Alex Berenson

2022-03-01 20:16:35 One other bit of bookkeeping - if you are a founding member on Substack (the $300 level) and would like a signed first edition of PANDEMIA, please email me your address at signedpandemiacopy@gmail.com. If you are not a founding member and would like to be, you can always upgrade here.

: https://substack.com/account/settings Open / Comment

2022-03-01 20:16:23 A word on censorship

Since the failed effort to deplatform Joe Rogan and the Department of Homeland Security bulletin equating Covid skepticism with terrorism a few weeks ago, the noise has died down again. Still, it may be a good idea to sign up for my Telegram channel, which is fairly close to censor-proof, just in case.

You can find it here.

https://t.me/Alex_Berenson

And back to research for Berenson v. Twitter. Turns out we have some nice Ninth Circuit precedents! I like nice Ninth Circuit precedents.

(Some of you have asked about supporting the suit financially. As I’ve said since Twitter banned me, I would rather not ask for small individual donations - there’s no reason anyone with a mortgage should be paying for this fight - but if writing a five-figure check is in your wheelhouse, please let me know and I can put you in touch with my lawyer.) Open / Comment

2022-03-01 18:38:29 This is Aubrey. He/him has thoughts.

Okay, here’s the thing.

Drug development is really hard. Pharmaceuticals and biologics mostly don’t work. Sometimes they have serious side effects. Randomized clinical trials are the ONLY way to know with any reasonable certainty whether a new therapeutic will do what its developer says it does.

A drug that fails to show meaningful clinical benefit (which does NOT mean cure) with more than 95 percent statistical significance in a carefully designed clinical trial is likely to be at best useless and at worst harmful in the real world. Trials generally OVERSTATE the effectiveness of medicines for all kinds of complex reasons.

Trials aren’t perfect. But in a world filled with error, they are not just our best but our only real alternative to guesswork.

Find a different way to mess up your kids, Aubrey. Open / Comment

2022-03-01 18:37:45 The New York Times hits a new Covid low on vaccines for kids, thanks to one Aubrey Clayton, PhD

I know, I didn’t think it was possible either.

But today the NYT ran a opinion piece basically arguing the Food and Drug Administration should okay the Pfizer mRNA shot for children under 5 even if they fail the ongoing clinical trial.

This hideousness was titled

A Smarter Way to Think About the Under-5 Vaccine
As soon as I saw the headline I knew it would be bad. But I couldn’t imagine how bad.

The piece

Imma translate it for you from scared academic phonics into English:

Pfizer’s mRNA shot appears to be failing its clinical trial in little kids.

Yes, it can’t even manage to demonstrate benefit in a trial intentionally designed to be as easy as possible to pass. (Remember, the pivotal clinical trials for mRNA jabs in adults showed a HUGE benefit against Covid infection, a benefit that doesn’t exist.)

I, Aubrey Clayton, PhD, wish to force my three young children to take a biotechnology that is useless for them to protect them from a disease that is an infinitesimal risk to them.

That way I can stop abusing them by forcing them to have outdoor play dates in subfreezing temperatures and wear masks on their tiny faces. Because I’m scared, or my second cousin has long Covid, or I have pronouns in my biography, who knows?

Point is, I want them to get the shot. Like about 10 percent of parents of little kids nationally, and 100 percent of the parents of little kids I know, I WANT THEM TO GET THE SHOT. I WANT I WANT.

Sad me. It looks like the FDA may do what it has done for generations, which is require that the trial designed to show a medicine works actually show it works.

Sad me so sad. So I am proposing an alternative pathway to approval. It’s called the, “I really want this shot to work so I’m going to assume it works and look for evidence supporting that assumption” pathway for approval.

Then I can give my children the useless biotechnology and feel better.

Yay me. Open / Comment

2022-03-01 03:17:18 Don’t worry, though, the vaccine fanatics will be glad to tell you correlation is not causation and VAERS is not reliable (they are correct, the data suggest that 70 to 95 percent of events are NOT reported, depending on seriousness).

Anyway it was all worth it to save grandma or something! Remember, dead kids have their whole lives behind them, grandma has precious years ahead.*

*Official motto of Team Apocalypse.**

**Stuff like this is why they hate me.

Good.

Let them.

I will never stop coming for the people who did this. Open / Comment

2022-03-01 03:17:09 And the occasional psychiatric crisis: Open / Comment

2022-03-01 03:16:54 A fair bit of sudden-onset diabetes and DKA: Open / Comment

2022-03-01 03:16:13 Suffer the children

VAERS - the federal side effects reporting system - has received more than 500 reports of life-threatening events, permanent disability,or deaths following mRNA shots in kids and adolescents.

In the light of today’s report that the jabs actually increase the risk of Covid infection in kids under 12 - and do little or nothing to reduce hospitalizations - I figured you might want to see what those reports actually look like.

Lots of myo/pericarditis and other cardiovascular events: Open / Comment

2022-03-01 01:30:13 The study covered the period from mid-December through the end of January, when the Omicron variant became predominant. Although many other studies have shown the vaccines are largely useless against Omicron infection in adults after four months, this database makes clear they are even more useless even more quickly for children.

Children 5 to 11 receive a smaller mRNA dose than adolescents and adults, 10 micrograms versus 30 for each shot. It is not clear whether the smaller dose is the reason the shots are even less effective in kids than in adults, or whether children’s immune systems react differently to mRNA at any dose.

Vaccine protection against Covid hospitalization in children under 12 also dropped over time. By the final two weeks of the study, vaccines offered no statistically significant protection against hospitalizations from Covid, though the numbers were very small.

The database covered 365,000 vaccinated children in New York state aged 5-11. The researchers did not mention the negative effectiveness in their discussion of their findings. Open / Comment

2022-03-01 01:30:03 Six weeks after becoming fully vaccinated, kids under 12 are 40 percent MORE likely to be infected Covid than those who never received mRNA shots, a huge New York state database shows

The mRNA jabs provide some protection for the first two weeks of full vaccination. But it declines rapidly, turns negative by the fifth week, and more sharply negative in the sixth

“Negative” vaccine efficacy means that vaccinated people are more likely to become infected. It is not clear how high the increased risk may become for young children, since the database only covered six weeks and the trend worsened each week

The blue bar in the chart below shows the relative odds of unvaccinated and vaccinated children to get Covid. The dashed red line equals a risk ratio of 1 - a 50/50 risk

See how the blue bar falls each week and drops below the red line after 35 days? At point, unvaccinated children have lower risk. The orange bar is kids 12-17 They still have some protection six weeks out, although it too is declining

SOURCE Open / Comment