Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Aug 27 7 tweets 4 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
For the record, Ben Goldacre had campaigned for years for full data transparency.
In 2017 he backtracked.
The paper is here.

This happened under Stuart Buck's grant.

The call for full data transparency died in 2017.
Pfizer would benefit in 2020. bmj.com/content/357/bm…

Also for the record there were two papers on the "failure" of #hydroxychloroquine published in the same journal, using huge datasets not available for audit, within 2 months late 2020.

The second was Ben Goldacre's OPENsafely group.
The earlier paper was funded by pharma and supposedly found over 300,000 patients who were taking Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin for Rheumatoid arthritis.

That is not a combination used for RA.

This paper needs to be fully audited.

So what is the probability that two huge papers (over 100,000 patients) appeared at around the same time, in the same journal, after the #surgisphere scandal had died down, using exactly the same kind of model as Surgisphere, and not available for inspection?

@chrismartenson I should also point out that we have looked at this many times before, so this is an archival (legal) record.

OPENsafely have produced papers previously that are not consistent with the same data from open sources.

#LancetGate #LancetGate2
It's also worth noting that in the Lancet Rheumatology Goldacre paper, the COVID mortality rate for HCQ users was 0.2% - in the UK in April 2020.

The corresponding published mortality for the UK was over 0.5%.

For over 70's:
HCQ mortality 0.3%
UK mortality 1.2%

Over 80's
HCQ mortality 1%
UK mortality 5%

The whole cohort had similar mortality rates with or without HCQ, but the non-HCQ users were using other inflammatory modulators (DMARDs).

Goldacre's paper probably found one of the most striking cohorts (and thus treatment options) with reduced COVID mortality, but this was never investigated.

@profnfenton @joshg99 @ClareCraigPath @P_McCulloughMD @stkirsch @alexandrosM

And just imagine that the massive reduction (60%+) in death rate in the #Hydroxychloroquine (or DMARD) cohort was known by Rentsch and Goldacre in Jan 2021 but they failed to declare it, and refused to release the data...

There were 78,000 COVID deaths in the UK in 2021.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Jikkyleaks 🐭

Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Jikkyleaks

Aug 24
What if...
@francescagino refused to stay silent on #Hydroxychloroquine because she had been to Italy and knew that they had discovered that it reduced deaths by half?

Would that have been enough reason for her to be targeted for discrediting?
That large study in Italy in the early phase of the COVID outbreak not only showed a robust improvement in survival in hospitalised patients with COVID, but the death rate was HALVED in the most severe patients. Image
So what was Gino's role in Italy?

This. I tweeted a few weeks ago that this was COVID propaganda. It is. It was. It copied what everybody else was saying - that there was some novel lethal disease. We know better now of course.

Read 8 tweets
Aug 22
The difference between our side and the pharma sponsored propaganda units is that we will support people who disagree with us.

This is an excellent piece on how #DataColada have emulated #ChisquaredKyle by claiming fraud using the wrong methods.

And here is the original paper (retracted).
It's a psychology study, so the statistics are not at a high level. This should have been picked up at peer review, but it probably passed because of the standards in that field.

And here is #DataColada's review of the insurance data.
The points they make are valid. The data does indeed look like junk the way it's presented here.

But Francesca Gina is not the person who wrote the paper. She was the third author.
Read 12 tweets
Aug 20
WHOA! 🧀🧀🧀

Novavax's patent sequence coding for their "non-genetic vaccine" is different from every other SARS-COV-2 spike protein sequence (Wuhan, Pfizer, Moderna).

#NovaGate just joined #taggate

There is only one explanation.
Sequence 35 in the Novavax patent (MX473662.1) is the DNA sequence coding for the Wuhan spike (with the PP mutation common to all the mRNA vaccines).

It only matches 73%. It should be 99%+.

There is no reason to codon optimise for a protein vaccine.

What that means: when coding for a viral protein, they should use the same RNA sequence as the virus.

They changed the RNA sequence but produce the exact same protein.
Pfizer did too, so did Moderna.
It was partially covered in #Coptigate but there is more to it.

Read 16 tweets
Aug 19

#taggate may become a reality in time, but for now @Kevin_McKernan has cleverly produced an assay that allows pathologists to identify *which* vaccine mRNA is present in tumour tissues.

This could support some huge lawsuits

Read 4 tweets
Aug 18

I have discovered something.
And you're not going to like it.

Saponin is a transfectant and Novavax didn't tell you.

Add one more piece of information there is something damning that nobody realised.

See next tweet.


This is the second piece of information that blows open a global #Novavax scandal.

That any plasmid DNA cannot be removed by traditional DNAase processes if a transfectant nanoparticle is present.

And if a transfectant (a chemical that helps DNA get into cells) is present...

And the plasmid that made the Novavax spike protein has not been removed...

Novavax recipients have been given a gene therapy without consent.

Assault on a massive scale.
@Fynnderella1 @jjcouey
Read 12 tweets
Aug 15

Because so many Pharma advocates are trying to wriggle out of this really obvious fail of the COVID vaccines in preventing #LongCOVID I'll put it in a graph format, with references in the tweets to follow.

@stkirsch @_johnbye @Johnincarlisle https://t.co/Nuft3tOQZb
The green column is the incidence of #LongCOVID (i.e. related symptoms lasting more than 90 days after a COVID infection) in a big study published in 2021.

The incidence was only 2.3%.
This was before any vaccines and in the worst waves (alpha & delta)

The middle column is the incidence of #LongCOVID in patients who got COVID before they were vaccinated, but reported Long COVID after vaccination.

It's deliberately confusing:
The 17% figure is the difference against those who didn't get COVID!
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!