I forgot to include this in the article and have now added this part:

Similarly, because of the toxicity of the mRNA lipid nanoparticle combination, it was very difficult to determine an appropriate therapeutic dose (as the vaccine was either too toxic or not effective—hence why Malone abandoned in). I thus was very curious to see how the doses would be chosen, and then was astonished that Moderna chose a dose that was 3.3X higher than Pfizer’s—something I interpreted as a reflection of the fact all of Moderna’s mRNA products had failed, the company had a sociopathic CEO, and the company was desperate to bring a viable product to market.

In turn, as I showed here, once Moderna came to market, it had a much higher rate of adverse injuries (including deaths) than Pfizer, but was completely left alone by the regulators (which is a gross violation of regulatory standards), and something I suspect was in part due to the NIH having massive investments in Moderna. Likewise, one of the curious things noticed with adverse reactions to the Pfizer vaccines was that lot toxicity seemed to directly correlate with sequential lot numbers, suggesting a large scale dose-response study was conducted after the vaccines hit the market.