He combines results of two studies, where the definitions for serious adverse effects are different... so he combines numbers, which can't be combined.
I read Peter Doshi's 4 pt series in the BMJ about the crappy trials when the death jabs first came out. It was obvious to me (and I am completerly average in intelligence) that at best, the shots would never work, and at worst, they would be very dangerous. I knew I would not be taking them. The more people tried to coerce, persuade, shame, vilify, shame, push and mandate, the more determined I was that I would NOT be getting them nor would my loved ones.
Leading to the question of exactly why there have been such great efforts to coerce, persuade, shame, etc. everyone into getting vaccinated. That in itself is suspect.
Thank you for posting the article. I am stunned by the incredibly bad scientific design of the drug trials (or brilliant design depending on what one wants to accomplish). The collusion with the FDA is hard to accept. Good work and thoughtful analysis, possible flaws presented on all sides. Just out of curiosity, does anyone have the information that explains why pfizer decided on 2 shots as the definition of “fully vaccinated” when looking at adverse effects? Is there any data on their trials where they compared outcomes of 1 shot versus 2 shots?
I ❤️Peter Doshi. He has been at this from the beginning. What a stand up human being.
This study should be earth shattering. Where are the mainstream journalists who should be all over this?
Climate change. Oh, uh ... I mean, sustainable green energy carbon credited new jobs!
He combines results of two studies, where the definitions for serious adverse effects are different... so he combines numbers, which can't be combined.
Probably just someone who sees the jig is up and is trying to come out in front of the avalanche thats hopefully about to come.
Doshi has been skeptical of the trials since the beginning. He's also one of the ones that helped bring the Tamiflu scandal to light back in the day.
Oh, ok i must have him mixed up with someone else. Maybe a guy with the name Drosten or something close.
Christian Drosten, Director of the Institute for Virology, Charité Berlin.
He has written some excellent articles.
I read Peter Doshi's 4 pt series in the BMJ about the crappy trials when the death jabs first came out. It was obvious to me (and I am completerly average in intelligence) that at best, the shots would never work, and at worst, they would be very dangerous. I knew I would not be taking them. The more people tried to coerce, persuade, shame, vilify, shame, push and mandate, the more determined I was that I would NOT be getting them nor would my loved ones.
Leading to the question of exactly why there have been such great efforts to coerce, persuade, shame, etc. everyone into getting vaccinated. That in itself is suspect.
Thank you for posting the article. I am stunned by the incredibly bad scientific design of the drug trials (or brilliant design depending on what one wants to accomplish). The collusion with the FDA is hard to accept. Good work and thoughtful analysis, possible flaws presented on all sides. Just out of curiosity, does anyone have the information that explains why pfizer decided on 2 shots as the definition of “fully vaccinated” when looking at adverse effects? Is there any data on their trials where they compared outcomes of 1 shot versus 2 shots?
Why isn't death called out separately in the study? Not dying is more important than adverse events.