(NaturalHealth365)  Earlier this month, the drug company giant Pfizer released another 80,000 pages of clinical trial data related to its mRNA COVID shot.  Any wonder why the mainstream media isn’t covering this?

Perhaps it’s because, as some critics argue, the data reveals some alarming information that yet again calls into question the true “safety and efficacy” of this new class of drugs being pushed, via coercion, onto virtually every global citizen over the age of 5.

Pfizer vastly exaggerated efficacy rate for its mRNA COVID injection

In a May 5 Substack post, Emerald Robinson offers an extensive review of Pfizer’s recent clinical trial data pages.  Featured most prominently among her assessment is the suggestion that the COVID shot from this company was never “95 percent effective,” as they and public health officials claimed.  In fact, the data seems to indicate that the efficacy rate was as low as 12 percent within the first week post-jab and then continues to plummet to less than 1 percent.

Robinson cites this paragraph from the Pfizer documents to support her claim:  “Among 3410 total cases of suspected but unconfirmed COVID-19 in the overall study population, 1594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1816 in the placebo group.”

There is plenty of backlash against her assessment.  Fact-checkers say, for instance, the study protocol defines “suspected but unconfirmed” cases of COVID-19 as people who present with symptoms such as fever, cough, shortness of breath, chills, muscle pain, sore throat, loss of taste/smell, diarrhea, or vomiting, but have a negative PCR test.

“So,” as Jeffrey Morris counterargues in a May 5 blog post on the website COVID-19 Data Science, “these 3410 ‘suspected but unconfirmed’ cases were people who any symptom mentioned in the list, which of course could come from many causes, not just COVID-19 infections, triggering an unplanned COVID-19 visit (for which a PCR test was indicated), and for whom the SARS-CoV-2 test was not positive.”

Morris also argues that false-negative PCR tests, while possible, would likely not account for all the “suspected but unconfirmed” COVID cases among vaxxed individuals.

Readers, what do you think:  Is this a valid “fact-checking” argument, given everything we know about the unreliability of these PCR tests?

Other questions and concerns sparked by newly released clinical trial data from Pfizer

Plenty of other issues and questions remain about the COVID shots that have effectively been used as ransom in order to force people to comply with the pharmaceutical agenda.  And the more Pfizer releases trial data, the more questions seem to arise.

Here are some more points to reflect on if you choose to review the data or explore opposing opinions and criticisms about the information:

• No pregnant women were included in the safety trials yet were immediately encouraged to take the shots.  Pfizer and government officials used data from 44 rats to determine it was “safe” for women and their unborn children.
• A reported 25,706 patients are missing from Pfizer data.  And as of May 2, data from only 9 out of 158 clinical trial sites are accounted for.
• Lipid nanoparticles contained within the Pfizer mRNA shots have been found throughout the body 48 hours post-injection, integrating into other tissues and organs, including ovaries and liver.

Sources for this article include:

Substack.com
Icandecide.org
Substack.com
Childrenshealthdefense.org
Phmpt.org
FDA.gov
Yahoo.com