Amid the tyrannical vaccinate-everyone approach to the COVID-19 pandemic implemented by multiple governments, large groups of doctors, scientists, and health care practitioners continue to unite together to offer trustworthy, evidence-based COVID-19 information and guidance. Their goals are straightforward—to reduce hospitalizations, save lives, and facilitate a return to "normal" as quickly as possible. One such group is the Canadian COVID Care Alliance (CCCA). In eye-opening detail, the group recently published a slide show titled "The Pfizer Inoculations for COVID-19 / More Harm Than Good," emphasizing the dangers of the Pfizer COVID jab.
As shared by Steve Kirsch, founder of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation (VSRF), the "superb presentation" is based on "rock-solid" scientific evidence. Kirsch explains the CCCA exposition reinforces the allegation that Pfizer "tried to 'bury' a lot of less than stellar results in their supplementary data file that most people never look at. Their own data show that their mRNA 'vaccine' should have never been rolled out to the public."
Screenshot / CCCA, Pfizer's Inoculations for COVID-19 / More Harm than Good; page 42
Relative Risk Reduction vs. Absolute Risk Reduction
The 51-slide display runs through the hierarchy of damaging evidence beginning with Pfizer's original trial report on Dec. 31, 2020. In the New England Journal of Medicine, the report showed just two months' worth of safety and efficacy data on the Pfizer' vaccine.' Explaining the difference between Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) and Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR), the CCCA clarifies the misleading claim that the shots had 95% efficacy seven days after the second dose. See the 1-minute video below.
Early Unblinding of Randomized Control Trial = No Long Term Safety Data
The unprecedented early unblinding of Pfizer's randomized control trial made it impossible to obtain accurate, ongoing data in the placebo group vs. the inoculated group. As reported by UncoverDC, following the 'vaccine's' emergency use authorization (EUA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allowed Pfizer (and Moderna and Johnson & Johnson) to turn the trial study from a placebo-controlled, blinded study into an open, observational study. Remarkably, in the middle of phase III of the trial, Pfizer unblinded the two cohorts, and members of the placebo group were allowed to take the vaccine if they wanted to. And many of them chose to get the vaccine.
Screenshot / CCCA, Pfizer's Inoculations for COVID-19 / More Harm than Good; page 9
Pfizer Ignored Protocol & Used Misleading Demographics
It is common knowledge that normal vaccine development takes nearly ten years and can be done in as little as five years in rare cases. The current COVID-19 shots were developed in one year, skipping many crucial steps. For example, scientists did not perform animal testing, phases II and III were combined, EUA occurred after just two months, the trials were unblinded, and phase III is ongoing until 2023.
CCCA declares the continued claim that the COVID-19 inoculation products do not need to be tested because mRNA technology has already undergone testing (the mRNA technology is the delivery mechanism, not the vaccination.) It is like saying that "since we've used syringes safely before, anything injected via syringe is safe. And in fact, there are still a lot of unknowns about the effects of the mRNA delivery mechanism."
Screenshot / CCCA, Pfizer's Inoculations for COVID-19 / More Harm than Good; page 15
Besides not following established protocols, CCCA maintains Pfizer's target population was misleading. Typically, when designing a trial to determine the safety and efficacy of a treatment, the focus should be on the target population who could most benefit from that treatment. Instead, Pfizer chose participants from a younger demographic that would be a) less likely to need a vaccine, b) less likely to suffer an adverse event during a trial, c) more likely to respond well to a vaccine, as the elderly have comparatively poor immune responses.
CCCA notes that many health conditions were excluded from the trials, including pregnant or breastfeeding women, people suffering from allergies, bleeding disorders, immunocompromised, people prescribed steroids or tested positive for COVID-19. Still, even though there has been no data to make safety claims about the neglected health conditions, individuals suffering from those conditions are not excluded from mandates and other draconian measures like vaccine passports. Page 16 of the slide show explains:
"The vaccines were tested on the healthy and then immediately given to the frailest members of society - the elderly with multiple health conditions. This is unscientific and unethical."
Screenshot / CCCA, Pfizer's Inoculations for COVID-19 / More Harm than Good; page 35
Manipulated Data in Sept. 15, 2021 Report
The CCCA slide show reveals how Pfizer took the results from their adult trial, which started July 27, 2020, and then counted the results from the 12 - 15-year-olds' trial, even though the adolescent trial started four months later. Since it's well known that the efficacy of the injections wanes over time, this gives a false boost to the efficacy numbers. The effectiveness for these two cohorts should have been reported separately, not presented as one combined result. Without this boost, their efficacy number would likely have plunged.
Screenshot / CCCA, Pfizer's Inoculations for COVID-19 / More Harm than Good; page 33
Pfizer's First Cache of "Secret" Documents
On Nov. 17, the FDA released the first batch of 329,000 pages of data used by the agency to approve Pfizer's 'vaccines.' The documents reveal the drug manufacturers' awareness of Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Disease (VAED), including Vaccine-associated Enhanced Respiratory Disease (VAERD)." In other words, the FDA knew Pfizer's jab could adversely harm or even kill patients who were later infected with COVID-19.
Pfizer recorded 29,914 adverse events in women and 9,982 in men. While it is unclear if males and females received the 'vaccine' equally, the difference between the two groups indicates the probability of a vaccination damage risk profile directly tied to the female gender. If this is the case, based on the figures below, 85 of every 1,000 pregnancies will result in spontaneous abortions. CCCA insists the first trove of Pfizer data should be incriminating for any agency—specifically the FDA—who viewed it and called these 'vaccines' safe.
Screenshot / Representative Credentials of CCCA Members / CanadianCovidCareAlliance.org
CCCA Insists the Vaccines Be Withdrawn Immediately
The experts declare it is clear that Pfizer - and the agencies overseeing their trials - failed to follow established, high-quality safety and efficacy protocols right from the beginning. The group asserts, "We have presented Level 1 evidence of harm from Pfizer's own trial data. Any government which has approved these inoculations, much less mandated them, knew or should have known from the available data that harm would be caused to its citizens."
Furthermore, CCCA states, "Any government that approved this medical intervention for its citizens should have ensured that the trial had used the appropriate clinical endpoints and high-quality safety science. Any government official who possesses this evidence and continues to allow its citizens to be inoculated with a toxic agent is, at the very least, negligent." With the urgent need to protect our children, Kirsch offers insight into the continued neglect by Pfizer and government agencies as they advance their vaccine agenda and praises CCCA's efforts to underscore the current situation. He stresses:
"I'm pleased that the presentation highlighted the story of Maddie de Garay, a 12-year-old whose life has been totally destroyed by the Pfizer vaccine. The FDA promised to investigate and did absolutely nothing. No email. No phone call. No investigation whatsoever. They just pretended it didn't happen.
What did the medical community do about this? They should have expressed outrage and refused to administer the shots in protest. Instead, they remained compliant and silent. They did nothing. Even worse, people like Dr. Eric Topol tout these vaccines as one of mankind's greatest accomplishments and refuse to debate us about vaccine safety."
