Clinical Trial Designer: Not Safe and Not Effective | Christine Cotton

I caught up with Christine Cotton in southern France. She has had a long and distinguished career working for the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world designing clinical trials and making sure the methodology was sound. My French contacts brought Christine to my attention as one of the most credible voices from inside the pharmaceutical industry speaking out on the questionable methodology of the Pfizer clinical trials and the misleading statistics repeated to the public. I got in contact with her and drove to her house in French countryside for a thorough interview to break the story down.

“I’ve never seen such a bad clinical trial in my life.”

In this interview Christine Cotton breaks down how a good clinical trial should be structured. When the clinical trial study reports for the Pfizer jab were released in December 2020 she reviewed them thoroughly and was shocked by what she discovered.

She had never seen such a poorly designed clinical trial in her life and found significant bias baked into the trial and missing data.

Pfizer telescoped a 24-month process into 3 months, which means that only immediate adverse events could have been identified. Mid-term and long-term adverse events could not have been taken into consideration. She points out the inherent risk of running a clinical trial so quickly with the multiple phases of the trial overlapping. The jab was allegedly developed within three months of the outbreak starting, which is questionable.

PLEASE DONATE
https://bigpicture.watch/newsletter

The criterion Pfizer used was symptomatic Covid confirmed with a PCR test. This brings up the issue of statistical bias.

The clinical trials only measured for antibodies, rather than T cells or lymphocytes. And antibodies were only tested for a three-month period and no longer. This data showed a dwindling of antibody immunity in the third month. This questionable methodology coincided suspiciously with the marketing of the perpetual booster shots to the public.If statistical bias is not omitted in a clinical trial, than it's conclusion are invariably false. The Pfizer data showed that many died within days and weeks after the injection, yet those criteria were not considered in the analysis.

The public was constantly told of the efficacy rates of the jab, but as Christine Cotton points out, they didn't tell you the confidence interval of those efficacy rates. If the confidence interval of those rates were low, which they were, than those efficacy rates are meaningless.

Listen to this interview to better understand the dynamics of designing and running a clinical trial and what to look for to spot deceptive statistics presented by the media!

Cordially,
James Patrick

PLEASE SUPPORT OUR WORK.
https://bigpicture.watch/fund-a-film/
It costs a lot to make these interviews and we are grateful for any donation BIG or SMALL.