Pfizer Trial Fraud: The House of Cards Shakes
The Many, Many Faces of Fraud
"There are three things in the world that deserve no mercy: hypocrisy, fraud, and tyranny." -Frederick William Robertson
The list of serious problems in the Pfizer trials just grows and grows and grows.
And yet, it's an interesting question as to whether that even matters.
I've never seen this in a tweet, but I had to click the "Show more replies" button a total of 29 times to get to the end. No, I'm not kidding! Try it.
Let us summarize what is to come:
The trial reports should never have been read as demonstrating efficacy.
A trial whistleblower was buried for more than a year, then shared how poorly and dishonestly her trial site was run.
The FDA never checked around 94% of trial sites.
It appears some of the trial sites were purely fabricated. I leave my mind open for this to be incorrect, but I highly doubt it.
Evidence suggests that the vaccines are inducing COVID-19.
The method for confirming COVID-19 was both cherry-picked and inconsistently applied. Another method shows Zero Efficacy.
International data tells a Zero Efficacy story.
National data handlers seem to be "fixing" data to hide Zero Efficacy.
A Confidence Game
"The code of the con is to know just enough about everything so you can lie about anything." -Dan Garfat-Pratt
It took me approximately 19.3 minutes to grow tired of hearing the phrase, "Well run clinical trial" after the December 10, 2020 publication of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine trial report. If you did not recognize the insertion of that catch phrase into the daily conversation of every standard American drone model, you probably need your hearing checked. But perhaps that was a perfectly reasonable assumption for a company like Pfizer that has a well-designed logo and ample advertising budget, and gets described as a "habitual offender" in journal-speak (Evans, 2010; Hat tip LifeSiteNews). Isn't a habitual offender who you'd trust to look after your children? Or does that sound a little cra-cra?
What a beautifully type-set document, don't you think?
I remember thinking it sounded…less than classy when college football bowl games were sponsored. At least at that level we can mostly pretend there is no conflict of interest like an egotistical CEO sending a quarter of a million dollars in cash to five star recruits, or whatever the refs might get to keep the outcome of the game in line with positive association with the sponsor brand. And in bowl games, neither university gets to sponsor the game and pay the refs (legally). I wonder what it would buy them if they could?
Let us recall from the start that Pfizer was not even presenting a document in which enough trial participants were reported on to establish the claimed results.
That we still do not have answers as to whether all of this lopsided exclusion total represents injuries that might be fairly classified as COVID-19 stands out as criminal on its own. But this is only one of numerous serious problems that corporate and government actors seem to pretend away en route to the largest medical experiment in human history.
On January 4, 2021, Peter Doshi published an article in the BMJ with the simple message, "We need more details and the raw data." While Doshi covered many important points, the most obvious one that stands out are the thousands of participants with "suspected, but unconfirmed" cases of COVID-19 were not even evaluated for COVID-19. This does not even include hospitalized participants from Site 1231 (and perhaps many others), which we'll talk about below.
The trial additionally seemed to show around an 86% reduction in COVID-19 reinfection cases. This does not seem to fit reality since, which should make us wonder about the entire body of data.
Though we were promised transparency, and presented with a beautifully type-set trial report, there have always been questions about how the data was "processed" or "laundered" or whatever word you might want to use.
The problems are so numerous that it's hard to imagine anyone honest suggesting that they know exactly how to process it all.
Poorly Conducted Trial Sites
"The tragedy is not that things are broken. The tragedy is that they are not mended again." -Alan Paton
Most Americans probably imagine that the FDA reviews more than a handful of trial sites—particularly during the study of a brand new medical technology. The reality is closer to 1 in 20.
In 2021, after being pushed around a Labyrinth for more than a year, Ventavia whistleblower Brook Jackson's story finally hit the news. And by "the news" I don't mean much of anything mainstream. LifeSite reported,
Data were falsified, patients were unblinded, the company hired poorly trained people to administer the injections, and follow-up on reported side effects lagged way behind. The revelation was published in The British Medical Journal. In his November 2, 2021, report, investigative journalist Paul Thacker wrote:
Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal COVID-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight …
[F]or researchers who were testing Pfizer’s vaccine at several sites in Texas during that autumn, speed may have come at the cost of data integrity and patient safety … Staff who conducted quality control checks were overwhelmed by the volume of problems they were finding.
Jackson, a former regional director of Ventavia Research Group, a research organization charged with testing Pfizer’s COVID jab at several sites in Texas, repeatedly “informed her superiors of poor laboratory management, patient safety concerns and data integrity issues,” Thacker wrote.
Let's take a look at how the game of Pfizer Trial Jenga is progressing.
Fake Trial Sites?!
"Trials teach us what we are; they dig up the soil, and let us see what we are made of." -Charles Spurgeon
Most of my readers surely already know this, but earlier in May, the epic rodent researcher currently known as Jikkileaks (Fan account, ahem), noted a lot of startling observations about Pfizer's trial sites. It is worth reading this entire thread. It is likely to be purged at any moment, so maybe even save a copy.
To make a long story short, some of the trial sites look as though they might be largely or wholly fabricated. But maybe we can find receipts for a small army of medical transcriptionists brought in to handle the paperwork load.
Now, let's hear what serial medical trial funder Steve Kirsch has to say about all this since he knows a bit about the bureaucratic progression of clinical trials.
From the video:
I've funded clinical trials, and I know how quickly you can recruit people, and it is dog slow. So, this site managed to recruit people absurdly quickly in a week, with just one person involved in the trial…which is impossible. (laughs dismissively)
If this is not impossible, then this is the greatest achievement ever done in medicine. All we have to do is copy what this guy did and we should be…copying this worldwide because this guy was able to recruit so many patients into the trial and enroll them in a record amount of time never seen before.
One suggestion I will make is that perhaps the paperwork was "inappropriately filled out" but that there were patients at Site 1231 because we're about to talk about one of those patients.
Welcome to the Moderna Halftime Report starring some guy doing stuff you know isn't real, then breaking the magician's code so that you know how it's done.
Subject #12312982 Speaks Out
Augusto Roux has stepped forward as what appears to be an example of trial fraud that casts doubt on the entire mRNA quasi-vaccine trial program. He was a participant from Site 1231, indicated by the first four digits of his Subject ID.
From Joshua Guetzkow's summary of Roux's story:
Subject # 12312982 in Pfizer study C4591001 is Augusto Roux, a 35-year old lawyer from Buenos Aires, Argentina who volunteered for Pfizer’s stage 3 trial of its COVID-19 vaccine (or whatever you want to call it) in order to protect his mother with emphysema.
His story and some of the shenanigans surrounding the Argentinian trial site have been amply covered by Dr. David Healy in three sprawling but extremely important blog posts: 1, 2, 3. The first one was published March 1st, but it was only last week that I caught on to this story, so I’m assuming most of you probably aren’t familiar with it. So please share this — we’ve got to get the word out, because Augusto Roux may very well hold the key to bringing down the Pfizer vaccine trial, or at least proving fraud at the largest trial site that was home to over 10% of the participants in the trial.
Even worse, Roux wasn't alone. Not by a long shot. Emphasis mine:
On Sept. 14, he was discharged. The doctor wrote in his chart that he had suffered an adverse reaction to the vaccine. Augusto was told by hospital staff they there had been a huge influx of people from the clinical trial coming to the hospital (there were 2,981 subjects enrolled in the trial before Augusto), so his experience was not new to them. (The trial site managed to enlist several thousand subjects in just a few weeks.) One nurse estimated they had seen around 300 people.
You're going to want to read that whole story, including the part where the trial lead tags Roux with a mental illness (retaliatory?). It sounds like Roux and many others either had COVID-19 cases that were then suppressed in the trial report, or perhaps what I've called Type II COVID-19 cases. Recall that the Comrinaty package insert only claims to prevent COVID-19 cases caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The vaccine makers do not even make the claim that the vaccines aren't causing the same symptoms caused by the spike protein itself!
As Vinu Arumugham points out, it has become common for trial investigators to dismiss injuries and illness over the course of a trial as having "nothing to do with the investigational product." That's a serious structural problem in biomedical research that certainly needs to be dealt with, but we are now seeing the worst case scenario during this experimental quasi-vaccine rollout.
Thank you for your testimony, Citizen ID# 12312982. You may return to your cell now.
Kidding aside—haven't we seen enough?!
At what point do we stop the process and suggest that anyone who doesn't see the problem is a good German or a bad Nazi?
The Second Crime: Extended Trust
"There are not enough jails, not enough police, not enough courts to enforce a law not supported by the people." -Hubert H. Humphrey
Since the very first Pfizer trial, the FDA has opened the door wider and wider to almost every last soul in the U.S. Still no word on when employees of the FDA and CDC will take the shots.
If the trial results were engineered as it certainly appears, then the FDA has essentially just left the door open for one fraud to become many frauds as Pfizer continues to self-report results that make no sense and nobody can verify.
Consistency, Consistency, Consistency
One of the most important features of a good theory is that it remains consistent with the larger body of observed phenomena—in this case real world data.
Fraudulent trials are consistent with the need to run government data through statistical sieves to justify the experimental quasi-vaccination program:
Fraudulent trials are consistent with my Zero Efficacy hypothesis:
Speaking of my Zero Efficacy hypothesis, Jikkileaks has done it again, showing that N-antibody (nucleocapsid) seroconversion results in ever-so-slightly negative vaccine efficacy in the original Pfizer trial.
And finally, it is becoming more and more clear that the cleanest hospitalization data shows no VE, and that authorities have been monkeying with the data to make it appear otherwise for as long as they could get away with it.