on that the first several months most hospitals had no testing to confirm a Covid case, so they were diagnosing and documenting Covid cases based on symptoms. And eventually many tests that were used early on were later pulled off the approved list by the fda because they were deemed to be inaccurate. So even a armchair doctor like me can see those numbers can’t be anywhere near accurate. Now, don’t get me wrong, I acknowledge the disease and the threat to health it poses. I am not a Covid non believer or even an antivaxxer. If you want the vaccine go for it. But I have yet to see any sort of believable or thorough data on the vaccines safety for the short term or long term. Again, when you’ve seen the first hand medical complications from the vaccine that I have, you begin to doubt the safety of it. That is all. And in that mindset I search for legitimate data to confirm it’s safety or danger. It is just very hard to find. That’s all. And when you throw in the fact that the government has either lied, hid or manipulated the data the whole way, it’s hard to just take their word for it.

 

[bpurtz]

Cigarettes are good for you.

Ironically, 56.5 years ago when my mother was pregnant with me, her doctor recommended she take up smoking to help deal with stress.

 

[Rob5589]

Cigarettes are good for you.

Cigarette smoking causes about one of every five deaths in the United States each year. Cigarette smoking is estimated to cause the following: More than 480,000 deaths annually (including deaths from secondhand smoke) 278,544 deaths annually among men (including deaths from secondhand smoke)

You'd think tobacco would be banned until you read this,

In 2020, revenues from tobacco tax in the United States amounted to 12.35 billion U.S. dollars.

 

[lif]

A couple of things: measles and smallpox vaccines are in the high 90% effective range, but not 100%.

On the serious complications/deaths data question, I do not think that data exists because 1) the primary means by which they are reported (VAERS) is voluntary, and 2) deaths are reported which may or may not be due to the vaccine. Deaths reported to VAERS of those who received the vaccine are in excess of 20K, but at last look only 9 were deemed to have been directly caused by the vaccine. Most of the 20k have not been adjudicated and, if I had to guess based on how the cases have been adjudicated *seem* to translate to vaccine-caused death, the actual number is likely more in the 2-3 digit range rather than low 5 digits as some errantly claim.

The best data I can think of to assess deaths and serious side effects would be to look at Pfizer or Moderna’s clinical trial data. If memory serves Pfizer included 44K people in its clinical trial and 10 died during the course of that trial, I believe 6 in the placebo group and 4 that received the vaccine.

So not to be a smartass, but I’m supposed to get my data on safety and efficacy from Pfizer and Moderna, the two pharmy companies that are selling it?

 

[ddd-shooter]

This is a good (IMHO) podcast that came out today - https://peterattiamd.com/covid-19-current-state-omicron/. Peter Attia interviews two MDs - Marty Makary and Zubin Damania. I expect that everyone who has chimed in on this thread (at least lately) will find something they agree with, and something that conflicts with their views.

Came here to post the same thing. These guys get it. I feel pretty in line with most of what they say.

 

[qwerksc]

I haven’t seen one commercial for the Pfizer, j&j or moderna vaccine, wonder why?

 

[MattB]

So not to be a smartass, but I’m supposed to get my data on safety and efficacy from Pfizer and Moderna, the two pharmy companies that are selling it?

You have been dismissive of every other data source I am aware of for various reasons, good luck in bagging that unicorn.

 

[fwafwow]

I’m also interested in this info. I’m not an expert, but I can try to help with the search.

I changed my mind.

 

[Newtosavage]

Accusing me of being a domestic terrorist is typical of a leftist trying to infringe on my first amendment rights. Also your name is Newtosavage. Mine Is Yoder, which is my actual name. I'm vaccinated. Half my family is vaccinated. All I'm saying is there are drugs that may help treat covid and may prevent you from getting covid. I never said don't get vaccinated. I could care less if anyone gets vaccinated. I really think it doesn't matter either way. Also I'm 99.9% sure nobody is losing their life because of this. Fun fact, Tylenol is more dangerous than Ivermectin. Look it up. If you want real domestic terrorists just turn on CNN or listen to anything Faucci says.

I didn't accuse anyone. Are you self-identifying?

 

[Sherman]

It has always struck me as queer that many of the people who won’t even commit the 30-60 minutes to take a vaccine that is effective and safe think the panacea for protection from COViD is simply to ask others to make wholesale lifestyle changes in terms of diet and exercise.

This guy....holy crap!!! Somebody who uses the words “queer” and “panacea” while drinking his tea with his little finger pointing upward is struck as “queer”, while staring judgmentally down his monocle, with a straight face, and states the vaccine is “safe and effective,” while acting as if asking somebody to make “wholesale lifestyle changes” to diet and exercise as to not be obese is a mortal sin.

I was not gonna jump in this one. These usually lead to crazy debates....but this judgey bear had me rolling in his arrogance of him simply stating the vaccine is “safe and effective” somehow makes it fact. Or maybe the good people at Pfizer have said so, or the CDC, or our saviour Christ incarnate Dr. Fauci and his cronies at CNN stating so makes it fact.

 

[TreeStandAthlete]

This guy....holy crap!!! Somebody who uses the words “queer” and “panacea” while drinking his tea with his little finger pointing upward is struck as “queer”, while staring judgmentally down his monocle, with a straight face, and states that the vaccine is “safe and effective,” while acting as if asking somebody to make “wholesale lifestyle changes” to diet and exercise as to not be obese is a mortal sin.

I was not gonna jump in this one. These usually lead to crazy debates....but this judgey bear had me rolling in his arrogance of him simply stating the vaccine is “safe and effective” somehow makes it fact. Or maybe the good people at Pfizer have said so, or the CDC, or our saviour Christ incarnate Dr. Fauci and his cronies at CNN stating so makes it fact.

Someone's a little insecure about the size of their vocabulary.

 

[Sherman]

Someone's a little insecure about the size of their vocabulary.

It strikes me as queer you would gather that from my post. Perhaps the panacea of my insecurities would be to attend an institute of higher learning to be indoctrinated in the liberal ways of unquestioned loyalty to the overlords of this country.

 

[TreeStandAthlete]

It strikes me as queer that you would gather that from my post. Perhaps the panacea of my insecurities would be to attend an institute of higher learning to be indoctrinated in the liberal ways of unquestioned loyalty to the overlords of this country.View attachment 363709

You must have gone to private college or something. My experience was more sorority girls and Busch light than indoctrinations or Victorian era lion-human hybrid fetishes, but whatever floats your boat.

 

[Musky]

No data and no amount of data will "prove it's safe". Data/Research don't "prove" things- they support or don't support them. Things that were "proven" in the past have been found to be incorrect, or at least incomplete, many, many times in all fields of science. "Proof" is too definitive and if you really need it, you'll be disappointed.

People tend to absolutely hate the info above. Most folks want a black and white answer that is crystal clear, but unfortunately that's not how research works.

This rings a bell with me. Unfortunately, I am looking for that black and white. I've lost friends shortly after their vaccines and lost friends without vaccines. I wish there was a clear cut answer to either getting the vaccine or not, and there just isn't.

The only thing I know for sure is that you're more opt to be shunned from the general public and medical community for not getting the vaccine versus the other way round. I just don't think there is enough black and white proof either way for either side. And to claim there is, IMHO is ludicrous.

I do feel that if it wasn't so driven by politics and money, the anti-vax community probably would be much smaller. Maybe that's me being naive, I certainly would've had the vaccine already if it wasn't driven for "wrong" reason, in my mind.

 

[IdahoElk]

Dr Robert Malone interview with Joe Rogan

www.bitchute.com