A J&J product years ago killed 8 people and was pulled off the shelves and never saw the light of day again...
It turned out J&J "overlooked" some data that said it shouldn't have hit the market in the first place, of course.
That's an interesting story actually, and tells more about the regulatory environment in the US than it does about pharma companies.
In short, a very rare adverse event was observed in clinical trials, but it lacked the statistical relevance to justify an inclusion in the label. J&J suggested including it during draft labeling discussions with the FDA, but FDA said it should not be included. J&J was later sued over the deaths, and a judge determined that J&J was at fault because they knew there was some chance of these events occurring. That a different government body told them not to do it didn't absolve them of any liability, even though the drug would have never made it to market if J&J didn't do what FDA wanted.
COVID vaccines are no different. Even though the pharma companies involved aren't exactly moral, their profit motivations are simple and expected. But the other half of responsible parties include government agencies like FDA, who exist solely to protect the consumer, while also being entirely funded by the taxpayer. They have utterly failed at their one job, and we'd never be in this situation to start with if they had done what we pay them to do.
As someone working for a pharma company very little the FDA does makes any sense. We recently doubled our batch sizes and only one test out of dozens for the same product had to have the sample size doubled, and that only doubled because the drum size didn't change.
When I asked my boss about it she said "it has nothing to do with logic and science, that's what the FDA says we have to do"
I don't think a comparative ratio of total subjects to adverse effect reactions can get much worse than 42,000 of 46,000. And 46,000 was a number I actually heard in regards to this exact document, but I can't verify.
This thing's about as effective as the morning-after pill, even three months in. I wouldn't rule out some genuine issues, and you shouldn't either.
Now, you may crib a phrase from Breadlines Bernie and suggest that women sterilizing themselves during a mass panic takes away some of their power over men, but denying this concoction is bad for humans, not just men, is denying reality itself.
I do think it would be funny if a portion of the reports from women were just whinging and mewling, though. You've got me there.
they might be looking to outlaw abortion now because the elites might have realized they went too far with the vaccines and birth rates are going to fall by a lot cuz of them, leading to not enough slaves, unless they also stop abortions. Cuz otherwise it doesn't make as much sense that they'd allow the supreme court to do that, and also allow the red state governors to be putting so many restrictions on abortions. That's a theory.
I was told there would be donuts.
donuts and free cardio exam.
but theyre all out of cardio
It was 42000/46000 (91%) adverse events for the trial that lasted one, maybe two, months.
If that's true, around 5% (over a thousand people) died in the first month of trial. Am I reading that right?
It was about 2%. There were 46K in the trial. This page just shows the adverse events.
How many deaths did it take to stop doing the Swine Flu vaccine again? Like in the 30s?
A J&J product years ago killed 8 people and was pulled off the shelves and never saw the light of day again...
It turned out J&J "overlooked" some data that said it shouldn't have hit the market in the first place, of course.
That's an interesting story actually, and tells more about the regulatory environment in the US than it does about pharma companies.
In short, a very rare adverse event was observed in clinical trials, but it lacked the statistical relevance to justify an inclusion in the label. J&J suggested including it during draft labeling discussions with the FDA, but FDA said it should not be included. J&J was later sued over the deaths, and a judge determined that J&J was at fault because they knew there was some chance of these events occurring. That a different government body told them not to do it didn't absolve them of any liability, even though the drug would have never made it to market if J&J didn't do what FDA wanted.
COVID vaccines are no different. Even though the pharma companies involved aren't exactly moral, their profit motivations are simple and expected. But the other half of responsible parties include government agencies like FDA, who exist solely to protect the consumer, while also being entirely funded by the taxpayer. They have utterly failed at their one job, and we'd never be in this situation to start with if they had done what we pay them to do.
As someone working for a pharma company very little the FDA does makes any sense. We recently doubled our batch sizes and only one test out of dozens for the same product had to have the sample size doubled, and that only doubled because the drum size didn't change.
When I asked my boss about it she said "it has nothing to do with logic and science, that's what the FDA says we have to do"
And wasn't this from a section of 46,000?
It's from a specific timeframe that I'm not aware of. I'm sure that the overall total number is actually way higher.
I don't think a comparative ratio of total subjects to adverse effect reactions can get much worse than 42,000 of 46,000. And 46,000 was a number I actually heard in regards to this exact document, but I can't verify.
It was in the America Frontline Doctor's lawsuit from last year, page 41: https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/3c6a0774-cfad-46fa-aa97-af5aa5e74f00/M%20for%20PI%20file%20stamped.pdf
This thing's about as effective as the morning-after pill, even three months in. I wouldn't rule out some genuine issues, and you shouldn't either.
Now, you may crib a phrase from Breadlines Bernie and suggest that women sterilizing themselves during a mass panic takes away some of their power over men, but denying this concoction is bad for humans, not just men, is denying reality itself.
I do think it would be funny if a portion of the reports from women were just whinging and mewling, though. You've got me there.
I remember IRC chatbots with longer scripts than yours
Frankly, I am surprised anyone is GAF.
These are mostly 31-50yo Wall aged women.
it messes up women's periods. for men it gives heart attacks so that is worse but either way it's no good
Cardiac issues and clots in women as well really.
lets see imp laugh when he trys having a kid and its phizborted. oh thats if he's ever seen a woman irl
they might be looking to outlaw abortion now because the elites might have realized they went too far with the vaccines and birth rates are going to fall by a lot cuz of them, leading to not enough slaves, unless they also stop abortions. Cuz otherwise it doesn't make as much sense that they'd allow the supreme court to do that, and also allow the red state governors to be putting so many restrictions on abortions. That's a theory.