Vaccine industry, vaccine firms, criminality and legal issues

NASEM met to review literature on adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and it is expected to release a report based upon that review soon.

The boards overseeing the COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials are supposed to be independent of pharmaceutical companies. ICAN’s intensive investigation into these boards has revealed conflicts of interest with pharmaceutical companies that are shocking to the conscience. ICAN, through its attorneys, has therefore filed a formal demand to remove these individuals from these boards.

As the greatest public health emergency for a century brought illness, bereavement and hardship to millions in the UK and presented taxpayers with a £75bn bill for extra health spending, a smaller band of opportunists was using that cash to fund the richest of private paydays. This is the story of the Covid profiteers who took advantage of a country in crisis and the government that let them get away with it.

Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal covid-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight. Paul D Thacker reports In autumn 2020 Pfizer’s chairman and chief executive, Albert Bourla, released an open letter to the billions of people around the world who were investing their hopes in a safe and effective covid-19 vaccine to end the pandemic. “As I’ve said before, we are operating at the speed of science,” Bourla wrote, explaining to the public when they could expect a Pfizer vaccine to be authorised in the United States.1 But, for researchers who were testing Pfizer’s vaccine at several sites in Texas during that autumn, speed may have come at the cost of data integrity and patient safety. A regional director who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told The BMJ that the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial. Staff who conducted quality control checks were overwhelmed by the volume of problems they were finding. After repeatedly notifying Ventavia of these problems, the regional director, Brook Jackson (video 1), emailed a complaint to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Ventavia fired her later the same day. Jackson has provided The BMJ with dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings, and emails. Video 1 Whistleblower Brook Jackson tells The BMJ about her experience working on the Pfizer covid-19 vaccine trial On its website Ventavia calls itself the largest privately owned clinical research company in Texas and lists many awards it has won for its contract work.2 But Jackson has told The BMJ that, during the two weeks she was employed at Ventavia in September 2020, …

They keep telling us to “trust the science.” But who paid for it?

Pfizer Vaccine Petition Filed.pdf (texasattorneygeneral.gov) Trial Design: Pfizer designed the trial such that “defined COVID-19 cases” were counted starting only seven days after a participant received the second of two shots (at least 28 days after the first shot). Put differently, COVID-19 cases that occurred before that point—that is, between shot one and seven days after shot two—were not considered when evaluating the efficacy of Pfizer’s vaccine. That was a highly significant qualifier because

A life ruined by the vaccine – and a new low in the battle for compensation

It is eminently apparent, given all the information in this article, and in the preceding Part 1, that the BioNTach/Pfizer Covid mRNA vaccines were developed, manufactured, and authorized under military laws reserved for emergency situations involving biological warfare/terrorism, not naturally occurring diseases affecting the entire civilian population.

The FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization for the vaccines was based on clinical trials and manufacturing processes conducted with no binding legal standards, no legally proscribed safety oversight or regulation, and no legal redress from the manufacturer for potential harms. (This last point is being challenged in multiple court cases, so far to no avail.)

American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. and its subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn Company Inc. (hereinafter together “Pfizer”) have agreed to pay $2.3 billion, the largest health care fraud settlement in the history of the Department of Justice, to resolve criminal and civil liability arising from the illegal promotion of certain pharmaceutical products.

Our 4 previous entries concerned the safety of COVID vaccines, with a large focus on the questionable conduct of major COVID vaccine developer Pfizer. In 2009 Pfizer “agreed to pay $2.3 billion, the largest health care fraud settlement in the history of the Department of Justice, to resolve criminal and civil liability arising from the illegal promotion of certain pharmaceutical products… The company will pay a criminal fine of $1.195 billion, the largest criminal fine ever imposed in the United States for any matter.”

Drugmaker makes $37bn in vaccine sales and predicts bumper year ahead from Covid jabs and pill