Fraudci-lent ‘Science’

 

justice and COVID-19The Hill story promoting Fraudci’s latest line caught my eye. Consider the following, and the related story on the FDA advisory panel’s entirely unscientific conduct. Scientific study, we don’t need no stinkin’ studies! This is Fraudci-lent “science.”

ABC’s Martha Raddatz asked Fauci on “This Week” if the millions of Americans who received the Johnson & Johnson (J&J) COVID-19 vaccine should be concerned after a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory committee voted unanimously to recommend adults receive a booster shot of the vaccine.

“No, not at all, Martha. I think that they should feel good about it because what the advisers to the FDA felt is that, given the data that they saw, very likely this should have been a two-dose vaccine to begin with,” Fauci said.

[ . . . ]

Last week, an FDA advisory committee met to vote on whether to recommend Americans receive a booster shot of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. The FDA, which had to rely on data provided by the vaccine maker given that trial data had not been provided to the agency in time, decided to vote on recommending it despite the sample size of 17 people.

Wait, what? A “sample” size of 17 people is the basis of a so-called scientific recommendation from the Food and Drug Administration. That is fraud, it is science fantasy, not evidence-based medicine. Here are the details of the FDA’s Johnson & Johnson shot shenanigans:

The agency’s vaccine advisory committee voted unanimously, 19-0, to recommend authorization of a second dose as early as two months after the primary shot for anyone ages 18 and older.

Johnson & Johnson representatives told the panel that a second dose given either two months or six months after the first shot increased antibody levels, but a single dose of the vaccine continued to offer protection.

The recommendation, which is not binding, will now be taken up by the FDA, which could make a decision within days.

Committee members expressed concern with the quality of data presented by the company, because there were ultimately only 17 people included in an analysis, who were followed for six months.

The FDA said it relied heavily on studies conducted by Johnson & Johnson and could not independently confirm many of the findings because data from the trials were not submitted in time.

Archana Chatterjee, an infectious disease expert at Rosalind Franklin University, asked FDA officials why there was even a meeting if the agency hadn’t been able to conduct its own studies.

Peter Marks, the head of the agency’s vaccine division, said it could have taken months to review all the data, and the agency is trying to act as quickly as possible.

Whatever you think of vaccinations in general, and COVID-19 vaccinations more narrowly, and the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine in particular, these two stories and the actions of the FDA must be disquieting.

Published in Healthcare
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 65 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Columbo Member
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Fraudci said that masks not really effective in keeping out virus!

    Why should anyone believe anything this Fraud ever says?!

    • #1
  2. Sandy Member
    Sandy
    @Sandy

    Seventeen people, for six months, and no control group.  “Disquieting” to say the least.

    • #2
  3. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    It just keeps getting worse and worse. I have no idea why they let him run loose–or run his mouth off.

    • #3
  4. W Bob Member
    W Bob
    @WBob

    Very confusing. Do you really need a trial, even one with only 17 people, to conclude that a booster will boost your immunity? That seems like it would go without saying. Of course it will increase immunity. The question is whether you need it. Based on J and J’s data from its original trials last year, they had said that the first dose provided substantial protection for at least 8 months. Has that been reversed now? 

    • #4
  5. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Very confusing. Do you really need a trial, even one with only 17 people, to conclude that a booster will boost your immunity? That seems like it would go without saying. Of course it will increase immunity. The question is whether you need it. Based on J and J’s data from its original trials last year, they had said that the first dose provided substantial protection for at least 8 months. Has that been reversed now?

    I think the data would be more to confirm that a booster boosts it enough to be worth any as-yet-unknown risks, and to (hopefully) confirm that the risks of a booster are few and far between.

    • #5
  6. Jim McConnell Member
    Jim McConnell
    @JimMcConnell

    I’m not a big believe in conspiracy theories, but I’m a very big believer in the stupidity of regulators; and there is an abundance of history to justify that belief. Even good intentions aren’t always enough to justify a course of action.

    • #6
  7. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Very confusing. Do you really need a trial, even one with only 17 people, to conclude that a booster will boost your immunity? That seems like it would go without saying. Of course it will increase immunity. The question is whether you need it. Based on J and J’s data from its original trials last year, they had said that the first dose provided substantial protection for at least 8 months. Has that been reversed now?

    I think the data would be more to confirm that a booster boosts it enough to be worth any as-yet-unknown risks, and to (hopefully) confirm that the risks of a booster are few and far between.

    Yes, remember all that “safe AND effective” talk early in 2020?

    • #7
  8. W Bob Member
    W Bob
    @WBob

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Very confusing. Do you really need a trial, even one with only 17 people, to conclude that a booster will boost your immunity? That seems like it would go without saying. Of course it will increase immunity. The question is whether you need it. Based on J and J’s data from its original trials last year, they had said that the first dose provided substantial protection for at least 8 months. Has that been reversed now?

    I think the data would be more to confirm that a booster boosts it enough to be worth any as-yet-unknown risks, and to (hopefully) confirm that the risks of a booster are few and far between.

    Yes, remember all that “safe AND effective” talk early in 2020?

    I got the JJ shot six months ago. I think I’m going to sit this round out. If the virus is still a problem  a couple years from now and the shot still looks safe, I’ll think about it. But whatever Fauci says is going in one ear and out the other. 

    • #8
  9. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    W Bob (View Comment):
    whatever Fauci says is going in one ear and out the other. 

    Words running in one ear and out the other are a known side effect of the Wu Flu vaccines.

    • #9
  10. Doctor Robert Member
    Doctor Robert
    @DoctorRobert

    Sandy (View Comment):
    Seventeen people, for six months, and no control group.  “Disquieting” to say the least.

    Disquieting and meaningless.  Try 1700 people, 850 in each group, half getting mock boosters, comparing rates of clinical disease, now you have my attention.

    May we have some data on the safety of Jansen boosters?
    How about some data on the need for any vaccine in Covid survivors?

    • #10
  11. DonG (CAGW is a hoax) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a hoax)
    @DonG

    Wait.  The panel voting on boosters (19) was larger than the study group (17)?   These tyrants are not even pretending any more.

    • #11
  12. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Maybe they were the study group.

    • #12
  13. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):
    whatever Fauci says is going in one ear and out the other.

    Words running in one ear and out the other are a known side effect of the Wu Flu vaccines.

    But hasn’t Fauci assured  us that if we simply wear masks over our ears, that problem could be solved!

     

     

    • #13
  14. Buckpasser Member
    Buckpasser
    @Buckpasser

    Ear muffs!!!   And face diapers!!!   Bozo the fauci told me that we could cure all that ails us if we just did this!!!

    • #14
  15. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Why should Moderna and Pfizer get all the taxpayer money? J&J wants some of that sweet, sweet government cash.

    And if people have to die so that J&J execs get their yachts, well, “eggs –> omelet”.

     

    • #15
  16. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Very confusing. Do you really need a trial, even one with only 17 people, to conclude that a booster will boost your immunity? That seems like it would go without saying. Of course it will increase immunity. The question is whether you need it. Based on J and J’s data from its original trials last year, they had said that the first dose provided substantial protection for at least 8 months. Has that been reversed now?

    I think the data would be more to confirm that a booster boosts it enough to be worth any as-yet-unknown risks, and to (hopefully) confirm that the risks of a booster are few and far between.

    People are dying from these shots. They halted Swine Flu shots in the 70s after fewer than 50 deaths from the vaccine and the development of Guillian-Barre Syndrome in hundreds more. This after 45 million Americans had been jabbed.

    We’ve had a lot more deaths from the COVID jab, but Big Pharma execs must have their yachts!

    We are ruled by monsters.

    • #16
  17. Full Size Tabby Member
    Full Size Tabby
    @FullSizeTabby

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Very confusing. Do you really need a trial, even one with only 17 people, to conclude that a booster will boost your immunity? That seems like it would go without saying. Of course it will increase immunity. The question is whether you need it. Based on J and J’s data from its original trials last year, they had said that the first dose provided substantial protection for at least 8 months. Has that been reversed now?

    I think the data would be more to confirm that a booster boosts it enough to be worth any as-yet-unknown risks, and to (hopefully) confirm that the risks of a booster are few and far between.

    Yes, remember all that “safe AND effective” talk early in 2020?

    I got the JJ shot six months ago. I think I’m going to sit this round out. If the virus is still a problem a couple years from now and the shot still looks safe, I’ll think about it. But whatever Fauci says is going in one ear and out the other.

    Perhaps the people baffled by all the public “vaccine hesitancy” will be interested in my own transition from being relatively vaccine enthusiastic in spring 2021 to extremely vaccine hesitant today.

    Most of my transition into vaccine hesitancy is because the information on the Covid vaccines themselves is changing so rapidly. In the six months since I received both doses of the Pfizer Covid vaccine, information has come out claiming that the Pfizer Covid vaccine doesn’t work as originally advertised, and that its effectiveness doesn’t last, and so I need to get a “booster.” Why wasn’t that known before I got the original vaccine? How many more “boosters” are going to be required? What happens as “boosters” start building up in my body? Why does the information about the dosages and effectiveness of the J&J Covid vaccine keep changing? Let me know when the data and information about the Covid vaccines stabilize and stop changing every few weeks. Then I’ll reconsider my current plan NOT to take the Pfizer Covid vaccine “booster.”

    Vaccine mandates also contribute to my transition to vaccine hesitancy. My personality is such that requiring something of me raises in me an inclination to resist. But even from just a logic standpoint, when officials transitioned from encouraging me to get vaccinated to trying to require me to get vaccinated, I start asking, “Why?” If I am being required to do something, that something will probably cost me more than it will benefit me. Especially when I am being required to do something about which the data and information is constantly changing. Vaccine mandates make no sense until the information and data about those vaccines stabilize and stop changing every few weeks. 

    • #17
  18. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):
    How many more “boosters” are going to be required?

    How many yachts does a person need?

    • #18
  19. Ontheleftcoast Member
    Ontheleftcoast
    @Ontheleftcoast

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Very confusing. Do you really need a trial, even one with only 17 people, to conclude that a booster will boost your immunity? That seems like it would go without saying. Of course it will increase immunity. The question is whether you need it. Based on J and J’s data from its original trials last year, they had said that the first dose provided substantial protection for at least 8 months. Has that been reversed now?

    I think the data would be more to confirm that a booster boosts it enough to be worth any as-yet-unknown risks, and to (hopefully) confirm that the risks of a booster are few and far between.

    At best, the study would see if it reinforces flagging antibody levels. It would be nice to know if the known risks of the J&J vaccine are additive: If you got the jab with no serious problems (Guillan-Barre syndrome, blood clots, stroke, thrombocytopenia) are you at risk of them developing from a second shot? In reality, that ain’t gonna happen. they’re rare enough that a study big enough to find out won’t be done.

    People getting the booster are the experiment, but it will be a lousy experiment. VAERS is designed not to report adverse effects known or previously unknown,  but to not report them. It’s been underreporting by a factor of at least 90% since it was set up. Anaphylaxis will get reported better, since it shows up very quickly.

    • #19
  20. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):
    Perhaps the people baffled by all the public “vaccine hesitancy” will be interested in my own transition from being relatively vaccine enthusiastic in spring 2021 to extremely vaccine hesitant today.

    I respect your decision, FST. In our cases, my husband is 75 with a compromised immune system. I’m 71 (soon to be 72) and am doing well. Our doctor, however, who is no pushover by any means, strongly encouraged us to get the booster. I also plan to return to hospice volunteering. So we will get the booster in the next couple of weeks. (My husband is having cataract surgery this week and doesn’t want to do anything that could compromise that plan.)

    But that’s it for me, at least. No more boosters. Forget mandates. 

    • #20
  21. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):
    Perhaps the people baffled by all the public “vaccine hesitancy” will be interested in my own transition from being relatively vaccine enthusiastic in spring 2021 to extremely vaccine hesitant today.

    Had I would enough and time, I could take a look at Delta cases and some arguments about VAERS and, possibly, join you.

    It’s so wrong that they’re leaving us all to figure it out for ourselves. Not just to make our own decisions–they actually should let us do that.

    But they won’t even give us the information we need to make an informed decision.

    It’s all Vaccines, Masks, Lockdowns, January 6, and The Election Was Safe. It’s all the narratives of the PTB.

    Contrary evidence sometimes gets loudly refuted when it’s low-hanging fruit, and sometimes even the refutations are glaring fallacies.  Usually contrary evidence is just ignored, and contrary arguments are censored.

    It’s no wonder people jump to conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories explain the efforts at social control through narratives as well as those narratives explain the available data.

    People who want better evidence are left to fend for themselves–first to find it and then to evaluate it. Who has that kind of time?

    • #21
  22. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Very confusing. Do you really need a trial, even one with only 17 people, to conclude that a booster will boost your immunity? That seems like it would go without saying. Of course it will increase immunity. The question is whether you need it. Based on J and J’s data from its original trials last year, they had said that the first dose provided substantial protection for at least 8 months. Has that been reversed now?

    I think the data would be more to confirm that a booster boosts it enough to be worth any as-yet-unknown risks, and to (hopefully) confirm that the risks of a booster are few and far between.

    People are dying from these shots. They halted Swine Flu shots in the 70s after fewer than 50 deaths from the vaccine and the development of Guillian-Barre Syndrome in hundreds more. This after 45 million Americans had been jabbed.

    We’ve had a lot more deaths from the COVID jab, but Big Pharma execs must have their yachts!

    We are ruled by monsters.

    But we have been assured, including by members of the medical-industrial complex right here on R>, that they are the very finest, noblest of monsters.

    • #22
  23. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Very confusing. Do you really need a trial, even one with only 17 people, to conclude that a booster will boost your immunity? SNIP  Of course it will increase immunity. The question is whether you need it. Based on J and J’s data from its original trials last year, they had said that the first dose provided substantial protection for at least 8 months. Has that been reversed now?

    I think the data would be more to confirm that a booster boosts it enough to be worth any as-yet-unknown risks, and to (hopefully) confirm that the risks of a booster are few and far between.

    Yes, remember all that “safe AND effective” talk early in 2020?

    I got the JJ shot six months ago. I think I’m going to sit this round out. If the virus is still a problem a couple years from now and the shot still looks safe, I’ll think about it. But whatever Fauci says is going in one ear and out the other.

    Perhaps the people baffled by all the public “vaccine hesitancy” will be interested in my own transition from being relatively vaccine enthusiastic in spring 2021 to extremely vaccine hesitant today.

    Most of my transition into vaccine hesitancy is because the information on the Covid vaccines themselves is changing so rapidly. In the six months since I received both doses of the Pfizer Covid vaccine, information has come out claiming that the Pfizer Covid vaccine doesn’t work as originally advertised, and that its effectiveness doesn’t last, and so I need to get a “booster.” SNIP  How many more “boosters” are going to be required? What happens as “boosters” start building up in my body? Why does the information about the dosages and effectiveness of the J&J Covid vaccine keep changing? Let me know when the data and information about the Covid vaccines stabilize and stop changing every few weeks. Then I’ll reconsider my current plan NOT to take the Pfizer Covid vaccine “booster.”

    Vaccine mandates also contribute to my transition to vaccine hesitancy. My personality is such that requiring something of me raises in me an inclination to resist. But even from just a logic standpoint, when officials transitioned from encouraging me to get vaccinated to trying to require me to get vaccinated, I start asking, “Why?” If I am being required to do something, that something will probably cost me more than it will benefit me. Especially when I am being required to do something about which the data and information is constantly changing. Vaccine mandates make no sense until the information and data about those vaccines stabilize and stop changing every few weeks.

    Super quick timeline of Fauci walking  back the vax efficacy from over 90% efficacy to around 33%, if you have twitter:

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1450148580065374209

    • #23
  24. Old Bathos Moderator
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    Dr. Fauci, will I still need three masks after the fourth booster?

    Dr.  Fauci, as of yesterday, October 12, 2026, WHO reports only nine cases of COVID-19, worldwide, all asymptomatic, all in the jungle region of Ecuador.  Do you still recommend that we restrict normal Thanksgiving gatherings this year?

    The deference granted this putz is astounding.  He is the Michael Avenenti of medical science–completely full of it yet elevated by the left because he is seen as an enemy of the libertarian right and an instrument of more benevolent government control.  He has flip-flopped and/or been wrong about every aspect of the pandemic and yet he supposedly farts pure science.  He is the chief scientist of Poyais, the Bernie Madoff of public health policy ideas, and will someday be declared the patron saint of amnesiacs and the delusional–by the Church of Satan.

    • #24
  25. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Old Bathos (View Comment):
    He is the Michael Avenenti of medical science

    If only he could end up in prison, too.

    But prison’s too good. As the architect of the COVID-19 virus, he should be brought before an international tribunal for his role in the deaths of millions worldwide. He should be tried, found guilty, drawn and quartered, his head placed on a pike on the Washington Mall where passersby can throw rotten fruit at it.

    What am I saying? We’ll be so starved by supply chain problems that we’ll be eating that rotten fruit. Spit on him, instead.

    (That’s a little vindictive, Drew . . .)

    Yes. Yes it is.

    • #25
  26. Old Bathos Moderator
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Old Bathos (View Comment):
    He is the Michael Avenenti of medical science

    If only he could end up in prison, too.

    But prison’s too good. As the architect of the COVID-19 virus, he should be brought before an international tribunal for his role in the deaths of millions worldwide. He should be tried, found guilty, drawn and quartered, his head placed on a pike on the Washington Mall where passersby can throw rotten fruit at it.

    What am I saying? We’ll be so starved by supply chain problems that we’ll be eating that rotten fruit. Spit on him, instead.

    (That’s a little vindictive, Drew . . .)

    Yes. Yes it is.

    I thought I was over the top but you went there so I feel better.

    • #26
  27. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    Old Bathos (View Comment):

    Dr. Fauci, will I still need three masks after the fourth booster?

    Dr. Fauci, as of yesterday, October 12, 2026, WHO reports only nine cases of COVID-19, worldwide, all asymptomatic, all in the jungle region of Ecuador. Do you still recommend that we restrict normal Thanksgiving gatherings this year?

    The deference granted this putz is astounding. He is the Michael Avenenti of medical science–completely full of it yet elevated by the left because he is seen as an enemy of the libertarian right and an instrument of more benevolent government control. He has flip-flopped and/or been wrong about every aspect of the pandemic and yet he supposedly farts pure science. He is the chief scientist of Poyais, the Bernie Madoff of public health policy ideas, and will someday be declared the patron saint of amnesiacs and the delusional–by the Church of Satan.

    If any here entertain thoughts of reincarnation, he could  easily be considered the reincarnation of Mengele.

    During the late 1980’s, seventeen thousand Americans died waiting for his “Gold Standard” AZT to receive approval.

    Bactrim was stated as being available, cheap and something that could receiver special emergency approval. (Which these past 11 months, is how the vaxxes right now received approval.)

    And how many hundreds of thousands of Americans died last year due to Fauci pretending he didn’t know HCQ worked? He co-authored a paper on HCQ obliterating corona viruses in 2005. Currently, study after study has shown that HCQ when used early on can reduce 83% of many fatalities. (Probably would not have helped those who were said to die of COV but actually died of advanced cancer of gun shot wounds, or auto accidents. But anyone else stood a good chance of recovery, had they been properly treated, and avoided rocephin, fentanyl, and remdesivir, as well as avoiding being thrown on vents.)

    • #27
  28. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):
    He co-authored a paper on HCQ obliterating corona viruses in 2005.

    I wonder if there really is such a study. 

    • #28
  29. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):
    He co-authored a paper on HCQ obliterating corona viruses in 2005.

    I wonder if there really is such a study.

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16115318/

    • #29
  30. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    This is a fascinating database on studies of various treatments for COVID.

    Click on the treatment at left and it’ll show you bunches of studies on its efficacy.

    Here’s the set of studies on Ivermectin: https://c19ivermectin.com/

    Here’s the set of studies on HCQ: https://c19hcq.com/

    Here’s Molnupiravir: https://c19mp.com/

     

    • #30