4/18/2021, 4:42:21 PM · by ransomnote · 65 replies
odysee.com ^ | April 15, 2021 | @DRutter, Dr. Charles Hoffe
600 particpants (vs 30,000 for Phase 3)
Penn is out of date and/or inaccurate.
They need manufacturing and distribution time.
As the graph I posted explains, they manufactured during the trial in the hope that it would work. No real risk since Trump paid for them up front.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That Pubmed article you linked was written by employees of Moderna so I don't consider it legitimate, objective information. Found something on NIH but questions were directed to Anthony Fauci. The medical establishment has so much control getting an objective opinion is a hall of mirrors.
Penn is a better source here. Otherwise I'm reading marketing materails (Fauci, Moderna and Pfizer, NIH are all collaborating).
Moderna still hasn't handed over the rest of its raw data and the editor of a British Medical Journal has been crunching the numbers on whatever data he can extract and so far, the data suggests it's nowhere near as effective as claimed.
Moderna can't complain if it fails to follow professional standards and is therefore not considered legit.
A key feature missing in Moderna and other studies is longevity. 2 to 3 months of observation is really just phoning it in - claiming to have trials but making them small and too quick to learn anything.
The Penn paper said that the studies it reviewed were small and Moderna's Phase II was only 600 people when range is usually 1000 to 2000. There's a rushed thrown together 'technicality' (technically, we're calling this our phase 2, our phase 3). The communications i found varied on when and how many would be in the trials to the extent that I can understand Penn published was was available then.
But we're talking about Moderna, a company who intentionally chose to base its experimental design on a PCR 'test' that has rated Coca Cola, goats, and fruit positive for Covid-19. Moderna based it's vaccine on China's genome which China released in January. Moderna wasn't working on sequencing the genome for itself, the morning China released the genome, Moderna engineers got to work.
So we're talking about China releasing the China virus and then releasing a fake genome, because China says it did not base that genome on live virus but used software to basically interpolate what would be the genome, except Covid-19 is supposed to be unpredictable as it is 'novel'....so you see, I'm not expecting honesty and it's pointless for me to spend more time wondering what Moderna said or did - they are lying.
For example, Moderna and all other mRNA's reported no serious side effects. But in the article below, the Doctor reports neurological damage and anaphylaxis in his 900 patients.
Moderna said anaphylaxis would be estimated at 1 out of 100,000 and the doctor had two out of 900 patients So out of Moderna's 38K Phase III participants (the nubmers vary. I've seen Moderna content stating 50K, 40K, 30K and 28K - this is why infomration for Moderna will always seem 'out of date').
The doctor described neurological damage that behaves like MS, but Moderna says their trials revealed none. Well, in 2 or 3 months? Maybe? But Moderna lies so there's that....