Pfizer « Aletho News

Pfizer Freezes Air Traffic Control Funds Over COVID Vaccine Contract Dispute With Poland, Romania

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | July 30, 2026

A vaccine contract dispute between Pfizer and the European Union (EU) has resulted in Pfizer freezing billions of dollars in funds earmarked for air traffic control in Poland and Romania.

Eurocontrol, an intergovernmental organization that coordinates air traffic control management across Europe, notified Poland and Romania’s air traffic control agencies earlier this month that it was freezing the funds after Pfizer enforced an April court ruling in Brussels.

The April 1 ruling requires Poland and Romania to pay Pfizer about $1.5 billion and $640 million, respectively, plus interest and fees, for additional vaccine doses, per a 2021 contract signed between the European Commission — the EU’s executive branch — and Pfizer.

Poland and Romania refused further COVID-19 vaccine deliveries in 2022, citing falling demand for the shots, according to Bloomberg. Poland also cited financial pressures it was facing after taking in refugees fleeing the conflict in Ukraine.

Brussels Signal reported Poland sold or donated some of its surplus vaccine doses. According to Romanian political scientist Dragos Moldovean, “Romania was among the European countries with the lowest COVID-19 vaccination rates.”

These actions led Pfizer to sue the countries in 2023, resulting in the April 1 ruling.

In a statement provided to The Defender, the Warsaw Enterprise Institute (WEI) said that the case, which is still ongoing pending the two countries’ appeal, is being heard in Belgium because the EU’s contract is governed by Belgian law.

Polish and Romanian authorities have said they will appeal the ruling. Polish public broadcaster TVP World reported that Poland sought a delay in the enforcement of the April 1 ruling pending its appeal, but that the Belgian court rejected this request.

Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst, who is not involved in the lawsuit, called Pfizer’s actions “outrageous and unethical,” arguing that “it could potentially endanger the safety of flights to or from Poland and/or Romania” by depriving those countries’ air traffic control authorities of funding required for their operations.

Łukasz Wojdyga, director of the WEI’s Center for Strategic Studies, took a different view. He said that while Pfizer is exercising its rights under the law, which allow it to freeze the disputed funds even despite the expected appeals, the focus should be on the flaws in the EU’s contract. He said:

“Even if this form of enforcement is allowed under Belgian law, targeting the main source of funding for an institution responsible for air-traffic safety strikes me as disproportionate and irresponsible.

“At the same time, a creditor has the right to enforce a court judgment and protect the interests of its shareholders through any lawful means.

“For that reason, the main focus should not be on blaming Pfizer for pursuing its claim. It should be on how the contract was negotiated, approved, and signed in the first place.”

Some legal and policy experts who spoke with The Defender suggested that Pfizer had other options available to it rather than immediately freezing the two countries’ funds held in Belgium. Other experts suggest that the EU’s contract with Pfizer is, itself, invalid, as it was signed through a dubious and potentially illegal process.

EU hasn’t revealed Pfizer CEO text messages, despite ruling

The EU-Pfizer contract has long faced scrutiny. For Wojdyga, the central question isn’t whether Pfizer is entitled to collect what it is owed. It’s how European and national authorities allowed such a “large, expensive and one-sided agreement to be signed, leaving taxpayers to carry most of the risk.”

According to Brussels Signal, the 35 billion euro ($40 billion) contract between the EU and Pfizer “was one of the largest in EU procurement history.” It was signed amid “claims that the EU may have paid up to fifteen times the production cost per dose, raising concerns that billions in taxpayer funds were overpaid.”

There are also questions about how European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen negotiated the contract with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, and about potential conflicts of interest between the two parties.

Last year, the European Court of Justice ruled that the European Commission violated EU law by denying The New York Times’ request to review text messages related to the contract between von der Leyen and Bourla.

The European Commission claimed it didn’t have the text messages. But according to the ruling, the commission did not provide “plausible explanations” to justify “the non-existence or non-possession” of the documents. The commission previously claimed the texts didn’t qualify as documents, according to Politico.

In 2024, the European Court of Justice ruled that the commission’s decision to heavily redact key portions of COVID-19 vaccine contracts with pharmaceutical companies during the pandemic violated transparency rules.

In 2023, the European Parliament blocked an attempt to cross-examine von der Leyen regarding the text messages. The previous year, Bourla refused to testify before the European Parliament about the contract terms.

According to Brussels Signal, “scrutiny has been directed at potential conflicts of interest involving von der Leyen’s family,” as her husband Heiko “is the medical director at Orgenesisi, a biotech company that received EU funds and partnered with Pfizer.”

According to activist Frederic Baldan, CEO of CEBiz:

“Ursula von der Leyen, without any mandate, bypassed the committees and negotiated directly with Albert Bourla via Signal messages programmed to self-destruct. She thus circumvented the anti-corruption safeguards of her own Commission. The price increased in an inexplicable manner and the quantities ordered became insane.”

Wojdyga noted that the commission did not appeal the 2025 ruling in time, “making the ruling final.” Yet, the text messages still haven’t been released. Gheorghe Piperea, a member of the European Parliament, said that “the content of those messages remains secret to this day.”

Documents leaked in 2022 showed that U.S. and EU officials pressured European drug regulators to rush approval of Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine despite safety concerns.

According to Romanian political scientist Dragos Moldoveanu, questions remain over how the parties determined the number of doses each country would receive under the contract.

“Romania ordered 120 million doses of the vaccine, based on a ‘strategy adopted at the EU level,’ even though Romania’s population is less than 20 million people,” Moldoveanu said.

For Piperea, the EU-Pfizer contract “ought never to have existed” in the first place, because the EU took on powers it doesn’t have under the treaties of the European Union.

“The Commission violated the principle of subsidiarity that governs the shared competences of the Commission and the member states. Health policy falls within the competence of the member states, not of the Commission. The member states may be supported in these health policies, but they may not be supplanted by the Commission,” Piperea said.

This also means that if Pfizer believed the contract terms were violated, it should have sought damages from the EU, not from individual states like Romania and Poland.

However, suing the EU would have revealed “that the exceedingly narrow circle of persons who conducted the negotiations — von der Leyen … together with two or three anonymous directors from the European Medicines Agency — possessed neither the competence nor the mandate to bind the member states to payments,” Piperea said.

Wojdyga said all 27 EU governments were represented on the steering board, while the joint negotiating team with Pfizer “included the Commission and seven member states, including Poland.”

The member states were responsible for placing orders, making payments and accepting delivery under the terms of the deal.

However, “the decision-making process matters,” Wojdyga said. “Once the terms of an agreement were presented, a member state had only five working days to opt out,” after which its acceptance was considered legally binding.

He added:

“So, governments technically had a choice. In reality, they had only a few days to assess complex, multiyear financial commitments in the middle of a pandemic, under intense political pressure and amid fears of vaccine shortages. That put national governments under considerable time pressure and limited their ability to carry out a full legal, financial, and public health review.”

Baldan, who initiated a 2023 criminal case against Pfizer challenging the contract, said that in closed session, lawyers for Hungary and Poland confirmed they had “never given any negotiating mandate to von der Leyen” and that the vaccine orders were placed at the EU level and were “inexplicable” to them.

Baldan said the case resulted in a 1,000-page report by the Belgian Federal Police’s anti-corruption unit, finding that “there are sufficient elements to establish the offenses.”

However, the Belgian police handed over the investigation to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, which moved to have it annulled.

“This is what allowed Pfizer to resume its civil proceedings and obtain judgments against the member states that refused to pay,” Baldan said.

Has Pfizer endangered air traffic and public safety in Poland and Romania?

Questions remain over whether Pfizer’s freezing of Poland and Romania’s air traffic control funds held by Eurocontrol will put air travel and public safety in question.

According to TVP World, the frozen funds “are critical” because they make up more than 80% of the revenue of the country’s air traffic control agency, Polish Air Navigation Services Agency (PANSA, or PAZP).

Without the funds, the agency “could quickly lose financial liquidity, making it impossible to pay hundreds of air traffic controllers, whose work is essential for every passenger aircraft taking off, landing or safely flying through Polish airspace,” Brussels Signal reported.

PANSA could also lose the ability to maintain critical infrastructure, including radar installations and communication systems. “For ordinary citizens, this could mean cancelled flights and even the closure of Poland’s airspace,” Brussels Signal reported.

Romania Insider reported that the frozen funds equate to 0.2% of its GDP, posing “a significant burden at a time when the government is attempting to reduce the fiscal deficit.”

Piperea said the April ruling “arrived at a most inopportune moment in Romania, in the midst of recession and a major budgetary deficit.”

“Pfizer places the public in danger by leaving without funds the air-traffic control agency ROMATSA, and the state budget, which is already insufficient and cannot meet pensions, allowances, indemnities for persons with disabilities, and the like.”

Wojdyga said Pfizer’s actions are legal — but raise questions.

“I would not automatically equate the freezing of funds owed to Poland’s and Romania’s air navigation agencies with an immediate threat to passenger safety. Both agencies are still operating, and both governments have said they will protect their financial stability and keep services running. Pfizer also has the right to enforce its claims through lawful means.

“That said, targeting the main source of funding for agencies responsible for air traffic safety is bound to raise concerns, especially since neither agency was a party to the vaccine contract.”

“Pfizer is unlikely to close Poland’s airspace. By targeting PAZP’s revenue, however, it has shown how a poorly designed public contract can create problems far beyond the original subject of the agreement,” the WEI wrote.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

July 30, 2026 Posted by aletho | Corruption, Deception | COVID-19 Vaccine, European Union, Pfizer, Poland, Romania | Comments Off on Pfizer Freezes Air Traffic Control Funds Over COVID Vaccine Contract Dispute With Poland, Romania

What Is Really in Childhood Vaccines

Lies are Unbekoming | June 23, 2026

Forty-Three of Forty-Four

Lead was identified in five of the vaccines: Typhim Vi, Cervarix, Agrippal S1, Meningitec, and Gardasil. Tungsten appeared in eight more, distributed across products from GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Wyeth, and Novartis. Twenty-five of the forty-four samples contained stainless steel. Across the full set, the elemental analysis cataloged bismuth, gold, silver, platinum, cerium, zirconium, hafnium, antimony, strontium, barium, copper, tin, and zinc in various alloy combinations. None of these materials appeared on any package insert. None had a declared role in the vaccines’ formulation.

The work was published in 2017 by Antonietta Gatti and Stefano Montanari, materials scientists at the Italian National Council of Research. They obtained the vaccines from pharmacies in Italy and France. The manufacturers included Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Novartis, and Merck. They examined a twenty-microliter drop of each under a Field Emission Gun Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope. They identified the elemental composition of every particle they found using X-ray spectroscopy. They photographed each contaminant and compiled the catalog.¹

Forty-three of the forty-four vaccines were for human use. One was for cats. That single sample, Feligen CRP manufactured by Virbac, contained none of the heavy metals or industrial alloys cataloged in the human samples. The authors classified it as free from inorganic contamination.

The contamination is consistent across manufacturers, batches, countries, and years. The veterinary production line, examined by the same instruments at the same resolution, produced a clean vial. The human production lines did not.

This is not an argument about disease causation. It is not a contested mechanism. It is materials science applied to a drop of liquid pulled from a syringe. The instruments resolved what was there. None of it should have been in an injectable medical product. The system that produces and regulates these products has not addressed what the instruments showed.

One Particle in Agrippal

Figure 6 of the paper shows a single object, photographed at high magnification inside a drop of Agrippal S1, batch 147302A. This was Novartis’s flu vaccine for the 2014-2015 season. The object is a few microns across. It is wrapped in a darker, less atomically dense outline that Gatti and Montanari identify as organic material, a protein layer adhering to the particle’s surface. The metallic core, brighter under the backscattered-electron detector, registered four elements on the X-ray spectrum: cerium, iron, titanium, nickel.¹

Cerium is a rare earth metal. It has industrial applications in catalytic converters and glass polishing compounds. It has no medical use. It is not a declared ingredient in any flu vaccine. The four-element combination Gatti and Montanari documented does not match any recognized industrial alloy and appears in no materials engineering handbook. The authors describe it as the kind of debris produced when industrial waste is incinerated.

The protein layer around the metal was visible in the photograph. Within seconds of a metallic particle entering a protein-rich solution, the body’s serum proteins bind to the particle’s surface. The composite is no longer simply a foreign metal. It is a hybrid object: metal core, biological coat.

That vial was administered. So were the others in batch 147302A. So were the rest of the production batches Novartis manufactured that flu season. The doses are no longer in the pharmacy. They are no longer in any database. They are in people. Whoever received that batch received some quantity of cerium-iron-titanium-nickel debris, wrapped in their own unfolded proteins, deposited into deltoid muscle, and from there carried wherever the lymphatics and the blood took it.

The vial contained 429 additional detected particles in the same twenty-microliter drop.

The Pattern Across the Catalog

The cerium particle in Agrippal is one finding among thousands. The particle counts vary by orders of magnitude across the forty-four vaccines tested. The anti-tetanus products produced the lowest counts: two particles in one Anatetall sample, four in Vivotif. The childhood vaccines produced the highest. Varilrix returned 2,723 particles per twenty-microliter drop. Infanrix hexa returned 1,821. Cervarix returned 1,569. Fluarix returned 1,317. These are counts per twenty microliters. A standard injection is half a milliliter, or twenty-five drops. The arithmetic is straightforward.¹

The composition is more difficult to absorb than the counts.

The alloy combinations Gatti and Montanari cataloged include gold-copper-zinc in Repevax, platinum-silver-bismuth-iron-chromium in M-M-R vaxPro, zirconium-aluminum-hafnium compounds in Vivotif, and the cerium-iron-titanium-nickel particle in Agrippal. The paper notes that these combinations “have no technical use, cannot be found in any material handbook and look like the result of the random formation occurring, for example, when waste is burnt.”

Three of the Meningitec batches in the table carry an additional notation: sequestered by Procura della Repubblica. Italian prosecutors had seized those batches before Gatti and Montanari obtained access. The samples were already evidence in a criminal investigation. The contamination Gatti and Montanari documented was present in the seized batches as well as the over-the-counter samples. Whatever the prosecutors were investigating, the physical evidence cooperated.

The pattern does not isolate to any single manufacturer or batch. It crosses Italian batches and French batches. It crosses production dates from 2004 to 2017. The pattern is structural to the industry, not anomalous to any one production run.

Feligen contained 92 particles in its twenty-microliter drop, but the elemental analysis identified only calcium and silicon-aluminum. This is the kind of low-toxicity material that could derive from saline or environmental dust. It did not contain the tungsten, lead, stainless steel, or rare earth metal compounds cataloged in the human samples. The veterinary production line, examined by the same instruments at the same resolution, produced a vial without industrial debris. The human production lines did not.

What the Instruments Show, and Why No One Looked

The instruments Gatti and Montanari used are not exotic. A Field Emission Gun Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope resolves features at the nanometer scale and accommodates wet or oily samples without the artifacts conventional electron microscopy introduces. The X-ray microprobe attached to it (Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy, or EDS) identifies the elemental composition of any particle the microscope can see. The combination produces two outputs for each foreign body: a photograph at high magnification and a spectrum showing which elements are present.¹

Sample preparation is routine. Twenty microliters of vaccine are released onto a 25-millimeter cellulose filter inside a clean cabinet. The filter is then dried, mounted on a carbon-adhesive disc, and placed into the microscope chamber. Observations are made under low vacuum at 10 to 30 kilovolts. The microscope’s two sensors distinguish organic from inorganic material by atomic density: metal cores appear bright, protein coatings appear dim. The EDS identifies what each bright region contains.

Any contract laboratory with the relevant instruments could replicate the protocol in an afternoon. The equipment cost is in the range of half a million dollars, a budget category that does not appear on any pharmaceutical manufacturer’s annual report under “material constraints.” Most major manufacturers already own instruments of this class for other purposes.

What pharmaceutical quality control for injectables actually examines is something different. Sterility testing checks for viable microorganisms. Endotoxin testing checks for bacterial cell wall fragments capable of producing fever. Potency assays confirm the declared active ingredient is present at the declared concentration. Visible particulate inspection involves a trained human holding the vial to a light and looking. Visible inspection cannot resolve particles below approximately fifty microns. Most of what Gatti and Montanari documented falls below that threshold.

The contamination went undocumented for a century because the question was not asked. The instruments existed. The samples were on the pharmacy shelf. The technique was routine in adjacent fields like materials science, semiconductor manufacturing, forensic analysis, and environmental toxicology. It had simply never been applied to vaccines. The first systematic survey produced the catalog above.

What Foreign Bodies Do in Tissue

A particle of cerium-iron-titanium-nickel is not a molecule. It is a crystal. Once injected into muscle, it does not dissolve or biodegrade in any meaningful timeframe. The body has no enzymatic machinery for breaking down rare earth metal alloys. There is no biochemical process that handles them.

The first event after injection is the protein corona. The surfaces of metallic particles bind serum proteins on contact. The proteins do not adhere in their natural folded configuration. The contact with the metal surface distorts them, exposing parts of the molecule that would normally remain tucked inside. The composite that results is a metal core wrapped in distorted protein. It is recognizable to the body’s repair networks as a problem but is not removable, because the metal at the center cannot be processed.

The body responds to the composite the way it responds to any persistent tissue injury. Inflammation builds at the site and does not resolve, because the source of the injury cannot be removed.

In the establishment’s framework, this is what gets labeled an autoimmune effect, with the body said to be “attacking itself.” Gatti and Montanari, working within that framework, note that the protein-corona composite is “capable of stimulating the immune system in an undesirable way.”¹ The accurate description does not require any framework about systems attacking themselves. The body is responding to documented tissue injury caused by an inserted foreign object it cannot remove. The inflammation is the response, not the disease. The damage is the foreign body’s biopersistence.

The acute response can be cleared if the irritant can be cleared. A splinter or a bee sting resolves once the offending material is processed. A foreign body that cannot be broken down provokes inflammation that does not resolve. Granulomas form at the injection site. Some particles remain there. Others travel. Gatti and Montanari note that blood circulation can carry them anywhere, “including the microbiota, in a fair quantity,” and that particles of the size observed in the vaccines can enter cell nuclei.¹

Charles Richet documented the underlying sensitization mechanism in 1901. Injection of foreign protein into an animal produced a measurable response. On second exposure, the response was more severe. On third exposure, more severe still. Richet named the phenomenon anaphylaxis and received the 1913 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for the work.² The finding has not been refuted. In clinical medicine it has been displaced. The route of administration is no longer treated as a primary variable, despite Richet’s demonstration that it is the only variable that matters. Foreign proteins encountered through digestion are processed and do not sensitize. Foreign proteins encountered through injection sensitize predictably.

Gatti and Montanari supply the physical substrate Richet’s mechanism predicted. The “foreign protein” in a contemporary injection is not a single contaminant in a controlled formulation. It is a protein corona: the recipient’s own proteins, unfolded and presented in unfamiliar configuration on the surface of a tungsten particle, a lead particle, or a stainless steel fragment. The sensitization mechanism is identical to the one Richet described. The physical agent has now been photographed.

On “Trace Amounts”

The standard defense of contamination in injectable products is that the quantities are below any toxicological threshold of concern. The defense does not survive examination.

Toxicological thresholds for these materials in injected products have not been established. Standard toxicology threshold work is conducted on oral or dermal exposure, with the intestinal lining and the skin filtering the dose. Injection bypasses these barriers. The pharmacokinetics of injected particulate metal is a separate body of work that, for the contaminants Gatti and Montanari documented, has not been performed.

Even if such thresholds existed, they would not apply to crystals. The relevant comparison for a soluble toxin is dose in micrograms per kilogram of body weight. The relevant comparison for a tungsten particle in muscle tissue is not. It is a foreign body. The mechanism of injury is not chemical toxicity at low concentration. It is the mechanical and inflammatory response at the site where the body cannot clear it. Threshold arguments built on solubility do not apply to objects.

For some of the elements cataloged, no threshold defense was ever available. Lead has no established safe exposure level in pediatric populations. The EPA, the CDC, and the AAP all state this. An argument that a small amount of lead in an injection is acceptable would require a separate regulatory framework specific to injected lead in children. No such framework has been published.

What the manufacturers have in place of threshold defense is the assertion that the contamination is not there. The Gatti and Montanari work establishes that assertion as false.

The HPV Cases

The paper’s discussion section opens with the HPV vaccines. Gardasil and Cervarix.

Cervarix contained 1,569 particles per twenty-microliter drop. The elemental analysis identified aluminum, silicon, magnesium, calcium, iron-chromium-nickel (stainless steel), zinc, copper-tin-lead bronze, and several additional combinations. Gardasil contained between 304 and 454 particles per drop, depending on the batch. The composition included calcium-aluminum-silicon, aluminum-copper-iron, lead, bismuth, titanium, and bismuth-barium-sulfur.¹ Both vaccines are administered to adolescents, predominantly girls and increasingly boys, between roughly ages eleven and fifteen, on the schedule recommended by national pediatric authorities and reinforced by school-entry requirements in many jurisdictions.

The adverse event patterns following HPV vaccination have been documented in the medical literature since shortly after global rollout. Brinth’s 2015 case series at Frederiksberg Hospital described fifty-three Danish girls presenting after Gardasil with severe headache, syncope, cognitive dysfunction, autonomic disturbance, episodic loss of consciousness, and impairment of gait.³ Kinoshita and colleagues at Shinshu University documented Japanese adolescent girls with peripheral sympathetic nerve dysfunction following Gardasil and Cervarix. Their symptoms included orthostatic intolerance, complex regional pain syndrome, severe headache, photophobia, cognitive impairment, and inability to maintain upright posture.⁴ Palmieri’s group at the University of Modena published a 2016 case series and literature review describing severe somatoform and dysautonomic syndromes after the same vaccines, including patients who had lost the ability to walk.⁵

The Japanese Ministry of Health suspended its proactive recommendation for HPV vaccination in 2013 following these cases. The Danish health authorities, after Brinth’s work, established specialty referral centers to handle girls presenting with the post-vaccination syndromes. The clinical labels the patients receive (POTS, CRPS, chronic fatigue syndrome, various dysautonomias) describe symptom clusters without explaining mechanism. They tell the patient she is sick. They do not tell her why.

Gatti and Montanari’s analysis supplies the missing piece. The Gardasil vials contained lead. The Cervarix vials contained stainless steel and copper-tin-lead bronze. The particles entered the deltoid. The particles do not biodegrade. The particles bind protein. The composite persists at the injection site or travels through circulation to lodge in distant tissue. The body responds to persistent tissue injury with sustained inflammation. Where the particles come to rest determines what the patient experiences. A particle lodging near the nerves that regulate heart rate and blood pressure produces orthostatic intolerance, the picture clinicians label POTS. A particle near a sensory nerve root produces regional pain syndromes. The clinical picture in any given patient maps to the anatomical distribution of damage.

This is not a single-source argument. The physical contamination has been documented by Gatti and Montanari. The sensitization produced by injected foreign protein was documented by Richet at the turn of the twentieth century and recognized in his 1913 Nobel Prize. The clinical syndromes following HPV vaccination are documented in patient registries across Denmark, Japan, and Italy. The lines converge on a single conclusion: injection of biopersistent foreign bodies into tissue causes sustained inflammatory injury, and the clinical picture depends on where the foreign bodies travel.

The girls did not get sick from a virus. They got sick from what was in the vial.

What “Unintentional” Requires

In the conclusion of their paper, Gatti and Montanari propose that the contamination is unintentional. “Our hypothesis is that this contamination is unintentional, since it is probably due to polluted components or procedures of industrial processes (e.g. filtrations) used to produce vaccines, not investigated and not detected by the Producers.”¹ They are scientists. They stayed within what their instruments could establish. They did not assert intent they could not prove from a microscope image.

The hypothesis deserves examination. It requires us to believe specific things.

It requires that GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, Pfizer, Novartis, and Merck (corporations with annual revenues in the tens of billions of dollars, employing thousands of quality control personnel, with full access to the same materials science instruments Gatti and Montanari used) have not, as a matter of routine practice, examined their own injectable products at the resolution where contamination would be visible. The omission would persist despite the instruments being standard equipment in their other research operations. It would persist despite the cost of physical-evidence quality control being a rounding error against the revenue these products generate. It would persist despite the documented sequestration of Pfizer Meningitec batches by Italian prosecutors having already established that the contamination question was live.

It requires accepting that the regulatory bodies (the FDA, the European Medicines Agency, the various national medicines agencies) have not required physical contamination testing of injectable products at any resolution finer than visible particulate inspection. This is documented. The regulations require sterility testing, endotoxin testing, and visual examination. They do not require electron microscopy. They do not require X-ray spectroscopy. They do not require any examination capable of detecting tungsten, lead, or rare earth metal debris below the threshold of unaided human vision. Particles below approximately fifty microns fall below regulatory scrutiny. Most of what Gatti and Montanari documented falls below that threshold.

It requires accepting that the contamination has continued, in the same products from the same manufacturers, since the paper’s publication in 2017. The studies to determine where the particles travel after injection, what damage they cause over what timescale, and what cumulative effect they have on the recipient population have not been commissioned. The contamination has not been investigated by the producers. It has not been addressed by the regulators. It has not been examined in any follow-up by the same teams that produced the original work. Subsequent reporting indicates that the authors have themselves been the subject of administrative action by Italian authorities in the years since publication. The findings have not been refuted.

“Unintentional” is a word that requires consequent action to mean anything. An accidental fire that is left to burn ceases to be an accident. A contamination problem identified, published in peer-reviewed literature, and left unaddressed for nine years is no longer a quality control oversight. It is a settled equilibrium between what the manufacturers produce and what the regulators require.

The veterinary production line is clean. Feligen contains no industrial debris because Virbac’s manufacturing process for animal vaccines produces vials without it. The capability exists. The standard exists. It has been demonstrated by an adjacent product line owned by the same broad industry.

Whatever word is appropriate for the difference between the line that produces a clean injection for a cat and the lines that produce contaminated injections for children, “unintentional” is not it.

After 2017

The Gatti and Montanari paper was published before the rollout of the mRNA products. The contamination they documented was in conventional vaccines, manufactured by conventional methods. The pharmaceutical manufacturing system they examined was the system in place before 2020.

Subsequent work on the mRNA products has documented the same baseline. Sasha Latypova’s manufacturing analysis identifies undeclared contaminants in injected materials and regulatory frameworks that did not require the testing that would have caught them. What Gatti and Montanari cataloged in 2017 continues in new products under new labels. The 2017 findings and the post-2021 findings are not separate stories. They are the same story, told in different chemistries by an industry whose quality control standards are set by what the regulators require rather than what the instruments can detect.

The Particle Is in Someone

The cerium-iron-titanium-nickel particle photographed in Agrippal batch 147302A is in someone now.

We do not know whose arm received the dose. We do not know whether the particle remained at the injection site, traveled through lymph to regional nodes, entered circulation, or lodged in muscle, spleen, liver, brain, or microbiota. We do not know what damage it has done or is doing. The studies to determine these things have not been performed. They will not be commissioned by the entity that produced the vial.

The particle is a few microns across. It is composed of four elements, only some of which appear in any technical catalog of recognized industrial alloys. It is wrapped in protein. The protein was the recipient’s own, bound on contact, unfolded by the binding, presented in a configuration the body has no template for. The composite is biopersistent. It does not biodegrade. The response to it is the one Richet documented in 1901 and was awarded the Nobel for in 1913.

The vial it came from was administered in the 2014-2015 flu season. The batches manufactured this year are being administered now. The instruments Gatti and Montanari used are still available. The procedure they described is still routine. The contamination they documented has not been investigated by the producers, named by the regulators, or addressed in any meaningful way.

The particle is in someone now. The vial it came from is gone. The vials in production this week contain debris of similar composition in similar quantities, headed for arms that have not yet been chosen.

If You Were Six

Some scientists looked at the shots that doctors give to children. They looked very carefully, using a special microscope strong enough to see things much smaller than a speck of dust.

They found tiny pieces of metal in the liquid inside the shots. Some of the pieces were lead. Some were stainless steel. Some were other metals that nobody had told anyone were in the bottles. The pieces were too small for your eyes to see. You would need the special microscope to find them.

The scientists looked at forty-four different shots. Forty-three of them had the metal pieces inside. One shot did not. That clean shot was the one made for cats.

Once a tiny piece of metal goes into your arm, your body cannot get rid of it. Your body knows how to clean up many things, like old skin or the food you eat or the cut on your finger from yesterday. It does not know how to clean up metal. So the metal stays. It sits where it landed in your arm. Sometimes your blood carries it to other parts of your body.

When the body cannot clean something up, the place around it gets red and sore. If the metal does not leave, the redness does not leave either. Some of the children who got these shots got sick afterward and stayed sick for a long time. Some of them stopped being able to walk properly.

The companies that make the shots have special microscopes too. They could have looked inside their own bottles. They did not. The people whose job is to keep the shots safe never asked them to look. The cat company looked at the cat shots, and the cat shots are clean. The companies that make shots for children did not look, and the shots are not clean.

That is what the essay is about.

References

Gatti AM, Montanari S. New quality-control investigations on vaccines: micro- and nanocontamination. International Journal of Vaccines and Vaccination. 2017;4(1):7–14.
Richet C. Anaphylaxis. Nobel Lecture, December 11, 1913. Nobelprize.org, The Nobel Foundation.
Brinth L, Pors K, Theibel AC, Mehlsen J. Suspected side effects to the quadrivalent human papilloma vaccine. Danish Medical Journal. 2015;62(4):A5064.
Kinoshita T, Abe RT, Hineno A, Tsunekawa K, Nakane S, Ikeda S. Peripheral sympathetic nerve dysfunction in adolescent Japanese girls following immunization with the human papillomavirus vaccine. Internal Medicine. 2014;53(19):2185–2200.
Palmieri B, Poddighe D, Vadalà M, Laurino C, Carnovale C, Clementi E. Severe somatoform and dysautonomic syndromes after HPV vaccination: case series and review of literature. Immunologic Research. 2017;65(1):106–116.

June 27, 2026 Posted by aletho | Deception, Timeless or most popular | Gardasil, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Wyeth | Comments Off on What Is Really in Childhood Vaccines

Whistleblower Biologist Says Pfizer Covered Up Her Exposure to Engineered Virus, Threatened Family

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | November 7, 2025

Molecular biologist Becky McClain began raising safety concerns in 2000, soon after she started working in Pfizer’s Biosafety Level 2 lab in Connecticut.

Three years later, after management failed to address the issues, McClain was exposed to a genetically modified lentivirus, engineered using gain-of-function technologies that made the virus more infectious and more pathogenic.

The exposure left her disabled, with symptoms including numbness, periodic paralysis, pain and other neurological problems. Doctors couldn’t diagnose or effectively treat her condition because Pfizer refused to disclose what she had been exposed to, citing “trade secrets.”

The incident launched McClain into a decade-long fight to understand her illness and obtain her exposure records so she could seek proper treatment. During her battle, she became a whistleblower, standing up to Pfizer’s threats against her and her family.

In her new book from Skyhorse Publishing, “Exposed: A Pfizer Scientist Battles Corruption, Lies, and Betrayal, and Becomes a Biohazard Whistleblower,” McClain recounts how she raised workplace safety concerns, suffered exposure to a dangerous virus, fought Pfizer for years in court, and resisted the company’s repeated attempts to silence her — ultimately winning a legal victory.

McClain refused to sign a gag order — even after Pfizer fired her, harassed her and threatened her — making her one of the few people who can share her story publicly.

In her book, McClain exposes corruption she says runs not just through Pfizer, but across the pharmaceutical industry and the agencies meant to hold it accountable — from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to the federal courts.

Consumer safety advocate Ralph Nader wrote in his foreword to the book:

“No general description of this book can convey the horror and details of what Becky McClain and her husband, Mark, endured at the hands of Pfizer, enabled over the years by collusion with government officials. Pre-verdict and post-verdict, this company employed thuggish retaliatory tactics, blacklisting, threats, harassments, wrongful discharges, coverups, and demands for total gag orders.

“Those tactics were designed to keep her case from flaring into a national demand for Congressional regulation in the form of rigorous biolab inspections and mandatory safety/health standards with teeth. Against this objective, Pfizer and the bioengineering industry are succeeding.”

‘If you document biosafety issues and or speak out about them, you’re out’

In an interview with The Defender, McClain said she noticed safety issues as soon as she started working in the lab.

“We had no break room, no safe break room. We had unsafe offices. We had improper biocontainment protocols using infectious agents,” she said. “And although the lab was unsafe, management made it worse by instilling a culture of fear for anyone who dared to raise safety issues.”

McClain said most scientists at the lab shared her concerns, but managers made it clear: “If you document biosafety issues and or speak out about them, you’re out.”

Scientists at the lab worked on genomic-altering biotechnologies, creating viruses capable of entering cells and changing their genomes, she said.

After multiple safety incidents — including one that left several scientists sick — McClain walked in one morning to find “a mess” on her personal workbench. A supervisor and an untrained scientist had left a dangerous experiment there overnight, without McClain’s knowledge.

A month later, the untrained scientist asked McClain if she knew anything about lentiviruses, a family of viruses that includes HIV and FIV (feline immunodeficiency virus).

By then, McClain was experiencing numbness on one side of her face, which a neurologist suggested might be the start of multiple sclerosis.

McClain realized she had likely been exposed to a modified lentivirus and asked the scientist to find out more about its safety. He returned “a little bit nervous” and told her the virus he had used on her bench was safe, indicating it wasn’t infectious to humans.

That conversation marked the beginning of McClain’s fight to obtain her exposure records. Pfizer refused to provide them, telling her that “trade secrets supersede your right to that information.”

As her condition worsened, McClain went on medical leave — and the company terminated her.

McClain was shocked because she had assumed worker rights would protect her. She said:

“I couldn’t get directed medical care for my illness, which was a mystery illness because these genetically engineered virus technologies were designed to cause new emerging diseases for use in laboratory research studies.

“So when I visited doctors, no one knew what was happening. They were all fearful and unable to explain my illness.

“My husband and I feared I was going to die. It eventually became very, very, very, very severe. It began with numbness on the left side of my face, then extreme left jaw pain, inflammation of my trigeminal nerve, headaches, spinal pain, then periodic paralysis.”

‘There’s no free speech for scientists’

McClain turned to OSHA for help, submitting documentation she had gathered that exposed egregious safety violations in the lab. OSHA refused to help her access her exposure records and didn’t even conduct a safety inspection of the lab.

“OSHA is a captured agency now,” McClain said. “They oversee approximately 24 different whistleblower laws under one roof, making it easy for the industry to control OSHA. It’s easy to capture. Place a corporate head to oversee OSHA, and you gain control of all the whistleblower laws and investigations.”

After OSHA declined to provide substantive help, McClain’s next step was clear. “The only legal remedy to get my exposure records was to file a civil whistleblower claim,” she said.

During the process, McClain met countless other scientists in similar situations.

“There’s no free speech for scientists,” she said. She cited examples of scientists being censored and smeared as “anti-vaxxers” during the COVID-19 pandemic, when “they were merely raising legitimate safety concerns.”

A recent investigation by The Defender found that OSHA told healthcare employers not to report employees adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines — but to continue reporting injuries caused by all other vaccines.

Pfizer launched ‘backdoor retaliation’ by targeting McClain’s husband

Throughout her long legal battle, Pfizer tried relentlessly to compel her to sign a gag order. She refused, knowing that signing would cost her the leverage she needed to access information about her exposure.

The company launched what McClain called “backdoor retaliation” by targeting her husband, who worked at the FDA in Connecticut.

“Two months before the trial, my husband was called into his office and told that if he didn’t make me settle with Pfizer, he’d be out of a job,” McClain said.

The threat terrified the couple, as McClain was extremely sick and they relied entirely on his income. “I thought Pfizer couldn’t have that kind of reach … my husband works for the government. But they did,” she said.

Her husband refused to force her to sign a gag order. After facing false accusations despite a spotless 18-year record as a commissioned officer, he left the FDA.

McClain eventually won her free speech whistleblower lawsuit in a 2010 jury trial, even though later revelations showed that the judge had financial conflicts of interest. She received 10 years of back pay — but no compensation for her exposure, illness or suffering.

Pfizer faced no obligation to remediate its safety program.

Although McClain never gained full access to her exposure records, she did obtain additional details about the virus, which she explains in her book.

Today, she publicly advocates for industry reform. She told The Defender there are several key issues she thinks need to be addressed. She said:

“First, is that all gag orders related to lab injuries and public health and safety concerns should be illegal. The public has a right to know about the dangers in these laboratories, especially in our post-pandemic environment.

“Then, OSHA needs to be revamped. It’s a captured agency.”

McClain added that OSHA can’t effectively oversee biotechnology because the agency doesn’t fully understand the serious and unique safety risks. She said the safety problems run through biotechnology research in academia, government and the private sector — each with its own set of regulations — and that the private sector faces the fewest rules.

“The bottom line is that we need better free speech and whistleblower protections for scientists, physicians, and injured workers,” McClain said. “No one should go through 10 years of hell just to have a safe workplace or to protect the public by standing up for professional standards.”

November 8, 2025 Posted by aletho | Book Review, Civil Liberties, Deception | FDA, Pfizer, United States | Leave a comment

Pfizer lawsuit in US links contraceptive injection to brain tumours

Al Mayadeen | September 28, 2025

Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer is facing a growing lawsuit in the United States over claims that its contraceptive injection, Depo-Provera, caused brain tumours in women who used it long-term.

The class action, brought by law firm Levin Papantonio, alleges that Pfizer failed to warn women and doctors about the increased risk of intracranial meningioma if Depo-Provera is used for more than a year.

A court hearing is scheduled in Pensacola, Florida, on Monday.

Since May, the number of plaintiffs has tripled to more than 1,300 cases, consolidated into multi-district litigation. Lawyers expect the total to rise to between 5,000 and 10,000 claims, with potential damages reaching billions of dollars.

Scientific studies have raised concerns about the safety of Depo-Provera. Research published in the British Medical Journal in March 2024 found that prolonged use of certain progestogen medications was linked to a higher risk of intracranial meningioma, a type of benign brain tumour. Depo-Provera was specifically linked to a 5.6-fold higher risk.

While meningiomas are not usually cancerous, they can cause seizures, headaches, and loss of vision or hearing. Surgical removal is often necessary but carries risks of damaging surrounding brain structures.

FDA and the debate over drug label warnings

At the center of the Pfizer lawsuit is the question of whether the company acted responsibly in warning patients. Pfizer argues that it sought to add a tumour warning to Depo-Provera’s label, but the FDA rejected the request.

“This is a clear pre-emption case because FDA expressly barred Pfizer from adding a warning about meningioma risk, which plaintiffs say state law required,” the company said in court filings.

Plaintiffs counter that Pfizer’s request was too broad, grouping Depo-Provera with other lower-dose contraceptives, which led to the FDA’s decision. They argue the company failed to provide adequate data that might have justified a targeted warning.

Depo-Provera, marketed since the 1980s, is used by millions of women worldwide, both for contraception and to treat conditions such as endometriosis. Around 247 million women globally use hormonal contraceptives, and nearly a quarter of sexually active women in the United States have used Depo-Provera.

Warning labels were updated in the UK in 2024, and similar updates have been made in Canada and Europe. Pfizer has said it is “aware of this potential risk associated with long-term use of progestogens.”

What the lawsuit could mean for Pfizer

Virginia Buchanan, co-chair of the plaintiffs’ executive committee, accused Pfizer of avoiding accountability: “Pfizer is attempting to avoid accountability by invoking a pre-emption defense, yet there are serious questions about whether it ever provided the FDA with the full picture.”

Buchanan added, “Pre-emption was never meant to serve as a shield for drug companies that fail to warn patients adequately. Pfizer has consistently failed to take reasonable steps to alert patients and their physicians to this very real danger.”

In addition to the class action, law firm Berger Montague is investigating whether Pfizer’s board breached its fiduciary duties in the marketing and sale of Depo-Provera, which could lead to shareholder lawsuits.

With thousands of potential plaintiffs and billions of dollars at stake, the Pfizer lawsuit could become one of the most consequential pharmaceutical cases in recent years.

September 28, 2025 Posted by aletho | Deception | Depo-Provera, Pfizer, United States | Leave a comment

Kiev regime assassinates Russian General to hide the truth about bioweapons

By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | December 18, 2024

In a bold and lethal move, a terrorist attack carried out by Ukrainian intelligence operatives in Moscow killed Igor Kirillov, head of the Russian Federation’s Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Defense Forces, along with his main advisor. Kirillov, one of the most important figures in Russian national security, became a strategic target due to his investigations revealing the complex and shadowy ties between the West, Ukraine, and the bioweapons research laboratories. His death is not only a blow against Russia but also a critical turning point in international relations, involving the controversy surrounding biological laboratories, the pharmaceutical industry lobby, and, inevitably, Kiev’s connections to U.S. politics.

Kirillov’s investigation into biological laboratories

Since the beginning of Russia’s Special Military Operation in Ukraine in 2022, Igor Kirillov had been denouncing the existence of bioweapons research laboratories in Ukrainian territory. These laboratories, operating under the guise of “scientific research” and funded by global actors such as the Soros Foundation, Big Pharma companies, and even influential members of the Biden family, have been accused of developing biological weapons aimed at Russia.

In public statements, Kirillov warned of the growing risk posed by these biolaboratories, pointing out that their goal was to create a “universal package” of genetically modified biological pathogens to target Russian people, cattle, and crops simultaneously. The development of such weapons could potentially cause a catastrophe of epic proportions, destroying Russian food production and decimating the population. Once Russia became aware of these activities, it had no choice but to launch a military operation to dismantle these dangerous research centers.

Moscow also raised suspicions that, without early intervention, Ukraine, with U.S. support, could have launched a large-scale biological attack against Russia. This attack would target Russian public health by releasing multiple lethal viruses and bacteria simultaneously, with the aim of creating catastrophic chaos.

The truth obscured by a media blockade

The greatest obstacle Russia faced in exposing these threats was the absolute silence of the Western media. In the European Union, the United States, and even the Global South, an iron curtain was raised on the subject, with most media outlets ignoring or discrediting Kirillov’s revelations. However, Russia believed that without its military operation and the dismantling of bioweapons laboratories in the early days of the conflict, the country would have been vulnerable to a biological attack of catastrophic magnitude.

Furthermore, during the eight years following the Euromaidan coup, citizens of Russian-majority regions in Ukraine were subjected to a series of biological experiments. These included tests of new chemical and biological substances, some of which were administered under the guise of “voluntary treatments” or even by force, as in the case of prisoners or ethnic Russian low-ranking soldiers. The ultimate goal of these experiments was to understand the genetic characteristics of Russians in order to develop even more lethal and ethnically targeted pathogens, thus creating ethnically directed mass destruction biological weapons.

Big Pharma’s involvement and Hunter Biden

In addition to the evidence of involvement by organizations such as the Soros Foundation, another crucial point in Kirillov’s reports was the connection with Big Pharma companies. He spared no effort in revealing the role of pharmaceutical giants such as Pfizer and Moderna in financing bioweapons research in Ukraine. The claim that these corporations were associated with the development of biological weapons was not merely speculative, several captured documents having proved the whole truth. In the same vein, the involvement of influential members of the U.S. government and their families, including Hunter Biden, in contracts and initiatives related to Ukrainian biolabs was a central issue in his revelations. The U.S. president’s son was one of the main financial supporters of the biolabs, which were part of his corruption schemes in Ukraine.

Kirillov’s death, therefore, is not only a significant loss for Russia but also a grim reflection of global corporate interests and the biological risks the Western powers were willing to take in their reckless pursuit of hegemony. The pharmaceutical lobby, with its vast networks of influence, found itself in an uncomfortable position after 2022, when several countries began questioning the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, as well as dismantling the mandatory vaccination campaigns that had been previously fervently promoted.

Kirillov’s sacrifice and the future of the conflict

The death of Igor Kirillov represents a tragic chapter in the global confrontation currently taking place on Ukrainian soil, but it also serves as a dramatic allegory of the hidden tensions between the great powers. While Russia continues to expose the West’s involvement in creating biological threats, the global mainstream media watches in silence, more interested in preserving its narratives than facing the truth about a global power struggle involving the use of biotechnology as weapons.

By revealing these threats, Kirillov had become one of the greatest obstacles to Western hidden interests. His death, caused by a Ukrainian terrorist attack, represents not only a loss for Russia’s national security but also a turning point in the realm of modern geopolitics.

December 19, 2024 Posted by aletho | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | Hunter Biden, Moderna, Pfizer, Soros Foundation, Ukraine, United States | Leave a comment

Pfizer Failed to Disclose Deaths of Two Women in COVID Vaccine Clinical Trials

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | December 13, 2024

Pfizer-BioNTech did not disclose the deaths of two vaccinated participants in its COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, according to a team of Daily Clout researchers who analyzed documents related to the Pfizer clinical trials.

The deaths occurred before the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted emergency use authorization (EUA) for the vaccine in December 2020. However, it wasn’t until September 2023, nearly three years later, that the FDA publicly released documents revealing the deaths of a 63-year-old Kansas woman and a 58-year-old Georgia woman who participated in the trials.

The revelations prompted Dr. Jeyanthi Kunadhasan — an Australian anesthesiologist and perioperative physician and one of the researchers analyzing the Pfizer documents on behalf of Daily Clout — to write to Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach, requesting his office investigate the death of the 63-year-old Kansas woman.

“If the additional two deaths had been disclosed at the time of the EUA, it would have shown that the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID vaccine intervention provided no reduction in deaths,” Kunadhasan wrote in her letter.

In June, Kobach sued Pfizer, alleging the company misled the public by marketing its COVID-19 vaccine as “safe and effective” while concealing known risks — including myocarditis and pericarditis, failed pregnancies and deaths — and critical data on limited effectiveness.

In 2022, a federal court ordered the FDA to release the approximately 1.2 million pages of documents pertaining to the clinical trials for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, after rejecting the FDA’s request for 75 years to release the records.

The documents Kunadhasan analyzed revealed that Pfizer had the opportunity to disclose the deaths before the Dec. 10, 2020, meeting of the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) — but did not do so.

Pfizer also did not disclose the deaths — both classified in the documents as “sudden cardiac death” unrelated to the victims’ vaccination — in a December 2020 New England Journal of Medicine paper touting the “safety and efficacy” of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

Kunadhasan told The Defender :

“The death highlighted in Kansas is significant as it occurred well within the reporting period considered for the EUA, and as my letter shows was not disclosed. There was every opportunity to disclose this death at the VRBPAC meeting.

“This death even had an autopsy, which I show was probably available before the VRBPAC meeting, and again was not disclosed.”

According to The Sentinel, “The fact that both participants died of heart attacks becomes more important when other studies showed risks of myocarditis and pericarditis — particularly after a second shot and particularly in young men under 25, but among other patients as well.”

Brian Hooker, Ph.D., chief scientific officer for Children’s Health Defense (CHD), told The Defender the actions of Pfizer and the FDA are “duplicitous at best.” He said:

“All death data for clinical trials needed not only to be made available to the FDA but also to the public. Otherwise, informed consent is completely missing, regardless of whether the product is EUA or [fully] approved.

“It is also particularly devious that Pfizer lied about a reduction in deaths in the vaccination arm when, with these data, the opposite was true.”

Naomi Wolf, Ph.D., CEO of Daily Clout and author of “The Pfizer Papers: Pfizer’s Crimes Against Humanity,” told The Defender the documents show that the “FDA covered up the unlawfully concealed deaths” of the trial participants and that these records “may well reveal a direct connection to the mRNA injection.”

“The details that Dr. Kunadhasan and her colleagues revealed about the death of this poor woman could theoretically allow Kobach to demand the autopsy reports and interview witnesses with information about her passing,” Wolf said.

Dr. Chris Flowers, a retired radiologist and member of the Daily Clout team that examined the Pfizer documents, told The Sentinel that the two undisclosed deaths should have been enough to halt the clinical trial.

“If you put it in context, yes, there’s a small number of deaths,” Flowers said. “Normally, the FDA calls a stop to those clinical trials until further investigation is done. And in many cases, [this] is sort of the death knell of that clinical trial.”

Noting that these deaths “would have at least made it more difficult” for the FDA to grant the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine an EUA, Hooker said that “to release this information over two years later, after the obvious damage has been done, is criminal. Pfizer should be held accountable.”

Wolf said that while she’s “not an attorney, fraud, negligence and manslaughter come to mind.”

“This was one of the most important clinical trials in modern medical history,” Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist at CHD, told The Defender. “The people in political power chose to ‘trust the science,’ and they were wrong to do so.”

Undisclosed deaths may have led to FDA granting EUA ‘on incorrect premises’

In her letter, Kunadhasan said she wants to draw attention to “an undisclosed participant death from Kansas that occurred in the BNT162b2-vaccinated arm of Pfizer’s clinical trial.”

Kunadhasan pointed out that Daily Clout published a report about the two undisclosed deaths in October.

According to the documents Kunadhasan cited, the death of the Kansas woman occurred “well before the data cutoff date of November 14, 2020” and nearly a month before the December 2020 VRBPAC meeting.

She said there was a 37-day delay in reporting the results of the Kansas woman’s autopsy, which revealed “sudden cardiac death,” Kunadhasan noted.

“Notably, the omission of the deaths and autopsy report from the vaccinated arm of the study at this critical juncture of EUA issuance raises substantial concerns about the overall safety reporting of Pfizer’s clinical trial,” Kunadhasan stated in the letter.

Kunadhasan also told the attorney general that Pfizer’s clinical trial protocol required that serious adverse events be reported: “immediately upon awareness, and under no circumstances to exceed 24 hours … Pfizer-BioNTech’s own clinical trial protocol indicated that it should have been disclosed.”

Referring to the New England Journal of Medicine paper, Kunadhasan noted that the paper disclosed only six deaths — two among vaccinated clinical trial participants and four among participants in the placebo group.

FDA documents released in September 2023, however, “included information showing that Pfizer-BioNTech was, in fact, informed of two additional deaths in the BNT162b2 arm of the trial well before the EUA data cutoff and that those deaths were not disclosed to the FDA,” Kunadhasan wrote.

The documents showed that the 63-year-old Kansas woman signed up for the Pfizer-BioNTech trial at the Alliance for Multispecialty Research LLC, in Newton, Kansas. She received the two doses of the vaccine on Aug. 18, 2020, and Sept. 8, 2020, and “had appropriate follow-up tests” done on Oct. 7, 2020.

“There is no documentation of any untoward clinical events during these visits,” Kunadhasan wrote. But on Oct. 19, 2020, 41 days after her second dose and less than two weeks after her follow-up visit, the woman died. A subsequent autopsy found the cause of death to be “sudden cardiac death,” not related to the vaccine.

“It is extremely important to know … Why this death (which occurred well within the reporting period) and the autopsy results were not disclosed publicly at the December 10th, 2020, VRBPAC meeting,” Kunadhasan said in her letter.

The letter also highlighted the death of the 58-year-old Georgia woman, who received her two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine on Aug. 4, 2020, and Aug. 27, 2020. She died in her sleep on Nov. 7, 2020. Kunadhasan noted that her death was “not added to the data for 26 days.”

Kunadhasan told The Defender these discrepancies prompted her letter to Kobach.

“As a doctor, the non-disclosure of a death and autopsy of a clinical trial participant is a profound betrayal of medical ethics. I hope Kobach pays attention to this, and there can be accountability for this Kansan,” Kunadhasan said.

“Kansans should contact Kobach for action in regards to this letter and other AGs should follow suit with investigating Pfizer’s crimes in their states,” Wolf said.

Kobach’s office did not respond to a request from The Defender for comment as of press time.

Prominent cardiologist joins calls for suspension of mRNA COVID shots

Kunadhasan’s letter comes amid growing calls for a moratorium — or an outright ban — on the mRNA COVID-19 shots, and an independent investigation into their safety.

In an 11-page letter to U.K. regulators and health officials last week, cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra joined these calls.

“There is overwhelming evidence that calls for the suspension of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (which, by technicality, is a genetic therapy) because of serious harms,” Malhotra wrote in the letter.

The letter was addressed to Charley Massey, CEO of the U.K.’s General Medical Council; Wes Streeting, the U.K.’s secretary of state for Health; Sir Christopher Whitty, the U.K.’s chief medical officer; and Lord Patrick Valance, the U.K.’s minister of state for Science Research and Innovation.

Malhotra wrote that these officials’ decision “to not support a pause and independent investigation of the safety of the vaccines is now untenable given accumulating evidence of harm and corrupt practices.”

The letter also referred to The Hope Accord — a petition Malhotra drafted earlier this year signed by over 64,000 people, including 1,900 medical doctors and over 2,000 scientists and academics.

The petition calls for the suspension of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, “comprehensive re-evaluation of the safety and efficacy of all COVID-19 vaccine products,” “immediate recognition and support for the vaccine-injured,” “restoration of ethical principles” and “addressing the root causes of our current predicament.”

Speaking on medical commentator John Campbell, Ph.D.’s YouTube show on Dec. 11, Malhotra said evidence supporting withdrawal of the vaccines is “overwhelming.”

Explaining why he wrote to U.K. officials, Malhotra told Campbell, “Sunlight is a very powerful disinfectant for malodorous health policy,” and said that there may be an explosion of people in the near future who are currently asymptomatic but who may develop vaccine-related conditions.

“We’ve got a lot of asymptomatic people in the population who I feel are at risk of heart attack, stroke and cancer. Until we get that addressed full on, more people are going to be harmed from a vaccine they took three years ago,” Malhotra said.

“My conscience will not allow me to stay quiet and just do this behind the scenes. As healthcare professionals, we need to address it because it’s not going away.”

“What we need to do is create almost a culture … where people aren’t afraid to admit that things have changed or they’ve got things wrong and they can change their mind,” Malhotra said.

Watch Campbell interview Malhotra here.

December 14, 2024 Posted by aletho | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, War Crimes | COVID-19 Vaccine, Pfizer, United States | Leave a comment

Whistleblower Will Appeal After Federal Court Dismisses Lawsuit Alleging Fraud in Pfizer COVID Vaccine Trials

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | August 13, 2024

For the second time, a federal court in Texas has dismissed a whistleblower lawsuit alleging Pfizer and two of its contractors manipulated data and committed other acts of fraud during clinical trials for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in 2020.

In his Aug. 9 ruling, District Judge Michael J. Truncale sided with the U.S. government, ruling the government had demonstrated “good cause” to intervene and dismiss the case. He wrote:

“The Government’s desire to dismiss the case — because of its doubt as to the case’s merits, differing assessment of the Pfizer vaccine data, desire to avoid discovery and litigation obligations, and belief that it should not have to expend resources in a case that is contrary to its public health policy — constitutes good cause to intervene.”

Whistleblower Brook Jackson filed the lawsuit against Pfizer, Ventavia Research Group — which conducted some of the clinical trials for Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine — and Pfizer contractor ICON PLC in January 2021. Jackson’s complaint was most recently amended in October 2023.

Jackson, a former Ventavia employee, alleged the companies committed numerous violations of the False Claims Act (FCA) during the clinical trials.

According to the lawsuit, the three companies “deliberately withheld crucial information from the United States that calls the safety and efficacy of their vaccine into question,” thus defrauding the federal government, which purchased the vaccines.

The FCA allows the government or a party suing on its behalf to attempt to recover money for false claims made by parties to secure payment from the government.

The FCA also allows whistleblowers to be rewarded for confidentially disclosing fraud that results in a financial loss to the government.

While whistleblowers have the right to sue under the FCA, the federal government can choose to intervene in the case at a later date. In Jackson’s lawsuit, the U.S. government initially declined to intervene in February 2022. However, in March, the government filed a motion to intervene and to dismiss the case.

Attorney Warner Mendenhall, one of the lawyers representing Jackson, questioned whether the U.S. government’s “public health policy” is tolerant toward allegations of fraud during clinical trials for vaccines.

In an interview Monday with Sasha Latypova, a former pharmaceutical industry executive with 25 years of experience in pharmaceutical research and development, Mendenhall said:

“What’s the public health policy of the United States? To kill people and damage people and injure people and make them sick? If that’s the public health policy, well then yes, we’re inconsistent with that.”

Latypova told The Defender she was “not really surprised” by the ruling, noting that drugmakers enjoy legal immunity afforded by emergency use authorization granted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Latypova described this immunity as a “legal cage.”

She said “The court took as evidence an unsubstantiated opinion of two government bureaucrats … published in an editorial article of a medical journal,” but did not consider the extensive evidence of wrongdoing Jackson provided.

The government’s motion to dismiss cited a Jan. 5 JAMA editorial authored by FDA Commissioner Robert Califf and the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director Peter Marks, claiming that “data from various studies” show that “tens of millions of lives were saved by vaccination.”

During his interview with Latypova, Mendenhall argued the government failed to demonstrate good cause and that last week’s ruling did not name any specific examples of this. He said:

“If you read the actual document, there’s no cause listed at all. In fact, the judge has a footnote saying, ‘There is no cause here, but I’m going to look at this other motion I think I can find’ … that’s not how courts are supposed to proceed. You look at the motion first to intervene for good cause. If it’s not there, you’re done. You don’t get to go on and look at the motion to dismiss for hints that maybe there is good cause.”

The ruling also stated that Jackson “failed to allege that she complained to Ventavia or the FDA about fraud against the government.” Accordingly, her claims don’t “rise to the level of protected activity” as a whistleblower.

Mendenhall told Latypova this poses “constitutional concerns” and may have “a chilling effect on other whistleblowers.”

Jackson has 30 days to appeal the ruling, and plans to, Mendenhall said.

“I am very confident we’re going to win that case and get, at least, the retaliation [claim] vindicated, and vindicate what she did as a conscientious citizen of the United States,” Mendenhall said.

Jackson fired within six hours of submitting claims to the FDA

Ventavia, which operated several sites where it conducted clinical trials on behalf of Pfizer, hired Jackson in September 2020.

That same month, Jackson reported problems she observed with the Pfizer vaccine trial to the company’s management. When management didn’t respond, she took her claims to the FDA on Sept. 25, 2020. Ventavia fired her later that day.

Jackson, who had over 15 years of experience working with clinical trials, claimed she “repeatedly informed her superiors of poor laboratory management, patient safety concerns and data integrity issues.”

She also gave The BMJ a cache of internal company documents, photos and recordings highlighting alleged wrongdoing by Ventavia.

“Her job was to fix things. They wouldn’t fix them. She reported it to the FDA, and six hours later was fired from her job,” Mendenhall said.

He added:

“There was not informed consent. They were making up records. I mean, it was just endless. They were violating patient privacy, which is critical in a clinical trial because you have to not know who’s getting the shot in order to determine any effectiveness.

“Basically, the allegations that she brought forward show that the clinical trial that she saw, what she saw of it, was essentially worthless. It wasn’t valuable or useful data.”

Jackson filed her qui tam lawsuit under the FCA in January 2021. A qui tam action refers to any legal case where a private citizen initiates legal action on behalf of a state.

Documents released in November 2021 supported Jackson’s claims that she was directly involved in the Phase 3 trials for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

‘Level of ignorance’ of scientific facts by government officials ‘astounding’

In February 2022, the federal government declined to intervene in the lawsuit on Jackson’s behalf but reserved the right to intervene at a later date.

Later that month, Jackson filed her first amended complaint, while the court unsealed 400 pages of exhibits.

In July 2022, Pfizer asked the court to dismiss Jackson’s lawsuit on the basis that the U.S. government was aware of wrongdoings in the clinical trials but continued to do business with the vaccine maker. In March 2023, Truncale granted the motion to dismiss, ruling that Jackson had not proved the companies violated the FCA.

Jackson appealed the dismissal in April 2023, and in August 2023 submitted a motion to file a second amended complaint, which was granted in September. Jackson filed her second amended complaint in October 2023.

Pfizer and Ventavia filed motions to dismiss the second amended complaint later in October 2023, while the U.S. government filed its motion to intervene and dismiss in March 2024. Oral arguments discussing the motions to dismiss took place on May 1.

“What happened in the interim here while we’re fighting the case and moving forward, apparently the government itself decided that what we were doing in exposing Pfizer and Ventavia and ICON, the three companies involved here, was contrary to the public health policy in the United States,” Mendenhall said.

In ruling in favor of the government, the court cited a 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision that gave the government significant leeway concerning when it could intervene in an FCA case and on what basis.

According to Mendenhall, this occurred despite meetings Jackson and her legal team had last year with representatives of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), during which he said they “were completely unaware” of evidence questioning the safety of the COVID shots, including SV40 DNA contamination and vaccine injuries.

Mendenhall said:

“The level of ignorance about the scientific facts that we have uncovered was astounding to me, for someone who is supposed to be in charge of a major decision on behalf of the United States’ people, whether these shots need to be pulled from the market, whether Pfizer needs to be prosecuted or at least held civilly liable along with the other companies.

“I think that, certainly for some in the government, they just don’t want to face what they’ve actually done … they have hurt, damaged the health of millions of Americans and tens of millions, at least, around the world.”

According to Mendenhall, government attorneys were “actually sitting on the side of the courtroom with Pfizer” attorneys during the May 1 hearing.

“How strange that was to have the defendants sitting with the government who’s supposed to be going after them,” Mendenhall said.

In April, Pfizer submitted a statement to the court in support of the U.S. government’s motion to intervene and dismiss.

Pfizer previously was fined in connection with the FCA. As part of a 2009 settlement, the company paid $2.3 billion in fines — the largest healthcare fraud settlement in the history of the DOJ — stemming from allegations of illegal marketing of off-label products not approved by the FDA.

August 16, 2024 Posted by aletho | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | COVID-19 Vaccine, Pfizer, United States, Ventavia | Leave a comment

DOJ Asks Court to Toss Whistleblower Lawsuit Alleging Pfizer Defrauded U.S. Government

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | March 14, 2024

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) on Tuesday asked to intervene in a lawsuit alleging Pfizer committed fraud during clinical trials for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

The DOJ simultaneously asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit, which was filed by whistleblower Brook Jackson, against Pfizer.

“The United States should not be required to expend resources on a case that is inconsistent with its public health policy,” the DOJ said in its motion to dismiss.

Jackson told The Defender the DOJ’s motion was “expected” and “will clarify the standards for good cause being applied” regarding the U.S. government’s justification for “allowing Pfizer to commit fraud on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration” (FDA).

“This fraud has undoubtedly cost American taxpayers billions of dollars and has led to an untold number of injuries from the COVID-19 countermeasure, including permanent disability and death among my fellow citizens,” Jackson said.

Jackson is a former employee of the Ventavia Research Group, an independent lab that conducted some of the clinical trials for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

In January 2021, she sued Pfizer, Ventavia and ICON plc, another Pfizer contractor, alleging the companies committed numerous violations of the False Claims Act during the trials.

In September 2022, Jackson filed an amended complaint, which was dismissed in April 2023. She subsequently filed a second amended complaint in October 2023, prompting the DOJ to claim it “has good cause to intervene and is entitled to dismissal” of the case.

Oral arguments in the case are scheduled for April 17 before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Beaumont Division.

Sasha Latypova, a former pharmaceutical industry executive with 25 years of experience in pharmaceutical research and development, told The Defender, “The case alleges that Pfizer committed fraud in order to get the contract for COVID-19 vaccines from the U.S. government while knowingly delivering a defective product.”

“The fraud that Jackson describes … has not been disputed by Pfizer,” Latypova said.

Robert Barnes, one of the lawyers representing Jackson, spoke at a March 8 presentation of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, where he said, “Any and every form of fraud they could commit, they did,” referring to Pfizer.

“[Jackson] discovered it, uncovered it and went through the appropriate internal review protocols and assumed that people would correct the defects,” Barnes said. “And instead of that occurring, she was summarily fired.”

‘Pfizer lied in order to get paid’

The DOJ’s motion to dismiss states that Jackson “alleged that defendants violated the protocol for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial at three study sites in Texas and that defendant Pfizer misrepresented the safety and efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).”

Jackson filed her lawsuit under the False Claims Act, which allows the government or a party suing on its behalf, such as Jackson, to attempt to recover money for false claims made by parties in an attempt to secure payment from the government.

Those parties, such as Pfizer-BioNTech, can be held liable under the act if they knowingly made a false claim or used a false record or statement to secure payment.

According to the DOJ’s filing, the False Claims Act “requires the United States to notify the court whether it will intervene in the qui tam action or decline to take over the action,” following “a period of investigation.” A qui tam action refers to any legal case where a private citizen initiates legal action on behalf of a state.

The government may choose whether to intervene in qui tam cases. If it does, it may then proceed with the lawsuit instead of the citizen who originally filed the claim — known as a “relator.”

The government may subsequently opt to settle the case or to file a motion to dismiss, which the DOJ did.

The DOJ claims the U.S. “has good cause to intervene for the purpose of dismissal” based on U.S. Supreme Court precedent in a June 2023 ruling, United States ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources Inc., et al., that said the government may intervene and move to dismiss a False Claims Act case at any time in the life of the case.

The DOJ further claimed that the U.S. government has good cause to intervene in the case because it has access to the same clinical trial data, adverse event data and other scientific research Jackson refers to in her complaint.

To support the DOJ’s claims, the motion cites a Jan. 5, 2024, JAMA editorial authored by FDA Commissioner Robert Califf and the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director Peter Marks, claiming that:

“Contrary to a wealth of misinformation available on social media and the internet, data from various studies indicate that since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic tens of millions of lives were saved by vaccination.”

The DOJ also argued that, if the case is allowed to continue, the discovery process and ongoing legal proceedings “will impose a significant burden on FDA, HHS [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services], and DOJ.”

Referring to the Supreme Court’s Polansky ruling, Jackson said:

“The government came in at the very last moment and did what they’re doing in this case, trying to get rid of it.

“So, it went all the way to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court ruled that based on the False Claims Act, the government has the ultimate authority to do whatever it wants to do in a sense. But again, having to show … good cause.”

Latypova said that once a case is filed under the False Claims Act, “it immediately goes under seal for an initial 60 days.” After this, “The government has 60 days to decide whether to intervene in the case or not. They could have intervened and dismissed or they could have declined to intervene and not dismiss.”

According to Jackson, “In February 2022, after keeping the case sealed and investigating the allegations for nearly 14 months, the government chose not to intervene but did not move to dismiss either. The case was then unsealed, allowing me to proceed with the action on my own, acting on behalf of the U.S.”

“The Justice Department waited until the last minute before the first round of dismissal hearings before the judge, and they made a very rare intervention, but not a full intervention,” Barnes said. “They attempted that and it partially worked,” he added, referring to the initial April 2023 dismissal of Jackson’s lawsuit.

Barnes added:

“We succeeded in getting the judge to reconsider his ruling, and he reinstated the fraud and the inducement claim, because that’s what the claim is fundamentally about — that Pfizer lied in order to get paid. They lied about what they were delivering. They said what they were delivering was safe. It wasn’t.”

Barnes said that under the U.S. government’s contract with Pfizer, the U.S. was “not paying for a therapeutic, they were not paying for a diagnostic, they were paying for something that would inoculate. And of course, this never did.”

According to Latypova, by waiting until now to file a motion to intervene, based on the Polansky ruling, the government opted to wait until “after they had an opportunity to get as many shots in as many arms as they possibly could.”

“This is the second time the DOJ is planning to intervene and to ask the court to dismiss the second amended complaint from Brook,” Latypova said. “This clearly points to the U.S. government’s desire to not investigate the clinical trial fraud for COVID-19 vaccines,” she said.

Jackson said the DOJ still must show good cause, noting that a motion to dismiss “must be done in good faith and they must provide good cause — this is key, and why I am confident that these motions will be denied,” she said.

“The government must show … why they have a reasonable argument that it is more likely than not that the downsides to the case exceed the upsides,” Barnes said. “In a multi-billion-dollar case, what’s that argument going to be from the Justice Department?”

Discovery could show government covered up vaccine adverse events

If the DOJ’s motion to dismiss fails, the process of discovery will proceed and that may reveal more evidence of a possible government cover-up.

“We believe discovery will show the government wasn’t conducting any meaningful investigation at all,” Barnes said. “It was lying to Brook Jackson, it was lying to her counsel, and more importantly, to a certain degree, it was lying to the court.”

“What was really occurring all along is that the Justice Department was deliberately slow-rolling the case for the benefit of Pfizer,” Barnes added.

“We’re going to ask to potentially receive some discovery in what that 14 months of government investigation looked like and why they chose to keep it under seal so long and at that point, dismiss … We want to know why,” Jackson said.

As for what discovery may reveal, Latypova said she is “quite certain” that “it would confirm all allegations of fraud that have been observed by Brook — violations of the clinical trial protocol, unblinding, lack of proper informed consent, manipulation of data, hiding adverse events from the vaccines, and more.”

“I hope that the discovery would also produce unredacted contracts between the Department of Defense and Pfizer,” Latypova added.

The opportunity to file a second amended complaint also allowed more evidence to be incorporated into the case, Jackson said, as the previous complaint only allowed her to “claim what I knew as of September 2020.”

“We found out more about the approval process through the FDA’s release of the clinical trial documents. As more people came forward, as science evolved, we learned more,” Jackson said.

According to Latypova, this new information includes preclinical studies from Pfizer and Moderna, human adverse event data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and other databases, and “reports and published studies from thousands of physicians and injured people.”

“The data is overwhelming, showing severe damage caused by these products,” Latypova said. “The documentation also demonstrates that the manufacturers knew that the product is extremely dangerous … Yet, they lied about the product’s safety, efficacy and manufacturing quality and took billions of dollars in taxpayers’ money.”

According to Barnes, constitutional issues will also be at play if the lawsuit proceeds. This includes “whether or not impermissible First Amendment issues are motivating the Justice Department in pursuing this case, a case that might embarrass the current administration that was in bed with Pfizer as to this vaccine.”

“It’s been four years of fighting a system that I thought was on our side,” Jackson said. “We’ve lost sight of what, or rather who, the government serves. It’s the people.”

“I’ll remind the powers-that-be in Washington once again that according to the U.S. Constitution, the government’s job is to protect and serve the people. We are the sole interest, and we demand vindication.”

Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., based in Athens, Greece, is a senior reporter for The Defender and part of the rotation of hosts for CHD.TV’s “Good Morning CHD.”

March 15, 2024 Posted by aletho | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | COVID-19 Vaccine, Pfizer, United States | Leave a comment

Pfizer sues Poland over Covid-19 vaccine

RT | November 23, 2023

US pharmaceutical giant Pfizer has escalated its feud with Poland over excess Covid-19 vaccine doses that were ordered under a massive contract with the European Union. The company is suing the country over what it claims is an unfulfilled contract for Covid-19 vaccines.

Warsaw was locked into buying tens of millions of doses under a controversial contract the European Commission had signed with Pfizer in 2021 on behalf of EU nations. Pfizer is demanding 6 billion zloty ($1.5 billion) in compensation for 60 million doses that Poland’s government declined, after it stopped taking delivery of the jabs in April 2022.

The entire bloc wound up ordering 1.1 billion doses under the contract, saddling EU states with a vaccine glut as the Covid-19 pandemic waned. The EU prosecutor’s office has already announced an investigation into the procurement process amid allegations of corruption and secret backroom deals while Polish Health Minister Katarzyna Sojka has warned other EU states could be next to face prosecution.

Warsaw has questioned the controversial role of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in the Pfizer deal after it emerged she had for weeks privately communicated with the company’s CEO Albert Bourla during the contract negotiations. However, the European Commission claimed last year that her text messages with the big pharma boss on deals worth multiple billions of dollars executive could not be found.

The first hearing in Pfizer’s lawsuit is scheduled to take place in Brussels on December 6. Earlier this year the pharma giant offered to give the EU more time to complete its minimum vaccine purchases under the binding contract, but insisted that the bloc must pay in full for the contractually specified number of doses. Poland since refused to sign a revised EU agreement with the drugmaker.

Sojka told broadcaster TVN24 on Wednesday that there is some hope of resolving the Pfizer lawsuit “in a positive way.”

A Pfizer company spokesman told Politico however that the company decided to go forward with the lawsuit “following a prolonged contract breach and a period of discussions in good faith between the parties”.

Millions of Poles refused to receive Covid-19 vaccines, and Warsaw halted deliveries of the jabs as an influx of Ukrainian refugees in early 2022 strained the government’s finances.

November 24, 2023 Posted by aletho | Corruption | COVID-19 Vaccine, European Union, Pfizer, Poland | Leave a comment

Texas Sues Pfizer for ‘Endangering Children’ by Selling Ineffective ADHD Drug

By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | November 22, 2023

Acting on behalf of the state of Texas, Attorney General Ken Paxton on Monday unsealed a lawsuit against Pfizer and its drug manufacturer, Tris Pharma, alleging the companies sold medication to children even though they knew the drug was ineffective and potentially unsafe.

The suit, filed in the Harrison County District Court, alleges Pfizer knowingly distributed a drug used for treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) to children on Medicaid — despite the drug’s pattern of failing quality control tests.

The drug, Quillivant XR, is a stimulant that affects brain and nerve chemicals involved in hyperactivity and impulse control.

From 2012-2018, “Pfizer and Tris continually manipulated Quillivant testing to hide poor manufacturing practices and defraud the Texas Medicaid program,” according to a press release.

During those years, many families complained that the medication failed to work. According to the complaint:

“At no point did Defendants warn Texas Medicaid providers or decision-makers that Quillivant had known manufacturing issues affecting its efficacy, thereby depriving the Medicaid program of the crucial information it relies on. … As a result, thousands of Texas children received an adulterated Schedule II Controlled Dangerous Substance.”

In a tweet, Paxton said:

🚨Breaking: Today, I have filed suit against Pfizer and Tris Pharma for defrauding Texas Medicaid and providing adulterating pharmaceuticals to children. I am horrified by the dishonesty we uncovered in this investigation. Pfizer and Tris intentionally concealed and failed to… https://t.co/SIfC72qatF

— Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) November 20, 2023

Commenting on the lawsuit, Kim Mack Rosenberg, acting general counsel for Children’s Health Defense, said, “Pfizer once again is in the spotlight for alleged unethical and fraudulent activity.”

Rosenberg told The Defender :

“I applaud the Texas AG for taking action here to protect some of Texas’s most vulnerable children, those who rely on Medicaid for healthcare. To knowingly supply adulterated medication to vulnerable children is inexplicable and unconscionable.”

“Unfortunately,” Rosenberg added, “this is not the first time questions have been raised about Pfizer’s conduct, including wrongdoing allegedly resulting in children dying in clinical trials in Nigeria in the 1990s and serious questions about Pfizer’s COVID-19 injections and its treatment medication Paxlovid.”

Defendants in the suit include Pfizer, Tris and Tris CEO Ketan Mehta.

The lawsuit stemmed from a whistleblower complaint made by Tarik Ahmed, who served as Tris’ technology chief from 2013-2017.

The lawyers are suing for more than $1 million, including civil penalty fees, and are asking the court to force Pfizer and Tris to pay back to the state of Texas all profits received from selling Quillivant in the Texas Medicaid program “as a result of Defendants’ unlawful acts” and, additionally, to pay back double that amount.

Lawyers with Paxton’s office requested a trial by jury.

In 2017, Quillivant grossed roughly $193.3 million in U.S. sales. The drug was developed by NextWave Pharmaceuticals, which Pfizer bought in 2012 for $680 million.

The lawyers charged the defendants with defrauding the Texas Medicaid program “by providing adulterated pharmaceutical drugs to Texas children in violation of the Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act, now known as the Texas Health Care Program Fraud Prevention Act (‘THFPA’).”

The press release said, “For years, Tris altered the drug’s testing method in violation of federal and state laws to ensure Quillivant passed regulatory hurdles and could continue to be sold.”

According to Reuters, Pfizer said in a statement that it had examined the suit’s allegations on “multiple occasions” and “did not find any impact on the safety of the product.”

Pfizer said the case has no merit and will move to dismiss it.

A Tris spokesperson told Reuters in an email, “We categorically deny and intend to rigorously defend these allegations in the court of law.”

Drug failed quality control tests for years

Almost immediately after getting U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, Quillivant began failing routine quality tests. According to the complaint:

“Beginning at least as early as October 2012, Tris quality control personnel observed that sample of Quillivant tested under FDA-required dissolution specifications were not generating passing results.

“Dissolution testing is an important quality control tool used to measure whether a drug was properly manufactured, by comparing a simulated release of the drug to a standard set upon the drug’s initial approval.

“This in turn helps to predict whether the drug (as manufactured) will be released as expected in a patient’s body — which is critical for ensuring proper and consistent patient dosing.”

The Quillivant samples formed lumps during the reconstitution phase of the test.

Instead of investigating why there were lumps, Tris “retrained” its analysts to shake the water/drug mixture longer and to conduct the test only when “foaming is absent from the suspension,” the filing said.

Even with these changes, Quillivant continued to fail dissolution tests. Tris then stopped using that testing method and switched to a new method.

“Alarmingly,” the filing said, “the new test method was not representative of real-world usage by patients, and worse, went against the pharmacy reconstitution instructions contained in the FDA-approved label for Quillivant.”

When quality control issues continued to arise, the companies told the FDA a “misleading” and “convenient narrative to explain away the problem.”

Pfizer wanted to ‘fully exploit the economic potential of Texas Medicaid’

Meanwhile, Pfizer was petitioning Texas Medicaid to get Quillivant added to the program’s preferred drug list — but said nothing about the drug’s ongoing and unresolved quality control issues.

The FDA on March 26, 2018, sent a warning letter to Pfizer, informing the company that Quillivant was “adulterated starting in 2012 and continuing into 2018.”

Yet “even after receiving this clear and unequivocal assessment, neither Tris nor Pfizer alerted Texas Medicaid decision-makers to the FDA’s serious findings,” the filing said.

The suit alleges that the companies avoided telling Texas Medicaid about the issues because “Quillivant’s status with Texas Medicaid became a selling point.” The filing said:

“Tris and Pfizer both recognized that Texas Medicaid business would be crucial for Quillivant’s success.

“To fully exploit the economic potential of Texas Medicaid, Defendants needed Medicaid decision-makers to add Quillivant to the VDP [Vendor Drug Program] Formulary and the Preferred Drug List.

“These steps would effectively allow Medicaid providers to prescribe Quillivant to their Medicaid patients and would streamline the prescribing process by eliminating the need for the treating doctor to go through the burdensome process of obtaining prior authorization.”

Pfizer projected that Quillivant sales in Texas would significantly increase if the drug were added to the Texas Medicaid Preferred Drug List, as Texas was a “populous state with a disproportionately high percentage of children covered by Medicaid,” according to the complaint.

The Civil Medicaid Fraud Division of Paxton’s office undertook the investigation.

Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa.

November 22, 2023 Posted by aletho | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | Pfizer, Texas, United States | Leave a comment

White House Orchestrated Cover-Up of COVID Vaccine Heart Damage

By Mike Capuzzo | The Defender | October 24, 2023

The White House and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) knew in April 2021 that the Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccine was linked to heart damage on an unprecedented scale for a vaccine — but they hid that knowledge from the public while pushing vaccine mandates, according to emails obtained by DailyClout through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

The emails show the White House communications team struggling to craft a cover-up message on email chains that included Dr. Anthony Fauci, then-director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and chief medical advisor to President Biden; CDC Director Rochelle Walensky; Dr. Janet Woodcock, then-acting commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and Dr. Francis Collins, then-director the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

A number of high-level public health officials worked with upper-echelon leadership to craft a “Myocarditis Email” that minimized the relationship between COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and myocarditis,” said Amy Kelly, program director for the War Room/DailyClout Pfizer Documents Analysis Project.

According to Kelly, the officials included: Ian Sams, COVID-19 response and special assistant to the president and senior advisor and spokesman for the White House; Abbigail Tumpey, then-associate director for communication science for the CDC’s Public Health Infrastructure; and Dr. Dana Meaney-Delman, CDC lead on maternal immunization and CDC chief of Infant Outcomes Monitoring Research and Prevention Branch.

The FOIA emails were obtained by Edward Berkovich, one of 250 volunteer attorneys Kelly oversees on the DailyClout and War Room Project to analyze the court-ordered, FDA-released 450,000 pages of Pfizer’s records on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine — records the drug maker tried unsuccessfully to keep private for 75 years.

The War Room-DailyClout Project was founded by bestselling author and journalist Naomi Wolf, a former advisor to the Clinton campaign, in collaboration with Steve Bannon, former advisor to President Trump and podcaster on “The War Room.”

In addition to volunteer attorneys, Kelly oversees approximately 3250 volunteer doctors, nurses, scientists and others who are reviewing the documents. They’ve issued 89 investigative reports, including the Oct. 18 report on the myocarditis cover-up evident in FOIA emails.

“Astonishingly, the emails reveal that the most senior of leaders, all the way up to the White House, knew about heart damage linked to mRNA vaccines,” Kelly said. “Yet they “colluded behind the scenes to conceal this side effect from the American people.”

Anyone can study the three FOIA releases of emails at dailyclout.io, Kelly said.

“What I think most important is to see who all is involved,” she said. “I believe 105 different people are on the emails, a whole slew of people at the White House, CDC, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, NIAID, Pfizer, some children’s hospitals and organizations and some other external people,” Kelly said.

“My takeaway from seeing this is that everyone, all over the public health agencies, knew there was an issue” with myocarditis dangers linked to the COVID-19 vaccines, Kelly said. Yet “when you read through the emails, you see they are crafting messages to downplay the significance of myocarditis and the vaccines, all the the way up to the White House.”

Emails show the Israeli Ministry of Health tried to alert the CDC in late February 2021 to the problem, Kelly said.

“They said, ‘We’re seeing a myocarditis signal and we’re happy to share information with you,’” she said. “The CDC actually didn’t even respond to the first email as far as I can tell. So the Israeli Ministry of Health emailed again March 2, ‘Hey we’re seeing this myocarditis signal, we’re concerned, let’s discuss it if you want.’”

White House created 17-page script to ‘keep everyone on message’

The FOIA email trove was a frequent topic of discussion Saturday at the “Summit for Truth,” which brought together leaders of the health freedom movement at the Bethel Christian Fellowship church and community center in downtown Rochester, New York.

Wolf was the keynote speaker in a lineup that included Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Ryan Cole, attorney Bobbie Ann Cox, and Brownstone Institute publisher and writer Jeffrey Tucker.

Wolf spoke about her journey from feminist icon to outcast from the liberal media establishment when she questioned the safety of the COVID-19 shots.

She has written two books on her experience investigating and reporting on the pandemic. They include, “The Bodies of Others: The New Authoritarians, COVID-19 and the War Against the Human,” and the forthcoming “Facing the Beast: Courage, Faith, and Resistance in a New Dark Age.”

During a panel discussion Saturday, Wolf called the White House involvement in a cover-up of vaccine dangers “absolutely shocking.”

Berkovich’s FOIA request was aided by “a whistleblower at the CDC,” Wolf said, who was “throwing the White House under the bus.”

“In addition to the pages he had asked for, he got 46 pages he didn’t request that showed the White House communications team was “freaking out at the highest levels in April of 2021, because news of blood clots and heart damage had reached them,” Wolf said.

“Instead of coming clean with the American people and pulling this injection off the market, they looped in Dr. Fauci, Dr. Collins, Dr. Walensky and created a script,” she said.

It was “a 17-page script, their word, which is wholly redacted, to keep everyone on message and downplay the dangers. And in fact if you recall from 2021, rather than pulling this injection off the market, they mandated it. They doubled down and mandated it.”

Wolf said the emails reveal “a massive crime.”

They show a template was prepared to email to “POTUS, which stands for president of the United States,” to keep the president up to date on the email discussions among the top U.S. public-health officials on myocarditis and vaccines, Wolf said.

“Dr. Wallensky was on the emails, Dr. Fauci, Dr. Collins,” she said. “The entire White House communications team was driving the discussion.”

“They were reacting to the fact that blood clots and heart damage had been presented to them at scale and that the American Association of Pediatrics was warning them about myocarditis in teens, a serious, sometimes fatal disease that needs constant management. Instead of coming clean with the American people… they doubled down and made a strategy to cover it up.”

Public-health officials went ahead with mandates for the Pizer COVID-19 vaccine, “knowing it was killing people,” Wolf said.

Dr. Peter McCullough, one of the most highly published cardiologists in the world, said the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines should have been pulled from the market in January 2021, after “no more than 50 deaths” — the previous government standard to guarantee the safety of a biologic product.

McCullough said FDA records show the agency expected a myocarditis risk from the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines as early as Oct. 22, 2020.

Nearly two months later, Pfizer “covered up 38 additional deaths” linked to their vaccine before the Dec. 10, 2020 meeting of the FDA Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee.

“If they had reported these deaths, there would have been a three- to four-fold excess cardiovascular risk with Pfizer in the core slides at the Dec. 10, 2020 meeting and Pfizer would never have been approved,” he said.

McCullough said the myocarditis cover-up has killed untold thousands of Americans.

He pointed to his research paper with other scientists including Dr. William Makis. They performed a systematic review of “all published autopsy reports involving COVID-19 vaccination-related myocarditis” through July 3, 2023.

The paper concluded “there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death from suspected myocarditis in cases where sudden, unexpected death has occurred in a vaccinated person.”

McCullough and colleagues concluded that “urgent investigation is required for the purpose of risk stratification and mitigation in order to reduce the population occurrence of fatal COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis.”

Dr. Bruce Boros, a Key West, Florida cardiologist who was one of the first American physicians to use ivermectin for early COVID-19 treatment based on his resarch of the emerging literature, said recent studies show that the RNA from the COVID-19 vaccines “goes right to the heart.”

A study that applied the Moderna and Pfizer vaccine to heart muscle cells in culture “showed direct evidence that within 48 hours there was heart dysfunction, mechanical and electrical chaos,” Boros said.

Young athletes dropping dead from heart failure at unprecedented rates are “almost assuredly suffering” myocarditis symptoms brought on by the shots, he said.

“Everybody who received the shot had some damage to the heart muscle,” Boros said. “They knew it in the preclinical studies and they covered it up. All the signals were there, the FDA went ahead and approved it anyway.

“It’s all a money game, a eugenics game, and they’re continuing to say you need to get a booster,” Boros said. “Now every child in the world should get this shot for a virus that has been falsely normalized as dangerous when the risk, especially for children, is essentially zero when it comes to death,” he said.

“It saddens me,” Boros concluded. “We need to remember this was created as a bioweapon, and hold our government accountable.”

Mike Capuzzo is the managing editor of The Defender. He is a former prize-winning reporter for The Philadelphia Inquirer and The Miami Herald, a science writer, and a regional magazine founding editor and publisher who has won more than 200 journalism awards as a writer, editor and publisher.

October 25, 2023 Posted by aletho | Deception, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | CDC, COVID-19 Vaccine, FDA, HHS, NIAID, Pfizer, United States | Leave a comment

Pfizer Deliberately Deceived Regulators About SV40 Contamination of COVID Shots, Scientist Says

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | October 25, 2023

Did Pfizer deliberately deceive regulators about contamination of its COVID-19 vaccine? Yes, according to Kevin McKernan, chief scientific officer and founder of Medicinal Genomics.

Appearing on CHD.TV with Children’s Health Defense (CHD) President Mary Holland and Brian Hooker, Ph.D., CHD’s senior director of science and research, McKernan explained how Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine is contaminated with plasmid DNA, which should not be present in an mRNA vaccine.

He said this raises concerns that the plasmid DNA could lead to cancers or autoimmune issues in some vaccine recipients.

McKernan said that annotating Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine sequence with a simple online tool — which any trained person can do — reveals the presence of DNA from simian virus 40 (SV40).

But in the data it gave to regulators, Pfizer deleted the annotation of the SV40 DNA and did not disclose its presence. That deletion, McKernan said, shows “intent to deceive.”

This raises serious questions about the vaccine’s safety that must be investigated, McKernan said. It also suggests major problems with the mRNA vaccine regulatory process.

After McKernan’s lab made its findings public, and other researchers confirmed them, Health Canada also confirmed that the Pfizer vaccine contains this DNA. However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has neither confirmed nor denied the presence of these billions of plasmid DNA fragments in Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.

The FDA told reporter Maryanne Demasi, Ph.D., who questioned the agency on the issue, that it remains “confident in the quality, safety, and effectiveness of these vaccines.”

McKernan and his team stumbled accidentally on what Holland called an “incredibly important finding” when they used the RNA from the Pfizer vaccine — which they assumed was a functional pharmaceutical grade RNA — as a control to test the RNA purification system they were using in other work the lab was conducting.

In the process, they tested vaccines and found that instead of only containing mRNA, the Pfizer vaccines also contained DNA plasmids — small, circular, double-stranded DNA molecules distinct from a cell’s chromosomal DNA.

How did the contaminant DNA get into the vaccines?

McKernan explained that to synthesize the RNA for the vaccines, labs use a process called “in vitro transcription” whereby an RNA-making enzyme called an RNA polymerase uses a DNA template to synthesize RNA molecules.

“It’s like the ink for your Xerox machine,” McKernan said.

But the DNA first has to be amplified. For the clinical trials, Pfizer amplified the DNA using PCR (polymerase chain reaction), a method it called “Process 1.” McKernan said this process is ideal because it amplifies the DNA a millionfold. As a result, “There’s no residual background. You get a really clean piece of DNA that you can make your RNA from.”

But to scale up the process to mass produce vaccines for the public, McKernan said, Pfizer did a “bait-and-switch,” producing the vaccines using “Process 2.”

Process 2 includes “changes to the DNA template used to transcribe the RNA and the purification phase, as well as the manufacturing process of the lipid nanoparticles,” Josh Gueztkow and Retsef Levin wrote in a letter, published in the BMJ, which raised concerns with the process.

For Process 2, rather than amplifying DNA with PCR to make the template, vaccine makers amplified the DNA by plugging it into a bacterial plasmid vector, which uses E. coli for rapid amplification, but runs the risk of introducing sequences not present in the initial DNA, McKernan said.

This creates a practically infinite supply of DNA much more cheaply and easily than using PCR, he added.

But this DNA template comes with additional risk because the DNA of the plasmid used to create the template has to be removed from the vaccine before it can be injected into people.

He said it is clear the vaccine makers tried to get rid of that DNA by “chewing it up with an enzyme” called deoxyribonuclease, or DNase, which breaks down DNA, but they failed to eliminate it completely.

Why didn’t the DNA-destroying enzymes eliminate the DNA?

McKernan told Holland and Hooker the DNase failed to fully eliminate the contaminant DNA fragments from the vaccines delivered to the market because of the modifications they made to the RNA in order to make the mRNA vaccines function, and because of “blind spots” in how they measured the amount of residual DNA.

To make the mRNA vaccines work the way they wanted to, the vaccine designers had to make the RNA slightly more durable than usual, he said.

DNA, he said, is like a hard drive — it’s a long-lived form of information storage. RNA is temporary — like the task manager of the programs that are opening and closing on the hard drive.

Those programs and the RNA itself, get turned on and off. For RNA, an enzyme called RNase functions as an on/off switch.

The makers of the mRNA vaccines added a nucleotide, N1-Methylpseudouridine, that stopped the RNA from turning off right away so it would remain present to ensure the spike protein was produced “long enough to matter,” McKernan said.

That made the RNA “extraordinarily sticky,” so when the RNA polymerase copies the RNA off of the DNA template, it accidentally makes some RNA-DNA hybrids, a triple helix.

In that context, the DNase enzyme that was supposed to get rid of the template DNA can’t function properly.

McKernan said it was likely that the vaccine developers didn’t anticipate that would happen and they would therefore need to develop different enzymes.

“I think with the Warp Speed program, they didn’t really have time to investigate this,” he said.

The second reason the DNA is still there, he said, is because of the tools Pfizer used to measure the DNA and the RNA. Pfizer could measure them both with a single tool, called fluorometry, which can identify very tiny pieces of DNA and RNA.

But, he said, instead Pfizer is using fluorometry only for the RNA, which will give the vaccine developers inflated numbers, and the vaccine maker is using a different tool, called qPCR for the DNA, which can’t identify such small pieces of DNA and so will produce deflated numbers.

“They are playing some games” with these measuring tools, McKernan said, because regulators will want them to have high RNA numbers and low DNA numbers — and by measuring RNA and DNA with different tools, that’s exactly what they get.

That, he said, suggests “intent to deceive.”

What’s in the DNA and why should we be concerned?

Hooker asked McKernan to explain what “is hiding” in this remnant DNA and why people should be concerned.

McKernan said “hiding” was an apt term, because Pfizer gave the whole sequence to the regulators, but only annotated certain parts of it, which allowed it to hide some of the contents.

He said anyone can plug the sequence into a standard annotation software tool like SnapGene, and it automatically annotates the entire sequence — and he wrote a Substack post showing people how to do this.

He also showed Holland and Hooker a side-by-side comparison of the software’s annotation and Pfizer’s annotation, and he showed them where a key annotation was missing in Pfizer’s regulatory submission.

McKernan said that annotation marked the location of the fragments of SV40 virus— which Pfizer used as the necessary promoter and enhancer to drive gene transcription during the vaccine manufacturing process.

Someone had to delete those annotations before giving them to the regulators, he said.

SV40 is controversial because it was an artifact of the live polio vaccine and some experts say it is a cancer risk due to potential integration with the human genome.

To really understand the possible risks, McKernan said, more data have to be collected.

“We have a lot of reasons to believe this is a bad idea. They don’t need this DNA in there. They didn’t tell the regulators about it.”

He added:

“So all of that is a train wreck. If you’re putting in 200 billion of these molecules per shot and you’re doing them five times a year … I don’t know how many times people are taking them, but if you think of your schedule, you should be past your fifth by now. So there’s a cumulative dosing problem here. There’s a high number of these fragments in there.”

Even though the amount of DNA overall may be small, McKernan said, it has been fragmented into tiny pieces that make it “like a buckshot,” meaning it scatters like a shotgun bullet, hitting a broad area, which makes them “much more potent as integration tools because you have more active ends of DNA.”

Concerns beyond SV40: gene therapy and ‘open reading frames’

The U.S. regulatory structure is completely outdated, McKernan said. The current regulations allow for fairly high quantities of DNA because they are based on the idea that the DNA takes the form of a dead virus.

But mRNA vaccines are bringing these DNA sequences into the body in lipid nanoparticles that target the cell nucleus.

Hooker said, “We were told this [mRNA] would not target the nucleus. Is the nuclear targeting sequence the SV40 enhancer?”

McKernan said it is. In fact, he said, SV40 has been successfully researched as a gene therapy tool.

“There’s just no debate anymore. The plasmids that are in there are gene therapy tools, and they’re injected into billions of people,” he said.

Holland asked, “So not only was there no informed consent for anybody, and this was Emergency Use Authorization, so, by law, they weren’t able to give truly informed consent, but it looks like this was a gene therapy, and people were not told that this was a gene therapy. Is that right?”

“That’s right,” McKernan responded.

Holland asked McKernan whether, now that Health Canada acknowledged the presence of SV40, he thought all governments should take the vaccine off the market until this issue is investigated.

“I would think so,” McKernan said. “If they don’t do this, what are they there for?”

McKernan said he also identified other concerns in Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine sequence.

For example, he showed Holland and Hooker that the sequence contains an Open Reading Frame — a DNA sequence with no “stop codon” or stop signal — that is 1,252 amino acids long on the reverse strand of the spike protein in the Pfizer sequence.

Despite extensive research, he said, he can’t identify what it is. “I don’t know what this does, but I know that this is an artifact of their codon optimization that should not be there and is a massive risk and they should get rid of it.”

Hooker asked what the implications of that might be. McKernan said it was unknown, but regulators should never have let it through because it is “risk with no gain and it’s unnecessary.”

Watch video:

Brenda Baletti Ph.D. is a reporter for The Defender. She wrote and taught about capitalism and politics for 10 years in the writing program at Duke University. She holds a Ph.D. in human geography from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a master’s from the University of Texas at Austin.

October 25, 2023 Posted by aletho | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | COVID-19 Vaccine, Pfizer, United States | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries

Subscribe to Aletho News

Enter your email address to receive new posts by email.

Email Address:

Join 2,446 other subscribers
Visits Since December 2009
- 7,640,665 hits
Looking for something?

Search for:
Archives
Archives
Calendar

August 2026

M T W T F S S

1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16

17 18 19 20 21 22 23

24 25 26 27 28 29 30

31

« Jul
Categories

Aletho News Civil Liberties Corruption Deception Economics Environmentalism Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism Fake News False Flag Terrorism Full Spectrum Dominance Illegal Occupation Mainstream Media, Warmongering Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity Militarism Progressive Hypocrite Russophobia Science and Pseudo-Science Solidarity and Activism Subjugation - Torture Supremacism, Social Darwinism Timeless or most popular Video War Crimes Wars for Israel
Tags
Afghanistan Africa AIPAC al-Qaeda Australia BBC Benjamin Netanyahu Brazil Canada CDC Central Intelligence Agency China CIA CNN Covid-19 COVID-19 Vaccine Donald Trump Egypt European Union Facebook FBI FDA France Gaza Germany Google Hamas Hebron Hezbollah Hillary Clinton Human rights Hungary India Iran Iraq ISIS Israel Israeli settlement Japan Jerusalem Joe Biden Korea Latin America Lebanon Libya Middle East National Security Agency NATO New York Times North Korea NSA Obama Pakistan Palestine Poland Qatar Russia Sanctions against Iran Saudi Arabia Syria The Guardian Turkey Twitter UAE UK Ukraine United Nations United States USA Venezuela Washington Post West Bank WHO Yemen Zionism

August 2026
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
	1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30
31

Aletho News
If Americans Knew
No Tricks Zone
Contact:

atheonews (at) gmail.com
Disclaimer

This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.

This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.

Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.

Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.

The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.

Fair Use

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

DMCA Contact

This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.

If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.

We will respond and take necessary action immediately.

If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.

All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Featured Video

Book Review

By David Miller | July 30, 2026

Blog Roll

Subscribe to Aletho News

Visits Since December 2009

Looking for something?

Archives

Calendar

Categories

Tags

Contact:

Disclaimer

Site info