by Meike Leonard, Daily Mail:
- Members of the Covid-19 advisory board claim crucial data was withheld
- Omitted study showed that new booster was LESS effective than original jab
- Though data was limited, advisors say it should have been shown to them
- US taxpayers have forked out $5billion for new booster, with very low uptake
- Vaccine advisory board say they’re ‘disappointed’ and ‘angry’ at omission
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
Moderna and the Food and Drug Association (FDA) have been accused of concealing data during the approval process for the pharma giant’s bivalent Covid booster.
Vaccine advisors who signed off on the updated shot late last year claim they were not shown trial data that indicated the booster was actually less effective at preventing Covid than the older vaccine it was meant to replace.
While the early trial results had substantial limitations, ‘disappointed’ and ‘angry advisors say its omission from panel discussions shows a remarkable lack of transparency.
US taxpayers ended up shelling out nearly $5billion on the new booster, which was intended to enhance immunity against new variants.
FDA and CDC advisors speaking out against the data omission include Dr. Paul Offit, Dr. Eric Rubin and Dr. Pablo Sanchez
The infection data not shared with advisors, although from a limited sample size, indicated that the the new bivalent booster was actually LESS effective than the original vaccine at preventing new strains of Covid-19. 3.2 percent of study participants given the new vax went on to catch the virus, compared to just 1.9 percent of those given the old shot
For new vaccines to be approved, both the FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) must convene their advisory boards and make presentations to a panel of advisors. This panel of objective reviewers then votes on whether or not to recommend its approval.
It is these independent advisors – including infectious disease experts and vaccinologists from Stanford, the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard – who are now raising concerns about the partial information shown to them during approval discussions for the bivalent booster.
At both an FDA meeting in June and a CDC advisory panel in September, experts were shown reams of information suggesting that the new bivalent vaccine was more effective than its predecessor.
