Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Gergő Tisza🔹's avatar

Thanks for putting this together.

> 12 August 2020 🇵 The person delegated EUA authority for vaccines at the FDA, Dr. Peter Marks,

cut off?

> AstraZeneca has to halt their trial due to among a participant having neurological symptoms.

extra word?

> 13 September 2020 ... Bourla also announced announced Pfizer has almost 30,000 people enrolled in their Phase III trial

extra word

Also all the scroll emojis have a weird link which is probably unintentional.

Steve Sailer's avatar

The smoking gun is the November 9, 2020 article in "StatNews" in which a Pfizer executive flat-out admits that they halted processing of their clinical trial samples from late October 2020 until the day after the election:

StatNews offers a timeline of the announcement of its effectiveness:

"The story of how the data have been analyzed seems to include no small amount of drama…. In their announcement of the results, Pfizer and BioNTech revealed a surprise. The companies said they had decided not to conduct the 32-case analysis “after a discussion with the FDA.” Instead, they planned to conduct the analysis after 62 cases. But by the time the plan had been formalized, there had been 94 cases of Covid-19 in the study."

In other words, the companies skipped both the first (32 cases) and second (62 cases) scheduled interim analyses and only did the third (92 cases). But then it turned out that the vaccine was so effective (over 90 percent) that the first 32-case analysis likely would have been sufficient after all.

"Gruber said that Pfizer and BioNTech had decided in late October that they wanted to drop the 32-case interim analysis. At that time, the companies decided to stop having their lab confirm cases of Covid-19 in the study, instead leaving samples in storage."

That’s pretty wild: The firms had their labs stop processing cases and just put the samples in cold storage. They stopped the count. They ran out the election clock.

"The FDA was aware of this decision. Discussions between the agency and the companies concluded, and testing began this past Wednesday."

Perhaps coincidentally (or perhaps not), last Wednesday was the day after the election. As one cynic suggested: They didn’t choose a sample size for when to report, they chose a date.

So, it appears that Monday’s announcement perhaps could have been made before the election. But the corporations weren’t in the mood to follow their own protocol and Trump’s FDA let them get away with stalling on telling voters and investors what had been achieved.

From a political and financial standpoint, the firms likely made the self-interested right decision to delay. Even giant pharmaceutical companies don’t want to wind up on blacklists for vengeance by Democrats. But from a scientific and ethical perspective, it was highly questionable.

https://www.takimag.com/article/the-new-normal-by-any-means-necessary/

3 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?