Vaccine Trial - Help Needed - Clarification Required

I mentioned earlier that I travel for work but will not be having a 'booster' injection, even if it means I cannot travel and carry out my job properly.

I think I am building a strong enough case to present to management to support my decision.

I need help on one part regarding vaccine trials.

You are all probably familiar with Dr Robert Malone's presentation regarding the shortfalls and problems with the Pfizer vaccine trials. If you are not, here's a link to the PDF: Link to PDF.

In this presentation it states:


Animal testing was skipped.

However, back in June (I think) the UK Government published an assessment of the vaccine trials for the exact same vaccine, this assessment is here: Link to assessment.

In this assessment it states:

Study R-20-0085: COVID-19: Immunogenicity of BNT162b2 in mice

Study R-20-0112: Characterizing the immunophenotype in spleen and lymph node of mice treated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates

Study R-20-0072: Biodistribution of BNT162b2 using the luciferase protein as a surrogate marker protein after intramuscular injection in mice. Toxicology

The vaccine was tested for its ability to result in S protein expression in a mammalian cell population in vitro, for its immunogenicity in mice in two studies, and in one study in rhesus monkeys, including its capacity to prevent disease after challenge with SARS Cov-2 virus in rhesus monkeys. The vaccine also induced an immune response in rats in the two toxicity studies.

Can anyone explain to me or help me argue in opposition to this? To me, it clearly refutes Dr Malone's statement. I am almost certain Dr Malone and the UK Gov document are discussing the exact same trial because they describe the same number of participants (43,000) and the exact same vaccine (BNT162b2).


How do I counter this objection I have found whilst researching? It's not the be all and end all, I have written a pretty robust case in favour of sensibly not having a booster injection, but if I can explain this anomaly away it would REALLY help my case.

a reply to: and14263

I can't offer any advice, but merely point out that in this current pandemic(tm) climate, there is no consensus of what is and is not applicable. I've seen people wearing masks that are better equipped to prevent any contamination to or from a person, be denied entry to an establishment because they are not wearing one of those cloth masks. I've seen people, in authority, push the boundaries of societal rights, and often over rule them, not from law, but by media bandied ignorance. I've seen time and time again the leaders of this so called free world, claim that without full capitulation, rights will be eroded and destroyed - and they appear to be gaining strength.

You can bring 100% accurate information to the fore, but the narrative will be all that is heard. This is not going to end well, when enough people have seen the light. For now, it is us heathens who are at the whim of the opposition.

And, well you know the old poem, first they came for the first jabbed, and I did not speak out, because I was first jabbed....

May someone else provide you with insight, brother...

Follow your path of common sense, even the homeless are happy without a job or even a roof over their head. (well some are that is )

For me I have never taken the route of here little boy, take this candy from me a stranger. Those pushing this poison are strangers to me and nothing more.

a reply to: and14263

Malone is wrong, it's best not to quote him if you want a case to be taken seriously as most of his claims are made up.

The animal trials were done on several species of monkeys, mice, rats and syrian hamsters as Phase I. It's all public data and has been since early May 2020 when the trials were done.

originally posted by: bastion
a reply to: and14263

Malone is wrong, it's best not to quote him if you want a case to be taken seriously as most of his claims are made up.

The animal trials were done on several species of monkeys, mice, rats and syrian hamsters as Phase I. It's all public data and has been since early May 2020 when the trials were done.

I've gone through the presentation with a very fine tooth comb and of the 50 pages this is the only item I have found that is not supported by external sources.

I would never use just one source to argue my point to management. I would also never dismiss an entire person - most of his claims can be supported by other sources, either peer reviewed or Government published.

It is this one claim I am not able to find any support for. And I suspect on this subject Malone is indeed wrong.

originally posted by: and14263
I mentioned earlier that I travel for work but will not be having a 'booster' injection, even if it means I cannot travel and carry out my job properly.

I think I am building a strong enough case to present to management to support my decision.

I need help on one part regarding vaccine trials.

You are all probably familiar with Dr Robert Malone's presentation regarding the shortfalls and problems with the Pfizer vaccine trials. If you are not, here's a link to the PDF: Link to PDF.

In this presentation it states:

Animal testing was skipped.

However, back in June (I think) the UK Government published an assessment of the vaccine trials for the exact same vaccine, this assessment is here: Link to assessment.

In this assessment it states:

Study R-20-0085: COVID-19: Immunogenicity of BNT162b2 in mice

Study R-20-0112: Characterizing the immunophenotype in spleen and lymph node of mice treated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates

Study R-20-0072: Biodistribution of BNT162b2 using the luciferase protein as a surrogate marker protein after intramuscular injection in mice. Toxicology

The vaccine was tested for its ability to result in S protein expression in a mammalian cell population in vitro, for its immunogenicity in mice in two studies, and in one study in rhesus monkeys, including its capacity to prevent disease after challenge with SARS Cov-2 virus in rhesus monkeys. The vaccine also induced an immune response in rats in the two toxicity studies.

Can anyone explain to me or help me argue in opposition to this? To me, it clearly refutes Dr Malone's statement. I am almost certain Dr Malone and the UK Gov document are discussing the exact same trial because they describe the same number of participants (43,000) and the exact same vaccine (BNT162b2).


How do I counter this objection I have found whilst researching? It's not the be all and end all, I have written a pretty robust case in favour of sensibly not having a booster injection, but if I can explain this anomaly away it would REALLY help my case.

I believe they were rushed and not following the rigor that past animal trials would have followed.

a reply to: Acknt

Thanks.

Do you have any specific details? Like what the animal trials should have looked like, compared to what these look like?

I will of course take your information and start looking at the specifics of animal trails in vaccines now.

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: Acknt

Thanks.

Do you have any specific details? Like what the animal trials should have looked like, compared to what these look like?

I will of course take your information and start looking at the specifics of animal trails in vaccines now.

I just got the info one sec I wanna quote it properly. It actually confirms what malone said

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: Acknt

Thanks.

Do you have any specific details? Like what the animal trials should have looked like, compared to what these look like?

I will of course take your information and start looking at the specifics of animal trails in vaccines now.

I had posted something I was misinformed about after idk If you saw it but I deleted it cause I was wrong.

Here's some information on what the process typically looks like for drugs being tested. Shortly into it it describes what the animal trials usually consist of. Perhaps you could weigh that up against the non-clinical animal trials they did.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

a reply to: Acknt

Great, thank you for the resource, I will read it and hopefully will help answer some details.

a reply to: and14263

If you're looking to help disprove the vaccine, you can see in this article and the links within it,
M oderna and Pfizer botched their long term trial by telling placebo patients they were not immunized

originally posted by: SoundisVibration
a reply to: and14263

If you're looking to help disprove the vaccine, you can see in this article and the links within it,
M oderna and Pfizer botched their long term trial by telling placebo patients they were not immunized

Yes, this is explained in the PDF posted in the OP - I'm specifically looking to explain why DR RM states the animal testing was skipped but other sources are contrary to this.

a reply to: and14263

I have seen this used to try to discredit the entire video that was produced by the Canadian Covid Alliance.

I really don't care. It is part of the whole, but only one small part. The injection is killing people now and will continue to do so into the future, animal testing or not.

a reply to: and14263

Regardless of whether they tested on animals or not, they truncated the trials. It also wouldn't surprise me that they throw out some backdated information in order to disprove Malone's argument.

a reply to: myselfaswell

I completely agree. But I also think to be able to formulate a sturdy argument against any objections will help me personally in my case but also help universally when discussing the topic in general.

a reply to: and14263

Look the point is the long term affects aren’t known, a vaccine is normally tested for 6-10 years. This one was rushed out under emergency use authorisation, meaning it’s still in the experimental phase. As such you have a right to refuse it by law.

Also a proper vaccine doesn’t wear off over time, and require endless boosters. A proper vaccine prevents you from catching and passing on whatever it is.

Tell your company you will take them to court over discrimination If they persist.

a reply to: and14263
I don't know if this will help, but here you are.

Are animal models predictive for humans? Currently, nine out of ten experimental drugs fail in clinical studies because we cannot accurately predict how they will behave in people based on laboratory and animal studies

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

I think you are doing it wrong.

Just quote the Nuremberg accords. That is all you need. Mention that they were written after people such as Dr. Mengles forced medication and procedures on unwilling people.

Sue them under this.

P

originally posted by: and14263
I mentioned earlier that I travel for work but will not be having a 'booster' injection, even if it means I cannot travel and carry out my job properly.

I think I am building a strong enough case to present to management to support my decision.

I need help on one part regarding vaccine trials.

You are all probably familiar with Dr Robert Malone's presentation regarding the shortfalls and problems with the Pfizer vaccine trials. If you are not, here's a link to the PDF: Link to PDF.

In this presentation it states:

Animal testing was skipped.

However, back in June (I think) the UK Government published an assessment of the vaccine trials for the exact same vaccine, this assessment is here: Link to assessment.

In this assessment it states:

Study R-20-0085: COVID-19: Immunogenicity of BNT162b2 in mice

Study R-20-0112: Characterizing the immunophenotype in spleen and lymph node of mice treated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates

Study R-20-0072: Biodistribution of BNT162b2 using the luciferase protein as a surrogate marker protein after intramuscular injection in mice. Toxicology

The vaccine was tested for its ability to result in S protein expression in a mammalian cell population in vitro, for its immunogenicity in mice in two studies, and in one study in rhesus monkeys, including its capacity to prevent disease after challenge with SARS Cov-2 virus in rhesus monkeys. The vaccine also induced an immune response in rats in the two toxicity studies.

Can anyone explain to me or help me argue in opposition to this? To me, it clearly refutes Dr Malone's statement. I am almost certain Dr Malone and the UK Gov document are discussing the exact same trial because they describe the same number of participants (43,000) and the exact same vaccine (BNT162b2).


How do I counter this objection I have found whilst researching? It's not the be all and end all, I have written a pretty robust case in favour of sensibly not having a booster injection, but if I can explain this anomaly away it would REALLY help my case.

Thats not a study on animals, those are trials on animals to see if they drop dead. Studies would include long term outcomes and last years leading up to human trials. They would check for all types of things in reaction to the vax, not just what the vax does.

Of course they injected animals for a couple of months first. But they didnt complete animal studies before moving to humans. Thats what the Doctor was talking about.

Hope I cleared that up for you. Its not possible to complete animal studies from the beginning of the pandemic to the time they released the vax, not even close. My GF used to do animal studies on mice as well for her Phd at Cornell in Molecular Biology. Just basic studies last much longer than the hypothetical time frame these companies had.

Knowing this is why I never got the shot, I understood from day 1 the humans were the trial subjects and kept myself in the control group. I have been nerding out over this stuff for over a decade, and I am not stupid enough to fall for their fake arguments about it being proven safe when that is not possible.

Operation Warp Speed was Trumps biggest mistake by far. Stupid stupid idea. I was yelling at the screen when I first heard him describe his plan. It was obvious people standing to make a lot of money were influencing him, and he lacked the education in this area to know what they were claiming to be able to accomplish was not possible in the time given.

I say this as a Trump voter who has received more vaccines in my life than I can count. The people taking this shot and the boosters are victims of propaganda and blatant lies. Those of us who have been paying attention for a long time to this area had alarms going off in their heads before mRNA was even mentioned.