Pfizer hired 600 employees in the months after its COVID-19 vaccine received emergency use authorization in the United States due to the “large increase” of reports of side effects linked to the vaccine, according to a recently released company document. The FDA is required to release a certain number of vaccine-related Pfizer documents each month as the result of a February court ruling.
Pfizer has “taken multiple actions to help alleviate the large increase of adverse event reports,” according to the unredacted document. “This includes significant technology enhancements, and process and workflow solutions, as well as increasing the number of data entry and case processing colleagues.”
According to the document, Pfizer had recorded 42,086 case reports (25,379 medically confirmed and 16,707 non-medically confirmed) across 158,893 events as of February 28, 2021. When breaking this figure down further, Pfizer recorded 1,403 cardiovascular Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs), amounting to 3.3% of the adverse events data set. The full unredacted document contains information on all recorded AESIs that were recorded as of its creation last year.
The analysis of adverse event reports was previously disclosed to the health transparency group, but certain portions were redacted. Among the redacted information was the number of workers Pfizer hired in order to deal with the increase adverse event reports.
“We asked that the redactions on page 6 of this report be lifted and the FDA agreed without providing an explanation,” Aaron Siri, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs, told The Epoch Times in a statement. The redactions had been made under (b) (4) of the Freedom of Information Act, which lets agencies “withhold trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person which is privileged or confidential.”
The Pfizer document further revealed that approximately 126,212,580 doses of the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine had been shipped worldwide as of last February, though it is unclear how many of those doses had been administered. Prior to the court order, the FDA wanted to keep the documents sealed for at least 55 years.
The drug industry influences and manipulates media through advertising dollars. In 2021, drug companies spent an aggregate $6.88 BILLION on direct-to-consumer advertising (DCTA), up slightly from $6.86 billion in 2020
The U.S. and New Zealand are the only two countries that permit DCTA, making media in these countries more likely to have pro-pharma bias
Over the past year, the U.S. government spent $1 billion of U.S. taxpayers’ money to advertise the COVID jab, which is the most dangerous and least proven drug ever marketed, while simultaneously calling for the censorship of anyone who dared to address the risks of this novel treatment
By law, drug ads must not be false or misleading, must present a “fair balance” of information describing both the risks and benefits of a drug, must include facts that are “material” to the product’s advertised uses, and must include a “brief summary” that mentions every risk described in the product’s labeling. Few if any ads for the COVID jab have fulfilled these requirements
How do you control major media? The short answer — illustrated in the video above — is: through advertising dollars. Big Pharma advertising dominates, making up a large portion of a given media outlet’s revenue, and that funding gives Pharma the power to dictate what ends up in the news and what doesn’t.
While Big Pharma has frequently spent more on advertising than on research and development, over the past couple of years, ad spending has increased to new heights.1
In 2021, drug companies spent an aggregate $6.88 BILLION on direct-to-consumer advertising (DCTA), up slightly from $6.86 billion in 2020.2 And, remember, DCTA is only permitted in two countries in the world, the U.S. and New Zealand, so media tend to be particularly biased in favor of Big Pharma those two countries.
Taxpayer Money Used to Advertise Most Dangerous Drug Ever
Even more egregiously, over the past year, the U.S. government used your tax dollars to advertise the COVID jab, which is the most dangerous and least proven drug ever marketed in the history of the world. How do we know this? Well, there’s:
An unprecedented number of adverse reports after the COVID jab filed with the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS)
Insurance companies are reporting unprecedented death rates. For example, OneAmerica reported the death rate among working-age Americans in the third quarter of 2021 was 40% higher than prepandemic levels;9 the Hartford Insurance Company found mortality in 2021 was 32% than 2019 and 20% higher than 2020, and Lincoln National reports that claims were 54% higher in the fourth quarter of 2021 compared to 2019 (compare that to an average year-over-year increase of 13.7%)10
Funeral homes are reporting an increase in burials and cremations in 2021 compared to 2020, when the pandemic was at its peak11
In Germany, a large health insurance company found the death rate after the rollout of the COVID jabs was 14 times higher than what was being reported by the German government,12,13 and according to a British government report, 9 out of 10 COVID deaths have occurred in people who were fully vaccinated14,15
So, the U.S. government purchased favorable media coverage for a novel and poorly tested gene transfer injection that is now killing and disabling hundreds of thousands of Americans, while simultaneously calling for the censorship of anyone who dared to address the risks of this novel treatment.In all, the U.S. government spent $1 BILLION of U.S. taxpayers’ dollars to ‘strengthen vaccine confidence in the United States’ and ‘combat misinformation about vaccines,’ all with ‘the goal of increasing rates of vaccination across all ages.’
As reported by The Blaze:16
“In response to a FOIA request filed by TheBlaze, HHS [Health and Human Services] revealed that it purchased advertising from major news networks including:
ABC, CBS, and NBC, as well as cable TV news stations Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC, legacy media publications including the New York Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Washington Post, digital media companies like BuzzFeed News and Newsmax, and hundreds of local newspapers and TV stations.
These outlets were collectively responsible for publishing countless articles and video segments regarding the vaccine that were nearly uniformly positive about the vaccine in terms of both its efficacy and safety …
The Biden administration purchased ads on TV, radio, in print, and on social media to build vaccine confidence, timing this effort with the increasing availability of the vaccines … Though virtually all of these newsrooms produced stories covering the COVID-19 vaccines, the taxpayer dollars flowing to their companies were not disclosed to audiences …”
In all, the U.S. government spent $1 BILLION of U.S. taxpayers’ dollars to “strengthen vaccine confidence in the United States” and “combat misinformation about vaccines,” all with “the goal of increasing rates of vaccination across all ages.” Government also collaborated with celebrities, social media influencers and “expert” interviewees such as Dr. Anthony Fauci. As noted by The Daily Exposé:17
“In other words, Fauci, the man who has been the ‘face’ of COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021, who publicly disparaged anyone who questioned the data he was using to support his recommendations, and who blithely referred to himself as ‘the science,’ was, in fact, a shill.”
The Level of Manipulation of Information Is Immense
While newsrooms claim to be completely independent from the advertising department, history and the personal experience of insiders tells us this simply isn’t true.
Take Sharyl Attkisson, for example, a five-time Emmy Award-winning network anchor, producer and reporter whose television career spans more than three decades. In 2009, she blew the lid off the swine flu media hype, showing the hysteria was manufactured and completely unfounded.
In 2014, she wrote “Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama’s Washington.” It’s a tell-all exposé on what really goes on behind the media curtain, and it’s not pretty. The extent to which information is manipulated is far greater than most people suspect, and this is particularly true when it comes to COVID.
Years before the pandemic, Attkisson explained how false “consensus” was being created: Let’s say you hear about a new drug for an ailment you have, and you decide to do your own due diligence. Ultimately, you conclude it is safe and effective because everywhere you look, the information seems to support this conclusion. You feel good knowing you’ve done your homework, and fill the prescription. But what you don’t know is that:
Facebook and Twitter pages speaking highly of the drug are run by individuals on the payroll of the drug company
The Wikipedia page for the drug is monitored and controlled by a special-interest editor hired by the drug company
Google search engine results have been optimized, ensuring you’ll find all those positive sources while burying contradicting information
The nonprofit organization you stumbled across online that recommends the drug was secretly founded and funded by the drug company
The positive study you found while searching online was also financed by the drug company
The news articles reporting the positive findings of that study sound suspiciously alike for a reason — they’re reiterating information provided by the drug company’s PR department; hence, you will not find any contradictory information there either
Doctors promoting the drug and making derogatory comments about those who worry about side effects are actually paid consultants for the drug company
The medical lecture your own personal doctor attended, where he became convinced the drug is safe and efficacious, was also sponsored by the drug company
In short, the “consensus” you see has been cleverly manufactured by the most effective propaganda campaign in the history of the world, in an effort to convince you of what the corporate cartels want you to conclude at the end of doing “your own research.” This way, they can sell you more of their expensive and dangerous products.
Over the past two years, this manipulation has become far more obvious and easy for people to see. Before the pandemic, it was pretty well disguised. Today, most can rattle off dozens of examples of how COVID information was manipulated and controlled, through the examples above and others, both by Big Pharma and the U.S. government.
Government Media Manipulation Has Been Routine for Years
For years, the U.S. government, regulatory agencies and public health organizations have colluded with media to control what gets reported and what doesn’t. This, too, is something that has become blatantly obvious during this pandemic, but it’s not a new phenomenon.
For example, back in 2016, a Scientific American investigation revealed how the U.S. Food and Drug Administration routinely manipulated mainstream media, stripping them of their independence:18
“It was a Faustian bargain … The deal was this: NPR, along with a select group of media outlets, would get a briefing about an upcoming announcement by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration a day before anyone else.
But in exchange for the scoop, NPR would have to abandon its reportorial independence. The FDA would dictate whom NPR’s reporter could and couldn’t interview … NPR reporter Rob Stein wrote back to the government officials offering the deal. Stein asked for a little bit of leeway to do some independent reporting but was turned down flat. Take the deal or leave it.”
As it turns out, NPR accepted the deal and Stein joined reporters from a dozen other media organizations to get the scoop. “Every single journalist present had agreed not to ask any questions of sources not approved by the government until given the go-ahead,” Scientific American wrote.
Considering the U.S. government’s many power grabs over the past two years, there’s no reason to assume it hasn’t been using this kind of manipulation to control media coverage of COVID-19 and the injections. Bill Gates, whose influence rivals that of nation states through his funding of the World Health Organization, has also poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the COVID campaign. As reported by The Daily Exposé:19
“Using more than 30,000 grants, Gates has contributed at least $319 million to the media … Recipients included CNN, NPR, BBC, The Atlantic and PBS. Gates has also sponsored foreign organizations that included The Daily Telegraph, the Financial Times, and Al Jazeera. More than $38 million has also been funneled into investigative journalism centers.
Gates’ influence within the press is far-reaching, from journalism to journalistic training. This ultimately makes true objective reporting about Gates or his initiatives virtually impossible.”
DTCA Known to Produce Negative Public Health Effects
In 2006, experts warned that DTCA could trigger “placebo effects” and result in “negative economic, social and political consequences,”20 and in 2011, an article in Pharmacy and Therapeutics noted that the rules governing drug ads to the public were “too relaxed and inadequately enforced.”21
As reported by Forbes in 2019,22 “While DTCA has some positive effects, these commercials tend to mislead patients and can result in the breakdown of the doctor-patient relationship … According to an FDA survey, 65% of physicians said that DTCA for drugs sent confusing messages to the patients …” Importantly, drug ads must:23
not be false or misleading
present a “fair balance” of information describing both the risks and benefits of a drug
include facts that are “material” to the product’s advertised uses, and
include a “brief summary” that mentions every risk described in the product’s labeling
Have you ever seen an ad for the COVID jab that held true to these four requirements? I can’t think of one. People who have been injured by the COVID jab are now also starting to speak out, saying they feel betrayed and misled, as they were never told about the potential dangers of the shot.
One excellent example is the Substack writer Joomi’s story, “I Was Deceived About COVID Vaccine Safety.”24 Has mainstream media become too corrupted to serve its intended function? I believe so. At bare minimum, the likelihood of getting the truth on anything related to government or health, specifically, is virtually nil these days.
As we have been reporting for the last three weeks, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is horrific. Russian president Vladimir Putin is a thug who is committing war crimes and who is killing innocent Ukrainians while endangering the people of Russia — all the while threatening nuclear war. While this war is not near American soil, because of the United States’ involvement in NATO and its relationship with Ukraine, it most certainly affects all Americans.
US sanctions on Russia have helped to drive oil prices up nearly 50 percent since this conflict began, which is undoubtedly going to drive up the cost of literally everything else.
These things most assuredly affect the lives of millions of Americans and this war deserves coverage in the media. That being said, given the track record of US media, and their tendency to deceive the American public to get them to accept wars for profit, we shouldn’t be so quick to let down our guard and unquestioningly absorb the constant barrage of information coming from them.
If the mainstream media was so concerned about wars and illegal invasions why don’t they ever report on the genocide in Yemen which is being aided by the United States or any of the other places the US has invaded over the years? The corporate press is actively avoiding these conflicts while conveniently using the Ukraine crisis as a means of ignoring other very important stories that also affect your life.
We have compiled a list of five of these stories to make sure they don’t get lost in the constant barrage of war propaganda from the mainstream.
1. FOIA Request Reveals Biden Admin Paid $1 Billion to Corporate Media Outlets to Push Covid Vaccines
According to FOIA documents obtained by the Blaze, the current administration paid the whole of corporate media, including the so-called “conservative” outlets, a billion of your tax dollars to carry out a massive campaign to push positive information about the COVID-19 vaccines.
The breach of journalistic integrity in this scheme cannot be overstated. While the average American thought they were consuming “unbiased” media reports, they were actually part of a paid propaganda campaign to convince them to take the vaccine.
As The Blaze points out, “though virtually all of these newsrooms produced stories covering the COVID-19 vaccines, the taxpayer dollars flowing to their companies were not disclosed to audiences in news reports, since common practice dictates that editorial teams operate independently of media advertising departments and news teams felt no need to make the disclosure, as some publications reached for comment explained.”
2. Pfizer Data was Quietly Released Listing Well Over 1,200 Adverse Side Effects from the Covid Jab
While the mainstream media incessantly reported on all things Ukraine over the last several weeks, literally all of the major outlets have refused to report on the release of Pfizer’s data.
In January, after the FDA and Pfizer received massive backlash for delaying the release of vaccine data for 75 years, U.S. District Judge Mark T. Pittman ordered the agency to turn over 55,000 pages of vaccine trial data every month. On March 1, that first release came and not a single mainstream outlet reported on it.
In that 55,000-page set of documents released last week, the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research allowed the public to access data for the first time that Pfizer submitted to the FDA from its clinical trials in support of a COVID-19 “vaccine” license. Hidden in one appendix is a 38-page report of clinical data for Pfizer’s “vaccine” which lists a massive array of 1,291 alleged adverse side effects from the shot.
“This is a bombshell,” said Children’s Health Defense (CHD) president and general counsel Mary Holland.
“At least now we know why the FDA and Pfizer wanted to keep this data under wraps for 75 years. These findings should put an immediate end to the Pfizer Covid vaccines. The potential for serious harm is clear, and those injured by the vaccines are prohibited from suing Pfizer for damages….”
State Agents Raid Preschools, Question Toddlers Without Parental Consent for Not Wearing Masks
As the rest of the country began following actual science, the People’s Republic of California maintained their covid tyranny for the peasant class. While politicians and celebrities openly flaunted the mandates they wrote and shilled for, the general public, including children, were forced to obey.
One preschool company in San Diego, however, said enough was enough and made masks optional for their students. While other schools were muzzling their children in defiance of science, Aspen Leaf openly told parents that masks were optional. As a result, state agents with the California Department of Social Services raided all three locations simultaneously — as if they were trafficking children, not freeing them from cloth face coverings.
Despite clear laws on the books about interviewing children without parental consent, CDSS questioned children aged 1-4 without their parents.
“This gross abuse of power is shameful and unacceptable for many reasons,” Stephanie and Richard Rosado wrote in a complaint about their 4-year-old being interrogated, according to the Voice. “The people who ordered this to be done and those who participated should be held responsible.”
As Gov’t Sends Billions to Ukraine, Millions of US Children are Being Pushed into Horrible Poverty
On Thursday, the House and Senate approved a bill to send $14 billion to the Ukraine, most of which will go toward weapons.
With moves like this, it is no surprise that the stock market associated with the military industrial complex is booming as the rest of the market plummets. What’s more, as the politically elite send billions to the other side of the world, 3.7 million children have been pushed into poverty here at home.
According to a recently released Columbia University report, by late January 3.7 million U.S. children were plunged back into poverty, as the government ended the child tax credit.
While the child tax credit is a band-aid to a much larger problem, it was helping millions of children yet it is a drop in the bucket on what the US spends on war every year. And now, instead of helping starving American children, the war hawks are asking for more money for war.
Biden Pushing Executive Orders to Make US Gun Owners Felons
As the US government sends billions of your tax dollars to Ukraine to put weapons in their hands, that same government is working overtime back home to take weapons out of yours. There will be no vote in Congress and you will have no say in the matter. Instead, Biden is ruling by executive decree.
The second EO being rammed through by the Biden administration will force citizens to register their “80 percent lowers.” Officially called a “receiver blank” by the ATF, an 80% lower is an unfinished receiver that isn’t considered a firearm until the purchaser finishes it at home. Biden likes to call these “ghost guns” to scare folks but they are really just modifications for most people who like to tweak their firearms.
Under these two executive orders, millions of gun owners will also be turned into felons overnight.
So, as stated above, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is most assuredly an important issue but we must remain resilient when consuming information. As the above stories illustrate, the sleight of hand tactics by the corporate press are in full swing, which is why independent media is so important. It is also why we are constantly under attack from those who wish to control the narrative.
If you’d like to help us in the battle against constant censorship and demonetization, please consider becoming a member of the Free Thought Project by signing up for one of our member packages offering free schwag and other perks. You can do so by clicking here.
Three pathologists have published a piece in the journal, Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine regarding their examination of autopsies conducted of two teenage boys who died days after receiving Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. According to the three pathologists, two of whom are medical examiners, ”The myocardial injury seen in these post-vaccine hearts is different from typical myocarditis.”
These were healthy children, with no evidence of active or previous COVID-19 infection. They also had toxicology screens showing no poisons or drugs present in their bodies.
Instead of observations seen with normal myocarditis injury, the authors explain the injury as “closely resembling a catecholamine-mediated stress (toxic) cardiomyopathy.”
“The microscopic findings are not the alterations seen with typical myocarditis. This suggest a role for cytokine storm which may occur with an excessive inflammatory response.”
Autopsy Histopathologic Cardiac Findings in Two Adolescents Following the Second COVID-19 Vaccine Dose
The idea that these injuries could be a result of a natural COVID infection was thus ruled out. They explain that “there are areas of contraction bands and hypereosinophilic myocytes distinct from the inflammation that’s seen with typical myocarditis.”
The type of injuries these two boys suffered is also called ‘neurogenic myocardial injury’ or ‘broken heart syndrome.’
“This injury pattern is instead similar to what is seen in the myocardium of patients who are clinically diagnosed with Takotsubo, toxic, or ‘stress’ cardiomyopathy, which is a temporary myocardial injury that can develop in patients with extreme physical, chemical, or sometimes emotional stressors.”
Autopsy Histopathologic Cardiac Findings in Two Adolescents Following the Second COVID-19 Vaccine Dose
Their injuries were a result of a reaction to something, in this case it seems pretty clear that these deaths were vaccine-induced.
“This post-vaccine reaction may represent an overly exuberant immune response and the myocardial injury is mediated by similar immune mechanisms as described with SARS-COV-2 and multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) cytokine storms.”
Autopsy Histopathologic Cardiac Findings in Two Adolescents Following the Second COVID-19 Vaccine Dose
The next question is, are these types of injuries really as rare as federal health regulatory agencies claim? The citizenry has been assured that the risks of serious adverse reactions to COVID vaccines are far less than the risk of serious reactions to COVID itself. But is this true for children? Multiple countries have reported zero COVID deaths in children throughout this pandemic, like Germany and Sweden for example. Others have reported similar numbers on par with the flu, and the survival rate for children has been estimated to be nearly 100 percent.
These are a few of many reasons why some countries, like Norway, do not recommend these vaccines for children.
Furthermore, how effective can a vaccine be for children if their survival rate is already so high, and their chances of hospitalization so low? The effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine against Omicron “declined rapidly for children, particularly those 5-11 years,” according to a study released Feb 28, 2022. It was found to be only 12 percent effective.
A 2021 study out of the University of California used VAERS to show the risk of myocarditis for teenage boys in the 12-15 age group is at least six times greater after two doses of the Pfizer vaccine than being hospitalized for COVID. Another one published in Nature Medicine suggested the same.
Has an appropriate cost/benefit analysis been done with regards to the rare risk of vaccine injury compared to the rare risk of injury from a COVID infection for children?
There are multiple reports of serious reactions to COVID vaccines that have been reported in the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). This includes approximately 24,000 deaths ad 44,000 permanent disabilities since their rollout. But the CDC continues to assure the public that “Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem.”
Well, do they (the vaccine injury reports) or don’t they cause health problems? Are they properly looked into or not? How can we determine if vaccine injury reports did or didn’t and are appropriate measures being taken by these federal health regulatory agencies to dive in deeper into these cases?
Approximately 50 percent of vaccine injuries reported to VAERS in the last 30 years are all from COVID vaccines. Furthermore, anecdotal evidence of people sharing what they perceive to be their COVID vaccine-induced injuries has exploded on social media. There are multiple examples, Jab Injuries Australia is one of them, Jab Injuries Canada is another.
Below are a few examples of reports submitted to VAERS in context with the autopsy examination analyzed in this article.
A recent death involved a 12-year-old girl (VAERS I.D. 1784945) who died from a respiratory tract hemorrhage 22 days after receiving her first Pfizer product dose. Another recent death is the case of a 16-year-old girl (VAERS I.D. 1694568) who died of pulmonary embolism 9 days after a Pfizer product dose (whether it was the first or second is unknown).
Yet another recent death was that of a 15-year-old boy who died six days after receiving his first dose of Pfizer product. The VAERS report (I.D. 1764974) states that the previously healthy teen ‘was in his usual state of good health. Five days after the vaccine, he complained of shoulder pain. He was playing with 2 friends at a community pond, swinging from a rope swing, flipping in the air, and landing in the water feet first. He surfaced, laughed, told his friends “Wow, that hurt!”, then swam towards the shore, underwater as was his usual routine. The friends became worried when he did not reemerge.
His body was retrieved by local authorities more than an hour later.’ The autopsy revealed ‘small foci of myocardial inflammation, an adverse effect of these COVID products commonly found among children and youth, particularly young men.
People, journalists, doctors and scientists who have brought up vaccine safety and efficacy concerns throughout this pandemic have been censored, vilified and labeled as “conspiracy theorists” by governments and legacy media.
That’s not a good look for inspiring confidence in COVID vaccines. What would be more effective would simply be an open discussion, and addressing these concerns that have been brought up. They continue to remain unacknowledged within the mainstream and therefore those who rely on legacy media sources for information remain completely unaware.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday released a 10,000-page cache of documents pertaining to the Emergency Use Authorization of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine. An initial review shows the documents containing details about animal studies, adverse events experienced by trial participants, the makeup of Pfizer’s internal review committee … and more.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday released a 10,000-page cache of documents pertaining to the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine.
The documents provide more insights into the FDA’s process for approving the vaccine, and may also shed more light on the safety and efficacy of the vaccines and the number and nature of adverse effects that were observed during the clinical trials and the first months after the EUA was issued.
PHMPT, a group of medical and public health professionals and scientists from Harvard, Yale, UCLA and other institutions, submitted the request in August 2021.
The FOIA request asked for the approximately 400,000 pages of documents pertaining to the approval of the Pfizer COVID vaccine to be made public, including safety and effectiveness data, adverse reaction reports and a list of the vaccine’s active and inactive ingredients.
When the FDA ignored the request, PHMPT sued the agency in September 2021, taking the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. On Feb. 2, federal judge Mark Pittman issued an order requiring the FDA to release redacted versions of the documents in question according to the following disclosure schedule:
10,000 pages apiece, due on or before March 1 and April 1, 2022.
80,000 pages apiece, to be produced on or before May 2, June 1 and July 1, 2022.
70,000 pages to be produced on or before Aug. 1, 2022.
55,000 pages per month, on or before the first business day of each month thereafter, until the release of the documents has been completed.
The cache of documents made public on March 1, available on PHMPT’s website, represents the first release of such documents following the issuance of Pittman’s order in February.
However, the FDA released smaller sets of documents in November and December 2021 and January 2022, while the legal case was ongoing.
The documents also revealed a nine-page list of adverse events observed during that same period. The list recently was circulated widely on social media and wrongly attributed to the set of documents released March 1.
This may be because the March 1 document release garnered widespread attention among those following the issue, likely delivering traffic to PHMPT’s website, which catalogs all of the documents that have been released thus far.
Major media outlets, however, have not covered the latest release of documents and, as of this writing, there has been only limited coverage by smaller media outlets. That may be due, at least in part, to the vast volume of information and data to sort through.
Endpoints News, a publication focusing on the pharmaceutical industry, published a dismissive article regarding the release of the latest cache of documents.
The publication’s editor, Zachary Brennan, reported the documents contain mundane information that is “typical for any drug or vaccine application” and that “will give readers a good overall sense of the required documentation necessary to apply for a drug or vaccine approval at the FDA.”
Such information includes, according to Brennan, “more than 100 pages worth of anonymous safety-related tables of data” and “unidentified participants’ gender, age and BMI.”
Other documentation pertains to “the standard, nearly $2.9 million user fee payment to FDA from Pfizer” and to “the confidential nonclinical overview for the vaccine,” Brennan said.
Brennan noted some documents included in the cache, such as the fast track designation letter and Pfizer’s request for a waiver from adding a suffix to the vaccine’s name, are “not typically released” to the public.
All indications from corporate media tell us Big Pharma is a safe investment as Pandemic Panic Theater continues to rage. But the biggest investors are pulling out now. Why?
For the average investor, there seems to be a future in Big Pharma. The world is engulfed by Pandemic Panic Theater as new jabs, boosters, and pills continue to roll out to fight Covid. Mandates are still in place for millions of people and threats of more still loom. This week, a national vaccine passport quietly moved forward.
But the elite investors are inexplicably pulling out. Stock prices for the major vaccine manufacturers are plummeting as a result, leaving many smaller investors wondering if this is a long-term trend or a blip. According to The Deseret Review:
Wall Street investors are dumping their Moderna and Pfizer stock faster than the world can drop the mandates. Moderna is down 70 percent from its high, while Pfizer is off 19 percent. Former Blackrock Executive and investment adviser Edward Dowd calls for Moderna to go to zero and Pfizer to end under ten dollars per share.
How is this possible given that Pfizer now enjoys record earnings per share and a market capitalization of some $270 billion, making it the 29th largest corporation globally? With nothing but profits in sight for the Pharmaceutical giant, what could be the problem?
After all, in December, a Forbes‘ headline read, “The Vaccine Maker Can Dominate The Covid Market For Years to Come, Wells Fargo Predicts.” In addition to the enormously profitable mRNA vaccines, Pfizer is rolling out potent antivirals like Paxlovid, which could earn $22 billion in 2022.
Compared to the $81 billion in 2021 revenue, the earnings from the vaccines and the antivirals could top $102 billion for 2022, which is music to shareholders’ ears. However some are hearing shrieks, and these happen to be Wall Street’s finest, the smart money that beats the rest of the herd to the exits like clockwork.
These sophisticated investors make it their business to not go with the conventional wisdom but to do their own research, which often pays spectacular dividends.
The prevailing conspiracy theory explaining this swift change in money confidence claims the powers-that-be have initiated the next stage of their plan to bring forth The Great Reset. Russia in Ukraine, perhaps followed by China in Taiwan, and other conflicts across the globe could send America’s and the world’s economies into full-blown collapse.
In other words, whatever the big investors know about Big Pharma stocks, it’s very likely that the agenda is not one the people of the world will enjoy. Machinations of globalist elites invariably harm the masses even as they’re promoted as beneficial to all. The precepts of The Great Reset demand an unwitting embrace of Neo-Marxism disguised with colorful terms like “stakeholder capitalism” and “the end of poverty.”
What they don’t tell you is that the “equity” they promote is designed to make us all equally destitute. They want the vast majority of people are beholden to the powers-that-be in order to survive.
We’ll be keeping a very close eye on how the big money is moving. Every action by the globalist elite going forward will be calculated and pre-planned. It’s time for the rest of us to prepare for what’s to come.
The request comes after the regulatory agency made headlines for previously requesting 55 and then 75 years to fully release the information it used to approve Pfizer’s increasingly-mandated COVID jab.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has once again requested permission to hold off on releasing the data it used to approve Pfizer’s COVID-19 shots for widespread distribution despite a court order requiring them to begin publishing 55,000 pages of documents per month starting in March.
Meanwhile, Pfizer has attempted to insert itself into the matter in an effort to protect its interests.
The FDA’s request to continue hiding the crucial safety data from consumers comes as COVID-19 jabs, including those produced by Pfizer, are increasingly mandated across the U.S. and the globe for participation in many aspects of society.
Attorney Aaron Siri, who filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the FDA in August on behalf of a coalition of researchers and scientists to demand the full release of the documents, wrote about the developments in a Substack post on Wednesday.
According to Siri, the FDA “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.”
Meanwhile, “[a]s the FDA tries to obtain months of delay, guess who just showed [up] in the lawsuit?” Siri asked rhetorically, adding, “Yep, Pfizer.”
FDA tells Court must delay first 55,000 pages until at least May. FDA’s excuse? Lack of resources. Maybe spend less taxpayer money fighting transparency!
And Pfizer has now moved to join the lawsuit claiming it wants to help expedite. 😂
The regulatory body’s renewed efforts to stall publication of the documents and Pfizer’s arrival on the scene come after the FDA raised eyebrows last year by requesting decades to fully release the data it had reviewed before authorizing Pfizer’s COVID-19 injections.
In response to Siri’s FOIA lawsuit, the FDA had asked the court for 55 to 75 years to make public the roughly 329,000 pages of documents in its possession.
Facing legal pressure, however, in November the FDA released its first batch of documents, a scant 91 pages that, nonetheless contained data suggesting that tens of thousands of serious adverse events and more than 1,200 deaths had been reported in the first three months after Pfizer’s drug was cleared by the FDA under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA).
Then, earlier this month, a U.S. district judge rejected the FDA’s request to continue delaying the release of the data, ordering the regulatory body to publish the documents at a rate of 55,000 pages per month beginning in March rather than the 500 pages per month initially requested.
Drug manufacturing giant Pfizer — which is projected to report industry shattering $80 billion in business for last year thanks largely to sales of its coronavirus vaccine — is sticking charter school kids in Brooklyn with an injection of rejection, school officials said.
Operators of Beginning with Children, one of the first charter schools to open in the city in 1992, wants to open a high school on an empty lot adjacent to its existing middle-grades charter school at 11 Bartlett St. in Williamsburg.
“They have a great record of success,” said Joseph Belluck, chairman of the SUNY Charter School Committee that approved Beginning With Children’s high school grades expansion.
Its elementary school is at 215 Heyward St. and the middle school is on the property turned over to BWC by Pfizer.
But the charter school operators claim that Pfizer — whose storied history as one of the world’s largest drug manufacturers started at its campus in Brooklyn — is being stingy by reneging on a promise to give or sell the vacant lot to the school for expansion.
“Pfizer made promises to our school, our families and our community that they haven’t kept, and they’ve provided no explanation why,” Beginning With Children Foundation CEO Lewson Kurz told The Post.
“They deserve credit for their work on the vaccine but their refusal to engage the community on this sliver of abandoned property is puzzling. Pfizer’s obstinance is denying opportunity to Brooklyn children. We hope Pfizer changes its mind and does the right thing,” added Kurz.
Pfizer offered to negotiate a purchase of the vacant lot at fair market value but cut off negotiations in January 2020, reps for Beginning with Children said. Discussions about the future use of the vacant lot go back to at least 2008.
The property is an abandoned brownfield site and existing buildings were knocked down to do environmental clean up.
Local Brooklyn political leaders also complained about Pfizer’s stall on the use of the property and urged them to be a good neighbor.
“The Pfizer location [next to] 11 Bartlett St. is currently unmaintained, fenced off eyesore that is out of step with the blossoming neighborhood surrounding it. Across the City abandoned or underutilized properties are being repurposed for community benefit. There are no shortages of individuals who are interested in developing this property beyond what it is currently being used for,” Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso said in an Oct. 22, 2021 letter he co-wrote as a councilman to Pfizer Executive VP Sally Susman.
Reynoso mentioned affordable housing as one option and added, “It is our understanding that the Pfizer-owned property also controls the development rights of the Charter School next door thereby inhibiting their development and growth as well.”
“For years the neighborhood worked to support Pfizer while it operated there, we are now asking Pfizer to work to support the neighborhood by allowing the property to be developed,” Reynoso said in the letter co-signed by former Councilman Stephen Levin.
Pfizer, in a statement to The Post, said it has been a good community neighbor, including to students. The company noted it provided BWC charter school with its current building and property for a $1-a-year annual lease in 1992 and then gave them the title for $10.
“As we prepare for the 175th anniversary of Pfizer, we have been diligently working on options for the 0.42-acre Bartlett St. property recognizing that the remaining parcel is the last link to the founding history of the Company,” the statement said.
“Our plans are to retain the last remaining piece of property, and we look forward to sharing our proposal for the site with elected officials and the community of Brooklyn very soon.”
Beginning with Children students was founded by Joseph and Carol Reich, who also helped create the New York City Charter School Center.
BWC students outperformed kids from surrounding neighborhood schools on the state’s 2019 standardized Math and English exams.
Nearly two-thirds of students were deemed proficient in Math — 23 percent higher than nearby district schools and 15 points higher than the citywide average.
In English Language Arts, 52 percent of students met proficiency, eight points higher than surrounding district schools and 5 points higher than the citywide average.
Meanwhile, Pfizer is expected to close its books with $80 billion in revenue for 2021, double its $40 billion in business in 2020. Sales from COVID-19 vaccine and booster generated about half the revenue.
Pfizer could generate more than $100 billion in 2022 thanks to continuing sales of the COVID vaccine developed with BioNTech as well as delivery of its antiviral pill, Paxlovid, to non-hospitalized patients.
German immigrants and cousins Charles Pfizer and Charles Erhart founded Charles Pfizer & Company in a brick building in Brooklyn’s Williamsburg neighborhood. At the intersection of Harrison Avenue and Bartlett Street, they launched what would become one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical producers. The closing of its Flushing Avenue plant in 2007 was a bitter pill for the community.
Pfizer was instrumental in manufacturing penicillin antibiotics from its Brooklyn plants a century ago — dubbed the “miracle drug” to treat bacterial infections and sexually transmitted diseases. By the mid-1940s the company was the largest producer of the life-saving drug in the world.
Though the fact-checking madness began long before COVID-19, over the last two years, fact-checking has seemingly been weaponized to defend the establishment’s narrative only. Challenge the status quo and you will be censored into oblivion by the system’s praetorian guard — never mind the fact that they have been wrong countless times.
One of the most egregious “fact checks” happened recently after Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla made a statement during an interview with Yahoo Finance on January 10. Speaking in reference to the Omicron variant of COVID-19, Bourla said, “We know that the two doses of a vaccine offer very limited protection, if any.”
Naturally, this statement from the CEO of a vaccine company that manufactures the jab which many Americans were forced to take against their will in order to keep their jobs or go out in public, drew much deserved attention. Many folks called out the CEO for his comments in April in which he stated that the “Phase 3 study with BioNTech also showed that our COVID-19 vaccine was 100% effective in preventing #COVID19 cases in South Africa. 100%!”
Excited to share that updated analysis from our Phase 3 study with BioNTech also showed that our COVID-19 vaccine was 100% effective in preventing #COVID19 cases in South Africa. 100%! https://t.co/E2ksTJSopU
As people began to compare these two statements — one claiming 100% efficacy, with another claiming two doses may not work at all — the praetorian guard, aka the fact-checking army, came to the rescue to conduct damage control.
Because Bourla did in fact state that the vaccine was 100% effective in April only to claim 9 months later that it may not be effective at all, the fact-checkers couldn’t claim this was false. Instead, Reuters claimed that anyone who pointed out Bourla’s most recent statement was “missing context” when quoting the CEO because his comments about offering “very limited protection, if any,” were made specifically in regard to the Omicron variant.
VERDICT Missing context. During an interview on Jan. 10, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech shot offered “very limited protection” against COVID-19 infection with the Omicron variant. He was not talking about protection against infection by other variants of the coronavirus.
This statement is true and the carefully chosen wording makes it impossible to dispute. A win for Bourla, loss for anyone who quoted him.
Let’s forget about the fact that the federal government did not detail the efficacy of the jab against specific variants when it mandated vaccines through OSHA. Let’s also forget that New York, San Francisco, and the myriad of other municipalities who have mandated the jab for access to public places also make no mention of efficacy against all the different variants while compelling the medical procedure. This is apparently not important to them.
What is important, however, is protecting the image of Pfizer and making sure no one becomes “vaccine-hesitant” based on misconstrued statements or misinformation. Right?
Moving forward, we will have to specify the exact variant of the covid-19 virus to which the big pharma shills are referring in regard to the vaccine if we are to challenge or quote anything they say — lest we get the ban hammer. Just ask former Congressman Ron Paul what happens when you quote the Pfizer CEO and leave out Omicron.
Paul was banned from Facebook for 90 days for sharing the video of Bourla, and titling it “Pfizer CEO: From “100% Effective in Preventing Covid” To “Very Limited Protection, If Any.” All of this is factual, but leaving out Omicron left the former Congressman open for attack, and attacked he was.
“My speech crime? I shared an interview with the CEO of Pfizer,” Dr. Paul wrote in an email.
“The so-called “missing context” that Facebook’s “fact-checkers” claim justifies banning me from interacting with over a million followers is that the drug company CEO was “only” referring to the Omicron variant that makes up 95% of new COVID cases in the United States,” he said, adding that “this was my second sanctioning by Facebook in just over a year.”
The idea that a former Congressman of three decades can be wiped off of social media for simply sharing a video of the Pfizer CEO should be shocking. Unfortunately, however, it is the norm, and it is to be expected, especially considering the cozy relationship between the fact-checkers and the industry.
In fact, their relationship is far more than just cozy. In 2014, James C. Smith — who was then the President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Thomson Reuters and served on its Board of Directors — was appointed to the Board of Directors to the Corporate Governance and Science and Technology Committees at Pfizer.
That’s right, after his appointment to the Board of Directors for Pfizer, Smith remained the CEO for Reuters for the next six years. Though he retired from the news agency in 2020, Smith remains on the Pfizer board. He is also still the current Chairman of the Thomson Reuters Foundation.
But that’s not all. Smith is also on the international business council of the World Economic Forum and the international advisory boards of the British American Business Council and, last but not least, none other than the infamous Atlantic Council.
Certainly there has to be a conflict of interests somewhere in all these entanglements, right? If Reuters is conducting fact checks for Pfizer’s benefit, it might be beneficial if people knew the tightly woven connection between these two multi-billion dollar corporations, right?
A federal judge in Texas on Thursday ordered the Food and Drug Administration to make public the data it relied on to license Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, imposing a dramatically accelerated schedule that should result in the release of all information within about eight months.
That’s roughly 75 years and four months faster than the FDA said it could take to complete a Freedom of Information Act request by a group of doctors and scientists seeking an estimated 450,000 pages of material about the vaccine.
The court “concludes that this FOIA request is of paramount public importance,” wrote U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman in Fort Worth, who was appointed to the bench by former President Donald Trump in 2019.
The FDA didn’t dispute it had an obligation to make the information public but argued that its short-staffed FOIA office only had the bandwidth to review and release 500 pages a month.
While Pittman recognized “the ‘unduly burdensome’ challenges that this FOIA request may present to the FDA,” in his four-page order, he resoundingly rejected the agency’s suggested schedule.
Rather than producing 500 pages a month — the FDA’s proposed timeline — he ordered the agency to turn over 55,000 a month. That means all the Pfizer vaccine data should be public by the end of the summer rather than, say, the year 2097.
Even if the FDA may not see it this way, I think Pittman did the agency — and the country — a big favor by expediting the document production.
I’ve been chronicling this fight since November and have heard from dozens of readers who said they felt something was suspicious, even nefarious, in the FDA’s proposed slo-mo timeline. Making the information public as soon as possible may help assuage the concerns of vaccine skeptics and convince them the product is safe.
Pittman in his order nodded to this as well, including a quote from the late senator John McCain, who said that excessive administrative secrecy “feeds conspiracy theories and reduces the public’s confidence in the government.”
Still, the FDA is likely to be hard-pressed to process 55,000 pages a month.
The office that reviews FOIA requests has just 10 employees, according to a declaration filed with the court by Suzann Burk, who heads the FDA’s Division of Disclosure and Oversight Management. Burk said it takes eight minutes a page for a worker “to perform a careful line-by-line, word-by-word review of all responsive records before producing them in response to a FOIA request.”
At that rate, the 10 employees would have to work non-stop 24 hours a day, seven days a week to produce the 55,000 pages a month (and would still fall a bit short).
But as lawyers for the plaintiffs Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency pointed out in court papers, the FDA as of 2020 had 18,062 employees. Surely some can be dispatched to pitch in at the FOIA office.
Aaron Siri of Siri & Glimstad, who represents the plaintiffs, in an email said the decision “came down on the side of transparency and accountability.”
His clients — a group that includes more than 200 doctors, scientists, professors and public health professionals, including some who have publicly questioned the efficacy of lockdown policies, mask mandates and the vaccine itself — have pledged to publish all the information they receive from the FDA on their website.
The Justice Department, which represented the FDA in the litigation, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday evening. Pfizer, not a party to the suit, also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Pittman in his order made clear that the FOIA request, even if burdensome, has to be a priority for the FDA.
Quoting from remarks made during the hearing before him on December 14, he wrote that “there may not be a ‘re important issue at the Food and Drug Administration . . . than the pandemic, the Pfizer vaccine, getting every American vaccinated,” and assuring the public that the vaccine was not “‘rush[ed] on behalf of the United States.'”
“As far as I'm concerned, it's a damned shame that a field as potentially dynamic and vital as journalism should be overrun with dullards, bums, and hacks, hag-ridden with myopia, apathy, and complacence, and generally stuck in a bog of stagnant mediocrity.” -Hunter Thompson