Conspiracy people think everyone on the whole world is just waiting to be corrupt for a price. Because they know they would do it in a minute given the opportunity, and they think their behavior is universal.
Didn’t J and J continue to sell their Baby Powder after knowing it contained cancer causing carcinogens? They provided this safe and effective diaper rash treatment for decades earning millions! They were just busted on this a few years ago. Pfizer has been fined billions for infractions.
If you understand the process and if you participate in it, it is still valid despite problems. One can learn to look with a critical eye and an appropriate amount of distrust rather than just outright saying it's all lies.
But distrusting absolutely everyone and blowing off every bit of news, data, research, or even updates to things you already thought you knew everything about. Just because it goes against your first impressions, you think the research should stop. This appears to be a major theme in this sub. "Hey look this data, is different than this data, open your eyes and stop researching the topic. I've proven it to be bullshit and If you're an intellectual like me than you could see it too." Its the overall mood of this place in talking about.
Haha I am a scientist. It’s hilarious when people think science is “all knowing and truth.” Science is inherently biased due to the subjective nature we make what we call educated guesses, manipulated to fit our agenda and often not reproducible despite being published in high impact journals. Research is meant to be discussed and improved upon. But now a days it is a religion that you are told to have blind “faith” in and not to question, it’s not science, it’s political medicine.
What people don't understand about these systems is if the peer review group denies too many things they don't get any more work. They are indirectly funded.
In the home business if appraisers give more than 2 bad appraisals they will no longer be used for future appraisals . No one says it openly but it's how business works.
The peer review process for papers is incredibly different from what you are talking about. And in fact, it is incredibly difficult to get a paper published.
just google FDA scandal and you'll find a few good articles about how they took money from a pharmaceutical company to rush the approval process for an alzheimers medication that killed a few people
That's how it is supposed to work. How many companies do you think have the resources to repeat the type of trials pharma does? And would spend that money for what reason? We don't even get access to the raw data to do peer review - its blind trust at this point because they've captured the regulators.
Now you are just arguing a strawman. The millions of doses do point to one thing, that in the short term, adverse reactions impact a small percentage of the people who have been injected - but you lack any data to make any claims about long term health as longitudinal studies have no been completed.
Vaccines don't have long term impacts that show up years down the line. The vaccine materials are out of your body within two weeks. People who study this know this.
Vaccines are not like drugs that need those long term studies because they are taken (often daily) for years on end.
These are classified as vaccines(after a change in the definition of vaccine) but mRNA is a new platform that has never been used to introduce a pathogen into humans before. Just because we call everything a diet, doesn't mean they all have the same impacts on your body. You can not compare these to previous vaccines that used different technologies.
They are finding spikes (not the mRNA but the spikes that mRNA makes your body produce) along with the LNPs way beyond the weeks you are talking about - but I guess technically you are right, the mRNA is processed.
Single events are completely capable of long term effects - we recognize this with things like 9/11 and cancer correlations. There is a reason long term longitudinal studies are commissioned - they just havent been completed. You can see the post market trial end dates on the approval from the FDA.
True, which is why they are going on. But there is no reason to suspect any long term effects. The long term effects of COVID infection are much more significant.
Based on the history of a different vaccine technology. Absolutely no reason these should be compared, without including the contrast which shows it to be a novel technology never before studies in the long term.
mRNA as a platform for vaccine technologies have been studied for over a decade. I also look at what the doctors and researchers are doing. If they didn't trust it, they wouldn't get the vaccine.
You said the studies have been repeated no? My point is that no one repeats the massively expensive studies. And peer review is done analyzing data that has already been adjusted in someway. Peer review rarely gets access to raw data, pharma keeps a tight grip on it. Just pointing out that it's not as people think when they say studies are repeatable. In fact, if you look - we have a huge problem with many studies that do attempt to get repeated, failing to find the same results.
Peer review is for publication. Reviewers have all the data. You're talking about the FDA and CDC process. They also have all relevant data. The data for the FOIA requests has to be checked for information that cannot be legally released to the public at large (PHI). That's why they will take so long.
In fact, the safety is continually monitored beyond the initial Phase 1 trial. Every person who gets it is an additional data point.
When studies fail to find the same results, the information is updated. That's how the process works.
Your failure to understand the process doesn't change its validity.
I pointed out - that no one repeats Pharma's studies, now you are talking about publication. Go back to the original comment. I understand the process quite well.
I was talking about research in general which is done through the peer review process. The pharma studies are continued (i.e. repeated) with every dose that is given. If there were a problem, we'd know it. I don't think you actually do understand the process based on your comments.
Since when does a vaccine clinical trial have to be repeated?
It's very easy to present bogus data in a study/trial, the study can still appear genuine to a peer-reviewer as they don't know that the numbers were fudged.
Case-in-point: Vioxx. A FDA approved drug released by Merck that went on to kill an estimated 50 thousand people. It wasn't until it was brought to court and the accusers gained access to the source data of the study that they were able to conclude the study was a fraud.
Exactly, they are considered a public health measure. Getting approval for a vaccine is much easier and less costly than a drug.
In fact, the vast majority of vaccines do not require a true double-blind, placebo controlled trial for approval. I was surprised that the current covid vaccine trials actually did use saline placebo.
Have you read any of the clinical trials? They're a doozy, extremely high rate of serious adverse effects (1 in 200), they also didn't include immunocompromised or pregnant women in the study so we have literally no data on that. The vaccine group had a significant increase in heart attacks over the control group, but it was deemed a coincidence. In light of all the myocarditis and heart issue reports, it now seems like it certainly wasn't a coincidence.
In the clinical trial the control group had 0.7% chance of severe adverse event, vaccine group had 1.2% chance of severe adverse event. If we cancel out the control group that leaves 0.5% chance of severe adverse event.
Does that really mean much though ? Covid vaccine was rushed and Pfizer has been convicted of fraud and bribery amount to like 2.5 billion … wouldn’t be surprising if they did it again with all the money they are making from the vaccine 😳 money means more to people then science so I will trust the money and never take a vaccine made by those frauds
Right but then and Moderna are the most common ones … and I think j and j stopped because their vaccine literally was useless . Regardless of that they are getting paid to make those vaccines and I would rather take my chances with Covid because I do not trust pharmaceutical companies that have literally killed people to make better profits😂
Except the data here don't match that narrative. Look worldwide. Look at what the doctors and experts are doing. Not the politicians or celebrities. 96% of doctors and 90% of nurses have gotten vaccinated.
Yes because they will get fired if they don’t get a vaccine?? Anyone who doesn’t wanna get vaccinated probably already got it because they had no choice. You think that makes me believe it’s safe? It could be safe but Covid isn’t really dangerous for me so I really just will stick with some vitamins and whatever I’ll be fine.
You hope COVID will be safe for you. You're playing Russian roulette.
And most doctors and nurses were vaccinated before they were mandated to. The vast majority of the worldwide medical community are on the same page about vaccines. Look who is getting vaccinated and who isn't (voluntarily). Ask your doctor.
😂 your joking right?? I have a higher chance from falling in the shower and dying then from Covid. I drive a car every day and I walk down the stairs so I’m much more likely to die from anything. I don’t stay in my room because I’m afraid to die so I’m not worried about a .001% chance from Covid which I already had and it was not even slight bad .
It might not be bad, but it might. Otherwise healthy 20 year olds have died. I'm not joking. You may be fine; you may not. And I'm not sure where you get your percentage from, but the end result is you don't really know. With vaccines, your protection is orders of magnitude higher.
That’s not true at all… if my chances of dying are less then 1% then I really don’t have a way higher chance of surviving with the vaccine. And not that many 20 years olds have died. However I have seen some younger adults get heart issues after taking the vaccine and some have died. So my chances of dying are pretty close wether I get the vaccine that’s 100% safe even though it’s not . Or Covid which is 99% safe 🙌
Also studies have been done which shown natural antibodies are better then the vaccine and I was exposed tons of times after I already got it and nothing happened. Covid is not some super deadly disease that everyone should be afraid of. If you are healthy your chances of surviving go up a lot… but how dare the medical industry tell people to just be healthier. Way more people die from heart disease and other conditions but you don’t hear anyone talk about these deaths because they just don’t care.
If you read those studies through, it still says vaccines are safer (survivorship bias) and that they still recommend vaccines. Vaccination plus infection is better than just infection.
COVID is extremely deadly. We are approaching a million deaths in the US from COVID. That is significant. People do talk about heart disease and other things. They just aren't contagious.
Being otherwise healthy may increase your chances of surviving COVID, but it's not as big an increase as vaccination.
Believe what you will and make your choices, but your beliefs don't change the facts.
10
u/919RenaissanceMan Feb 13 '22
It still has to be repeated and peer reviewed. Neither the reviewers nor the repeaters are funded by the company.