Despite the promise of “transparency” prior to giving full approval to the COVID vaccines, the FDA gave its final green light just moments ago!
Join The True Defender Telegram Chanel Here: https://t.me/TheTrueDefender
“The FDA’s approval of this vaccine is a milestone as we continue to battle the COVID-19 pandemic. While this and other vaccines have met the FDA’s rigorous, scientific standards for emergency use authorization, as the first FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccine, the public can be very confident that this vaccine meets the high standards for safety, effectiveness, and manufacturing quality the FDA requires of an approved product,” said Acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock, M.D. “While millions of people have already safely received COVID-19 vaccines, we recognize that for some, the FDA approval of a vaccine may now instill additional confidence to get vaccinated. Today’s milestone puts us one step closer to altering the course of this pandemic in the U.S.”
But, there’s always another side of the story…
According to recent reports and comments made by anti-vaxxers all around the globe, but not just regular anti-vaxxers, but people who have a scientific background, here’s what’s going on with the approval given to Pfizer from the FDA.
“Dr. Nass importantly notes that the new, approved vaccine will carry a brand name (Comirnaty) and have liability attached to its use, whereas the unbranded, emergency-use vaccine didn’t/doesn’t. Would Pfizer risk being liable for its product given its current safety record? (A new bill in Congress is trying to have their liability removed).
In her latest, subsequent post, Nass notes that they’ll probably use up all the old Pfizer stock first, THAT DOESN’T HAVE A BRAND NAME, authorized formerly under emergency-use and non-mandatable WHILE HAVING US BELIEVE THAT IT IS MANDATED. In other words, the actual vial from which the vaccine is drawn is CRITICAL. No brand name? Emergency use, non-mandatable, Pfizer is not liable. Brand name? Mandatable, with Pfizer carrying the dangerous risk of liability (before Congress comes to their rescue):
So, my inference is that the feds want the public to THINK the vaccine they are receiving is licensed, which will make people submit because they believe it can now be mandated, but instead the public is almost certain to receive the EUA vials instead, to save Pfizer’s behind.
* You will be able to tell the difference when you see the vaccine vial. The letter explains that the COMIRNATY-labelled vials will be the licensed ones, and the others (under EUA) will say something like Pfizer BioNTech Covid-19 Vaccine without the brand name COMIRNATY.
According to the article published in BMJ,
“Kim Witczak, a drug safety advocate who serves as a consumer representative on the FDA’s Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee, said the decision removed an important mechanism for scrutinizing the data.”
“ These [FDA] public meetings are imperative in building trust and confidence especially when the vaccines came to market at lightning speed under emergency use authorization,’ she said. ‘The public deserves a transparent process, especially as the call for boosters and mandates are rapidly increasing. These meetings offer a platform where questions can be raised, problems tackled, and data scrutinized in advance of an approval’.”
“Witczak is one of the more than 30 signatories of a citizen petition calling on the FDA to refrain from fully approving any covid-19 vaccine this year to gather more data. She warned that without a [public FDA] meeting ‘we have no idea what the data looks like.”
“ It is already concerning that full approval is being based on 6 months’ worth of data despite the clinical trials designed for two years,’ she said. ‘There is no control group after Pfizer offered the product to placebo participants before the trials were completed.”
“ Full approval of covid-19 vaccines must be done in an open public forum for all to see. It could set a precedent of lowered standards for future vaccine approvals’.”