Political Memes

I actually never heard about this one, so can't really comment.

I was mostly referring to the following two things:

• Number of 'adverse reactions' that wasn't disclosed until long after vaccinations
• Pfizer and FDA agreeing to publicize the clinical trial data very slowly over decades, until about year 2100

Now, taking a closer look at both, it seems I may have read misinformation and gravely misunderstood the situation. For some reason, even people with PhDs in medicine are spreading what now looks to me like false claims online, which is troubling.

First one - 'adverse reactions' seems to be a pointless statistic, since it's all kinds of adverse reactions, regardless of nature or link to the vaccine. So now I'm not sure why it's even included in the documents. In any case, I can't find any source for links between Pfizer's vaccines and these reactions, so I'll have to assume they never occurred or were negligible.

Second - I'm a little confused here. Many sources claim Pfizer's clinical trial data was going to be published so slowly (taking several decades in total) due to FDA's FOIA office only having 10 staff members.

Now that sounds odd. Shouldn't all these documents be published ASAP? Surely it's not standard procedure to publish half of the data long after everyone affected is dead? And in the end, they did publish it all almost immediately after a court order, so it looks like it was entirely possible.

All in all, there are some circumstances that look suspicious, which is just enough to form believable-sounding, but probably false theories. Especially by medical doctors, who are supposed to be the source of truthfull information.

While I can't say I'm 100% convinced Pfizer did nothing wrong - I also can't say there's nearly enough evidence to claim it did. Admittedly, I should have read more on the subject before posting. I'll definitely have to review my usual sources for presence of misinformation. I'll also happily read more if anyone has anything good to share.