- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
AG, I suggest extreme caution, about both the hearing, and this report about it.
The hearing seems to have been politicised and adversarial, many of the questions being posed by members of the right wing CDU, with the most biased questions coming from a particularly right wing member, Saskia Ludwig. This may explain some of the secrecy, though I’ve little doubt that secrecy was also urged by pharmaceutical companies, as they always avoid scrutiny as much as possible.
I cannot read German, and from the translation I cannot tell whether the references given in the article were the documentary evidence presented to the hearing, or just supporting articles chosen by Christine Born, who wrote the article you linked to. However, two of these references are to YouTube which, of course, frequently promotes pseudoscience. Five of the twelve references are to tkp.at which is clearly a right wing site, no less than four of them being by Peter F. Mayer who promotes the view that climate change is a hoax by a worldwide conspiracy of scientists. One of these references, tellingly and predictably, is based upon the editorial to Stat by John Ioannidis, made in the early months of the pandemic and strongly criticised by most epidemiologists, in which Ioannidis underestimated the US infection fatality rate by a factor of four, as it turned out, and claimed there were only seven covid deaths aboard the cruise ship Diamond Princess, when the eventual death toll was thirteen. In another reference, Mayer badly misrepresents UK official data despite each table carrying a clear warning about likely misinterpretation, which Mayer simply ignored.
These are the same old anti-mask, anti-lockdown crowd now doing their anti-vax thing. I’m really not surprised that the officials at the hearing were cagey.
Oh, sorry; I forgot a positive point I meant to include, a section I strongly approve of:
– “The RKI subsequently monitors the effectiveness of the vaccination in the population in post-marketing studies (PMS), whereby the performance of medical devices is checked “in the field”, i.e. in the population. [5] Post-marketing – an interesting term and association when it comes to medicine, health and human life.”
Big Bad Pharma spends more on marketing than on research and development; twice as much, by some estimates. There should be NO place for marketing in pharmaceuticals, as it can only make health outcomes worse.
