10 reasons why the FDA approval for Pfizer jab isn't about health, but about forcing people to take the shot

By newseditors // 2021-08-30

Mastodon

Parler

Gab

Copy

The announcement [on Aug. 23] by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that it has granted full approval to Pfizer for its Covid-19 vaccine is not surprising to many people who have been watching all of the Operation Warp Speed fast-tracking, moving of barriers, and rule-bending for vaccine makers. Here are 10 reasons why the FDA "gold standard" stamp of approval doesn’t mean anything about protecting citizens’ health and safety but has everything to do with erasing liability and giving governments and businesses the gumption to coerce injections on employees and consumers. (Article by Celeste McGovern republished from LifeSiteNews.com)

1. It’s still experimental – Pfizer’s clinical trials don’t end until May 2023

Some people think that the FDA approval means that Pfizer’s shot is no longer experimental. That’s not the case. Every Covid shot, including Pfizer’s, is less than a year in use and still experimental by definition. Pfizer’s vaccine, like Moderna’s is based on a "novel" experiment using messenger RNA that hijacks human cell machinery to produce spike antibodies. There’s never been anything like it used in humans before and this vaccine rollout is a giant experiment – whether you call it that or not.

The fact is, Pfizer’s clinical trials don’t end until May 2023. FDA-approval usually requires letting clinical trials run their course but granting an emergency use authorization (EUA) – the sort of thing that allows doctors to try experimental drugs on a patient because he is dying anyway — is a different game altogether. And Pfizer’s EUA extends to 12-year-olds whose odds of dying from Covid are significantly less than getting hit by lightning.

More questions are emerging everyday about what the long-term effects of the Pfizer Covid jab will be on the immune system, on Covid, on chronic disease, on fertility, and so on. Given that no-one knows the answers to these questions the jab is obviously still experimental.

2. COVID jab mandates violate fundamental human rights

When some people hear that an injection is still experimental, they pause. Some might hesitate to issue vaccine mandates because it would be in violation of the Nuremberg Code. After the horrific atrocities of Nazi experiments on Jews in World War II were exposed, the world accepted the Nuremberg Code which said that we as humanity would never, ever coerce people into medical experiments against their will again.

Some people don’t want to break codes like that. The EUA status itself forbids mandates. But "approval" doesn’t. So Joe Biden and Anthony Fauci’s gangs didn’t advertise that the shots were experimental and now they’ve just changed the process to make something experimental sound not-so-experimental.

3. There’s a history of medical disasters to consider

Many people still remember medical horrors like Thalidomide and DES – experimental drugs that doctors cavalierly doled out like bubble gum until thousands of babies started being born with malformed limbs and young girls started getting rare vaginal cancer years and years after they were exposed to the experiment.

There have been disasters with vaccines in the past, too. A vaccine for the swine flu pandemic of the 1970s is a considered a public health debacle because hundreds of people developed the neurologically disabling condition, Guillain Barré Syndrome.

In 2017, Sanofi Pasteur was forced to yank its new Dengvaxia vaccine off the market after it killed several hundred children by making them experience a worse version of dengue fever than if they’d never been vaccinated at all. The Dengvaxia fiasco led to dozens of public health figures being indicted for "reckless imprudence resulting in homicide." Do you think that can’t happen again?

4. There has been no external review of the Pfizer jab

There was a lot of blathering from public health types like Anthony Fauci about "transparency" in the FDA review process for Covid vaccines. In ordinary circumstances, this would involve bringing outside experts to the table and opening the data books.

That didn’t happen here. The FDA approval appeared uncontested because they simply skipped the bit where people contest.

"[W]e have no idea what the data looks like," the British Medical Journal quoted Kim Witczak, a drug safety advocate who serves as a consumer representative on the FDA’s Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee, a few days ago.

In June, Witczak had circulated a petition signed by herself and at least 30 other health professionals opposing the FDA process which they said "removed an important mechanism for scrutinizing the data" by disallowing external review.

"If the FDA listens to us, they won’t give serious consideration to approving a Covid-19 vaccine until 2022," she told the BMJ.

5. All we have is six months of incomplete data

The reality is that Pfizer set up its trials to last two years and now approval has been granted based on just six months of incomplete data. If you look at the public heath nightmares that happened before – in most cases, it took longer than six months for the problems to emerge. The narcolepsy signal didn’t emerge until two years after the vaccine was doled out and it wasn’t confirmed until years after that. Data sifting takes time and if people are blinded to seeing disaster signals they don’t want to see, it takes even more time. If there are big problems with Pfizer’s vaccine, it will be a long time before public health admits to them.

6. There are no control groups in this global experiment

"It is already concerning that full approval is being based on 6 months’ worth of data despite the clinical trials designed for two years," the FDA’s own regulator Witczak said in the BMJ. "There is no control group after Pfizer offered the product to placebo participants before the trials were completed."

High schoolers understand the importance of controls in trials and Pfizer erased their controls and gave everyone the shot just months in to the experiment so that no real outcomes can be measured. If there are long-term adverse event to be detected, you won’t see then in Jen Psaki’s "gold standard" approval process that has no controls. Now, the unvaccinated are the only control group left to erase and there seems to be an urgency to do that.

Read more at: LifeSiteNews.com and MedicalTyranny.com.