Here is why Pfizer asked for 50+ years to release vaccine study data...

[Lejeboca]

According to this release, there were 1223 deaths from 21720 participants, and that is just over the first 90 days. Ask those stubborn people what other medical interventions they know of (especially vaccines) that killed 5%+ of recipients in just the first 90 days after administration. That may raise a few eyebrows, especially if some of them work in the medical field and know something about acceptable risk of side effects, etc.

https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf
In the 90 days following EUA release of the “vaccine” they recorded 1223 deaths, and 158,000 adverse reactions, including fetal deaths, spontaneous abortions and more.

In the saidreport, there were 1223 deaths from 42086 people reported worldwide during EUA. Hence, the fatality is about 2.9%. Still

Spoiler: Table 1 from report: Overview of Selected Characteristics of All Cases Received

 

[Xavage]

In the saidreport, there were 1223 deaths from 42086 people reported worldwide during EUA. Hence, the fatality is about 2.9%. Still

Spoiler: Table 1 from report: Overview of Selected Characteristics of All Cases Received

View attachment 31046

You are forgetting approx half of that 42086 is a control group. Look at previous comments by myself and Haidut.

So it’s +5% fatality rate.

 

[Lejeboca]

You are forgetting approx half of that 42086 is a control group. Look at previous comments by myself and Haidut.

So it’s +5% fatality rate

My point is that all the 42086 are not from trials but from the EUA, after Dec 1, 2020.

From the report: It is estimated that approximately XXX doses of BNT162b2 were shipped worldwide
from the receipt of the first temporary authorisation for emergency supply on 01 December
2020 through 28 February 2021. Cumulatively, through 28 February 2021, there was a total of 42,086 case reports...

 

[Xavage]

My point is that all the 42086 are not from trials but from the EUA, after Dec 1, 2020.

From the report: It is estimated that approximately XXX doses of BNT162b2 were shipped worldwide
from the receipt of the first temporary authorisation for emergency supply on 01 December
2020 through 28 February 2021. Cumulatively, through 28 February 2021, there was a total of 42,086 case reports...

Yeah this is what I am confused about...

So there is this trial of "43,448 participants, who were 16 years and older, 21,720 of whom received BNT162b2 and 21,728 placebo, the two-dose regimen of 30 μg BNT162b2, which was given 21 days apart, was well-tolerated and demonstrated vaccine efficacy of 95% against COVID-19."... "At the data cut-off date of October 9" 2020

Maybe I am retarded but why do people think that the 1223 fatality number from this report is relevant to the trial above? This report is looking at 42,061 cases received during the reporting interval through 28 Feb 2021.

Why is @haidut comparing these two completely different things? Maybe I am confused

 

[Xavage]

How did @haidut calculate +5% fatality rate if we only know "events", "cases" and "fatalities" but not the intervention group or the control group?

 

[Makrosky]

Thanks @haidut

Does anybody know if there is a shorter, more straight to the point article summarizing all this that can be shared in mainstream social networks? People won't read this (more than 30 lines is TLDR for ppl) but they might read a more concise version.

Edit: found it, it is on the same post. The link from thetruthaboutvaccines.

 

[DonLore]

How did @haidut calculate +5% fatality rate if we only know "events", "cases" and "fatalities" but not the intervention group or the control group?

I think this is an error too. We have to be careful not to throw false numbers around. There are fatalities but its not 5%, at least according to this document

 

[Sefton10]

I think this is an error too. We have to be careful not to throw false numbers around. There are fatalities but its not 5%, at least according to this document

We would have seen 2.5m vaccine deaths in the UK alone by now if it was.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

In the saidreport, there were 1223 deaths from 42086 people reported worldwide during EUA. Hence, the fatality is about 2.9%. Still

Spoiler: Table 1 from report: Overview of Selected Characteristics of All Cases Received

View attachment 31046

But here N equals reports of adverse events. Not the people injected.

 

[Wagner83]

Yeah I don't see any page of the document mentioning the ratio of deaths to administered doses. They probably shipped billions of doses and administered a whole lot of them. If they want to hide the document there's probably more to it though.

 

[haidut]

1223 deaths from 42086 people

I see your point. I got confused by the Substack article and the comments under it saying the 42086 cases were was from Pfizer's monitoring of only the people who participated in the trial since that number is so (suspiciously?) close to the total number of trial participants 43448. However, even if worldwide numbers, they were over just a 90 day period. Pfizer did not administer billions of vaccines over 90 days. Also, those were only the case reports sent to Pfizer. They did/do not include the ones reported to VAERS (likely different set). I will read the full PDF and edit the original post. I guess for now, the more accurate statement is that 2.9% of the people who experience SAE, die. Do you know what that number looks like for other vaccines?
@Xavage

 

[mamakitty]

Granted that this is the case, why did Pfizer use the terrible 5% lots for the aforementioned trials instead of the benign 95%

It doesn't make sense.

By the way, I'm also not hearing of any deaths nor adverse events among my circle of friends and relatives who have taken Pfizer. I live in Manila.

Could it be that the terrible 5% batches are used on target populations, whatever they may be? Since whites are race du jour favored for elimination by the Zionist-controlled establishment, could whites in the West be the target?

Correct

 

[Lord Cola]

Granted that this is the case, why did Pfizer use the terrible 5% lots for the aforementioned trials instead of the benign 95%

It doesn't make sense.

By the way, I'm also not hearing of any deaths nor adverse events among my circle of friends and relatives who have taken Pfizer. I live in Manila.

Could it be that the terrible 5% batches are used on target populations, whatever they may be? Since whites are race du jour favored for elimination by the Zionist-controlled establishment, could whites in the West be the target?

Regarding dangerous batches, this is why they are trying to inject everyone, every few months: to gradually get everyone injected with a dangerous batch, rather than get everyone at once, which they would not be able to cover up.

What I find weird about the argument that they are trying to destroy specifically the West is why the so-called elite would decide that's a good idea, when they have by far the most control over the Western population. If they think they can ingratiate themselves with the Chinese by screwing them over less than the West, that is a miscalculation; the Chinese have a history of punishing traitors (eg executing entire families), even if those traitors benefitted them, and Chinese people who are at least vaguely familiar with politics know which group controls the West. I guess the "elite" want to intensify tensions between the US and China or Russia by blaming China or Russia for whatever bioterror.

 

[haidut]

I see your point. I got confused by the Substack article and the comments under it saying the 42086 cases were was from Pfizer's monitoring of only the people who participated in the trial since that number is so (suspiciously?) close to the total number of trial participants 43448. However, even if worldwide numbers, they were over just a 90 day period. Pfizer did not administer billions of vaccines over 90 days. Also, those were only the case reports sent to Pfizer. They did/do not include the ones reported to VAERS (likely different set). I will read the full PDF and edit the original post. I guess for now, the more accurate statement is that 2.9% of the people who experience SAE, die. Do you know what that number looks like for other vaccines?
@Xavage

OK, couple of things. Pfizer's own doc says the number of SAE may be underreported, and then give a corroboration of that possibility by saying a large number of SAE has been submitted. I am not sure how they quantify a "large number" - i.e. by comparison with previous vaccines they released or just the sheer magnitude, but it is something to keep in mind. Another thing to keep in mind is that Pfizer did not include ALL reported SAE, but only those that met a specific dataflow criteria. So, we don't know how many SAE were left out, but considering Pfizer complaining about the "large number" of reports, I am inclined to think the exclusions are not a trivial amount.

"...Reports are submitted voluntarily, and the magnitude of underreporting is unknown."
"...Among adverse event reports received into the Pfizer safety database during the cumulative period, only those having a complete workflow cycle in the safety database (meaning they progressed to Distribution or Closed workflow status) are included in the monthly SMSR. This approach prevents the inclusion of cases that are not fully processed hence not accurately reflecting final information. Due to the large numbers of spontaneous adverse event reports received for the product, the MAH has prioritised the processing of serious cases, in order to meet expedited regulatory reporting timelines and ensure these reports are available for signal detection and evaluation activity."

On page 6, there is reference to the number of vaccines shipped by the end of the 90 day period, but I can't find that reference (e.g. (b) (4)). If somebody can find it that would be great. That number mentioned in (b)(4) would be an upper limit on the number of vaccinations, as not all shipped vaccines were administered, and in fact there is currently a stockpile of about 2bil Pfizer vaccines sitting unused. In other words, "vaccines shipped" != "vaccines administered", but unfortunately, it looks like Pfizer only has info on the former, at least for that 90 day period.
Interestingly enough, this reference to (b)(4) is littered throughout several other Pfizer vaccine documents and Google can't seem to find the document containing the actual text of the reference. Is (b)(4) simply a substitute for "redacted"??

https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download

https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/pfizer-inc-covid-19-vaccine-contract.pdf

@Wagner83 @Lejeboca @Xavage @Hugh Johnson

 

[mamakitty]

Still, wasn't there a report (or rumors) about the pharma/medical complex getting a lot of samples of saliva from the world in prior years? Could this data be used to develop vaccines that give adverse reactions/deaths to target races?

Yes, and how they seduced millions into doing 23 and me tests lol

 

[Rafe]

I’m on my way to class but this is a bombshell. Is there no appeal process? I’m not hoping for it, it’s only surprising that the release is immediate.

Breaking: DeBlasio just mandated all private sector employers have to impose a mandate.

Why? Why are the politicians doing it? Catherine Austin Fitts has an answer: they can’t refuse b-c it’s not them who are running the system, it’s global finance that is collapsing & demands that the real economy be shut down.

 

[yerrag]

Yes, and how they seduced millions into doing 23 and me tests lol

The 23andme tests - but of course!

 

[haidut]

I’m on my way to class but this is a bombshell. Is there no appeal process? I’m not hoping for it, it’s only surprising that the release is immediate.

Breaking: DeBlasio just mandated all private sector employers have to impose a mandate.

Why? Why are the politicians doing it? Catherine Austin Fitts has an answer: they can’t refuse b-c it’s not them who are running the system, it’s global finance that is collapsing & demands that the real economy be shut down.

Well, conveniently for Pfizer, it is not bombshell yet as it turns out those 150K+ adverse events are from their worldwide reporting program. So, it depends on how many vaccines they shipped in that 90 day period and how many of those vaccines were actually administered. It looks like Pfizer has redacted that info as I can't find any other document that provides info on the "(b)(4)" placeholder, but that placeholder exists in many other Pfizer documents and based on its usage throughout the documents it seems to be a substitute for a redaction. They do say the events may be underreported and admit they received a "large number" of adverse event reports for "this product". So, unfortunately, it is a muddy picture and no smoking gun as of yet. If we get a solid number on how many vaccines were administered in the 90 day period, we would know better how bad the situation is, but honestly, if AIDS is a possible side effect of that vaccine I don't see how it can be explained as "acceptable".

 

[yerrag]

Regarding dangerous batches, this is why they are trying to inject everyone, every few months: to gradually get everyone injected with a dangerous batch, rather than get everyone at once, which they would not be able to cover up.

What I find weird about the argument that they are trying to destroy specifically the West is why the so-called elite would decide that's a good idea, when they have by far the most control over the Western population. If they think they can ingratiate themselves with the Chinese by screwing them over less than the West, that is a miscalculation; the Chinese have a history of punishing traitors (eg executing entire families), even if those traitors benefitted them, and Chinese people who are at least vaguely familiar with politics know which group controls the West. I guess the "elite" want to intensify tensions between the US and China or Russia by blaming China or Russia for whatever bioterror.

The Western population has a substantial number of people raised in civics and who have enshrined in the hearts and minds of a large base the Christian ideals of freedom and human dignity. This tradition is not as strong in the rest of the world. The concept of vox populi is anathema to tyrants. If the base is eroded, then any stirrings of the people waking up en masse will never happen. Already, Zionists have taken over all our institutions - churches, newspapers and broadcast and social media, and leading universities, and they have become accomplices to an authoritarian police state that makes the people servile to thw state apparatus, controlled by mercantilist Zionist elites.

Obliterating the torch carriers of liberty and dignity is most easily began by destroying the traditions that uphold the soul and spirit of creation - for man to share in God's happiness.

 

[Fred]

Well, conveniently for Pfizer, it is not bombshell yet as it turns out those 150K+ adverse events are from their worldwide reporting program. So, it depends on how many vaccines they shipped in that 90 day period and how many of those vaccines were actually administered. It looks like Pfizer has redacted that info as I can't find any other document that provides info on the "(b)(4)" placeholder, but that placeholder exists in many other Pfizer documents and based on its usage throughout the documents it seems to be a substitute for a redaction. They do say the events may be underreported and admit they received a "large number" of adverse event reports for "this product". So, unfortunately, it is a muddy picture and no smoking gun as of yet. If we get a solid number on how many vaccines were administered in the 90 day period, we would know better how bad the situation is, but honestly, if AIDS is a possible side effect of that vaccine I don't see how it can be explained as "acceptable".

You're right, this is not a bombshell, and is not an admission of a 5% death rate. This is basically VAERS 2. An important admission from the report:
"Reports are submitted voluntarily, and the magnitude of underreporting is unknown."
This confirms that NOBODY has an accurate record of events (probably because they DON'T WANT an accurate record). A million vaccine deaths in the USA alone is certainly plausible, considering past evaluations of underreporting in VAERS.
What we really need is the raw data for all-cause mortality/injury, vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. Either they have this data, and aren't releasing it because it tells the horrible truth (perhaps millions dead), or they don't have this data and we are truly flying blind.