By Peter C Gøzsche

Today, Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson published a highly revealing comment about Pfizer’s trial of its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine Comirnaty in pregnant women and about the kind of advice authorities provide.

The package inserts from the UK, the EMA, the FDA and Canada are cautious, saying that safety data were not available about use in pregnancy.

In contrast, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the UK Health Security Agency and the UK National Health Service informed the public that “It’s safe to have the vaccine during any stage of pregnancy.”

The effect of such reckless and horrible misinformation is that people lose trust in the authorities and might refuse to take vaccines that are much, much better than the COVID-19 vaccines, which, moreover, are pretty superfluous because virtually all of us have been infected by now, including my wife and me even though we got two doses of Pfizer’s vaccine.

Four years ago, Pfizer announced with great fanfare in the press that it is critical to develop a vaccine that is safe and effective for pregnant women, and they planned to recruit 4000 women.

Two months ago, Pfizer quietly uploaded their results in a trial register, with no fanfare. So, what did they do and what did they find? It took Pfizer four years to recruit 348 women!

Worse still, women were only enrolled if they had been pregnant for at least 24 weeks. But when do foetal abnormalities develop? In the first trimester, which is up to 12 weeks.

Pfizer’s rigged trial goes directly against FDA advice that “study participants should be representative of a typical patient population for the drug to be studied including race, ethnicity, and trimester of pregnancy.”

The data in Pfizer’s trial showed an increased risk of congenital malformations, adverse events of special interest, including significant congenital anomalies and developmental delay, and preeclampsia. We have no idea whether these are signals to worry about, as none of the risks were statistically significant.

Pfizer argued that they terminated the trial “due to enrollment challenges into a placebo-controlled trial as a result of universal recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination of pregnant women and the increased global availability of COVID-19 vaccines.”

I once worked in the drug industry where I did clinical trials. I am convinced that if Pfizer had wanted to, they could have recruited the planned 4000 women. Moreover, there is no excuse for avoiding the first trimester if one wants to find out if a drug has teratogenic effects. Pfizer seems to have had an extreme lack of interest in getting data on this vitally important issue.

I agree with Carl and Tom that women of reproductive age should not be exposed to Pfizer’s vaccine – or to any other COVID-19 vaccine. They have likely all been infected with COVID-19 and have acquired a much better immunity than any vaccine can provide.

SHARE THIS ON:

It is sad to read Anders Goksøy’s comment about the COVID-19 pandemic in the Norwegian newspaper Morgenbladet (no. 3), where he attacks Sigrid Bratlie unjustifiably. Emails have revealed that Kristian Andersen also considered it likely that the pandemic was caused by a virus produced by the scientists in Wuhan, which escaped from the laboratory. But he quickly changed his mind after having consulted with Anthony Fauci. Then, everybody said the virus had a natural origin.

Over 5,000 scientists have signed a petition to retract Andersen’s 2020 Nature Medicine article on the origin of the virus, which they call fraudulent. Andersen has also called it a conspiracy theory to suggest that the pandemic is caused by a laboratory leak. It is deeply unscientific to use the term conspiracy theory.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the virus came from the wet market in Wuhan or from nature. Everything points to the fact that the virus was “Made in China”, which was very inconvenient for the Americans, because they had supported this very dangerous research economically, which Fauci lied about. I described these things as early as 2022 in my book “Vaccines: truth, lies and controversy” and in several articles later, e.g. this one: “Origin of COVID-19: The biggest cover up in medical history.”

Both Andersen and Fauci have now been shown to have lied repeatedly about the issues, which I’ve tweeted about extensively, most recently on January 21st, with links to the documentation, at @PGtzsche1.

A Danish newspaper recently wrote that Donald Trump is extremely unpopular in Denmark. This is not only because he wants to buy Greenland or take it by force. Many Europeans are convinced that, during Trump’s second presidency, we will see disaster upon disaster, harming not only America but the whole world and they are right. Already on his first day in office, Trump made USA a banana republic by pardoning over 1500 Capitol rioters. Over 600 of these had been charded with assaulting, resisting or obstructing law enforcement, and 175 with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury. At least 5 people died and about 140 police officers were injured. Read full article.

Today, I wrote to the Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHR) in the UK asking them to check the package inserts for all antidepressants approved in the UK and to ensure that misleading messages about the cause of depression being caused by low serotonin or “chemical imbalances” get removed in all cases.

In an interview published in Sunday Times on 12 January 2025 (read the article here), psychiatrist professor Joanna Moncrieff explains that,

• depression is not a physical illness
• antidepressants don’t work
• there is no evidence that depression is caused by low serotonin (the chemical imbalance myth)
• it is a delusion that emotional problems can be resolved with a pill
• the real causes of mental illness are social issues
• “the idea of giving someone who’s depressed something that numbs you is uncomfortable — it’s a bit like telling someone to go and get drunk or take an opiate.”

Fluoxetine (Prozac) from Eli Lilly was the first SSRI approved for depression in children and adolescents. But it doesn’t work and it increases the risk of suicide and violence. After having reviewed Lilly’s unpublished clinical study reports, which we got from a drug agency,  psychiatrist David Healy and I concluded that fluoxetine is both unsafe and ineffective.

As we describe in our review, which can be downloaded here, essential information was missing; there were unexplained numerical inconsistencies; new outcomes appeared that were not prespecified in the trial protocol (the Texas sharpshooter fraud); rating scales and analyses were changed; the trial protocols were violated in other ways; and the efficacy outcomes were biased by differential dropouts and missing data.

The publications of the trials were seriously misleading and – with ten people who lost a child or spouse to suicide as a consequence of being prescribed a depression drug for a non-psychiatric condition – I called for retraction of the fraudulent trial reports, but to no avail.

Fluoxetine is a horrible drug that should never have been approved. But Lilly was in financial trouble and turned their drug, which they had wanted to shelve, into a blockbuster.

Lilly’s frauds are second to none. See more in my freely available book, Is psychiatry a crime against humanity?

In this report, we explain that the mental health system’s standard treatments are colossally counterproductive and harmful, often forced on unwilling patients. The overreliance on psychiatric drugs is reducing the recovery rate and life expectancy of people diagnosed with serious mental illness dramatically. Psychiatric incarceration, euphemistically called “involuntary commitment,” is similarly counterproductive and harmful, adding to patients’ trauma and massively associated with suicides. Harmful psychiatric interventions are being imposed on people without consideration of the facts about treatments and their harms, and are a violation of International Law.

We published our report on 18 September 2023 and I now republish it.

What knocked me over was one of the worst show trials in academic history

By Peter C Gøtzsche
Translation of my article in the newspaper Politiken 2024;Dec 2

In the Danish newspaper Politiken (25 Nov), Lars Igum Rasmussen brought a comprehensive portrait of me because of my 75th birthday the next day. Most of the article is laudatory, but already in the headline Lars Igum gets it wrong: “Peter Gøtzsche was one of the greatest. Until his manners knocked him off the throne.”

What knocked me over was one of the worst show trials in academic history, which I have written two books and also an article in Politiken about: “My dismissal is a scientific judicial murder” (11 Dec 2018). I was elected to Cochrane’s Governing Board with the largest number of votes to change Cochrane’s disastrous course, but it became too much of a threat to Cochrane’s CEO, who, by the way, suddenly disappeared without any explanation in the middle of a month after he had destroyed Cochrane. …

What really happened to Peter Gøtzsche?Read More »

Also called complementary medicine, there is no commonly accepted definition of alternative medicine which might delineate a logical boundary to other treatments. Most definitions say it is not presently considered part of conventional medicine. That could be translated into: It does not work. If it worked, doctors would be happy to use it – and would not call it alternative.

Alternative medicine is no alternative is chapter 13 in my book, Survival in an overmedicated world: look up the evidence yourself. Copenhagen: People’s Press; 2019, which has been published in 7 languages; Danish, Dutch, English, German, Italian, Spanish, and Swedish. Read the chapter here.

Some people with asthma are allergic to house dust mites, and many physical and chemical methods have been tried to eradicate the mites or reduce their occurrence. One of my researchers, Cecilia Hammarquist from Sweden, wanted to review the trials, which we did.

This is a hilarious story illustrating that there are no limits to stupidy and dishonesty in healthcare. Read it here.