Posted on 12/13/2021 2:03:17 AM PST by Enlightened1
First bolus of Pfizer vax data from our FOIA request yields alarming adverse event findings: "Cumulatively, through 28 February 2021 [less than three months], total of 42,086 case reports (25,379 medically confirmed and 16,707 non-medically confirmed) containing 158,893 events.
https://twitter.com/akheriaty/status/1469832293007069184
Pfizer Vaccine data released on adverse events after FOIA request.
Documents released by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reveal that drugmaker Pfizer recorded nearly 160,000 adverse reactions to its Covid-19 vaccine in the initial months of its rollout.
The documents were obtained by a group of doctors, professors, and journalists calling themselves Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency, who filed a (FOIA) request with the FDA for their release.
The first tranche of documents reveal that, as of February 2021, when Pfizer’s shot was being rolled out, the drugmaker had compiled more than 42,000 case reports detailing nearly 160,000 adverse reactions to the jab.
These reactions ranged from the mild to the severe, and 1,223 were fatal. The majority of these case reports involved people aged between 31 and 50 in the United States.
More than 25,000 nervous system disorders were reported, along with 17,000 musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders and 14,000 gastrointestinal disorders. A range of different autoimmune conditions were reported, along with some peculiar maladies, including 270 “spontaneous abortions,” and incidences of herpes, epilepsy, heart failure and strokes, among thousands of others.
I said no one, including Pfizer.
Show me some evidence of higher death rates in the vaccinated than in a similar unvaccinated population.
As many idiotic misrepresentations of adverse event data get posted you would think someone would get off their ass and actually produce some comparative statistics.
Or maybe those statistics don't support their narrative?
The Swine Flu vaxx in 1976 was pulled after causing around 30 deaths.
My, how times have changed.
Right now the CDC is only admitting to 6 deaths...
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html
Today Pfizer offered to buy Arena Pharmaceuticals for double it’s stock price. Arena stockholders are ecstatic. Arena has products that treat thrombosis (Temanogrel) and heart muscle problems (ADP418). Blood clots and heart failure.
Pfizer intends to make money coming and going with their jab.
1) Where in the United States were people aged 31-50 being vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine between December 2020 and February 2021?
2) 1221 deaths - what's the age range?
3) 1221 deaths - what's the denominator?
Don't you think it's also relevant that none of those deaths were attributed to the vaccine?
Your choice — no evidence that the mRNA inoculations are in some outcomes “fatal” — is your choice.
It's a choice backed up by data. The CDC is tasked with monitoring these adverse events. They review every reported death. So far they've attributed exactly 6 deaths to the J&J vaccine. That's it.
The PDF reads "case outcomes” as “fatal.”
It also states:
"An accumulation of adverse event reports (AERs) does not necessarily indicate that a particular AE was caused by the drug; rather, the event may be due to an underlying disease or some other factor(s) such as past medical history or concomitant medication."
Odd that you skipped that part. No one disputes the deaths happened, but anyone who reads the report honestly knows you can't attribute all those deaths to the vaccine.
Do you think they're lying?
Every death is reported by someone and reviewed by clinicians. If they're lying about the number of deaths how many people do you think are in on the conspiracy?
It would have to number in the thousands.
Well, if we ever get to 30 deaths caused by the Covid vaccine maybe we'll reevaluate. Until then...
You don’t need a conspiracy to fail to detect and report a vaccine as a cause of death.
If you are not looking for it, you will not see it.
My sister in law is a pro-vaxx fanatic, and she was severely injured/ill after getting her second shot. She is alive but in a lot of pain and the docs don’t know what is wrong with her. This has been going on for a couple of months now.
If she dies it will officially be of something other than the vaccine—even though it will be due to the vaccine.
She does not believe it is due to the vaccine.
That is not a “conspiracy”, that is just brainwashing and stupidity.
As I read your several apologia, I conclude that 1) you accept the CDC’s data and related assertions as fully factual and trustworthy, 2) discard dissenting views, and 3) you are a booster for these vaccines.
“...you can't attribute all those deaths to the vaccine.”
In an ongoing phase three clinical trial with sometimes years left to run, and with only some small amount of Pfizer data having been released, your firm conviction and faith in the Fauci-Collins-Biden administration of these “emergency” and “experimental” drugs seems remarkable.
An Arena Pharmaceutical clinical trial, which Pfizer has proposed to take over, treats suppressed immune systems associated with MS. Their “S1P modulater” (Etrasimod) affects immunity, heart rate, smooth muscle, and endothelial barrier function.
If Pfizer acquires this company as planned, they’ll be selling products to treat many of the problems their jab creates. Arena has other products that treat thrombosis (Temanogrel) and heart muscle problems (ADP418).
Blood clots, heart failures, and immune disorders. SMH.
If you are not looking for it, you will not see it.
But they are looking for it.
Every day.
They evaluate every death.
None of us have perfect knowledge but if I have to choose between thousands of medical professionals trained to do this, and a bunch of random people who intentionally or through ignorance misrepresent VAERS and other adverse event data, my choice is pretty easy.
Deaths that happen months after taking the vaccine are not going to be attributed by medical professionals to the vaccine.
They will be officially due to whatever medical condition was present and was the immediate cause.
You know this—I know you know this—You know that I know you know this.
They may make mistakes but I think they're pretty competent and acting in good faith. Otherwise their data would have to be the product of a massive conspiracy and I don't believe in those.
2) discard dissenting views
No, I discard obvious misrepresentations, like saying or implying that every death occurring after a vaccination was the fault of the vaccine when the people supplying the data explicitly say you can't do that.
3) you are a booster for these vaccines
You haven't, and probably won't, see me advocating for the vaccines.
What I do do is advocate against obvious misinformation like this article because I think it can mislead people and could cause them to make harmful decisions.
I'm all for debate but it has to be based on honest data.
Probably not unless they create some statistical anomaly that prompts further examination.
That has nothing to do with this constant misrepresentation of adverse event data.
Clever to appoint yourself judge over “misinformation” and what constitute for you “harmful decisions.” This places you outside a debate, and above it.
— “I'm all for debate but it has to be based on honest data.”
And so you validates which is the “honest data,” such as that of the CDC, and which is judged by you as dishonest data.
This is no debate, for you are the arbiter as your replies testify. I believe you, that you believe them. As you say, “I think they're pretty competent and acting in good faith.”
I believe that you believe you can decide for others about “harmful decisions.” Trust the CDC. Trust the FDA, Pfizer-BioNTech. Moderna, Johnson and Johnson, and Merck. Trust Fauci and Collins and the federal government. They would never lie to us.
Except...
https://www.fda.gov/media/97413/download
— “They may make mistakes but I think they're pretty competent and acting in good faith.” Yes, indeed you do think so.
You see only one alternative — a conspiracy. There are others. Such as rampant ineptitude, self-serving bureaucracies, politics, CYA actions by individuals or small groups, a regulatory capture which affects and biases decisions, and more. All, of course, acting in good faith.
When the people who collect the data tell you what it represents, presenting it as something else is misinformation by definition.
Unless you think everyone's lying to you.
This is no debate, for you are the arbiter as your replies testify.
There isn't any debate about what Pfizer and the CDC say the data represent.
You can say they're lying but you can't dispute that they say the deaths aren't necessarily the result of the vaccine.
rampant ineptitude, self-serving bureaucracies, politics, CYA actions by individuals or small groups, a regulatory capture which affects and biases decisions, and more.
All possible and I'm sure there in some measure. But none of them could begin to explain why thousands of public health professionals, in and out of government, understand and accept the description of what adverse event data represent.
They aren't all lying to you. Honest ;)
— “There isn't any debate about what Pfizer and the CDC say the data represent.” Really? This one thread suggests there is debate.
“People who collect the “data” tell us:
Global Deaths through 23+ months of the global population — ( 5,105,270 / 7,906,949,863 ) x 100 = 0.0645 %
Presenting this rudimentary calculation is what? Information or misinformation?
Was Ferguson-Imperial College's forecast to Trump of 2.2 million dead information or misinformation?
Are some individual testimonies information or misinformation?
-- "I'm going to shut down the virus," said a current president.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/13/opinions/biden-not-keeping-campaign-promises-jennings/index.html
What's information? Misinformation? You are the judge, because "There isn't any debate about what Pfizer and the CDC say the data represent."
Except there is. Go figure.
Not about what the CDC and Pfizer say. They've been consistent.
What's information? Misinformation?
Simple. When someone says all these deaths are due to the vaccine when that's not true, that's misinformation.
— “Simple. When someone says all these deaths are due to the vaccine when that’s not true, that’s misinformation.”
Equally simple. When one says almost none of these deaths is due to the gene therapy products when that’s not true, that’s misinformation.
I never stated “all.” Who did, for I am interesting in looking at those posts?
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.