by Steve Halbrook
As we have shown, vaccine “safety testing” is rigged and corrupt. This of course would be a given based on everything we are exposing about vaccines in this blog. The whole system is dishonest.
Moreover, note the following papers:
“How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data” by Daniele Fanelli
This is the first meta-analysis of surveys asking scientists about their experiences of misconduct. It found that, on average, about 2% of scientists admitted to have fabricated, falsified or modified data or results at least once –a serious form of misconduct my any standard [10], [36], [37]– and up to one third admitted a variety of other questionable research practices including “dropping data points based on a gut feeling”, and “changing the design, methodology or results of a study in response to pressures from a funding source”. In surveys asking about the behaviour of colleagues, fabrication, falsification and modification had been observed, on average, by over 14% of respondents, and other questionable practices by up to 72%.
Fanelli D. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS One. 2009 May 29;4(5):e5738. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005738. PMID: 19478950; PMCID: PMC2685008. Retrieved July 28, 2023, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2685008/
“Prevalence of industry support and its relationship to research integrity” by Patricia M Tereskerz, Ann B. Hamric, Thomas M. Guterbock, Jonathan D. Moreno
Our data demonstrate that senior-level investigators who responded to the survey receive a wide variety of industry-sponsored support which is important for their careers, and that industry support of research and researchers is pervasive in the clinical and research departments of top U.S. research institutions.
Tereskerz PM, Hamric AB, Guterbock TM, Moreno JD. Prevalence of industry support and its relationship to research integrity. Account Res. 2009 Apr-Jun;16(2):78-105. doi: 10.1080/08989620902854945. PMID: 19353387; PMCID: PMC2758529. Retrieved July 28, 2023, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2758529/
“Conflicts of interest in vaccine safety research” by Gayle DeLong
Vaccine manufacturers have financial motives and public health officials have bureaucratic reasons that might lead them to sponsor research that concludes vaccines are safe.
Gayle DeLong, Conflicts of interest in vaccine safety research, Accountability in Research. 19:65-88. 2012, Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group. LLC, ISSN: 0898-9621 print 1 1545-5815 online, DOl: 10.1080108989621.2012.660073. Retrieved July 28, 2023, from file:///C:/Users/steph/Desktop/vacc-books/Conflicts_of_Interest_in_Vaccine_Safety.pdf
Sources thanks to Neil Z. Miller’s book “Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies”
Now, in a safety study conducted by honest people, you can’t do better than a true placebo. When you use instead another vaccine or a vaccine adjuvant (as vaccine “safety” studies too often do), you are gambling that previous tests were neither manipulated nor at least shortsighted. We have already shown that studies can be manipulated. As for being shortsighted – which even the most sincere human being is capable of – note this paper:
“Contradicted and Initially Stronger Effects in Highly Cited Clinical Research” by John P. A. Ioannidis
Contradiction and initially stronger effects are not unusual in highly cited research of clinical interventions and their outcomes. The extent to which high citations may provoke contradictions and vice versa needs more study. Controversies are most common with highly cited nonrandomized studies, but even the most highly cited randomized trials may be challenged and refuted over time, especially small ones.
Ioannidis JPA. Contradicted and Initially Stronger Effects in Highly Cited Clinical Research. JAMA. 2005;294(2):218–228. doi:10.1001/jama.294.2.218. Retrieved July 28, 2023, from https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/201218
Finally – as victim testimonies show, those “approved” vaccines used as “placebos” are full of side effects (to put it mildly) – some of which you see on their own package inserts. So much for safety testing.
If you find this site helpful, please consider supporting our work.
