Neither pfizer or moderna has released the full analysis of the phase 3 data, but both interim data releases have been basically identical in terms of efficacy. It's good to be skeptical, but phase 3 trials are pretty tightly controlled and subject to independent analysis. I don't think there's really anyway you can read this data as being manipulated. Unless there's massive fraud in both studies.
I don't think it would be outright fraud that I would be looking for, but rather them glossing over things like composition of the group, the novelty of the RNA approach and how that could affect different subgroups given we'll be giving it not to 30k but hundreds of millions of people at least. A kind of crazy thing that occurs to me, how does it interact with someone that has a retrovirus infection? I get that those reverse-transcriptase proteins act specifically, but weird stuff out of left field could be a problem once deployed widely.
I figure a peer reviewed article would at least have to address the "known unknowns".
Well, the data will be published at a high-level (by the physicians who work with the company and ran the trial), but you won't get to see the level of data the FDA sees. You don't have much choice but to put some faith in them.
