Pfizer FOIA

Yes, I’ve downloaded it. I’m perplexed and waiting for a provax person to fill in their perspective.

The initial trial claimed about 7 deaths each in the placebo and vax groups. But after emergency authorization of the vaccines, about 1200 of the test subjects died within 4 months. The death rate for that group was much higher than the general population.

Other adverse effects like facial paralysis in youth, etc.

The irony is that the information contained in the Pfizer docs would get themselves fact checked for misinformation.

See this short article from Celia Farber for more info:
https://celiafarber.substack.com/p/court-ordered-pfizer-documents-they

I haven’t seen the documents, but if you fingerprinted a large number of elderly people, some of them would die within four months, but not due to the fact that they were fingerprinted. Post hoc and all that. Seven people died, for example, in the initial trial, from a placebo. According to the Social Security actuarial tables, a 74 year old man has over a 3% chance of dying in a normal year, much higher than for the general population.

The ICU’s are full of COVID patients, generally unvaccinated. The ICU’s are not full of people dying from the millions of doses of vaccines. Ask a hospitalist.

I had an adverse effect from the Moderna vaccine. It lasted about a day for my second jab and half a day for my boost.

See also https://www.wionews.com/world/fact-check-document-claiming-pfizer-vaccine-led-to-adverse-effects-are-false-436459

This is not the final word, but we shall see. So far I don’t see this as “The Most Shocking Document Release Of The Last 100 years” as claimed in the substack link above.

The article in the comment just above has no new information and it is an excellent example of propaganda of the type “we assert something so it must be true”

It states:

“”Reviews by FDA and CDC have determined that the vast majority of the deaths reported are not directly attributable to the vaccines,” she said, adding that reports of deaths after Covid-19 vaccination are “rare.””

How did they review? What were their methods? Doesn’t matter. It’s true because they said so.

Submission to VAERS is done under penalty of perjury. That makes the article self-contradictory.

Friends,

I am very interested in Leo’s perspective. Please point out flaws in his reasoning and such if you see any, but do so as to a pal.

I allowed comments against my better judgment. Let’s not teach me a Valuable Lesson About Trusting My Beter Judgment.

I can see the possibility that the vaccine trials had a higher level of harm/deaths than the threshold allowed for approval, but still far below the number of expected deaths (due to this coronavirus’s transmissibility and virulence) had there been no vaccines.

I suppose someone or some group made a “grown-up decision”, and opted for the lesser number of people harmed/killed. Kill/harm X people with the vaccine, …or…, allow 500X people to be killed/harmed by the virus. (500 is a made-up number on my part.)

That’s how I parse the 1st Presidency statement — regardless of any harm/death due to the vaccine, _in the aggregate_ the vaccines are safer than the virus.

(Analogy: yes, some saints died on the trek west, but collectively the saints were better off because they migrated. And… some just waited until the railroad was completed in 1869.)

If one supports the First Presidency as prophets and seers, then the only valid trump-card that I see is to claim personal revelation that you, individually, are one of the exceptions. Both Pres Nelson and Pres Oaks described such exceptions in these talks:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2007/03/faith-and-families?lang=eng

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2006/06/dating-versus-hanging-out?lang=eng