THE #MonkeyBusiness - CHAPTER 2 - THE PREPRINT.
HOW #BioNTech & #Pfizer LIED ABOUT THEIR PRE-CLINICAL STUDIES, AND HOW HEALTH REGULATORS AND NATURE MAGAZINE WHO "PEER REVIEWED" THEIR STUDY DIDN'T EVEN CARE.
By Ehden Biber
THE #MonkeyBusiness - HOW #BioNTech & #Pfizer LIED ABOUT THEIR PRE-CLINICAL STUDIES, AND HOW HEALTH REGULATORS AND NATURE MAGAZINE WHO "PEER REVIEWED" THEIR STUDY DIDN'T EVEN CARE.
By Ehden Biber
CHAPTER 1 - THE SCHEDULE
On the 9th of September 2020 #BioNTech & #Pfizer has announced to the world that their lead candidate "vaccine" formulation, called BNT162b2, has resulted in strong anti-viral effects against an infectious #SARSCoV2.
In #PFizer's PR, #BioNTech's CEO stated that “The data…include the characterization of our lead candidate BNT162b2, as well as key animal studies that were the basis for our clinical programs. THEY HAVE ENABLED US TO ADVANCE BNT162b2 INTO PHASE 3 EVALUATION”.
#Pfizer's senior VP & head of vaccine research & development stated that they (and #BioNTech) were "encouraged by the data thus far and confident in our progress towards developing a safe and effective vaccine candidate to help address this current pandemic".
#BioNTech/#Pfizer explain in the PR that "After two immunizations, neutralization titers were detectable in rhesus macaques sera with geometric mean titers of 962 (on Day 35 for the 30 µg group) or 1,689 (on Day 28 for the 100 µg group)."
In "Figure 3. Rhesus macaque immunogenicity", #BioNTech/#Pfizer stated: "Rhesus macaques (n=6 per group) were immunised on Days 0 and 21 with 30μg or 100μg BNT162b2 or buffer".
Not only there were no 6 monkeys w/BNT162b2 30μg…but the results are FAKE.
On the 1st of September 2020 #BioNTech/#Pfizer submitted ANOTHER paper, this time to @nature, who published it on the 1st of Feb 2021.
Take a look at the following chart, compare it to the preprint, and notice difference between the two…
While in the preprint #BioNTech/#Pfizer stated that On day 28 the GMCs of S1-binding IgG were 30,339 units (U)/mL (30 μg dose level), in Nature they stated that the "geometric mean concentrations of RBD-binding IgG were 20,962 units (U) ml−1".
That's 45% LESS!
The preprint was published a week after #BioNTech/#Pfizer submitted their paper to @nature. It excluded the results of the BNT162b1 and like the PR it was meant to support the usage of BNT162b2 in phase 3 clinical trials which started on the 27th of June 2020.
Also, in the #BioNTech/#Pfizer stated that "groups of six male, 2-4 year old rhesus macaques were immunised IM with 30 or 100 μg of BNT162b2", which I've proved in my last thread was a false statement.
They only had 3 monkeys who received 30 μg of BNT162b2.
I will leave you with a question:
If #BioNTech/#Pfizer had no problem publishing pre-clinical results that contradicted a paper they submitted for publication only a week earlier, how much can trust their clinical trials results or anything they published?