“We know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don’t know we don’t know.” Donald Rumsfeld, 2 Feb 2002
Come get your COVID vaccine!
We don’t know if it will keep you from getting the virus from someone else.
We don’t know if it will keep you from giving the virus to someone else.
We don’t know if it will keep you from getting sick.
We don’t know if it will keep you from dying.
We don’t know if it will cause you serious health issues over time.
We don’t know because we only tested the vaccine for a couple of months.
We have no idea what it might do for you or to you after six months, a year, two years, five years, ten years.
These were the Known Unknowns of the Pfizer COVID vaccine as the pharmaceutical company wrapped up its Warp-Speed clinical trials back in October/November, 2020 and prepared its pitch to the FDA for Emergency Use Authorization.
But was this what the world was told back in December, 2020 and January, 2021 when the vaccine became available (under Emergency Use Authorization)? No. These were Unknown Unknowns for the majority of people who depended on the medical community and the corporate media for their information about the vaccine.
The only problem being discussed in the media was availability—and, of course, the ever-present death and destruction story.
U.K. Begins Rollout of Pfizer’s Covid-19 Vaccine in a First for the West
Less than a week after the shot was authorized, the first Britons receive doses
Dec. 8, 2020
“The counteroffensive against the pandemic entered its next phase earlier this week, when 90-year-old Maggie Keenan became the first Brit to receive the initial dose of the United Kingdom’s rollout of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. Meanwhile, the U.S. effort is also moving forward, with some big milestones coming up this month. Here’s what the timeline looks like.”
America’s COVID deaths surge as vaccines roll out
Reuters / Thursday, January 28, 2021
“A coyote walks past graveside mourners at the biggest cemetery in North America as it struggles under a backlog of coronavirus-related burials, with the usual 5-7 day wait period after death now stretched to more than a month at Rose Hill Memorial Park and Mortuary, during the outbreak of the coronavirus in California, January 26, 2021. ” REUTERS/Mike Blake
But if you had known where to look, you would have found this:
Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine
December 10, 2020.
New England Journal of Medicine
“This report includes 2 months of follow-up after the second dose of vaccine for half the trial participants and up to 14 weeks’ maximum follow-up for a smaller subset. Therefore, both the occurrence of adverse events more than 2 to 3.5 months after the second dose and more comprehensive information on the duration of protection remain to be determined… These data do not address whether vaccination prevents asymptomatic infection…This report does not address the prevention of Covid-19 in pregnant women…”
Or, if you want something faster and easier to read…
Should I make it even simpler?
Benefit – Two months of protection from the virus spike protein (maybe).
Risk – Unknown vulnerability to the unknown effects of the vaccine spike protein for an unknown period of time.
This is what Pfizer, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Center for Disease Control and prevention (CDC), the National Institute of Health (NIH), the American Medical Association (AMA), and the entire medical community knew as of December 10, 2020 or earlier.
This is what the New York Times, CNN, The BBC, The Guardian, and all other corporate news outlets should have made known to you so that you could make an informed decision about whether or not to get vaccinated.
This is what your doctor should have told you before injecting you with the vaccine. “We don’t know if this vaccine is safe and effective”.
Those who didn’t tell you, lied to you by omission. They knew you wouldn’t be reading the New England Journal of Medicine. They knew you relied on them to keep you informed. They knew you would never suspect them of keeping vital information secret thereby denying you control over your mind and your body and your behavior.
Well, confession is good for the soul. Are they acknowledging that they betrayed humanity in general and the American people in particular by failing to report on the inadequate vaccine data before millions of innocents got vaccinated?
If they were, to begin with, they would apologize for this article–
The Next 6 Months Will Be Vaccine Purgatory
The period after a vaccine is approved will be strange and confusing, as certain groups of people get vaccinated but others have to wait.
By Sarah Zhang
December 11, 2020
“But vaccines are not an off switch. It will take several months to vaccinate enough Americans to resume normal life, and this interim could prove long, confusing, and chaotic. The next six months will almost certainly bring delays.”
They would also apologize for this December 19, 2020 video in which Sarah Zhang is being interviewed on CNN–click here to watch the video: https://www.cbsnews.com/video/the-atlantic-next-6-months-vaccine-purgatory/#x
Was there anyone in the vast wasteland of the media who actually reported that there was not enough data to claim vaccine safety and efficacy?
Yes. A few. Among them was/is Peter Doshi.
“Only full transparency and rigorous scrutiny of the data will allow for informed decision making, argues Peter Doshi
In the United States, all eyes are on Pfizer and Moderna. The topline efficacy results from their experimental covid-19 vaccine trials are astounding at first glance. Pfizer says it recorded 170 covid-19 cases (in 44,000 volunteers), with a remarkable split: 162 in the placebo group versus 8 in the vaccine group. Meanwhile Moderna says 95 of 30,000 volunteers in its ongoing trial got covid-19: 90 on placebo versus 5 receiving the vaccine, leading both companies to claim around 95% efficacy.
Let’s put this in perspective. First, a relative risk reduction is being reported, not absolute risk reduction, which appears to be less than 1%. Second, these results refer to the trials’ primary endpoint of covid-19 of essentially any severity, and importantly not the vaccine’s ability to save lives, nor the ability to prevent infection, nor the efficacy in important subgroups (e.g. frail elderly). Those still remain unknown. Third, these results reflect a time point relatively soon after vaccination, and we know nothing about vaccine performance at 3, 6, or 12 months, so cannot compare these efficacy numbers against other vaccines like influenza vaccines (which are judged over a season). Fourth, children, adolescents, and immunocompromised individuals were largely excluded from the trials, so we still lack any data on these important populations…”
Was Peter Doshi praised for writing this scientifically honest article? No. The exact opposite. This is what he had to put up with.
Why is Peter Doshi still an editor at The BMJ?
Peter Doshi is at least borderline antivaccine and has been casting doubt on vaccine efficacy since 2009. Earlier this month, he posted a badly flawed “analysis” casting doubt on the efficacy of the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines. Why does The BMJ still employ him?
January 15, 2021
Now that we know that they knew that they didn’t know, whether or not the vaccines were safe effective; now that we know that they lied about what they knew and didn’t know…what are we going to do to avoid being fooled again? I don’t know about you, but to begin with…
AMNESTY? HELL NO!
I don’t normally follow propaganda rags like The Atlantic. Therefore, I would have missed this article had I not watched the latest New World Next Week podcast on the Corbett Report. James Corbett knew that they didn’t know and he warned his viewers about the vaccines–and the lockdowns, and the masks, and the mandates, and the tracking, and the biosecurity state, and….and…and…