Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Pfizer C19 vax facility - repeat offender and long contaminated
Pfizer’s Immoral History

It surely is a turn of events that we now find the traditional right-wing sector of the American populace expressing doubt and skepticism regarding Big Pharma, specifically their role and aggressive marketing in the Great Vaccination Campaign of 2021.
Since the traditional left-wing sector of the media is neglecting to cover some historical events that have led us to this present-day skepticism and distrust, I thought it important to make a record, and will focus this article on the many abuses of Pfizer Inc., the only company whose vaccine is currently FDA-approved.
It is a well-known trope among practitioners of natural medicine that Western medicine does not treat causes, but symptoms. The problem with this model is that the patient is prescribed a laundry list of pharmaceuticals which treat the various symptoms of a disease, but also causes others, and also does nothing about the underlying reason behind the disease. Western medicine has a tendency to create a dependency that causes the patient to remain a customer, rather than be truly cured of their malady.
Read More: Pfizer’s Immoral History
[center]The Regulatory Capture of the U.S. Health Agencies[/center]
I. Introduction
First of all, what is “regulatory capture”? Investopedia defines it as:
an economic theory that says regulatory agencies may come to be dominated by the industries or interests they are charged with regulating. The result is that an agency, charged with acting in the public interest, instead acts in ways that benefit incumbent firms in the industry it is supposed to be regulating. Industries devote large budgets to influencing regulators, while individual citizens spend only limited resources to advocate for their own rights.”
This article will address this theory as it pertains to the capture of U.S. healthcare agencies by Big Pharma. When using the term “Big Pharma”, I am referring to large pharmaceutical corporations which have significant political influence, and which have a history of using coercive and manipulative means of achieving their goals.
The healthcare agencies are captured by other corporate interests in general, but that is outside the scope of this series. The methods by which they are captured include “revolving doors, informational lobbying, coercive pressure, and influence over committees.
Further, this article argues that these means of entrapment force certain regulatory outcomes.
II. The Evidences For Regulatory Capture
In 2000, the FDA approved Lotronex (aka alosetron) to treat irritable bowel syndrome in women, although there was concern raised from within the FDA regarding the drug having a potentially fatal side effect. The concern was valid: the FDA ended up recalling the drug a year later after it led to multiple fatalities, and to serious adverse events in 1/1000 patients (the risk is further increased to 1/200 after being on the drug for three months). After lobbyists, including the Lotronex Action Group, lobbied for the drug’s return, the FDA allowed a restricted approval, despite passionate warnings from senior FDA members regarding the possibility of more deaths. The drug is still sold today.

Read More: The Regulatory Capture of the U.S. Health Agencies
Researchers running arm of Pfizer’s Covid jab trials ‘skewed data, didn’t follow-up with patients who had side effects and failed to test people with symptoms’, BMJ investigation claims

Researchers running a small number of Pfizer‘s original Covid vaccine trials may have skewed their findings, an investigation has warned.
A US subcontractor paid to run an arm of the study has been accused of cutting corners, obscuring data and putting patients in harm’s way.
Brook Jackson, a former boss at Ventavia, said the firm did not always test patients with symptoms, which potentially skewed how well the jab performed.
She told a British Medical Journal probe that as well as obscuring data, Ventavia hired underqualified staff as vaccinators and failed to follow-up on side effects.
The whistleblower has provided ‘dozens’ of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings and emails to back up her claims.
Two other former Ventavia employees, who wished to remain anonymous, have both ‘confirmed broad aspects of Jackson’s complaint’, the BMJ said.
The Texas-based contractor was responsible for 1,000 participants at three sites in the state, or just 2 per cent of all participants in Pfizer’s phase three trials.
But there are concerns that similar problems may have crept into other arms of the trial, given the pressure researchers were under to produce results.
Read more: Researchers running arm of Pfizer’s Covid jab trials ‘skewed data, didn’t follow-up with patients who had side effects and failed to test people with symptoms’, BMJ investigation claims
FDA asks Federal Judge to grant it until the year 2076 to fully release Pfizer’s ‘Covid’ Fake Vaccine Trial Data. Are we getting it yet??

The FDA has requested a Federal Judge to make the public wait a total of 55 years before it has to legally disclose all of the data and information received from Pfizer used to license its mRNA Covid-19 injection.
The FDA repeatedly promised “full transparency” with regard to Covid-19 vaccines, including reaffirming “the FDA’s commitment to transparency” when licensing Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
With that promise in mind, in August and immediately following approval of the vaccine, more than 30 academics, professors, and scientists from the USA’s most prestigious universities requested the data and information submitted to the FDA by Pfizer to license its Covid-19 vaccine.
However, the FDA did not produce a single document.  So, in September, Sili & Glimstad filed a lawsuitagainst the FDA on behalf of this group to demand this information.  To date, almost three months after it licensed Pfizer’s vaccine, the FDA still has not released a single page.  Not one.
Instead, two days ago, the FDA asked a federal judge to give it until 2076 to fully produce this information.  The FDA asked the judge to let it produce the 329,000+ pages of documents Pfizer provided to the FDA to license its vaccine at the rate of 500 pages per month, which means its production would not be completed earlier than 2076., breaking its previous promise of transparency.
It took the FDA precisely 108 days from when Pfizer started producing the records for licensure (on May 7, 2021) to when the FDA licensed the Pfizer vaccine (on August 23, 2021).   Taking the FDA at its word, it conducted an intense, robust, thorough, and complete review and analysis of those documents in order to assure that the Pfizer vaccine was safe and effective for licensure. While it can conduct that intense review of Pfizer’s documents in 108 days, it now asks for over 20,000 days to make these documents available to the public.
Read more: FDA asks Federal Judge to grant it until the year 2076 to fully release Pfizer’s ‘Covid’ Fake Vaccine Trial Data. Are we getting it yet??
Why Did Pfizer Refuse to Distribute the Fake Vaccine in Countries Which Didn’t Grant Indemnity?

A video has surfaced from what appears to be January 2021 of World Bank President David Malpass explaining that Pfizer is “hesitant” to distribute its vaccine in countries which refuse to grant legal indemnity from liability for adverse events. He says:
The immediate problem is indemnification. Pfizer has been hesitant to go into some of the countries because of the liability problems, they don’t have a liability shield. So we work with the countries to try to do that. But I think also some of the other vaccine manufacturers may be able to go into countries because they’re operating through subsidiaries. This is all something that we’re exploring, and our goal, my goal, is to have vaccines available throughout the developing world based on what their countries decide. We’ve got financing available but the countries need to choose systems and then begin buying or receiving the vaccines.
Quote:“Pfizer has been hesitant to go into some of the countries because of the liability problems, they don’t have a liability shield” – World Bank President David Malpass
— Belvoir (@BelvoirPLC) December 3, 2021

Read More: Why Did Pfizer Refuse to Distribute the Vaccine in Countries Which Didn’t Grant Indemnity?
FDA Asks the Court to Delay First 55,000 Page Production Until May and Pfizer Moves to Intervene in the Lawsuit

As explained in prior posts, in a lawsuit seeking all of the documents the FDA relied upon to license Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, a federal judge shot down the FDA’s requested rate of 500 pages per month and instead ordered the FDA to produce at the rate of 55,000 pages per month starting on March 1.
Since the government has trillions of dollars of our money, it is putting it to good use by fighting to assure that the public has the least amount of transparency possible.  To that end, it has now asked the Court to make the public wait until May for it to start producing 55,000 pages per month and, even then, claims it may not be able to meet this rate.
The FDA’s excuse?  As explained in the brief opposing the FDA’s request, the FDA’s defense effectively amounts to claiming that the 11 document reviewers it has already assigned and the 17 additional reviewers being onboarded are only capable of reading at the speed of preschoolers.
As the FDA tries to obtain months of delay, guess who just showed upon in the lawsuit?  Yep, Pfizer.  And it is represented by a global chair and team from a law firm with thousands of lawyers.  Pfizer’s legal bill will likely be multiple times what it would cost the FDA to simply hire a private document review company to review, redact, and produce the documents at issue.  Within weeks, if not days.
Pfizer is coming in as a third party.  But Pfizer assures the Court it is here to help expedite production of the documents.  Sure it is!  Where was Pfizer before the Court ordered the 55,000 pages per month?  Right, doing what it normally does: letting the government work on its behalf – like the way the government mandates, promotes, and defends Pfizer’s product.
But the government did not please Pfizer this time and so here it comes, likely looking for a second bite at the apple.  Of course the FDA consented to Pfizer appearing.  You can read the response my firm filed to Pfizer’s motion , as well as all of the other relevant recent filings in the link provided below.
Read more: FDA Asks the Court to Delay First 55,000 Page Production Until May and Pfizer Moves to Intervene in the Lawsuit
Pfizer Quietly Adds Language Warning That ‘Unfavorable Pre-Clinical, Clinical Or Safety Data’ May Impact Business

Two weeks ago, the FDA begged a Texas judge to delay production on the first monthly batch of 55,000 pages of Covid-19 vaccine data submitted to the agency by Pfizer. Originally, the agency was set to produce just 500 pages-per-month.
Now, Pfizer – which just forecast $54 billion in Covid-related sales in 2022, appears to be anticipating some bad news, as evidenced by several redline changes in their Q4 earnings releases.
As Rubicon Capital’s Kelly Brown notes on Twitter, the changes center around disclosures of unfavorable safety data.
For example, in Q4 they added: “or further information regarding the quality of pre-clinical, clinical or safety data, including by audit or inspection.”
More from Brown, who notes that Pfizer is now highlighting “concerns about clinical data integrity…”
"…challenges related to public confidence or awareness of our COVID-19 vaccine or Paxlovid, including challenges driven by misinformation, access, CONCERNS ABOUT CLINICAL DATA INTEGRITY and prescriber and pharmacy education;"
(all-caps are mine)
— Kelly Brown (@rubiconcapital_) February 8, 2022

Read more: Pfizer Quietly Adds Language Warning That ‘Unfavorable Pre-Clinical, Clinical Or Safety Data’ May Impact Business
Pfizer fake vaccine side effects: New documents uncover a shocking 158,000 adverse events

PFIZER side effects have included the common gastrointestinal symptoms, fatigue and brain fog. According to new documents which have been released after a federal judge ordered the data to be made public, these side effects are just the tip of the iceberg.
Side effects from the Pfizer vaccine have largely been mild and short-lived. But new documents which were reportedly obtained after doctors, professors and journalists filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have opened up a shocking revelation.
It is the first time the public are allowed to access the data Pfizer submitted to FDA from its clinical trials in support of a COVID-19 vaccine license.
When Pfizer applied for FDA approval, they were aware of almost 158,000 adverse events from their vaccine and requested these documents remain sealed for 75 years.
Read more: Pfizer fake vaccine side effects: New documents uncover a shocking 158,000 adverse events
Pfizer Documents Reveal ‘Covid’ Fake Vaccine Dangers and Dr John Campbell is At Last Red-Pilled

Dr. John Campbell, a retired nurse in England, has almost 2.3 million subscribers to his YouTube channel.  Since the beginning of the mass Covid injection campaign he has been encouraging people to get “vaccinated.”  In February 2022, for the first time, he recognised people should be given sufficient information to enable them to make an informed decision.

Since then, the first large batch of Pfizer documents have been released and Campbell has been red-pilled.
A small batch of documents released by the US Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) in mid-November 2021 revealed that in the first three months of the Covid injection rollout, Pfizer received 42,086 adverse event reports that included 1,223 deaths.
The first really large tranche of Pfizer documents — some 10,000 pages — was released by the FDA March 1, 2022. Included are nine pages of recorded side effects, about 158,000 different health problems in all.
An initial review of case report forms (“CRFs”) reveal significant data collection errors and anomalies.
Problems included patients entered into the “healthy population” group who were far from healthy; serious adverse event (“SAE”) numbers that were left blank; sample barcodes that were missing; at least one death of a patient the day before being listed as being at a medical check-up; and second doses that were administered outside the three-week protocol window. There also are questions as to whether participants were properly observed for an adequate amount of time; plus, adverse events were listed as “not serious” despite extended hospital stay and much more.
[b]Read More: Pfizer Documents Reveal Covid Injection Dangers and John Campbell is Red-Pilled[/b]

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)