Why Did Pfizer and FDA Agree to Not Release the News of the Vaccine’s Success in October as the Original Protocol Would Have Required?

Why Did Pfizer and FDA Agree to Not Release the News of the Vaccine’s Success in October as the Original Protocol Would Have Required? By Steve Sailer.

So the original plan was to make a public announcement after 32 cases, but instead [Pfizer] stopped doing simple lab tests until the day after Election Day, at which point they had 94 cases, almost triple what the protocol had said they needed for making a public announcement. …

Basically, this says that Pfizer had the physical evidence in their labs in October that their vaccine had met the hurdle of success, but chose, with the agreement of the FDA, not to physically process the samples until the day after Election Day.

Am I nuts to read this as saying that Pfizer and the FDA conspired to alter the agreed-upon plan, which would have required a public announcement of the vaccine’s success before the election, and instead Pfizer refused to even process the crucial samples during the last days before the election to delay having to make a public announcement until after the election? And that this ploy may well have cost Trump the election?

In a close election, any number of factors would have likely changed the result. But yes, this qualifies.