A British pathologist and researcher has said that Pfizer’s clinical trial for its COVID jabs in babies as young as six months old contains so many egregious flaws and misrepresentations that “the trial should be deemed null and void.”
Diagnostic pathologist and co-chair of the Health Advisory and Recovery Team (HART) group, Dr. Clare Craig recorded a six-minute video analyzing the data from Pfizer’s COVID jab trial in children aged between six months and four years old.
Collating information from Pfizer’s June 15 Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) application with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use of the drug in young children, Craig discovered that the vaccinated cohort contracted the virus in greater numbers than the placebo group, but that the pharmaceutical giant misreported the data to instead show that the “vaccine” was marginally more effective at preventing infection than foregoing the shot.
“There’s an awful lot about this trial that has shocked me, and I think it will shock you too,” Craig said in opening.
The former NHS consultant noted that the trial had “recruited 4526 children aged from six months to four years old” but that “3000 of these children did not make it to the end of the trial.”
“That is a huge number, two-thirds of them,” Craig emphasized. “Why was there this drop off? That needs to be answered and without an answer to that on that basis alone, this trial should be deemed null and void.”
Craig explained – and appendix B of the EUA application confirmed – that the Pfizer trial appear to have lowered the bar for what the was considered to be a case of “severe COVID” in children, qualifying cases as such if participants expressed “a slightly raised heart rate or a few more breaths per minute.” Before the vaccine trial, however, a child was considered to have severe COVID if they required mechanical ventilation, dialysis, or other invasive treatments.
“What they did was to utterly twist the data,” Craig declared.
