Oh, look what the cat dragged in... (h/t to Vox)
They called said agency and were told that there were a high volume of SAEs being reported from multiple centers, so they were going through and removing the “irrelevant ones.” They claimed that the state of the pandemic warranted an unconventional approach to research. Obviously this is insane, even to the trusting individuals my friend worked with so the head of his clinic called a conference of the other 20 or so sites in that region and they all were having the same experience. In other words, this wasn’t a fluke.
Things eventually got so bad that my friends’ boss told the company he was contracted with that he was going to discontinue the trial because people were having so many SAEs including seizures, clots, myocarditis, death, etc. The contracting company told him that he was obliged to finish the trial, from what I gather because the official number of SAEs was below the 5% threshold. Friend’s boss said “go take a hike, I quit.” Walked away from his head job at the research center where he made millions.
Un-sourced back to the original, so I can't verify it -- and it might well be bull****. In general my rule as anyone who's followed my reporting over the last close to 15 years knows is that without sourcing I won't run it no matter where it came from. But there are times exceptions are called for and this is one of them. Among the reasons for my decision in this instance are that at least one instance of serious fraud in the trials on teens has been documented by the victim herself attempting to take said message public -- in a wheelchair -- and having it spiked by the media.
That standing alone might have been enough but in this case its even more-compelling because the claim can be verified as the reports are it was across multiple locations.
The claim thus must be run to the ground one way or the other: That the people conducting the original trials on the vaccines knew damn well they were dangerous and someone -- likely the FDA -- was intentionally deleting reports of adverse events.
This is either true or it is not. If its true then every party who was involved and did nothing to blow the whistle is responsible for injecting somewhere in the neighborhood of 200 million Americans (and God knows how many worldwide) with a drug that was known to be very dangerous -- and those dangers were intentionally concealed.
That's all discoverable, by the way, should someone sue. If its true then Moderna knew it too. Pfizer and J&J, from the field data I have discussed, likely knew had similar experiences and knew as well because the odds are extremely high their formulations and tests produced the same results.
May I remind you that one of the exceptions to the PREP Act's liability shield is intentional misconduct. You can't sue the government generally but if you can prove that the drugmakers knew of this data -- and if it happened they did know because their people or their contracted labs were seeing it and reporting it -- and they deliberately sat back and let anyone including the FDA delete the records and thus tamper with the trial their liability shield goes "poof" like Joe Biden's fart in front of the Duchess.
There are a hell of a lot of dead and injured people out there, and the VAERS reports, even under-represented as they are, shows that these jabs are wildly more-dangerous than any other in United States history. The adverse event rate is high enough to have immediately terminated the trials in the fall of 2020 if it had been reported.
Discovery is a bitch folks, and there's no way around a subpoena in a situation like this. Oh, and since the government was directly involved the issuance of a "mandate" in the face of this deception, assuming it occurred and was deliberate, is quite-arguably intentional manslaughter and no, government officials are not immune from being prosecuted for that.
Incidentally Pfizer's CEO has said, in public, that those peddling "misinformation" are criminals. If in fact the trial data was tampered with that makes him the criminal.
And let's put a cherry on what may well be the topper of the sundae: Moderna has been trying to use mRNA for roughly 10 years against various indications and every time had run into the same problem: Serious adverse events that closed the "effective-to-toxic" window, which exists for all drugs, causing them to fail. Now, we are told, both they and Pfizer magically solved the problem that had vexed the technology for a decade at a most-propitious time, just when the world needed it most.
Where are the landsharks with their briefcases -- and subpoenas?