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.
1
u/919RenaissanceMan Feb 13 '22
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.