I have located the text in the Clinical Overview (p. 79) that accounts for the majority of “withdrawn” participants: They were expired and wrongly diluted doses! Somehow, this escaped my first Cmd-F sweep.
The original post has been updated, along with a correction notice, and a relevant footnote regarding mis-dosing in children and adults (meanwhile, there are still enough unaccounted-for withdrawals to have left the original text in tact).
Additionally, I have added a double-disclaimer to the original disclaimer that much of what is in the Clinical Overview is probably already available knowledge: In fact, the raw numbers and plot of cases after the 1st dose were already published in the NEJM trial results last year!
Although I have spent hours trawling the Pfizer trial protocol (available in the appendix to the NEJM paper), I still haven’t bothered to read the paper itself - under the assumption that nothing interesting would have made it into what is essentially a giant advertisement. Only by coincidence of encountering the Canadian Covid Care Alliance’s “More Harm than Good” pamphlet (pdf at skirsch.com, see also Kirsch’s post at his substack; hat-tip to reader Guido Vobig for pointing out the pamphlet) did I happen to learn that the paper included the same chart “released” in the FDA’s recent document dump.
So, I could have offered this hot take on the “worry window” months and months ago. Who knew. (Meanwhile, I still encourage reading the first 30 pages of the report itself for all the points I did not highlight, many of which may in fact be new revelations: https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/STN-125742_0_0-Section-2.5-Clinical-Overview.pdf, from https://phmpt.org/pfizers-documents/.)
Thanks for subscribing to Unglossed!
Kind of like the "errors" in hcq tests where they overdosed and declared it dangerous, and started too late and declared it ineffective. It's easy to perpetrate frauds when your reviewers are in on the scam. Or maybe they're just 8ncompetent.
Brian, on page 80 there is a line item: "Had other important protocol deviations on or prior to 7 days after Dose 2". This was the line item that caused the most consternation because of the large difference between the arms (240 treatment 60 placebo). I didn't see a breakdown of the causes for this... did you?