Pfizer has delayed a major study into the risks of heart damage in children who received the company’s Covid mRNA “vaccines,” pushing the probe back until for another five years.
The Soros List: One by One, Politicians and Journalists Paid for in Europe, the US, and Argentina
The list of political leaders and journalists linked to Soros in Europe, the US, and Argentina helps explain why certain news stories and parliamentary resolutions are spreading across all countries. Latest revelations from a Hungarian newspaper.
Claudio Fabián Guevara by Claudio Fabián Guevara June 9, 2025 Reading time: 5 mins read
The Soros List: One by One, Politicians and Journalists Paid for in Europe, the US, and Argentina
This study has huge conflict of interest concerns and the veracity of results would be questionable anyway. Need studies done by outside parties with no stake in the game.
If the study depends on accruing a certain # of events of myocarditis to have the needed power to make a conclusion, then the delay is almost certainly out of their control. A drug company cannot make patients have myocarditis. It also means that the event rate is quite low
Isn't it laughable when any entity investigates themselves ? We, the unwashed masses can't do that. Plausible deniability is often baked into the cake too. The media is complicit in all this too. They won't chase this story. And our politicians get lobby money and campaign funding from them. So a Congressional investigation would be a dog and pony show if they ever even have one.
Doctors committed suicide with their faith in the COVID shots. Any living doctors after 7 years means they did not take the shot. Just being alive is proof of self-preservation deception.
RFK is a fraud! He wants more useless “studies” to show these jabs are safe. Also pushing more “warp speed” untested jabs. Getting rid of colored fruit loops and skittles. 🤡
Yeah, that trial is never going to get published because the results will involve reporting a bunch of injured kids are dead or living with heart failure.
Clearly the interim results have raised concerns hence the delay and on publication. No doubt they’re hoping 5 more years will be sufficient to manipulate the data until the required predetermined answers can be extracted. If it looks like a rat and smells like a rat it probably is a rat.
Pfizer are destroying all trust in any integrity they may once have possessed!
In fact, it’s likely the opposite. The event rate is low and the study hasn’t reached its pre-determined # of events to do a pre-defined analysis. You clearly have no idea how clinical trials are sized or conducted, especially notoriously difficult pediatric studies.
If that were the case a statement to that effect might have allayed fears that it was a cover up and could have given some information on which future informed consent could be given.
As a doctor I have more than enough knowledge of clinical trials to understand the issues but am not blinded by obfuscation by the pharmaceutical industry.
Having worked on unenrollable or slow moving pediatric commitment trials for more than a decade, and actually authoring briefing documents to FDA (and EMA) to get the trial completion date extended, I can confidently tell you that the statistical assumptions that go into sample size (effect size, baseline event rate and power) are routinely unreliable when you get to the real trial. A trial with myocarditis/pericarditis as an end point will need to accrue a set number of events to validate the a priori assumptions. Too many events makes the trial complete sooner. Too few and the trial needs to get extended. Also, slow enrollment is always a concern for pediatric trials, especially for a vaccine given all the sensationalization of the topic. Unless you’ve been through difficult mandatory pediatric commitments with a Health Authority, it’s hard to understand all the issues that go into a successful trial to genuinely answer the question at hand.
There’s the rub the “a set number of events to validate the a priori assumptions”. Clinical trials should have no “a priori assumptions” but a working hypothesis to be proved or disproved on a totally objective and scientific basis. They should not be extended indefinitely to prove the assumed truths and to allow time to doctor the results with creative statistical manipulation to ensure the assumptions are proved.
Incidentally who funds the data you submitted to the FDA and EMA? It sounds like that this is funded either directly or indirectly by the pharmaceutical company or companies involved in obtaining FDA or EMA approval.
It’s quite clear that you misunderstood what I was saying. No trial just has a hypothesis and objectives without statistical support a sample size. Do you understand how sample size for a clinical trial is constructed? Baseline event rate, expected treatment effect (how much the intervention will change the baseline event rate), and statistical power (ability to say something about the results with any confidence) determine how many people needs to be enrolled (with provision for dropouts or missing data) are mandatory for most clinical trials for drugs that intend to explore an effect of the drug on an endpoint. ICH E9 specifies a lot of this. Pharma experience is rare among physicians and it’s no surprise there are misconceptions about how they are conducted.
In that case why were the precise reasons for extending the trial not made absolutely explicit? That would help reaffirm trust in these matters. Merely extending the trial without clear-cut reasons looks suspicious to many who believe that statistics are being manipulated to give the desired result. When significant vested interests are potentially at play and a very serious public concern is at stake absolute openness and honesty is essential if trust is to be regained and maintained. Unfortunately the pharmaceutical industry and the regulatory authorities have been open to considerable criticism stemming from the onset of the pandemic and must demonstrate squeaky cleanness in all of their investigations and communications.
😡👹
Somebody remember
that Pfizer's ask for a 75-yeardelayed sealed vaccine 'safety data' to be released
PFIZER's full vaccine "safety data"
will be released in just months, rather than the 75 years
And now untill "2030"
The year of the "Agenda"?
I saved the 9 pages of this "so-called" safety data, which should be called "damage data." Sure are a lot of bad side effects this jab can cause.
The Soros List: One by One, Politicians and Journalists Paid for in Europe, the US, and Argentina
The list of political leaders and journalists linked to Soros in Europe, the US, and Argentina helps explain why certain news stories and parliamentary resolutions are spreading across all countries. Latest revelations from a Hungarian newspaper.
Claudio Fabián Guevara by Claudio Fabián Guevara June 9, 2025 Reading time: 5 mins read
The Soros List: One by One, Politicians and Journalists Paid for in Europe, the US, and Argentina
Dr.David Martin file:///private/var/mobile/Containers/Shared/AppGroup/7B7AD0E8-AA6A-4AA4-8054-64E2FFCEA31C/contents/548AED18-BADB-45E6-A99B-E73CFD8506B0.mov
Fizer and bourla are the scum of the earth. May the entire company rot in Hell. And don't tell me about all their "good" drugs.
"good" drugs?
They don't exist.
May their souls understand what they have done to God’s Creation.
When their souls “cross over” (eGO gone), ALL will be seen to their souls (all of us).
And, God/Creator/Universe/karma is brutal for the soul.
Universal Law never takes a break-EVER (all of us)!
This is my belief.
This study has huge conflict of interest concerns and the veracity of results would be questionable anyway. Need studies done by outside parties with no stake in the game.
On the brighter side.
Would you like to be more creative? I explain the process here:
https://open.substack.com/pub/soberchristiangentlemanpodcast/p/tips-for-being-more-creative?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=31s3eo
This is ridiculous. Why does Pfizer get to delay this study? I mean, why is it their prerogative?
Not only that: We can't trust Pfizer with this study anyway, because they will rig it. Some other arrangement should be made.
If the study depends on accruing a certain # of events of myocarditis to have the needed power to make a conclusion, then the delay is almost certainly out of their control. A drug company cannot make patients have myocarditis. It also means that the event rate is quite low
Don't be a patron til 2031.
Isn't it laughable when any entity investigates themselves ? We, the unwashed masses can't do that. Plausible deniability is often baked into the cake too. The media is complicit in all this too. They won't chase this story. And our politicians get lobby money and campaign funding from them. So a Congressional investigation would be a dog and pony show if they ever even have one.
Doctors committed suicide with their faith in the COVID shots. Any living doctors after 7 years means they did not take the shot. Just being alive is proof of self-preservation deception.
Evil, evil, evil.
RFK is a fraud! He wants more useless “studies” to show these jabs are safe. Also pushing more “warp speed” untested jabs. Getting rid of colored fruit loops and skittles. 🤡
Looks like warp speed is no longer an option, it's hit a snag, namely one of discovery, so we have to move very, very slowly...
Yeah, that trial is never going to get published because the results will involve reporting a bunch of injured kids are dead or living with heart failure.
Pigs.
Clearly the interim results have raised concerns hence the delay and on publication. No doubt they’re hoping 5 more years will be sufficient to manipulate the data until the required predetermined answers can be extracted. If it looks like a rat and smells like a rat it probably is a rat.
Pfizer are destroying all trust in any integrity they may once have possessed!
In fact, it’s likely the opposite. The event rate is low and the study hasn’t reached its pre-determined # of events to do a pre-defined analysis. You clearly have no idea how clinical trials are sized or conducted, especially notoriously difficult pediatric studies.
If that were the case a statement to that effect might have allayed fears that it was a cover up and could have given some information on which future informed consent could be given.
As a doctor I have more than enough knowledge of clinical trials to understand the issues but am not blinded by obfuscation by the pharmaceutical industry.
Having worked on unenrollable or slow moving pediatric commitment trials for more than a decade, and actually authoring briefing documents to FDA (and EMA) to get the trial completion date extended, I can confidently tell you that the statistical assumptions that go into sample size (effect size, baseline event rate and power) are routinely unreliable when you get to the real trial. A trial with myocarditis/pericarditis as an end point will need to accrue a set number of events to validate the a priori assumptions. Too many events makes the trial complete sooner. Too few and the trial needs to get extended. Also, slow enrollment is always a concern for pediatric trials, especially for a vaccine given all the sensationalization of the topic. Unless you’ve been through difficult mandatory pediatric commitments with a Health Authority, it’s hard to understand all the issues that go into a successful trial to genuinely answer the question at hand.
There’s the rub the “a set number of events to validate the a priori assumptions”. Clinical trials should have no “a priori assumptions” but a working hypothesis to be proved or disproved on a totally objective and scientific basis. They should not be extended indefinitely to prove the assumed truths and to allow time to doctor the results with creative statistical manipulation to ensure the assumptions are proved.
Incidentally who funds the data you submitted to the FDA and EMA? It sounds like that this is funded either directly or indirectly by the pharmaceutical company or companies involved in obtaining FDA or EMA approval.
It’s quite clear that you misunderstood what I was saying. No trial just has a hypothesis and objectives without statistical support a sample size. Do you understand how sample size for a clinical trial is constructed? Baseline event rate, expected treatment effect (how much the intervention will change the baseline event rate), and statistical power (ability to say something about the results with any confidence) determine how many people needs to be enrolled (with provision for dropouts or missing data) are mandatory for most clinical trials for drugs that intend to explore an effect of the drug on an endpoint. ICH E9 specifies a lot of this. Pharma experience is rare among physicians and it’s no surprise there are misconceptions about how they are conducted.
In that case why were the precise reasons for extending the trial not made absolutely explicit? That would help reaffirm trust in these matters. Merely extending the trial without clear-cut reasons looks suspicious to many who believe that statistics are being manipulated to give the desired result. When significant vested interests are potentially at play and a very serious public concern is at stake absolute openness and honesty is essential if trust is to be regained and maintained. Unfortunately the pharmaceutical industry and the regulatory authorities have been open to considerable criticism stemming from the onset of the pandemic and must demonstrate squeaky cleanness in all of their investigations and communications.
The delay tells us that they know the results will be appalling. We all know the truth. These people are evil: profit over people.
False
Just like they wanted to hide post marketing for 75 years. Demons.