Covid-19 Vaccine Protocols Reveal That Trials Are Designed To Succeed

Covid-19 Vaccine Protocols Reveal That Trials Are Designed To Succeed

Not surprising to most who are familiar with the ‘science’ that goes into vaccines in general, writing for Forbes, William A. Haseltine, professor at Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health says that the vaccine protocols are designed to succeed. Haseltine notes that preventing COVID-19 infection isn’t even being tested. With world leaders and people like Bill Gates stating that we cannot return to ‘normal’ until everyone is vaccinated, it’s concerning that the vaccine trials are not concerned with if the vaccines prevent infection at all.

Prevention of infection must be a critical endpoint. Any vaccine trial should include regular antigen testing every three days to test contagiousness to pick up early signs of infection and PCR testing once a week to confirm infection by SARS-CoV-2 test the ability of the vaccines to stave off infection. Prevention of infection is not a criterion for success for any of these vaccines. In fact, their endpoints all require confirmed infections and all those they will include in the analysis for success,  the only difference being the severity of symptoms between the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Measuring differences amongst only those infected by SARS-CoV-2 underscores the implicit conclusion that the vaccines are not expected to prevent infection, only modify symptoms of those infected.

Essentially they’re only looking at the difference in severity between the vaccinated and unvaccinated, not whether one got infected and one did not as most people would assume is the purpose of the vaccine to begin with.

We all expect an effective vaccine to prevent serious illness if infected. Three of the vaccine protocols—Moderna, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca—do not require that their vaccine prevent serious disease only that they prevent moderate symptoms which may be as mild as cough, or headache.
The greatest fear people have is dying from this disease. A vaccine must significantly or entirely reduce deaths from Covid-19. Over two hundred thousand people have died in the United States and nearly a million worldwide. None list mortality as a critical endpoint.

The bar for these manufacturers to claim “effiacy” is so low that they cannot miss, meaning that not only will the public be subject to dangerous vaccines, but they’re not likely to even work.

Interim analysis success requires a seventy percent efficacy. The vaccine or placebo will be given to thousands of people in each trial. For Moderna, the initial interim analysis will be based on the results of infection of only 53 people. The judgment reached in interim analysis is dependent upon the difference in the number of people with symptoms, which may be mild, in the vaccinated group versus the unvaccinated group. Moderna’s success margin is for 13 or less of those 53 to develop symptoms compared to 40 or more in their control group. For Johnson & Johnson, their interim analysis includes 77 vaccine recipients, with a success margin of 18 or less developing symptoms compared to 59 in the control group. For AstraZeneca, their interim analysis includes 50 vaccine recipients, with a success margin of 12 or less developing symptoms compared to 19 in the 25 person control group. Pfizer is even smaller in its success requirements. Their initial group includes 32 vaccine recipients, with a success margin of 7 or less developing symptoms compared to 25 in the control group.

The second surprise from these protocols is how mild the requirements for contracted Covid-19 symptoms are. A careful reading reveals that the minimum qualification for a case of Covid-19 is a positive PCR test and one or two mild symptoms. These include headache, fever, cough, or mild nausea. This is far from adequate. These vaccine trials are testing to prevent common cold symptoms.

These trials certainly do not give assurance that the vaccine will protect from the serious consequences of Covid-19. Johnson & Johnson is the only trial that requires the inclusion of severe Covid-19 cases, at least 5 for the 75 participant interim analysis.

One of the more immediate questions a trial needs to answer is whether a vaccine prevents infection. If someone takes this vaccine, are they far less likely to become infected with the virus? These trials all clearly focus on eliminating symptoms of Covid-19, and not infections themselves. Asymptomatic infection is listed as a secondary objective in these trials when they should be of critical importance.

It appears that all the pharmaceutical companies assume that the vaccine will never prevent infection. Their criteria for approval is the difference in symptoms between an infected control group and an infected vaccine group. They do not measure the difference between infection and noninfection as a primary motivation.

Article continues at


Vaccine Efficacy – Are “immunized” and “vaccinated” synonyms?

Vaccine Efficacy – Are “immunized” and “vaccinated” synonyms?

Sleight of Hand

Safe and Effective™ is the mantra we’re all familiar with. When we’re told a medical product is effective there is an automatic assumption that it has been scientifically proven to treat or prevent what it was designed for. It’s this assumption that proponents of vaccination prey on, hoping the average person will simply take them at their word.

“…there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza disease after vaccination with FLULAVAL”  – FLULAVAL Influenza Vaccine Insert (Licensed in Canada)

This excerpt from the FLULAVAL monograph (insert) highlights what is a little known fact of the industry – vaccines are never proven to be effective at actually preventing any disease. Rather, they’re said to be effective if they can elicit a temporal antibody response which theoretically might offer some temporary protection.

The problem with the theory is that antibodies do not equal immunity. Some people with high antibody levels still get sick, while others with low antibodies do not. It’s at best, an incomplete theory of immunity that was developed a century ago. Seemingly every decade new breakthroughs occur in our understanding of the immune system and how it works with the crucial role of the gut biome only recently starting to be understood and factored into the equation of how immunity works.

Learn more about Vaccine Efficacy at

Effective Failure

The lack of actual effectiveness is evidenced by the fact that outbreaks in fully vaccinated populations occur regularly. The Pertussis Surveillance Report issued by the CDC in 2017 found 44% of the more than 4,000 cases occurred in people who had received all three vaccinations. This is far from an isolated event, as vaccine failures have occurred regularly over the decades and continue to this day.

Learn more about Vaccine Failure at

Vaccinations are not “effective” in the way the word implies, and are never proven to reduce the incidence of disease only to elicit an antibody response. When weighing the risks versus benefits of a medical intervention that has little if any demonstrable benefits, the allowance for risks should be minimal.

Vaccine Safety – Is The Science Settled?

Vaccine Safety – Is The Science Settled?

Governments, the pharmaceutical industry, and our health officials repeatedly claim that vaccines are the first pharmaceutical drug that is universally safe. We’re consistently told that the “science is settled” and that time for debate is over. But is science really settled?

At Informed Consent Network Canada, we’ve catalogued hundreds of studies showing adverse events resulting from vaccination. The toxicity and risks involved with vaccine ingredients. The fact that unlike all other pharmaceutical drugs, vaccines are the only type of drug that isn’t required to undergo randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study to prove safety and efficacy.

Arguably, vaccines have the least settled science in all of medicine. They have the least rigorous study, for the shortest periods of follow-up of any drug. Vaccine safety is far from being established. In the United States, as many as 50,000 adverse events are reported to their national Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). A study funded by the US Dept. Of Health and Human Services found that just 1% of all adverse events are actually reported to the VAERS system which means the true number of adverse events could be in the millions every year.

Worse yet, vaccines are not as effective as they are reported to be. In fact, “effective” is not even used in the literal sense for vaccines, but rather the theoretical sense. Throughout history and up until today outbreaks consistently occur in vaccinated populations highlighting the common issue of vaccine failure.

With the effectiveness of vaccines in question, and the safety of vaccines having never been established – to suggest that the science is settled defies rationality.

Pin It on Pinterest