Bear in mind also that it was @MicrobiomDigest who persecuted Didier Raoult over his 2020 #Hydroxychloroquine paper which was a rapid review for obvious reasons.
Yet she completely ignored the @NEJM's impossibly rapid acceptance of the Pfizer vaccine paper
🧵
Remember that this study was published on the 10th December 2020 - the same day as the FDA VRBPAC submission, so it was IMPOSSIBLE to have been adequately peer reviewed.
It was a 44,000 patient study. Proper peer review should take weeks.
Worse still, the data cut off (the last patient data collection) for the study was 14th November.
The COI declarations - which are usually sent in when the paper is *accepted* (rather than submitted for peer review) were dated 1st December.
So we have a 44,000 patient study - which the FDA needed 55 years to publish - yet Fernando Polack is essentially claiming that they cleaned, imputed, corrected, verified and analysed that data in less than a week.
Not possible...
... because assuming the discredited @NEJM then took another week to peer review, this would be completely inadequate peer review for this size of study. Which is why the NEJM didn't care whether there was fraud in the study, just like the #surgisphere paper.
But of course that didn't bother @MicrobiomDigest. She didn't say a word.
Here is the archive of the pubpeer record for this paper.
Until November 2022 there were only 5 anonymous comments.... archive.is/wip/YOFD7
But you'll never guess who got spooked in November 2022 and posted a comment (far too late of course) confirming what I had previously confirmed two years prior - that the data was NOT available.
So, I am going to give credit to @K_Sheldrick here. This is actually an important note in the pubpeer record and should be recognised by @AaronSiriSG@IamBrookJackson
What I think happened is that someone close to Kyle, or he himself, has realised that fraud was committed.
And attempted to look into the data himself.
And failed.
And hopefully he has realised that he has made a very grave error siding with people like Bik and @GidMK and bashing those of us who just wanted the truth.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
As of today, @medpagetoday and @KristinaMFiore are the only entities continuing the defamatory statements reporting on Sheldrick's original claim which he has now fully retracted.
If this was my son I wouldn't be posting pictures on twitter pretending everything was OK. I would be at the football club asking who had authorised the prescription of a therapy that was known to cause myocarditis and should never have been given.
I'm going to show you that whoever (from NSW health) told the NCAT tribunal (under oath) that they do not retain the data for the COVID vaccination reports... committed perjury.
Here is a different FOI report from NSW health asking a parallel question regarding manipulated data which involved @NCIRS - desperate to cover their tracks over a failed vaccination campaign.
GIPA 23/51
This page states clearly that the databases (the source data) exist
Here's the next part leading to another lie.
For an epidemiologist to review the "outputs" they must exist in a tangible format, as data frames are only held on the client computer. You can't send them to anyone.
The files for review existed, saying they didn't is a lie.
Amazing thread showing that .@NSWHealth under the leadership of @NSWCHO - who lied, and @BradHazzard - whose fascistic "temporary" laws led to thousands of deaths - hid and then deleted data showing that the vaccines were INCREASING ICU rates.
NSW health are so powerful that this tweet - exposing the $65m government grants to Kristine Macartney (the govt's expert witness in the Kassam trial challenging the vaccine mandates) was deleted as a direct response to a threat from the govt lawyers. archive.is/Kq4xA