« J'ai découvert la face cachée de l'industrie pharmaceutique » – Christine Cotton

Epoch Times France · YouTube · Watch ▶

📅 2023-07-05🎙️ Epoch Times France (interviewer)📺 Epoch Times France⏱ 48 min

“There was no statistical proof of any effect on severe forms — for the simple reason that there weren't enough severe cases in the trial to demonstrate a difference between placebo and vaccine.”

Key statements

A major statistical bias in the Pfizer trial: not every participant is systematically given a PCR test, so you do not know who actually had COVID. The trial was designed in a way that produces this bias — a methodological choice that is itself a GCP deviation. ▶ 07:36
Sources: Pfizer C4591001 Protocol
Pfizer's primary immunogenicity marker — neutralizing antibodies — was measured only two months after dose 2. A vaccine is meant to raise antibodies; in a global emergency one would expect more measurement, not less. Antibodies were not measured again until six months after dose 2 — the window where decay would have shown up was deliberately not sampled. ▶ 09:54
Sources: Pfizer C4591001 Protocol (immunogenicity schedule)
We have known since December 2020 that Pfizer was planning to study a booster — a third dose in case of waning immunity. ▶ 11:50
Sources: Pfizer booster sub-study (Dec 2020 amendment to C4591001)
Using the FDA-released SAS data tables and recomputing efficacy on the anti-nucleocapsid serology endpoint — which actually identifies who was infected during the trial regardless of symptoms — Cotton obtains roughly 55% efficacy, not 95%. The under-tested vaccine group dropped the count of registered cases; this 55% figure was never reported by Pfizer. ▶ 13:53
Sources: Pfizer C4591001 trial database (FOIA / court-released SAS tables)
On severe cases the December 2020 result is statistically meaningless: 1 severe case in the vaccine arm vs. 3 in the placebo arm, on ~18,000 people per arm — about 4 severe cases on ~36,000 participants. "It was impossible to demonstrate any efficacy of the vaccine on severe cases. It's statistical — it's black or white." ▶ 15:56
Sources: Pfizer C4591001 interim clinical study report (Dec 2020)
Brooke Jackson, ex-regional director at Ventavia Research Group, blew the whistle on GCP violations on three sites that enrolled about 1,000 participants in the Pfizer Phase 2-3. If the trial was run that way at those sites, there is no reason to think it was better elsewhere. ▶ 17:49
Sources: Brooke Jackson — BMJ whistleblower report (Thacker, 2 November 2021)
The Augusto Roux case in Buenos Aires (Argentina) — a lawyer who nearly died during the Pfizer trial, suffered myocarditis/pericarditis, and whose data were transformed so the event does not appear in the results. The Argentina site was a single military hospital that recruited 5,700 participants — a major fraction of the trial. "This is obviously a center to audit urgently." The agencies did nothing. ▶ 18:40
Sources: Augusto Roux medical file; Pfizer C4591001 clinical study report (adult)
Maddie de Garay — adolescent participant in Pfizer's 12-15 trial — suffered a serious adverse event that was not reported as-such in the clinical study report or the database. Cotton: "Tolerability false. That's starting to add up." ▶ 20:18
Sources: Maddie de Garay testimony to Sen. Ron Johnson; Pfizer C4591001 adolescent (12-15) clinical study report
Commercial Pfizer vials don't contain the same ingredients as the trial vials: Pfizer modified its manufacturing process, reducing the proportion of integral mRNA. The ANSM (French agency) claims it performs quality controls but no inspection reports have ever been published. ▶ 20:59
Sources: Pfizer C4591001 Protocol (Process 2 amendment); ANSM quality control records (not public)
Claims that the vaccine reduces transmission do not come from clinical trials but from observational real-world studies, which the HAS itself ranks as the lowest level of scientific evidence for drugs. Cotton has personally never conducted such an analysis in 23 years; she ran ~1,000 projects and only three were observational, all prospective. ▶ 22:14
Sources: HAS — Niveaux de preuve scientifique (drug evaluation grid)
Since 1995 Pfizer has been implicated in around forty cases for scientific fraud, wild clinical trials, corruption of decision-makers, and dissemination of false information — paying roughly $6.5 billion in penalties. Cotton: not isolated cases, but corporate culture. ▶ 23:54
Sources: Pfizer settlement and litigation history (1995-2023)
From October 2020 there exists a publicly available FDA YouTube presentation listing the adverse events to actively monitor for COVID vaccines — and the list matches what was later observed: myocarditis, pericarditis, blood-clotting problems, thromboses, neurological problems. The harms were anticipated. ▶ 31:32
Sources: FDA VRBPAC meeting (22 Oct 2020) — adverse events of special interest slide deck
Risk Management Plans drafted by the labs at authorization and updated as risks emerge formally list the populations on which there are no data: pregnant or lactating women, immunocompromised patients, patients with comorbidities — together with unknowns about duration of protection and absence of interaction studies with other vaccines. ▶ 35:00
Sources: Comirnaty Risk Management Plan (EMA, Dec 2020 + updates)
Despite EMA, WHO and ANSM recommending vaccination for pregnant women, scientific publications subsequently showed that the spike protein circulates into the fetus. Cotton's position is not "don't get vaccinated" but "give people complete information so they can decide." ▶ 36:55
Sources: Peer-reviewed publications on placental transfer of spike protein
Cotton's January 2022 expertise figures in the French criminal complaint for poisoning filed against X. It is currently dismissed and under appeal. Her position: if trials are unreliable, the procurement contracts exonerating the labs from adverse-event liability should be revisited — and the labs made to pay. ▶ 45:37
Sources: Cotton — Expertise of the Pfizer C4591001 trial (January 2022); French criminal complaint for poisoning (plainte contre X)

Documents cited

Pfizer C4591001 Protocol — NEJM supplementary materials
Pfizer C4591001 interim clinical study report (December 2020) — FDA briefing documents, Dec 2020 VRBPAC
Pfizer C4591001 trial database — SAS tables (court-released) — Court orders following FOIA / PHMPT litigation
Brooke Jackson — BMJ whistleblower report (Thacker, 2 November 2021) — BMJ 2021;375:n2635
Augusto Roux medical file — Personal records, cited in Argentine court filings
Maddie de Garay testimony to Sen. Ron Johnson — Sen. Ron Johnson press conference, recordings publicly available
FDA VRBPAC meeting (22 October 2020) — adverse-event monitoring slides — FDA / CDC public materials, available on the FDA YouTube channel
Comirnaty Risk Management Plan (December 2020 + updates) — EMA EPAR archive
HAS — Niveaux de preuve scientifique grid — has-sante.fr
Pfizer settlement and litigation history (1995-2023) — US DOJ press releases, SEC filings
Cotton — Expertise of the Pfizer C4591001 trial (January 2022) — christinecotton.com
French criminal complaint for poisoning (plainte contre X, including Cotton expertise) — Paris criminal court filings

Research follow-ups

Locate the Argentine military-hospital Pfizer trial site record (single site, 5,700 participants in Buenos Aires) and any audit / inspection documentation. The Augusto Roux case is the most concrete entry point.Cited at 18:40 — a single site holding ~15% of the entire C4591001 enrolment, and the locus of the Roux fraud allegation.
Sources she cites in the book
Pull the Brooke Jackson / Ventavia Research Group documentation: the BMJ whistleblower article (Thacker, Nov 2021), the underlying complaint to the FDA, and the False Claims Act lawsuit (United States ex rel. Jackson v. Ventavia / Pfizer).Cited at 17:49 as one of the strongest publicly available pieces of evidence for site-level GCP violations.
Sources she cites in the book
Build a single archive page on the French criminal complaint for poisoning — date filed, parties, expertise reports attached (including Cotton's), the dismissal, and the appeal status. Update last_reviewed when status changes.Cited at 45:37 as the French legal vehicle for Cotton's expertise.
Sources she cites in the book
- 270 ICAN (Informed Consent Action Network) — Dressen v. AstraZeneca complaint, filed 13 May 2024 (PDF)
Identify the peer-reviewed publications Cotton references on placental transfer of spike protein and the absence of pregnancy-safety data. Cross-link to the ANSM and HAS pregnancy-vaccination guidance to expose the gap.Cited at 36:55 as the basis for her objection to the official EMA / WHO / ANSM pregnancy recommendations.
Sources she cites in the book

All research follow-ups →