(no title)
barbacoa | 2 months ago
You assume good faith on their part. These studies are run by the same companies that stand to make billions based off the study outcomes. For example we know now when a toddler died in the Moderna covid RTC of cardiac arrest after vaccination they reportedly covered it up and didn't report it.
This all is starting to sound a lot like what happened with vioxx. Where an increase in heart problems was detected in RTC but covered up. Vioxx would go on to cause an estimated 50000 deaths from heart attack.
estearum|2 months ago
No they're not. Studies are run by a distributed network of large, medium, and small businesses who are independently following the "recipe" designed by the pharma company.
Then this data is submitted back to the pharma company and collated into a report that is given to the FDA.
It is effectively impossible to systematically get a couple hundred or couple thousand independent trial sites to misreport safety data.
It is possible that the pharma company could manipulate data during collation, but unsurprisingly there is a vast infrastructure to detect this and gargantuan penalties for when they're discovered.
> For example we know now when a toddler died in the Moderna covid RTC of cardiac arrest after vaccination they reportedly covered it up and didn't report it.
This is literally not true. You can find the death reported in the exact regulatory filing exactly when and where it should have been reported. What happened is that a Substack author found it and has made it seem like it was not reported.
Re Vioxx comparison:
Sure we should always be vigilant for another Vioxx. The way we do that is through fair and levelheaded analysis of the data we have available. Right now, that analysis lands very clearly on the side of vaccines. At the scale of vaccine rollout, we would not need to squint to see signal of a major problem.