Every media outlet and government institution tells us that the Pfizer “vaccine” is “safe and effective.” Since COVID-19 shots are recommended for everyone, mandated for some, and are based on a new technology that doesn’t have a positive track record, it’s important to learn all about their effectiveness and safety. Let’s examine if the Pfizer “vaccine” has a favorable safety profile and is efficacious in preventing COVID-19.
Generally, vaccines and other pharmaceutical products have to go through different phases of clinical trials. Manufacturers have to engage in animal testing prior to human testing. This process takes between 8 to 15 years. This is the average time that takes before pharmaceutical products are deemed safe and effective and can be FDA-approved. However, this hasn’t been the case with these COVID shots.
Pfizer’s “Vaccine” Data
Besides the Moderna “vaccine,” Pfizer is another major manufacturer of COVID-19 shots. They went through phase 1 clinical trials. Pfizer clinical trial phase 1 enrolled 45 participants who were subdivided into two experimental groups. The BNT162b1 group received an experimental biologic that generated a great number of adverse events and was thus discontinued. The BNT162b2 group had a dose of 100 micrograms which was discontinued after concerns were raised as well. It was concluded that during the next phase of trials participants would receive a smaller dosage of BNT162b2, making it a 30 microgram dose.
Pfizer’s clinical trial phases 2/3 are still ongoing and are supposed to last 2 years. Pfizer reported that in participants with evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, there was no difference in COVID-19 cases between vaccine and placebo recipients.
“COVID-19 was less frequent among placebo recipients with positive N-binding antibodies at study entry than among those without evidence of infection at study entry, indicating ~72.6% protection by previous infection,” not due to vaccination. Despite the results, it was concluded that “the data in this report demonstrate that BNT162b2 prevents COVID-19 effectively for up to 6 months post-dose 2 across diverse populations.”
Problems with Pfizer Clinical Trials
Based on the information on Pfizer’s clinical trials, we can evaluate their claims. By looking at the pharmaceutical company’ methodology and assertions, it is evident that there are numerous problems with the data produced from these clinical trials:
🛑 The clinical trials offered no environmental controls. Most testing locations didn’t offer pre-screening for IgM and IgG antibodies or PCR testing for viral loads prior to giving the injection.
➡️ Since there was no systematic testing of participants prior to the clinical trials, we don’t know if participants were previously exposed to the virus or if they already had antibodies prior to starting the experiment. Efficacy can’t be determined since we don’t know if participants started with a clean slate or not.
If participants were exposed to SARS-CoV-2 previously, they already had antibodies and had low chances of reinfection. We, also, don’t know what methods were used to test infection or transmission post-administration of the shot. Only the phase 1 trial tested antibody production resulting from their drug, which means that they are claiming efficacy from less than 45 participants – this is an insignificant sample size that’s not generalizable.
🛑 Pfizer eliminated the placebo group. According to Pfizer, they felt the “ethical and practical need to immunize eligible initial placebo recipients under EUA and according to public health authority recommendations.”
➡️ The purpose of a clinical trial is to study a treatment/variable (in this case the SARS-CoV-2 shot) by comparing its effect on two groups with a similar number of participants, an experimental group and a control group. Once the effects of the variable on the experimental group are seen, conclusions can be drawn. The control group provides a basis for comparison to assess the effects of the tested treatment.
If the placebo group was eliminated by giving participants the shot too, how can both groups be compared? How can we draw real conclusions about effectiveness if most people received the vaccine? When did the control group become part of the experimental group?
Besides Pfizer’s desire to eliminate controls, Moncref Slaoui, Ph.D., Chief scientific adviser for Operation Warp Speed, said, “it’s very important that we unblind the trial at once and offer the placebo group vaccines” because trial participants “should be rewarded” for their participation. However, this type of “reward” violates the basics of experimentation.
🛑 This was not a double-blinded study. This is when participants and researchers have no knowledge of which treatment or intervention participants are receiving until the clinical trial is over.
➡️ Researchers knew who belonged in the placebo group and later vaccinated them. Double blindness is necessary to avoid bias in data collection, analysis, or interpretation. Having a double-blinded study avoids any placebo effects as well – this is when participants perceive an effect according to the group that they are assigned to.
🛑 The results reported that the chances of COVID infection were very similar for both groups.
➡️ If the rates of infection are similar between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, then the shot is null. There was no specific data showing a significant reduction in COVID-19 infections, transmission to others, reduced hospitalizations, or reduced deaths compared to the placebo group. There is no scientific evidence to say that the vaccine is “highly efficacious in preventing COVID-19.”
🛑 There was missing data.
➡️ The data of 9,400 enrolled participants is missing from the clinical trials and there was no accompanying information to explain. 9,400 is a significant number of participants. What happened to them and their data? Were these participants removed? If so, why? Did they withdraw from the study? If so, why? Why is there no information related to the missing data? Did they die?
🛑 During these trials, there was no independent analysis to verify the accuracy, objectivity, and integrity of their data. Pfizer and BioNTech, the collaborating manufacturing companies of BNT162b2, were involved in data collection, data analysis, interpretation, and conclusions for the report.
➡️ The lack of outside regulation by unbiased sources is unethical and presents a conflict of interest. Common practice requires that “FDA officials perform inspections of clinical trial study sites and anyone involved in the research to help protect the rights and welfare of volunteers and verify the quality and integrity of data submitted for review.” This didn’t happened. Pharma companies have financial interests in presenting positive results to gain approval for their experimental products.
A document submitted by Pfizer shows that there were 44,165 participants over the age of 15 and 2,264 participants between the ages of 12 to 15. The results showed that 9,839 participants exhibited reactogenicity (“expected” adverse reactions, including fever and sore arm at the injection site). Additionally, 30% of participants experienced adverse events, 24% related adverse events, and 1.2% severe adverse events. Yet, they concluded that “no participants had serious adverse events or adverse events leading to study withdrawal.”
Pfizer was ordered by the courts to submit in-depth reports. The Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Report included 42,086 participants. The following are some of the results:
- 1,223 participants died within three months of the clinical trials
- 31,463 participants experienced adverse events – not just expected reactogenicity
- 11,361 experienced adverse reactions from which they haven’t recovered
- 520 recovered with sequela
- 19,582 are still recovering
- 9,400 participants’ data were missing
- 7 medication errors resulted in fatalities
- Pregnant Women: From 270 pregnancies, there were 23 spontaneous abortions, 2 premature births with neonatal death, 2 spontaneous abortions with intrauterine death, 1 spontaneous abortion with neonatal death, 2 premature babies, 1 neonatal death, and 1 fetal growth restriction. No outcome was provided for 238 pregnancies
- Children: There were 34 children under 12 years of age. Over 70% of children (24) experienced adverse events [Off label use (11), Pyrexia (6), Product use issue (5), Fatigue, Headache and Nausea (4 each), Vaccination site pain (3), Abdominal upper pain, Facial paralysis (2), Lymphadenopathy (2), Malaise (2), Pruritus (2) and Swelling (2)]. 13 cases didn’t resolve and it’s not known what happened to 5 of them.
Besides all the issues related to the data, we are hearing very concerning feedback from some of the participants from the clinical trials.
- Maddie: She was a healthy twelve-year-old who volunteered for the shot and within 24 hours of the second dose suffered devastating life-altering injuries. She developed problems with her bladder and now requires a tube through her nose that carries her food and medicine, as well as a wheelchair to move around. When her mother reported her side effects to doctors, they were pushed to the side and told that it was all in “her head.” Besides, Pfizer listed her adverse event as “functional abdominal pain”
- Kyle: Professional mountain biker, who developed an extremely elevated heart rate, pericarditis (inflammation of the outer lining of the heart), and reactive arthritis. When he went to doctors for his heart symptoms, he was told that he was having a “psychotic episode;” now his career is over.
- Unfortunately, these are not the only stories from participants. Thousands and thousands of people are experiencing severe side effects. Not only that but their experiences are not being shared with the public since they are being censored on social media and most mainstream media channels. Fortunately, a public roundtable was organized by Senator Ron Johnson showcasing people who experienced adverse reactions to the COVID shot.
As if all the red flags associated with the clinical trials were not enough, whistleblowers have come forward and reported data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trials, which puts into question Pfizer’s claims about effectiveness and safety. A regional director was fired for reporting concerns, along with others working at Pfizer’s vaccine testing sites. They reported witnessing unethical procedures that compromised the study.
The following are some of the issues reported:
- participants were placed in hallways after the injection without being monitored
- deviations from protocol were not reported
- vaccines were not properly stored
- laboratory specimens were mislabeled
- participants only had a limited number of symptoms to choose from in relation to any adverse events (pain at the injection site, tiredness, headache, muscle pain, chills, joint pain, fever)
- participants who experienced adverse events did not receive therapeutic follow-up in a timely manner or any help
- staff who reported problems were harassed and targeted
FDA Approvals and Lawsuits
In May 2020, Pfizer launched a phase I/II clinical trial. By December 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued the first emergency use authorization (EUA) for the Pfizer “vaccine.” It was concluded that “the data do not reveal any novel safety concerns or risks requiring label changes and support a favorable benefit-risk profile of the BNT162b2 vaccine.”
The FDA already had the Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Report showing that, in the first three months, 1223 participants had died and that the whereabouts of 9400 participants who reported adverse events were unknown.
Yet, it’s interesting to point out that despite this information, the FDA just parroted Pfizer’s claims, “The most commonly reported side effects were pain at the injection site, tiredness, headache, muscle pain, chills, joint pain, and fever… The vaccine is 95% effective in preventing COVID-19 disease.”
On August 23, 2021, the FDA approved the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 shot. Four days later, Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency [PHMPT – a nonprofit made up of public health professionals, medical professionals, scientists, and journalists aiming to obtain and disseminate the data relied upon by the FDA to license COVID-19 vaccines] submitted a Freedom of Information Act Request to the FDA for all of the data within Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine biological product file.
When the FDA refused to release the data, PHMPT sued. A federal judge ordered the FDA to make public the data it relied on to license Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine within about eight months. To that request, the FDA’s legal team (U.S. Justice Department) proposed to produce 500 pages a month, which means that it would take them roughly 75 years to produce all the data. In return, the judge ordered the agency to turn over 55,000 pages a month.
Some of the documents obtained were the Cumulative Analysis of Post-authorization Adverse Event Report and the Non-Clinical Overview which has the synopsis of animal studies. Yet, there were no peer-reviewed studies exploring the outcomes of the Pfizer “vaccine” on animals presenting SARS-CoV-2.
In January 2022, Pfizer submitted a petition to intervene in the lawsuit. Pfizer’s attorneys said they wanted a role in the proceedings to help the FDA bring forth documents requested while avoiding the disclosure of confidential information. To which the FDA consented to Pfizer’s intervention, saying that Pfizer would facilitate the resolution of the matter.
The attorneys on behalf of PHMPT commented that it is “dystopian for the government to give Pfizer billions, mandate Americans to take its product, prohibit Americans from suing for harms, but yet refuse to let Americans see the data underlying its licensure.”
Another interesting fact released in response to FOIA requests is that BioNTech, the company that developed the mRNA technology and later partnered with Pfizer to give us the Pfizer “vaccine,” had already begun animal testing of this COVID-19 shot on January 14, 2020. This is only 2 weeks after the first reported case in Wuhan and 2 months before the WHO declared SARS-CoV-2 a pandemic.
Learn more about the BioNTech-“Pfizer” Vax Project Timeline.
Undercover Video of Pfizer Director
Jordon Trishton Walker, Pfizer Director of Research and Development, Strategic Operations – mRNA Scientific Planner, was taped by an undercover journalist from Project Veritas.
Walker revealed that Pfizer is exploring virus mutation so they could preemptively develop new vaccines. Doing research on viruses to change them and possibly make them more contagious and/or dangerous is called gain-of-function research (GOF). He referred to the process as “directed evolution” since GOF shouldn’t be taking place. He believes that this is how COVID-19 started in Wuhan and that “COVID is going to be a cash cow for us for a while going forward.”
And he is right! In 2021, Pfizer’s overall revenues were $81.3 billion, and nearly $37 billion in sales from its Covid-19 “vaccine.” This is one of the most lucrative products in history. And the drugmaker expects between $98 billion to $102 billion in 2022.
He also confessed that Pfizer is a revolving door for government, army, and defense government officials. Officials and regulators “who review our drugs, once they stop being regulators, they want to work for the company so they are not as harsh…It’s good for the industry but bad for everyone else in America.” This revolving door system is how big pharma gets away with taking to market products that have low efficacy and safety profiles.
Pfizer’s History of Criminality
Unfortunately for us, regulatory agencies have stopped fulfilling their role since they have been captured by big pharma. Pfizer has been engaging in fraud and criminal activities for decades costing innocent people their health and even their lives.
Pfizer has been sued since their products have caused thousands of deaths and injuries. Pfizer has also been found guilty of experimenting without consent, defrauding federal governments, fraudulently promoting drugs for unapproved uses, planting company operatives in medical audiences and bribing doctors, paying kickbacks, publishing false data, paying medical professionals for consulting and speaking on their behalf, violating federal anti-racketeering law, paying academic medical centers and research groups for illegally promotion their drugs, misbranding their products to defraud and mislead, blackmailing attorneys, passing ‘damaging’ information to the media and threatening attorney generals so they would drop their lawsuits, marketing drugs while violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and California’s Unfair Competition Law, making cash payments and providing incentives to bribe government doctors to utilize Pfizer products, withholding information about the risk of their drugs, presenting misleading data to doctors, and overcharging governments.
No member of Pfizer has been arrested or incarcerated. However, they have been allowed to settle lawsuits in order to avoid criminal trials. The following is a partial history of Pfizer’s criminality:
- 1992: Pfizer paid between $165 million and $215 million to settle lawsuits involving Bjork-Shiley Convexo-Concave heart valve, which killed hundreds.
- 1994: $10.75 million to settle Justice Department claims that the company lied to get federal approval for a mechanical heart valve.
- 1996: Pfizer paid $75 million for experimenting on children in Nigeria which caused brain damage and organ failure.
- 2002: $49 million lawsuit involved Lipitor.
- 2004: $430 million was related to Neurontin.
- 2009: Pfizer paid $2.3 billion, then the largest healthcare fraud settlement and the largest criminal fine ever relating to Bextra.
- 2009: $750 million paid due to deaths and liver failures involving Rezulin.
- 2009: a $6 billion lawsuit was dropped after an attorney general’s personal info was leaked to the press.
- 2010: $142.1 million for violating federal anti-racketeering laws.
- 2010: the New York Times exposed Pfizer, “Details on Payments to Doctors” for paying $20 million to 4,500 doctors and other medical professionals and $15.3 million to 250 academic medical centers and other research groups.
- 2010: Pfizer was accused of bribing 5,000 doctors to use Bextra.
- 2012: the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Pfizer with violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act for bribing doctors and other health care professionals in multiple countries.
- 2012: $1.2 billion to settle claims for hormone replacement therapy drug, Prempro, that caused breast cancer.
- 2013: $55 million for failing to warn patients and doctors about the risks of kidney disease, kidney injury, kidney failure, and acute interstitial nephritis caused by Protonix.
- 2013: $288 million to settle claims that Chantix, caused suicidal thoughts, psychological disorders, and was probably associated with a higher risk of a heart attack.
- 2014: $35 million to settle a lawsuit related to the kidney transplant drug Rapamune.
- 2016, £84.2 million for overcharging the National Health Service for its anti-epilepsy drug, Phenytoin, by 2,600%.
Learn all the details related to Pfizer’s Long History of Fraud, Corruption, and Using Children as Human Guinea Pigs.
The information related to the adverse events that took place during the first three months of the trials, which Pfizer hid, is disturbing and should frighten everyone. The numerous missteps during the clinical trials are extremely alarming and should nullify Pfizer’s results. Unsustainable claims by Pfizer, the CDC, and the FDA asserting that Pfizer “vaccines” are safe and effective are not only erroneous but fraudulent. The approvals were not based on scientifically proven data.
The FDA’s continuous attempts to hide Pfizer data only lead us to believe that there are nefarious issues at play. The FDA is supposed to be a regulatory agency, not a marketing arm of pharmaceutical companies. It shouldn’t be parroting the claims of the company that is trying to regulate. The conflicts of interest with pharma are huge.
Besides the unethical issues being exposed related to the COVID-19 shot, how can this company be trusted with the health of Americans after knowing that Pfizer doesn’t stand by their product, due to getting immunity from liability for this “vaccine,” and that it operates in a culture of fraud, deception, and criminality? After taking all these issues into account, the only thing “safe” to say is that these gene modification shots should be off the market due to being unsafe and ineffective.
To a Fitter Healthier You,
The Fitness Wellness Mentor