by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News:
In major media, certain stories gain traction. The trumpets keep blaring for a time before they fade.
Other stories are one-offs. A few of them strike hard. Their implications—if anyone stops to think about them—are powerful. Then…nothing.
“Wait, aren’t you going to follow up on that? Don’t you see what that MEANS?”
Apparently not, because…dead silence. “In other news, the governor lost his pet parakeet for an hour. His chief of staff found it taking a nap in a desk drawer…”
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
One-offs function like teasers. You definitely want to know more, but you never get more.
Over the years, I’ve tried to follow up on a few. The reporter or the editor has a set of standard replies: “We didn’t get much feedback.” “We covered it.” “It’s now old news.” “There wasn’t anything else to find out.”
Oh, but there WAS.
A few weeks ago, I ran a one-off. The analysis and commentary were mine, but the story was an opinion piece in the New York Times. The Times called it an opinion piece to soften its blow. I suspected it would disappear, and it did.
Its meaning and implication were too strong. It would be a vast embarrassment for the White House, the Warp Speed COVID vaccine program, the vaccine manufacturers, the coronavirus task force, and vaccine researchers.
And embarrassment would be just the beginning of their problem.
So…here it is again. The vanished one-off, back in business:
COVID vaccine clinical trials doomed to fail; fatal design flaw; NY Times opinion piece exposes all three major clinical trials. 
Peter Doshi, associate editor of the medical journal BMJ, and Eric Topol, Scripps Research professor of molecular medicine, have written a devastating NY Times opinion piece about the ongoing COVID vaccine clinical trials.
They expose the fatal flaw in the large Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Moderna trials.
September 22, the Times: “These Coronavirus Trials Don’t Answer the One Question We Need to Know” :
“If you were to approve a coronavirus vaccine, would you approve one that you only knew protected people only from the most mild form of Covid-19, or one that would prevent its serious complications?”
“The answer is obvious. You would want to protect against the worst cases.”
“But that’s not how the companies testing three of the leading coronavirus vaccine candidates, Moderna, Pfizer and AstraZeneca, whose U.S. trial is on hold, are approaching the problem.”
“According to the protocols for their studies, which they released late last week, a vaccine could meet the companies’ benchmark for success if it lowered the risk of mild Covid-19, but was never shown to reduce moderate or severe forms of the disease, or the risk of hospitalization, admissions to the intensive care unit or death.”
“To say a vaccine works should mean that most people no longer run the risk of getting seriously sick. That’s not what these trials will determine.”
This means these clinical trials are dead in the water.
The trials are designed to show effectiveness in preventing mild cases of COVID, which nobody should care about, because mild cases naturally run their course and cause no harm. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A VACCINE THAT PREVENTS MILD CASES.
There. That’s the NY Times one-off. My piece analyzing it went on much longer, but you get the main thrust: