I have previously interviewed McLeod who was part of a team that conducted a systemic review on Pfizer’s own COVID-19 clinical trial data. It showed an increase in harm (and death!) compared to the placebo group; harms that were buried and/or grossly misrepresented.
As the founder and head of Kaleidoscope Strategic, a medical research firm that specializes in preparing evidence-based guidelines and systematic reviews in terms of cancer research, MacLeod says that with COVID, they “stepped into this new environment and just did what we normally do which is evaluate clinical trials with an eye for safety.”
In this discussion McLeod elaborates on the different forms of safety standards — namely declared versus evidence-based safety. The regulatory bodies approving the novel mRNA injections are, as McLeod points out, relying on the former.
“With these particular vaccines what’s interesting is that they’re actually gene therapy being marketed as a vaccine. And gene therapy as per the FDA website Standards of Gene Therapy, is 15 years,” McLeod says.
Expanding on that detail, McLeod notes that adequate safety standards would mean establishing safety of a new product or medical technology by engaging in a robust follow up of a fully randomized control trial with approximately 180,000 participants.
Instead, these injections in all demographics have been approved based on a small sample size of under 2,500 participants, with a mere two months worth of follow-up, all of whom were unblinded thereafter, effectively ending the trial.
Since the two months of follow-up in a small sample population showed no harm as per the manufacturer, they declared the products safe.
The issue is even more troubling for children. McLeod continues, “what you want to do is look at the context. They have their whole lives ahead of them. This is referred to as ‘quality life years.’ If you injure a child when they’re young, that compromises all of those quality life years. That’s a real concern. You want to make sure your safety standards are higher, that you do extra testing.”
Yet this was not and is not being done.
“We don’t know what’s going to happen. People say that we’re experimenting [on the general public] but using this in the general population isn’t an experiment at all. There is no observation that’s happening, nobody is monitoring anybody to make sure that it’s [safe]. We’re not even acknowledging that there could be any safety issues so nobody is looking,” McLeod confirms.
Referring to Canada’s archaic and passive vaccine surveillance system, McLeod recounts a doctor testimony from earlier in the day where side effects are being screened so things can be tampered with from the inside.
“This is reckless behaviour on behalf of our health officials and I don’t know exactly what’s motivating them but in my business, when this happens, you then start to look for conflicts of interest and financial conflicts of interest whenever you see a pattern like this.”