The logical argument that Fauci, Moderna, Pfizer and others may have fabricated fake Covid-19 vaccine trials and reported falsified data

3/24/2021 | vanity

[ransomnote]

This post is organized to present 4 points to consider, and then a few key questions regarding these considerations, and finally overall observations that together, I believe, demonstrate that the vaccines, and their ‘rushed’ trials are mixtures of fabrications.

4 Points

1. Mike Yeadon is the former CSO and VP, Allergy and Respiratory Research Head with Pfizer Global R&D and co-Founder of Ziarco Pharma Ltd.

Referencing his 30+ years of experience working in the vaccine industry, Dr. Yeadon makes the case that the PRC test renders false positive test results for approximately 90% of tests administered, and that false negatives are also reported. The publication date is 9/20/2020 at which time Dr. Yeadon states that he believes the vaccines will be pulled from the marked within 6 months following introduction.

From the article:

“Because of the high false positive rate and the low prevalence, almost every positive test, a so-called case, identified by Pillar 2 since May of this year has been a FALSE POSITIVE. Not just a few percent. Not a quarter or even a half of the positives are FALSE, but around 90% of them. Put simply, the number of people Mr Hancock sombrely tells us about is an overestimate by a factor of about ten-fold. Earlier in the summer, it was an overestimate by about 20-fold.”

Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics – the Deadly Danger of False Positives

3/22/2021, 10:13:02 AM · by ransomnote · 15 replies

lockdownsceptics.org ^ | September 20, 2020 | Dr Michael Yeadon

 In the following article, the author makes the case that the PCR is invalid because it doesn’t identify the Covid-19 virus.

 The PCR test identifies manufacturers’ specified strings of molecules (i.e., ‘primer sequenes’) said to be present in the Covid-19 virus.

1. The PRC test returns a positive Covid-19 test result whenever it identifies predetermined sequences of molecules which are also found in fruit, motor oil, Spanish River water, animals, Coca Cola and many other materials.

1. Multiple manufacturers produce PCR tests, but they use different predetermined sequences of molecules to constitute a ‘match’ to sequences in the Covid-19 virus.

From the article, “The CDC is using 12 different computer data base "primer" sequences, varying from 17 to 21 nucleotide sequences in a row to look for Covaids, the same sequence found in goats, papayas, river water, motor oil, etc.”

The same small sequence found in goats, papayas, your pyjamas”

1. The World Health Organization’s version of the PCR test is designed to identify, as a positive Covid-19 test result, sequences of molecules also found in human DNA.

“The WHO was using human Chromosome 8 as their test database “primer” sequence to detect Covaids, which was looking for the 18 in a row nucleotide sequence ctccctttgt tgtgttgt, which is found on the 8th out of the 23 pairs of chromosomal trees on all humans.“

https://images.hive.blog/DQmUtVYWuvrdvqvqqe9xwqQtu8QBPbKwJPDhPRTgtNqnXEy/image.png

1. The PCR test is a tool designed for research, not public health, and therefore amplifies the fragments of molecular chains present in far too small amounts to cause disease.

From the article:

 “A so called PCR "test" is NOT a test.

 It's Nobel Prize winning inventor, Kary Mullis, himself was furious that it was being used for any such nonsense as it can neither “test” for anything nor prove how much of any detected genetic material is inside anybody, let alone tell anyone if whatever it does detect is the cause of any illness or disease or not.”

 PLAGUE OF FEAR 2020 - Part 7 - THE NAIL IN COVID'S COFFIN

3/18/2021, 5:53:41 PM · by ransomnote · 11 replies

hive.blog ^ | Jan 31, 2020 | Steve Falconer, francesleader 

3. Also in the article, PLAGUE OF FEAR 2020 - Part 7 - THE NAIL IN COVID'S COFFIN , the author cites the fact that according to the CDC, no isolated samples of the Covid-19 virus exists.

https://images.hive.blog/DQmdj7E5B62nrFFJ8JHuDbcTuxEXSx2pEWtXx5eZGG6pKvJ/image.png 

4. The vaccine trials used the PCR test to evaluate how the vaccine impacted the disease.

For example, the following is excerpted from Moderna’s Phase 3 trial report.

"Summary of Dat from Phase 3 Clinical Trial

The primary efficacy analysis population (referred to as the Per-Protocol Set), included 28,207 participants who received two doses (at 0 and 1 month) of either Moderna COVID‑19 Vaccine (n=14,134) or placebo (n=14,073), and had a negative baseline SARS‑CoV‑2 status. 

The median length of follow up for efficacy for participants in the study was 9 weeks post Dose There were 11 COVID‑19 cases in the Moderna COVID‑19 Vaccine group and 185 cases in the placebo group, with a vaccine efficacy of 94.1% (95% confidence interval of 89.3% to 96.8%).

Cases of COVID‑19, starting 14 days after Dose 2, were defined as symptomatic COVID‑19 requiring positive RT-PCR result and at least two systemic symptoms or one respiratory symptom.

Among all participants in the Per-Protocol Set analysis, which included COVID‑19 cases confirmed by an adjudication committee, no cases of severe COVID‑19 were reported in the Moderna COVID‑19 Vaccine group compared with 30 cases reported in the placebo group (incidence rate 9.138 per 1,000 person-years). One PCR-positive case of severe COVID‑19 in a vaccine recipient was awaiting adjudication at the time of the analysis.”

USING THESE 4 CONSIDERATIONS

The following are just a few of the problems with using an invalid test to validate Covid-19 vaccine trials.

1. Given that the the PCR test does not identify the Covid-19 virus, how can the vaccine trials determine if their products impacted the health status (with, or without Covid-19) of their patients
2. Given that the CDC says samples of isolated Covid-19 virus has never been “available” to researchers, how can the vaccine trials prove the efficacy of the vaccines against the Covid-19 virus?
3. How can researchers identify the cause of the Covid-19 symptoms recorded in their trial data?
4. Given false positive rates,often resulting in 10 to 20 fold distortions of Covid-19 data, how can the vaccine trials have recorded data that supports their clinical hypothesis. Any time the PCR ‘test’ was administered, the results were likely wrong; how did almost random positive/negative ‘test’ result taken before and after (and likely throughout) the trials happen to miraculously perfectly align to provide vaccine manufacturers with winning results as described below?

 “In another promising medical development, the biotechnology company Moderna has announced its COVID-19 vaccine could be up to 94.5% effective.

The news comes a week after Pfizer announced its vaccine could be up to 90% effective based on a similar, early analysis from its Phase 3 trial.”

 Moderna announces initial Phase 3 data showing its COVID-19 vaccine is up to 94.5% effective - ABC News (go.com)

 I think it’s reasonable to assume that vaccine trial participants were give the PCR ‘test’ repeatedly: at the start of the trial, after Dose 1, after Dose 2, and then routinely through the 4 or so weeks of monitoring following to see at what point they might supposedly contract (e.g., subject’s PCR ‘test’ positive 10 days after vaccine administration – too soon for vaccine to protect participant).

I think you can see where I’m going here. For the vaccine trials to be valid, the PCR test had to be valid. However the PCR test is not valid for this use, yet the many PCR ‘supposedly’ administered to 28,207 always tracked reliably to portray consistent, reliable, positive vaccine trial results

College students used to have two specific terms for false experimental data.

“Fudging the data”: After the experiment or study failed to return expected outcomes, the data was ‘modified’ to support the experimental hypothesis.

“Dry lab-ing”: While the experimental design specified in detail exacting laboratory and instrumentation critera, phases, tests etc., no actual lab work occurred (no need to wash out beakers, etc. as no real lab work took place).

I have to wonder just HOW the vaccine companies all came up with their data under the circumstances.

I’ll add one more problem with the scenario involving the development of the Covid mRNA vaccines that has me wondering. I haven’t given it a lot of thought but I believe there is something to it.

Initially I was posting that the mRNA technology upon which the mRNA vaccines were based was discovered in 2005; obtained Emergency Use Authorization and in 15 years since has failed to obtain FDA approval; conducted animal trials in 2005 and 2012 in which all animals (cats) developed anti-bodies and then when exposed to the virus being tested at the time (HIV, Hep C, other Coronaviruses), all animals died (their immune systems over-reacted).

Recently a FReeper has been reporting that there was in fact a successful  trials which included "mice, ferrets, monkeys and interim report on human trials 2017"  using the same nano mRNA technology underpining the Covid vaccines.

Suppressed Information About the Covid-19 Vaccine' | Vol 01 Date: 03/20/2021 (freerepublic.com)

The sources I had consulted made no mention of trials involving mice that survived. I was going to hunt for that data to see if it was correct, but now that I know the trials are worthless, I won’t bother.

Here’s the problem. The mRNA technology was considered an exciting find in 2005 because it could open the door to T-cell immunity which was otherwise little understood but believed to hold tremendous promise for human health.

The first animal trials took place in 2005 and failed. More work was done and the second round of animal trials was performed in 2012 and again met with failure. The mRNA technology under development for the past 15 years never reached human trials or obtained FDA approval.

If the FReeper is correct that trials involving mice which survived took place in 2017, why didn't the researchers move to begin full-scale trials with that technology? 3 years later that technology was modified for use in Covid-19 vaccines, but it seems like nothing happened with the platform technology until it was selected to for modification serve as the basis for the Covid-19 vaccines.

I wonder if I dig up information on this, might I find that Hillary Clinton was expected to win the 2016 election after which time her administration would have required mandatory vaccinations.

Our enemies want to reduce our population to a tame, manageable size. Just wondering. If you’ve seen the ‘Lock Down” scenarios, it does seem that the New World Order types have been planning their worldwide coup for some time, and one of the analyzed scnearios was a pandemic. And then we had Bill Gate’s symposium in 2019 walking through pandemic scenarios. Fauci funded Wuhan long before Wuhan’s ‘accidental’ release of a virus comprised of human/bat/HIV RNA material.

~~~~~~~~~~~

We’ve been betrayed in all aspects of the Planned-Demic since the engineered China virus was first deployed in Yuhan.

The sick were denied all treatment and told to go home until they needed hospitalization. How many illnesses could be spun into a fake Planned-Demic if the public were denied treatment? How can they claim to have a compassionate dedication to protecting us if they refuse us the right to try FDA approved medications when we’re dying?

HCQ and Ivermectin were FDA approved and in use with good track records for decades. The CDC not only banned the off-label use of these drugs during a time they declared an unprecedented medical emergency, they wouldn’t even award these drugs “Emergency Use Authorization” they would later grant their fake vaccines. They denied dying people the right to assume any risks in a final attempt to survive the illness.

They’ve lied to the public and told us the Covid-19 vaccines are FDA approved. Fauci himself said they were when asked on video. He then went on to craftily equate FDA approval with FDA authorization when he knows the difference.

Fauci is on video stating that asymptomatic spread does not drive epidemics; he’ll say whatever needs to be said to advance the narrative, and if it’s that asymptomic spread is devastating and we all have to shut down the economy, schools, and life stay home, he’s your guy.

45 Second Twitter Video Clip of Dr. Fauci Saying. ".... asympomatic spread is rare and historically not a driver of outbreaks. Symptomatic people drive outbreaks."

(sidenote: Fauci's NIH division collaborated with Pfizer to produce their Covid-19 vaccine and in particular, on those mouse trials.)

In the following video interview excerpt on Twitter, the inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, says Dr. Fauci is a liar and not qualified for the position he holds:

Christopher ✝️ ☂️ on Twitter: "“Dr. Fauci knows nothing.” According to Kary Mullis, the inventor of PCR. He sadly died in 2019 in a car crash. So he wasn’t around to call Fauci on his bs. https://t.co/1zC37R2nen" / Twitter

Text of Mullis’ comments:

 “Guys like Fauci get up there and start talking, you know, he doesn’t know anything really about anything and I’d say that to his face. Nothing. The man thinks you can take a blood sample and stick it in an electron microscope and if it’s got a virus in there you’ll know it. He doesn’t understand electron microscopy and he doesn’t understand medicine and he should not be in a position like he’s in. Most of those guys up there on the top are just total administrative people and they don’t know anything about what’s going on in the body. You know, those guys have got an agenda, which is not what we would like them to have being that we pay for them to take care of our health in some way. They’ve got a personal kind of agenda. They make up their own rules as they go. They change them when they want to. And they smugly, like Tony Fauci does not mind going on television in front of the people who pay his salary and lie directly into the camera,”~ Kary Mullis

Where the Covid-19 vaccines are concerned, we’ve been denied informed consent which is required for us to balance the risks versus the benefits of having the vaccine.

All benefits of the vaccine are exaggerated because the spike protein is not specific to Covid-19; we’ve probably already encountered pathogens that caused our bodies to produce the spike proteins triggered by the vaccine. The benefits of the vaccine are non existant because the vaccine is predicated on fake vaccine trials and false positives etc.

The risks of having the vaccine are deleted, purged, and ridiculed as disinformation. Even as the CDC’s VAERS database shows the Covid vaccines are notably at the top of some key observed ‘event categories’ (ER visits, life threatening reactions, Deaths) out of 93 vaccines in just 2 months into their administration.

Silencing the discussion of risk, and therefore denying us informed consent violates the primary tennent of the Nuremberg Code of 1947.

Nuremberg Code: Suppressed Information About the Covid-19 Vaccine' | Vol 01 Date: 03/20/2021 (freerepublic.com)

They’ve lied to lock us down and force us to wear useless masks.

MEDIA BLACKOUT: Thousands of Doctors and Scientists Have Come Out Against Fauci’s Lockdowns Including a Nobel Prize-Winning Biophysicist

Is anyone still hoping that the tightening noose and assault on our rights and our bodies is suddenly going to stop, or better yet, improve? Is it logical to hope that, after telling us to expect that our lives will never be the same and we must henceforth live from vaccination, to vaccination, a life of masked social distancing, the vaccines will actually be a product of their (non existent) integrity and good will or that the vaccines will be worse than all measures leading up to it?

They want to hurt us, to kill us. They still won't allow us to use safe, FDA approved treatments for Covid, insisting we die without it instead in order to drive us to the vaccines. Is that not the obvious conclusion of the unending series of lies driving us like livestock through a maze of narrowing chutes toward enslavement and mandatory vaccinations?

[ransomnote]

Admin, you you add “May Have” to the title. I’m not saying I have proof they did. I’m saying logically it’s hard to refute my premise. Thank you.

[Pollard]

4 points

1
1
1
1
3
4

oops

[bagster]

You make a very good case, as usual.

But you may have to translate it into sheep for the Fearbros.

***Gimme my va-a-a-ax so I can be free-e-e-e.

#BahBah

[Brian Griffin]

There are known problems with PCR Covid testing.

However Pfizer is a large reputable company that would not fake a trial.

The lower rate of US deaths prove the vaccines are working.

[cgbg]

Writing tips:

--Put the lead in the first paragraph. Summarize your argument there. If you have four points to make summarize each of them in ten words or less, with bullet points or similar.

--Point 1
--Point 2
--Point 3
--Point 4


--Then have a separate paragraph for each of your four points.

--Use short sentences that are easy to understand.

--Put the exhibits, charts, references in footnotes (at the end of your post)

The key to communication is not for you to talk or write, it is to get your reader to _understand_ what you said or wrote.

End of rant.

[monkeyshine]

As to mRNA technology, it is also my understanding it has been around for well over a decade and never found to be of any use. Holds a lot of promise in theory but so far (maybe) not in practice. It bothers me a lot this rush and oodles of money to push the vaccines and very little energy or money to study potential treatments. Vaccines won’t help people already infected.

As for “lab rats that survive” it is my understanding that the lab rats used in trials are almost always killed for research purposes at some point. Maybe you mean that some died from the experimental vaccines and some did not. But they eventually get examined for development of tumors and such.

I have heard about these stories of motor oil and tropical fruits testing positive but not sure how real that is. We’ve seen a lot of inconsistencies, poorly designed studies and corner cutting and ‘working assumptions’ the last year - hard to know if we are really comparing apples to apples. As you said there are many different ways to test. If it is true the more common tests are just looking for a specific genetic sequence then I suppose that it is possible for this sequence to exist on its own regardless of the presence of the virus. And would it hold that potentially a virus could mutate so it no longer expresses that exact same gene sequence? Or the inverse, that other viruses might mutate and show this same sequence?

[semimojo]

I think it’s reasonable to assume that vaccine trial participants were give the PCR ‘test’ repeatedly: at the start of the trial, after Dose 1, after Dose 2, and then routinely through the 4 or so weeks of monitoring following to see at what point they might supposedly contract (e.g., subject’s PCR ‘test’ positive 10 days after vaccine administration – too soon for vaccine to protect participant).

That's not necessarily a reasonable assumption and from what I know they didn't do routine PCR testing of the two populations at all.

As you posted, Cases of COVID‑19, starting 14 days after Dose 2, were defined as symptomatic COVID‑19 requiring positive RT-PCR result.... The person had to have Covid symptoms and if so the diagnosis was confirmed by the PCR test.

Many more people who got the placebo had symptoms than those who got the vaccine.

People were only tested if they had symptoms, so it's possible many people who got the vaccine contracted asymptomatic disease, but note the manufacturers don't make any claims about efficacy against that.

To the overall point about false positives the nearly perfect correlation between positive case counts, hospitalizations and deaths indicates the tests are very often right.

[Cletus.D.Yokel]

:: Holds a lot of promise in theory but so far (maybe) not in practice. ::

Let’s ask President Trump, shall we?
He says, “Regeneron is a miracle therapy.”

[metmom]

However Pfizer is a large reputable company that would not fake a trial.

How much are they paying you to say that?

[monkeyshine]

The lower rate of US deaths prove the vaccines are working.

You can't make that assumption. There could be many reasons why deaths are declining such as earlier intervention and better treatment protocols. Deaths are a trailing indicator anyway it is the "worst and final resolution" of an active infection case. There are millions of infected out there who remain unresolved.

AFAIK from BoBeaux's daily stat threads, only about 12-14% of the population has been completely vaccinated and roughly an equal number received 1 of the 2 shots. This would mean some 70% of the population has not yet been vaccinated at all and yet the numbers of cases and deaths is way down (more than one would expect given the rate of vaccination). I am sure other factors are at play in the daily case/death counts besides the vaccines.

[monkeyshine]

Regeneron is not a vaccine it is an antibody infusion. AFAIK it is not developed on the mRNA tech platform but I could be mistaken.

[House Atreides]

Your HYPERACTIVE ANTI-VAX JIHAD continues. So the vaccine trials used FAKE test results? So how did they know when to use false positive test results and show 95% difference between the trial participants who RECEIVED THE VACCINE VERSUS THOSE WHO RECEIVED THE PLACEBO?

By the way, may I assume you’re paid by the word and not by the scientific correctness of your jihad?

[bagster]

However Pfizer is a large reputable company that would not fake a trial.

"The climate scientists are reputable and they wouldn't fake their data".

"The electoral process is reputable, they would not fake the outcome".

"Bernie Madoff is reputable, he would not rip off his clients".

Hope that's enough to make my point, but just in case.

"The used care salesman is reputable, he wouldn't sell me a lemon".

[DugwayDuke]

Over 500,000 dead.

[bagster]

Writing tips:

Thank you, Sister Mary Elephant.

Condescension noted.

You are now recognized as superior. Congratulations.

[cyberstoic]

“ The lower rate of US deaths prove the vaccines are working.”

There is a huge hole in the parking lot where I work. It is an elephant trap to stop elephants. We have never seen an elephant. It totally works.

The death rate was falling before the vaccines were widely administered.

[DesertRhino]

“The CDC not only banned the off-label use of these drugs during a time they declared an unprecedented medical emergency, they wouldn’t even award these drugs “Emergency Use Authorization” they would later grant their fake vaccines.”

If a therapy is approved for use against a disease, CDC cannot give emergency use authorization to an experimental vaccine. And THAT is why all drugs to treat the disease are mercilessly attacked.

[Tellurian]

To the overall point about false positives ... [statistics] indicates the tests are very often right.

I at first had no faith in the PCR tests, but with time, seeing my SIL tested repeatedly (work related, probably a dozen times), and always testing negative, I've had to conclude that false positives are uncommon ... at least in the medical environment that administered his tests.

[cgbg]

Criticize me all you want—but do what I say!