questions on pharma promotion

the best laid plans of mice and marketing firms

this is the new booster/vaccine update marketing out from the FDA

obviously, there are A LOT of questions here:

• does it even work in any clinical fashion?

• is the proxy data of “greater titer expression in mice” even valid? (especially when we don’t even know what titer they used)

• does that even apply to humans?

would this add perhaps be more honest?

or perhaps even this?

(thanks to gatopals™ woke zombie and ben who created those two graphics)

and so many other questions remain.

should we listen to tony fauci “now”?

tlearo @urhomie4l

Fauci on covid boosters: "We don't have time to do a clinical trial" 🥴

or tony fauci “then”?

or tony fauci way back when?

so many questions, so few answers.

so many assurances

nychealthy @nycHealthy

As Dr. Fauci said, no corners were cut when developing the #COVID19 vaccines. The development of the COVID-19 vaccines involved an unprecedented amount of resources in order to make the vaccine available as quickly as possible. Learn more: on.nyc.gov/3a2E6qZ

yet so little track record to be assured about.

Tell It Like It Is! @Jeres_Rant

"Our data from the ⁦@CDCgov⁩ today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the #virus, don't get sick, and that it's not just in the clinical trials but it's also in real-world data," #covid

fortune.comIt’s official: Vaccinated people don’t spread COVID-19CDC Director Rochelle Walensky this week declared that “vaccinated people do not carry the virus.”

so many changes of tune

The Federalist @FDRLST

CDC Admits Post-Vaccine Myocarditis Concerns That Were Labeled Covid Misinformation Are Legit

thefederalist.comNew CDC Data Shows Covid Shot Myocarditis Concerns Are LegitThe CDC’s latest numbers about post-vax myocarditis represent a significant departure from last year’s narrative.

and so many failures of duty and suppressions of fact.

how do you miss the most blatant safety signal in vaccine history?

how is one to do anything but question this?

and are we even asking the correct questions?

because amidst all the data deception and programmatic posturing sometimes we can lose sight of that upon which we ought to be focused.

i would posit that perhaps this is the question that really ought be asked:

because that one sure is a doozie once you hear it, isn’t it?

public health and drug regulation is intended to protect the populace from slipshod safety and abusive practice by pharma.

at least, that’s what they tell us.

but to those steeped in the fine tradition of “ignore what they say and watch what they do,” this is becoming exceedingly hard to swallow.

we can argue about what to call the current practices at the FDA, but it’s certainly not going to be “safeguarding the public,” is it?