What she said is they were not even using real placebos anymore, but instead a compound with the same underlying toxic substance as in the vaccine. She seems pretty credible
They don’t use true placebos, they never have. I’m not sure how they do it with mRNA vaccines, but with traditional vaccines they use the aluminum or mercury and other parts but they leave out the antigen.
Well then, this will be the first vaccine to ever be double blind placebo tested, I don’t believe that’s the case. And even if they are placebo testing them, what are they testing for a period of two months, how could you ever know the effects of this on someone in the period of two months.
Here is an excerpt from an interview with Robert F Kennedy, it is well known that none of these vaccines are double blind placebo tested:
B: Second of all, in most vaccines, for example the Gardasil vaccine, they don’t use true placebos. In other words they don’t use inert placebos. For example [in the case of] Merck’s or Glaxo Smith Kline’s [HPV] Gardasil vaccines, they tested them for six months against an aluminum adjuvant that is highly neurotoxic. So if we don’t use a true placebo how can you determine whether the vaccine is safe?
First vaccine ever? Wrong again. The polio vaccine in 1954 was a double blind placebo test. Most vaccine trials since have been double blind tested...it's the gold standard.
If you're against vaccines for whatever reason that's your prerogative but sharing willfully ignorant misinformation about the science behind it is just dumb.
Most vaccines are not double blind placebo tested. That is a common myth. Dr Peter aabey said the following in a 2017 interview:
There are two stages before a vaccine comes to market. First, the FDA has to license the vaccine. Then CDC has to add it to the schedule. The FDA is the agency that is in charge of the initial step of licensing the vaccine.
Now, for most other drugs, the safety testing is, indeed, rigorous and that kind of testing takes several thousand people who are given the drug and then the same number of people who, usually similarly situated people, who are given a pill that looks exactly like that drug but it’s inert and neither the researchers nor the patients know which ones got the saline drug and which ones got the real drug, so it’s double blind.
Then the researchers look at both of those groups for typically five years and they look at health outcomes and that’s how they figure out whether or not the drug is safe. Vaccines, however, are characterized by FDA not as drugs, but as biologics, and that gives FDA the capacity to fast track them without all of that rigorous and bothersome testing.
For example, there are the two hepatitis B vaccines that are approved for one-day-old children. The safety review period was four days. That means if a baby had a seizure and died on the fifth day, it never happened, it wouldn’t ever be reported, no one will ever know because they only look at them for four days. Here’s some more examples, the Hib vaccines … the Sanofi Pasteur version had the longest safety review period. It got 30 days. The others got three or four days. And look what they were tested against, not a placebo. One was tested against six vaccines at the same time. The polio vaccine for two-month-old children, had a safety review period of only 48 hours. Look at the placebo group, they tested against the DTP vaccine.
Dr. Peter Aaby is an anthropologist and is a leading expert in anti-vaccination nonsense. He is a garbage source for anything vaccine related.
Double blind tests are common, and I said 'most' are. Your exceptions are irrelevant because I said 'most' and not 'all.
You're also incorrect in assuming that 'drugs' are more rigorously tested, and that just isn't the case. Some drugs are NOT double blind tested...for example, HIV medications and cancer treatments are not double blind tested. It is unethical to let sick people die because you want a more scientific study. Oops, not as much testing, but guess what...the people who get the drugs die less than the ones that don't get the drugs.
The ongoing Pfizer covid vaccine trial is a double blind trial, for example, despite it being fast tracked.
Most vaccines are not double blind tested. There is no reason for them to be double blind tested, if they are vaccines are not safe, there is no penalty.
My guess would be that after getting a death count from the vaccine they had to make the placebo number higher so it could be claimed that it’s safer than placebo. 🤦♀️
Well it’s widely accepted theory that people don’t live forever and in fact sometimes die unexpectedly for a whole host of reasons.
This theory seems to apply to people that are undergoing clinical trials as well.
That is a very good question...
I heard something yesterday from the author of "Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History". (this clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mi7Zma4qjM&t=1634)
What she said is they were not even using real placebos anymore, but instead a compound with the same underlying toxic substance as in the vaccine. She seems pretty credible
You die of something else.
They don’t use true placebos, they never have. I’m not sure how they do it with mRNA vaccines, but with traditional vaccines they use the aluminum or mercury and other parts but they leave out the antigen.
They use saline, I don't know what the hell you're talking about.
We used Saline.....
Well then, this will be the first vaccine to ever be double blind placebo tested, I don’t believe that’s the case. And even if they are placebo testing them, what are they testing for a period of two months, how could you ever know the effects of this on someone in the period of two months.
Here is an excerpt from an interview with Robert F Kennedy, it is well known that none of these vaccines are double blind placebo tested:
B: Second of all, in most vaccines, for example the Gardasil vaccine, they don’t use true placebos. In other words they don’t use inert placebos. For example [in the case of] Merck’s or Glaxo Smith Kline’s [HPV] Gardasil vaccines, they tested them for six months against an aluminum adjuvant that is highly neurotoxic. So if we don’t use a true placebo how can you determine whether the vaccine is safe?
First vaccine ever? Wrong again. The polio vaccine in 1954 was a double blind placebo test. Most vaccine trials since have been double blind tested...it's the gold standard.
If you're against vaccines for whatever reason that's your prerogative but sharing willfully ignorant misinformation about the science behind it is just dumb.
Most vaccines are not double blind placebo tested. That is a common myth. Dr Peter aabey said the following in a 2017 interview:
There are two stages before a vaccine comes to market. First, the FDA has to license the vaccine. Then CDC has to add it to the schedule. The FDA is the agency that is in charge of the initial step of licensing the vaccine.
Now, for most other drugs, the safety testing is, indeed, rigorous and that kind of testing takes several thousand people who are given the drug and then the same number of people who, usually similarly situated people, who are given a pill that looks exactly like that drug but it’s inert and neither the researchers nor the patients know which ones got the saline drug and which ones got the real drug, so it’s double blind.
Then the researchers look at both of those groups for typically five years and they look at health outcomes and that’s how they figure out whether or not the drug is safe. Vaccines, however, are characterized by FDA not as drugs, but as biologics, and that gives FDA the capacity to fast track them without all of that rigorous and bothersome testing.
For example, there are the two hepatitis B vaccines that are approved for one-day-old children. The safety review period was four days. That means if a baby had a seizure and died on the fifth day, it never happened, it wouldn’t ever be reported, no one will ever know because they only look at them for four days. Here’s some more examples, the Hib vaccines … the Sanofi Pasteur version had the longest safety review period. It got 30 days. The others got three or four days. And look what they were tested against, not a placebo. One was tested against six vaccines at the same time. The polio vaccine for two-month-old children, had a safety review period of only 48 hours. Look at the placebo group, they tested against the DTP vaccine.
Dr. Peter Aaby is an anthropologist and is a leading expert in anti-vaccination nonsense. He is a garbage source for anything vaccine related.
Double blind tests are common, and I said 'most' are. Your exceptions are irrelevant because I said 'most' and not 'all.
You're also incorrect in assuming that 'drugs' are more rigorously tested, and that just isn't the case. Some drugs are NOT double blind tested...for example, HIV medications and cancer treatments are not double blind tested. It is unethical to let sick people die because you want a more scientific study. Oops, not as much testing, but guess what...the people who get the drugs die less than the ones that don't get the drugs.
The ongoing Pfizer covid vaccine trial is a double blind trial, for example, despite it being fast tracked.
Most vaccines are not double blind tested. There is no reason for them to be double blind tested, if they are vaccines are not safe, there is no penalty.
This would essentially mean the vaccine is close to useless in treating the virus.
My guess would be that after getting a death count from the vaccine they had to make the placebo number higher so it could be claimed that it’s safer than placebo. 🤦♀️
Err.....how thefuk does one die from a placebo?