I'm neither PhD nor clinical researcher. But I have read a lot on this subject.

I read about what Pfizer did, not the others. The others used the same template, I suspect.

So ... where to begin?

Short answer to your last question: There was NO attempt to adhere to the Scientific Method in any way, shape, or form. NONE.

Longer answer --

I have read a lot, watched a lot of videos, some of it contradictory, most of it anti-mainstream. I have posted several threads here on GAW over the past 2 years. During that time, some of my early ideas have been modified by new information.

I never liked science (and, especially biology) in school. This is not something I have ever studied ... until Covid. It is quite possible I have some things not quite right or even wrong. But the big picture? I think it goes like this --

As a nurse, you might already know this (or, you might not). For anyone else reading, my understanding of clinical trials for new drugs goes through multiple stages.

• First, someone comes up with an idea for a drug that might be useful for some purpose. This might be nothing more than re-purposing an old, failed drug, to make money, even though there is no real reason to think it would really be helpful. This is what they did with AZT and AIDS. Or, someone might actually have a new insight and want to pursue it.
• Second, they run some in vitro (test tube) experiments in a lab. If they get results they expected, they move on to animals.
• Third, they use animals to find out if this new drug does what would be expected in vivo (in live animal/person).
• Fourth, if that works, then they move on to a 3-phase trial of humans.

Phase I: Small sample (a couple dozen) of healthy people are given the drug to see if it has adverse effects on healthy people.

Phase II: If that turns out OK, they get a larger group (a couple hundred) of people who have the illness they are targeting. They give it to them to see if they are harmed.

Phase III: If nobody was harmed, then they create the BIG study (several thousand) to see if it actually works on the target group. They divide this into Group A, the test group (who get the drug), and Group B, the control group (who all get a placebo).

Phase III trials take a MINIMUM of 2 years, but usually more like 5 years.

If ... AND ONLY IF ... the drug shows success for its intended audience ... the company applies for FDA approval. That process takes quite some time, as well. Then, the drug can get approved, then marketed, and then sold.

In the case of Pfizer's "Covid vaccine," NONE of these steps were done correctly.

Maybe something was done in a test tube, but then they tested some mice. Pfizer has not released the data on those results. They claimed they were going to do some testing on pregnant rats, but never did. ALL claims that their vaxx is safe for pregnant women is based on SPECULATION ONLY. There are ZERO tests -- even on animals.

There was NO Phase I trial.

There was NO Phase II trial.

All 3 phases were lumped together. They had around 40,000 participants -- MOST of whom were NOT the elderly (I think it was only 4% that were over 65), which is who the vaxx was SUPPOSEDLY aimed at, since they were the ones "dying of Covid" (in reality, they were dying of annual flu, and mostly in nursing homes, like every cold and flu season).

The 2 groups each had about 20,000 participants.

They started in July 2020. They gave "one shot" (drug or placebo), then waited 21 days, and gave a second shot.

Just 7 days after the 2nd shot, they declared their results! No 2 years, 5 years, or any of that messy "science stuff." 7 days after, 28 days TOTAL, and they announced their RESULTS.

And they LIED about their results.

They asked the participants to "self-report" if they had ANY "Covid symptom," which was things like headache, fever, runny nose, cough -- the usual cold symptoms.

THAT is what they claimed was their first marker of illness (self-reporting). Their second marker was a positive PCR test (which is NOT CAPABLE of diagnosing ANYTHING, which means it was completely bogus).

And yet, they STILL had to lie because their results did not line up with their narrative.

Of the 20,000 people in the test group, 409 reported at least one symptom. Of the 20,000 people in the control group, 287 reported a symptom.

Got that? MORE people who got the drug reported feeling sick than in the placebo group.

THEN, they did a PCR test on the people who reported symptoms. They tested all 287 in the control group, and 162 had a "positive PCR test" (which is bogus, of course).

In the test group, only 8 people had a positive PCR test. Sounds good, right? 162 vs. 8. Sounds good, and this is where Pfizer fraudulently claimed their drug was "95% effective." That was the early rollout of the vaxx, that's what the media was saying, and that's what got everyone believing the vaxx worked.

But ...

First off, these numbers are "relative risk," and not actual risk. Pfizer broke the law when they advertised relative risk only.

Not only that, but they LIED about even that. According to Karen Kingston, the reason it was 162 vs 8 was because they gave a PCR test to ALL 287 in the placebo group, but ONLY 9 in the control group. They did NOT give a PCR test to ALL 409. They STOPPED after just 9 (8 of whom tested positive) because, according to Pfizer ... they "ran out of time."

Remember, the trial STARTED in July 2020. It ENDED in October 2020. They published their original paper in November 2020.

Three months later, they KILLED THE CONTROL. They gave the vaxx to the people in the CONTROL group, just 3 months after their "official results" (which were 7 days after the 2nd jab).

So, there is NO MORE CONTROL GROUP. Then, they published a 2nd paper in 2021 about their 6-month follow up (which was meaningless, at that point).

To this day, they have not furnished their raw data to ANYONE, and they want FDA to give them 75 years to hand it over to the public.

There was NO testing of transmissibility of Covid-19. Transmission was NOT part of the "study." Only getting it was, and that was completely bogus. All that propaganda about "protecting others by getting the vaxx" is NOT supported by ANY studies. NONE.

The head of the committee at NIH that oversees vaccine trials said:

Dr. Larry Corey, who oversees National Institutes of Health COVID-19 vaccine trials said on 11/20/20: “The studies aren’t designed to assess transmission. They don’t ask that question, and there’s really no information on this at this point in time.”

Here is the FDA paper about the Pfizer trial:

https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download

Some threads I created here at GAW over the past 2 years, as I was learning about this myself, along with some resources:

https://greatawakening.win/p/12jJPv3MkS/

https://greatawakening.win/p/12jcvZXRBO/more-info-on-the-actual-pfizer-v/c/

https://greatawakening.win/p/12kFGJhbXD/

https://greatawakening.win/p/12jwVfsauG/

https://greatawakening.win/p/13zN6IyQbO/

https://greatawakening.win/p/13zg0MPGoz/

https://greatawakening.win/p/140c03rWRU/

More from Pfizer:

https://cdn.pfizer.com/pfizercom/2020-11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020.pdf

I GOCHU

https://t.me/FTFoYGL/417

There were 9 ferrets tested.... all died....

What you need to understand is that the injection we call a vaccine is not a vaccine as you or other medical staff were taught..... indeed the CDC had to change their definition so the FDA could issue the EUA......

The biggest reason they did this was to get around the testing protocols..... especially under a EUA..... properly tested these vaccines should have been submitted for approval to the FDA as gene therapy not as a vaccine....

WWG1WGA

I’m basically respectful asking for a breakdown of clinical trials conducted for this “covid” event by some much smarter people than myself.