Vaccine Trial - Help Needed - Clarification Required

a reply to: and14263

I do regardless...commend your effort. Jobs are important.

Good 🤞

The animal trials were not done properly, because they are not finished yet.

The name of the animal undergoing the Experiments™ is Homo-Sapiens.

The data from the Experiments™ will be handed-in, at the earliest, in about 75 years.

But that will only be the data from the private companies.

Those results will need to be independently reviewed.

So how long will it take for multiple independent reviews, of 75 years worth of data ?

So in about 100 years, would be the earliest one could make an informed decision about the Jabs™.

In the absence of what is needed to make an informed decision : you have your instincts and intelligence.

BTW : your employers do not have proper data neither, so the pressure they are putting on you, or the airlines, is not scientific, but Policy™ based.

Perhaps you might want to argue Policy™, instead of Science™ ?

a reply to: and14263

The animal trials were done concurrently with the human trials which is a little silly.

Challenge trials were only done using chadox. (As of fall of 2021)

I don’t know what Malone’s exact statement was but they were skipped in the case of timing. And challenge trials were skipped for the main brands of poison shots.

a reply to: and14263
According to my ventures, the specimen/vaccine referred to in OP is speaking on the delta variant, not the alpha, or the corona from which gain of function originates.
So for each variant that comes along, CDC creates/contrives a new serum without testing on animals first?

It's pretty cut and dry an assault on our sensibilities, isn't it?
🙏❤

originally posted by: musicismagic
even the homeless are happy without a job or even a roof over their head.

Most homeless people have severe mental health disorders and addictions. "Happy" is not a word you could use for the vast majority of people living on the streets.

a reply to: and14263
mrna animal studies

What Happened in the Animal Trials for mRNA vaccines?

April 8, 2021

Animal studies related to mRNA vaccines were definitely difficult to read and analyze.  My intent today is to begin to comprehensively present salient features of these studies one at a time addressing concerns of the vaccine being brought up on the internet.

I haven't read it all yet though.


🙏❤
eta

The papers’ conclusion was “These SARS-CoV vaccines all induced antibody and protection against infection with SARS-CoV. However, challenge of mice given any of the vaccines led to occurrence of Th2-type immunopathology suggesting hypersensitivity to SARS-CoV components was induced. Caution in proceeding to application of a SARS-CoV vaccine in humans is indicated.”*

same girl dif story

Holiday 2021 Story

“Covid caught up to our family Thanksgiving week.  We had no idea what kind a Thanksgiving it would turn out to be!  

Fortunately, we had an opportunity given to us that is denied to most.  We were able to begin taking a Covid protocol including Ivermectin within hours of a positive diagnosis. Not only did we see the protocol help our family progress through Covid with milder symptoms and shorter recovery than most, but in our family’s case, it became an answer to our prayers and Covid a blessing in disguise. 

originally posted by: and14263

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.

Personally I struggle to see any valid info in his document apart from the efficacy/effectieness part which is obvious to anyone in the field a manufacturer will misrerepresent these. There's good reason why no one agreed with his review and it has nothing to do with conspiracy.

He completely misses and fails to make any mention the most glaring error/anomaly in the Pfizer study which is the interpretation of Bells Palsy incidence being a statistical anonamly which was a ery convinient interpretation of the data for Pfizer (as myself and other scientists pointed out Nov 2020)

The rest of it is based on him either deliberately misreporting/misrepresenting how the long term Phase IV trials work/how the Phase III ended/false claims placebo group is required for long term side effect study and misapplying standards for daily drug use into vaccination - it's also misapplying animal models and using known unscientific ideas like having to wait 20+ years for the animals to die on the billion to one chance they died early due to something in the vaccine that goes against all known science and magically causes a long term effect, despite animal models haing 95%+ failure rate when applied to humans that may prevent a handful of deaths vs the millions of lives saved due to the vaccine.

If wanting to contruct an argument against boosters or similar - it's far better to stick to the solid science of how they're based on a flawed measure of immunity and have very little benefit to anyone other than over 50s or those with auto-immune disorders (and even then are better to be given to those with fully functioning immune systems to shield those who are comprimised).

originally posted by: nugget1
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...

Pretty much - animal studies have been known to be worse than useless for at least a decade (think it was 15 years ago myself an Prof Colquhoun from UCL discovered the 90%+ failure/non-replicable rate, which was one of/if not the first paper on this) - it's a hangover from poor scientific practice but Malone is trying to act as if animal studies still have any credibility in human drug research (other than making sure they dont die within days/hours due to unexpected rapid secretion from body/toxic necrosis) - computer models are far more accurate, ethical and easy to produce as computing power has risen dramatically in the last 20 years.