[naikrovek]

it's not ALL first-order data, man. have you ever seen an official document of any size? 99% of it is description of the 0.25% which actually matters, and the remaining 0.75% (AT LEAST) is whitespace.

That 0.25% is mostly known to subject matter experts. The rest is there to meet documentation requirements.

it is definitely NOT 329k pages of absolutely vital facts that can't be skipped.

besides, it can be split up among many people over the course of time.

experts know how to do this stuff.

[bitsnbytes]

I get the importance to allow certain DOD orgs to sift through the documents to ensure there are no national security secrets revealed to avoid any national threats.

However with this they should be fully transparent with any and all vaccine related data as they are already suffering from credibility concerns when it comes to vaccine.

[naikrovek]

there are only credibility concerns among people who don't understand vaccines and who don't trust people with decades of experience to know what they're doing.

this group is an EXTREMELY vocal micro-minority.

[mattkrause]

Exactly.

Here's literally the law on what goes into a New Drug Application: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/21/314.50

The idea is that it serves as the "whole story" of a drug, and includes everything from preclinical data demonstrating how the drug works on a molecular level, up through the plans for actually manufacturing and administering it. Thus, it includes a lot of things "for the record". For example....

If the application relies on material published in another language, then you are required to submit the original and a translated copy. It is very unlikely that the FDA is going to retranslate each article.

Similarly, you need to include individual case reports for any trial participants who die/drop out from adverse events even if in the placebo group and the cause is unrelated to the drug. If Mrs Jones from the control group got eaten by a shark after getting the placebo, a bunch of her medical info will be in there. This a) bulks up the application and b) slows down redaction but c) takes a reviewer about two seconds to realize they can ignore that entire section.

[perl4ever]

>it can be split up among many people over the course of time

Oh, yes.

>experts know how to do this stuff

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/judicial/publications/jud...

"One way to test the effectiveness of a redacted PDF document is by using a technique that nearly all word processing users know--copy and paste."

...nearly...all...

[naikrovek]

don't confuse usability and bad software with domain expertise. those are wholly separate things, and are not related in any way; they're completely independent skill sets.