Guest Post by Allon Friedman
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s controversial plan to enforce COVID-19 vaccinations for large businesses—recently enjoined by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals— was ostensibly designed to minimize “deadly outbreaks of COVID-19.” The ability of COVID-19 vaccines to protect life is at the heart of the OSHA mandate and the fierce debate over similar mandates now embroiling much of the world.
Nearly 18,000 scientific papers have been published since last year on COVID-19 and vaccines, so the task of sifting through the evidence to help critically evaluate whether vaccines reduce risk of death seems daunting. It turns out, though, that two studies stand so far above the rest in terms of rigor and quality that they are uniquely suited to help us address the question of vaccine protection.
These two studies, published last month in the New England Journal of Medicine, are fundamentally distinct from the other studies in that they are the only clinical trials yet reported to randomize adults to receive either a COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer or Moderna) or a placebo injection and then follow them over time. Why is this important? Because the randomized controlled study design they used is the gold standard and most rigorous scientific tool available to examine cause and effect relationships between an intervention and outcome (vaccination and death, in this case).
This design also limits as much as possible the influence of other factors, whether known or unknown, that could affect the outcome. Many studies have used other designs to try and understand how well the COVID-19 vaccine protects against death, but no matter how well planned or executed, none of these studies approaches the level of scientific rigor that a well-conducted randomized controlled trial offers.
So did these two clinical trials find that vaccination reduced the risk of dying from COVID-19? The Moderna study reported one death from COVID-19 in the vaccinated group and three in the unvaccinated group, far too few to make any statistical conclusion. The Pfizer trial was even more inconclusive because the findings published in the New England Journal report (one COVID-19 death in the vaccinated group and two in the unvaccinated group) differed from what Pfizer later reported to the Food and Drug Administration, and the FDA update did not specify the number of COVID-19 deaths.
Regardless, the most relevant study endpoint is not death from COVID-19 but all-cause mortality, which counts every death that occurred during the study period. All-cause mortality is the key outcome of interest not simply because it circumvents the oftentimes subjective decision as to why someone died but also because it balances all the possible effects of a COVID-19 vaccine, both good and bad, that could influence risk of death. In other words, it allows us to quantify lives saved by the COVID-19 vaccine while taking into account potential lives lost from vaccine-related heart disease, blood clots, severe allergic reactions, and perhaps other causes.
Because results from the two trials were so similar regardless of the type of vaccine used it is helpful to merge the results. Following a combined total of 74,580 individuals, half given the COVID-19 vaccination and half given a placebo shot, over six to seven months, the two studies reported that thirty-seven people who were vaccinated died as compared to thirty-three people who received placebo.
Simply put, the very best scientific evidence currently available to mankind does not support the widely held contention that COVID-19 vaccination using the Pfizer or Moderna brands lowers risk of death, at least over the first half-year after vaccination. Interestingly, these striking findings were not reported in the main body of the papers but in supplemental sections.
There are several additional points to consider.
First, the studies’ findings were limited by the fact that their design did not take into consideration previous infection leading to subsequent immunity from COVID-19 infection, which could very well have lowered risk of death in one or both study groups.
Second, there are serious concerns over falsification of data and other data integrity issues in the Pfizer trial so this could also have influenced results. Importantly, because both trials mostly excluded groups at highest risk of dying from COVID-19 such as the frail elderly, the very obese, or those with serious chronic illnesses, we cannot assume that the vaccines do not protect against death in these populations.
Based on my clinical judgment and lesser quality supportive evidence, I generally assume when treating such patients that the vaccine’s benefits outweigh its risks and so advocate for their use, though I cannot be absolutely certain they offer protection against death because of the lack of randomized controlled evidence.
Finally, the very low rates of death from COVID-19 observed in both studies should serve to remind us of how minimal this risk is in the general population.
Perhaps the key takeaway message is that absolutist, rigid COVID-19 vaccine mandates such as that put forth by OSHA are not based on best science. Such mandates run counter to the universal medical dictum of risk stratification, whereby treatment is tailored to individuals based on individual risks and benefits to be accrued. They also violate the dominant philosophy of evidence-based medicine, which supports the use of current best evidence when making decisions about patient care.
The Pfizer and Moderna trials show that in lower risk populations (which account for most of society) COVID-19 vaccines do not reduce mortality. Therefore, vaccine mandates, which are enormously costly and terribly divisive, are a cure worse than the disease.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
This is good information that people need to know.
The authorities know it and don’t care. They are filled with glee at the crimes against humanity they are getting away with, because nobody is telling them “No”. Sane people can’t comprehend this.
Sounds like maybe they are giving the “vaccines” to horses now:
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/kentucky-derby-winner-medina-spirit-dies-while-training-at-santa-anita-park-185259319.html
Must have been the Ivermectin.
Paraphrasing Bill Gates Quote. Through Vaccination we can get population down to five billion or so through our vaccination program. The evil will always tell you what is coming if you listen. Bill commenting on possible bioterrorism including smallpox means, we are considering releasing smallpox next if you don’t toe the line. The more I study it. The history of vaccination is about destruction and deceit.
short version:
forced medical treatments?
over my dead body
Finally some randomized controlled studies on the vaccine. The results are important because they show no benefit to the vaccination, but neither do they show a detriment. If these studies are accurate (i.e.., assuming neither Pfizer nor Moderna omitted a bunch of vaccine deaths–perhaps a bold assumption), then the vaccines do not seem to cause many deaths at least in the short term. Good news if the data are accurate. On the other hand, the vaccines would appear to be completely useless, at least in lower risk populations.
I have read enough info about the negative effects of the jab to not take it regardless of the lack of info on that in this article.
Noted the part about “serious concerns over falsification of data”. Isn’t that the bedrock the whole scheme rests on?
At best it does no harm, at worst. You are now a pawn for the transhumanist agenda. Do some research, the patents are already approved.
Figure 10 to 20 million people who know wtf is going on. Add in ghetto blacks, urban Latinos, rural whites, rednecks, bikers, northern hicks….the majority of us clearly arent falling for the scam. Time to go old school coms.
Regarding the Australian camps from an insider-
“We all must be careful with the propaganda and psyops regarding these camps.
At the moment the Australian Regime is very keen to show that the people being sent to these camps get quite reasonably treated and are eventually released.
People who have been sent to them are allowed (and some encouraged) to recount their stories and show that no real harm came to them in the camps. Indeed some accounts show that the “guests” were actually well treated, better in fact than the “guests” at some some British Quarentine Hotels.
This is part of the Psyop being played, and if they get it right the same psyop will be played in the US and UK.
The idea is to dispell any fear of these camps and to neutralise the warnings from “crazy conspiracy theorists”.
The good treatment and release of people unharmed will likely continue for some months – at least until most people do not “fear” the camps. The idea is that people do not violently resit being taken and perhaps even go willingly in the future.
But make no mistake this will change.
At first the “coincidences” will happen such as the people dieing of covid in the camps are those who “just happened to be” outspoken dissidents, polical opponents, and that most villifid group of people – the so called “unvaxed”.
At the moment we are in a very dangerous stage of the phoney war/psyop with regrds to these camps where regimes everywhere try to show they are safe and harmless places to be and all will eventually be released unharmed.
The horror will come later next year and beyond – remember these words.”
The above was a copy and paste from an insider.
Apparently there are camps being prepared right now in the UK, and a whistleblower was recently silenced for suggesting that the new “super prison” being built in Chorley, Lancashire (which may be built with an on-site eco friendly waste incineration power generation plant which could double up as a crematorium) is for dissidents (aka the unvaxed). This is quite interesting as several other people have noted that a new prison being built in Yorkshire is intended for dissidents (and is next door to an existing old crematorium).
Ventura and Jones showed that the US was years ahead with this (with mobile incenerators and carboard and plastic coffins stored at potential fema sites), so keep an eye on these sites /camps / prisons.
Germany and Austria have already made the threats to go next level on this, potentially force vaxinating hold outs, so I fear that for all us all the worst is yet to come, the worst is yet to come…………………
The same is generally true of most prisons.
We still don’t think its normal to send people who’ve committed no crime to prison.
@Anonymous
That was the whole point of the op’s message above.
He / she was specifically warning about the conditioning and programming of the masses to accept this sheet as normal, just like the vast majority now think its normal for healthy people to get an experimental drug intravenusly, and perhaps even force it on others.
The warning is clear – that some people will never return from these “camps” but to the majority it seems normal., or they simply wont notice / care.
(We are in the “Theresienstadt” propaganda stage with social media replacing the cinema).
Yes, the camps are easily converted to whatever they want.
From what I’ve seen and read I’m pretty much convinced this is a depopulation operation, but the “great reset” component is tied in as well, IMO.
Agreed. It seems hard for most people to grasp that there are several agendas in play – depop followed by enslavement of the survivvours.
The evil is too great for most to comprehend, much less process that there is a plan behind it.
Why not tell us who is behind this shit?
The Nazi’s of course.