Their contract was for a "large scale manufacturing demonstration," and not for a safe or effective clinically trialed drug. They already explained this in court and got a case dismissed. They argued that the clinical trial was not relevant to the approval by HHS of the treatment as an emergency authorized product since the standard for …
Their contract was for a "large scale manufacturing demonstration," and not for a safe or effective clinically trialed drug. They already explained this in court and got a case dismissed. They argued that the clinical trial was not relevant to the approval by HHS of the treatment as an emergency authorized product since the standard for this EUA approval was simply that the HHS secretary believes it might be effective. Nor, under those laws, is anyone liable for the harms induced by their manufacturing demonstration science goop other than secret kangaroo courts that exist to spit on vaccine injured.
Obviously, legislators can't legalize mass murder, so this is all unconstitutional; however, getting a court to hear this in a way that puts all those laws on the chopping block seems like a difficult task. The focus should be on the emergency laws and the fraud on the public in the FDA's false pretension that the trials were relevant to approval.
Brook Jackson trial. She is a whistleblower who sued over fraud in the trials that she observed and was fired over after telling the fda what was happening. See Sasha Latypova and Katherine Watts substack for many details.
I remember the Brook Jackson whistleblower story. That is just standard issue incompetence. The argument that trials are not important for EUA’s is a terrible precedent, but judges don’t know anything about pharmaceuticals. This does explain why the FDA thinks they can get away with making such a large process change without threats of criminal liability, though.
Excerpted from Pfizer's argument to the judge in that case:
The [contract’s Statement of Work] describes a ‘large scale vaccine manufacturing demonstration’ that imposes no requirements relating to Good Clinical Practices (‘GCP’) or related FDA regulations…
Literally zero standards. And this is mere incompetence? Their contract exempted them from manufacturing standards meaning they could literally inject you with liquified sewage. That was an accident? An oversight? It was written in the contract!!
Their contract was for a "large scale manufacturing demonstration," and not for a safe or effective clinically trialed drug. They already explained this in court and got a case dismissed. They argued that the clinical trial was not relevant to the approval by HHS of the treatment as an emergency authorized product since the standard for this EUA approval was simply that the HHS secretary believes it might be effective. Nor, under those laws, is anyone liable for the harms induced by their manufacturing demonstration science goop other than secret kangaroo courts that exist to spit on vaccine injured.
Obviously, legislators can't legalize mass murder, so this is all unconstitutional; however, getting a court to hear this in a way that puts all those laws on the chopping block seems like a difficult task. The focus should be on the emergency laws and the fraud on the public in the FDA's false pretension that the trials were relevant to approval.
What court case? This seems insane.
Brook Jackson trial. She is a whistleblower who sued over fraud in the trials that she observed and was fired over after telling the fda what was happening. See Sasha Latypova and Katherine Watts substack for many details.
I remember the Brook Jackson whistleblower story. That is just standard issue incompetence. The argument that trials are not important for EUA’s is a terrible precedent, but judges don’t know anything about pharmaceuticals. This does explain why the FDA thinks they can get away with making such a large process change without threats of criminal liability, though.
Quoted from here: https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/p/key-quotes-from-pfizers-april-22
Excerpted from Pfizer's argument to the judge in that case:
The [contract’s Statement of Work] describes a ‘large scale vaccine manufacturing demonstration’ that imposes no requirements relating to Good Clinical Practices (‘GCP’) or related FDA regulations…
Literally zero standards. And this is mere incompetence? Their contract exempted them from manufacturing standards meaning they could literally inject you with liquified sewage. That was an accident? An oversight? It was written in the contract!!