Experimental COVID Vaccines Refuted by Peer Reviewed Reports

Along with hazardous to human health ingredients in all vaccines, alleged protection afforded by Covid vaccines is dubious at best,  unsupported by evidence at worst.

BMJ calls itself a publication “intended for healthcare professions.”

According to its associate editor/pharmacologist Peter Doshi, covid vaccine trials were “not focused on answering the questions many might assume they are.”

Doshi quoted Molecular Virology and Microbiology expert Peter Hotez, saying the following:

“Ideally, you want an antiviral vaccine to do two things: first, reduce the likelihood you will get severely ill and go to the hospital, and two, prevent infection and therefore interrupt disease transmission.”

Doshi: Covid vaccines “are not actually set up to prove either.”

“None of the trials (were) designed to detect a reduction in any serious outcome such as hospital admissions, use of intensive care, or deaths.”

“Nor are the vaccines being studied to determine whether they can interrupt transmission of the virus.”

Medscape editor/molecular medicine expert Eric Topol asked: What counts as an adverse covid event?

“We’re not talking about…positive mild infection(s).”

They must be “moderate to severe illness to qualify as an event…”

Doshi explained that covid trials were structured to minimize significant numbers of severe illness because the elderly, frail, children, and individuals with allergies were screened out as participants.

Last September, Doshi and Topol said covid trials “don’t answer (what) we need to know,” adding:

Based on how trials were structured, “(w)e may not find out whether (experimental) vaccines prevent moderate or severe cases of Covid-19.”

They may only “protect (against) the most mild form of” the disease.

Individuals affected this way need no protection as it passes in a few days, normality restored routinely.

For meds to be effective, they must protect against severe symptoms.

“(T)hat’s not (what) Moderna, Pfizer and AstraZeneca” trial participants were tested for — mild symptoms alone.

“According to the protocols for their studies…a vaccine could meet (their) benchmark for success if it lowered the risk of mild Covid-19…’ ”

Their vaccines in trials were “never shown to reduce moderate or severe forms of the disease, or the risk of hospitalization, admissions to the intensive care unit or death.”

“To say a vaccine works should mean that most people no longer run the risk of getting seriously sick. That’s not what these trials…determine(d).”

“(T)here is no guarantee that reducing the risk of mild Covid-19 will also reduce the risk of moderate or severe Covid-19.”

“(S)ignificant increases in vaccination rates over the past decades have not been associated with reductions in deaths.”

“(V)accines…provid(ing) benefit(s) (for) mild” illness alone are worthless.

That’s what Pfizer, Moderna and Astra-Zeneca trials were structured to determine.

Doshi and Topol explained that “provid(ing) no benefit beyond a reduced risk of mild Covid-19 (risks) causing more discomfort than…prevent(ion).”

“Covid vaccine trials (failed) to address the aged…underrepresented minorities… children, adolescents and pregnant women since they” were excluded as participants.

“Vaccines must be thoroughly tested in all populations in which they will be used” — not so for covid trials.

Unless trials include a representative, large enough, sample of populations where they’ll be used for a long enough duration for results to be meaningful, results are meaningless.

Trials must also show whether meds in question protect against moderate and severe cases of disease.

Otherwise, results are incomplete for not addressing what’s most important to know.

Covid trials were “some of the most important (ones) in history, affecting a vast majority of the planet’s population,” said Doshi and Topol, adding:

“It’s hard to imagine how much higher the stakes (could) be to get this right. Cutting corners should not” have been allowed.

Yet that’s precisely what happened to fast-track covid vaccines to market.

What the FDA and Britain’s National Health Service permitted for mass-vaxxing against covid is playing fast and loose with the health and well-being of countless numbers of individuals being vaccinated.

Forewarned is forearmed.

A Final Comment 

The vast majority of individuals diagnosed with covid may, in fact, be ill from seasonal flu/influenza.

It’s because up to 90% of PRC tests  produce false positive results.

The vast majority of individuals ill from covid or seasonal flu/influenza have mild symptoms, not more serious ones that may require hospitalization.

Yet a mind-manipulation campaign has been underway for months — notably by government sources and and establishment media — to convince people to be vaxxed with what they don’t need and may be extremely harmful.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected]. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Featured image source


Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research


Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]