- Article: Federal Law Prohibits Mandates of Emergency Use COVID Vaccines, Tests, Masks — 3 Resources You Can Use to Inform Your School or Employer
- Article: What is the difference between Comirnaty and the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine?
- Pfizer’s Emergency Use Authorization letter was updated October 20, 2021 (Source)
- Comirnaty’s FDA Approved Insert (a different product from Pfizer Biontech)
- Article: Did FDA really approve the Pfizer COVID vaccine? Wait. What?
- Article: 2 Things Mainstream Media Didn’t Tell You About FDA’s Approval of Pfizer Vaccine
On August 23, the media was excited, because it appeared that the Pfizer shot that has been distributed since December 2020 was finally FDA approved.
Sadly, the headlines are all misrepresentations of the truth.
Here’s what really happened:
- The Pfizer BioNTech vaccine that has been used in the US and many other countries for months was given an extended Emergency Use Authorization (Source)
- Another Pfizer product, Comirnaty, was given FDA approval (Source)
These are two different products, though in the future (not yet), they will be considered the same product.
Current Pfizer Doses Available in the US are NOT the Same as the FDA Approved Product
The FDA-approved Pfizer-BioNTech product Comirnaty (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) and the FDA-authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine under EUA have the same formulation and can be used interchangeably.
In other words, if you go down to your local pharmacy to get the Pfizer vaccines that they currently have in stock, they will be used interchangeably with the Comirnaty product, but they won’t be FDA-approved! The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID 19 Vaccine is still under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA).
I asked a friend who works in a medical position which would be privy to this information: “Do the current vials say ‘Comirnaty’ anywhere on them?” No. They only say Pfizer.
Even Drugs.com recognizes that they are two different vaccines. Source
The Emergency Use Authorization for the Pfizer Vaccine Available in the United States was Extended
On the same day the FDA approved a product called Comirnaty, they also extended the EUA for the original Pfizer vaccine. If it is the same product, it would not need two separate letters on the same day.
The FDA approval for Comirnaty is: FDA Approves First COVID-19 Vaccine
The FDA extension of Pfizer’s vaccine in the US is: Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine EUA LOA reissued August 23 2021
The Emergency Use Authorization Extension Applies to ALL Ages
Some people are claiming that this EUA extension only applies to 12 to 15 year olds and that the full approval is for everyone 16 years and up. The EUA extension letter does not give an age range, but simply, a minimum age “and older.” Here is the exact quote:
The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID‑19 Vaccine covered by this authorization will be administered by vaccination providers and used only to prevent COVID-19 in individuals ages 12 and older.
The FAQ page words this a little differently, and may lead one to believe that the EUA only applies to 12-15 year olds:
Will the emergency use authorization (EUA) for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine remain in effect after the approval?
The EUA will continue to cover adolescents 12 through 15 years of age and the administration of a third dose to certain immunocompromised individuals 12 years of age and older.
That appears pretty cut and dry, because there is an age range stated. But then it goes on:
Additionally, for logistical reasons, the EUA will continue to cover the use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID 19 Vaccine in individuals 16 years of age and older; this use is also now approved.
The emergency use authorization will now continue to cover this shot, and the usage of this shot in people 16 years and up is “also now approved.”
It makes it sound as though the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID 19 vaccine is both under the EUA and ALSO approved. Odd. The real question is, how would it be viewed in a court of law? More on that in a bit.
The Two Vaccines are Not Exactly the same
While the FDA letter states that the two drugs may be used interchangeably, they are not the same drug:
The products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness.
In other words, the Pfizer vaccine that has been in use in the United States since December 2020 is not the exact same product as the Comirnaty vaccine.
The confusing thing is that the FDA Authorization statement for Comirnaty makes it sound like they are identical:
Comirnaty has the same formulation as the EUA vaccine and is administered as a series of two doses, three weeks apart.
The same formulation “with certain differences”? It seems like these statements are contradictory.
The Ingredients are Similar But in Different Order
According to Australia’s information, these are the ingredients in the Comirnaty vaccine:
• BNT162b2 [mRNA]
Other ingredients (inactive ingredients)
- ((4-hydroxybutyl)azanediyl)bis(hexane6,1-diyl)bis(2-hexyldecanoate) (ALC0315)
- 2-[(polyethylene glycol)-2000]-N,Nditetradecylacetamide (ALC-0159)
- Distearoylphosphatidylcholine (DSPC)
- Potassium chloride
- Monobasic potassium phosphate
- Sodium chloride
- Dibasic sodium phosphate dihydrate
- Water for injections
- Nucleoside-modified mRNA encoding the viral spike (S) glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2
- 2[(polyethylene glycol (PEG))-2000]-N,N-ditetradecylacetamide
- Sodium chloride
- Monobasic potassium phosphate
- Potassium chloride
- Dibasic sodium phosphate dihydrate
I am not a chemist, but these ingredients appear to be similar. The order is presented differently, and often the order, on an ingredients list, signifies the percentage of each ingredient in the total mixture. Meaning, the ingredients closer to the top make up a larger part of the mixture than the ingredients at the bottom. In the case of Comirnaty, ((4-hydroxybutyl)azanediyl)bis(hexane6,1-diyl)bis(2-hexyldecanoate) (ALC0315) appears to be the top ingredient after the active mRNA. In the case of the Pfizer vaccine, 2[(polyethylene glycol (PEG))-2000]-N,N-ditetradecylacetamide (a known toxin!) appears to be the top ingredient.
I’m not positive that these ingredients are listed in order of prevalence or quantity, but that is how ingredient lists generally work.
According to Heavy, a Pfizer representative responded to their inquiry about this and said:
In terms of its ingredients and how it is made, the vaccine being approved for those 16 years and older is no different from the vaccine that has been administered to millions of Americans to date under the EUA.
They didn’t mention who the Pfizer representative was, and that, in my mind, would have given this statement more credibility. Also, the response is just vague enough that it doesn’t clear up anything. According to this quote, Comirnaty and the EUA Pfizer vaccine have the same ingredients. We see up above that they are similar, but possibly in different amounts. This quote does not define in any way how the two shots are legally distinct “with certain differences.” What are those certain differences?
Comirnaty and Pfizer BioNTech Vaccines Have Different Literature for Providers and Consumers
If the two vaccines were identical, one would assume that all literature about the products would be the same. In fact, there were different documents distributed to different countries with similar, but not exactly the same information on them.
- The WHO’s Pfizer/BioNTech COMIRNATY®, COVID-19 vaccine
- Australia: Consumer Medicine Information (CMI) summary – Comirnaty COVID-19 Vaccine
- Also Australia: AUSTRALIAN PRODUCT INFORMATION –COMIRNATY™ (BNT162b2 [mRNA]) COVID-19 VACCINE
- New Zealand: COMIRNATY™ COVID-19 VACCINE
- EMA Document for European Union: Comirnaty, INN-COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine
- FDA: Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine EUA Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine (Vaccination Providers)
- CDC: Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine
- CDC: Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Questions
Comirnaty is Not Simply a New Name for the Same Old Vaccine
I keep seeing people state that Comirnaty is simply the new brand name for the Pfizer shots. This article claims the same thing: FDA reveals the new name for the Pfizer COVID vaccine
This isn’t true, though. Comirnaty has been used in other countries during the same time that Pfizer BioNTech was used in the United States. This article was published in December 2020: Why is Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine called Comirnaty in Europe?
In February 2021, Pfizer announced: PFIZER AND BIONTECH TO SUPPLY THE EUROPEAN UNION WITH 200 MILLION ADDITIONAL DOSES OF COMIRNATY® which brought the total distributed to the European Union to 500 million doses. Note that they were already calling the vaccine Comirnaty. April 19, Pfizer supplied the European Union with an additional 100 million doses of Comirnaty (Not the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine that was distributed in the United States). Yet again, in May, Pfizer announced PFIZER AND BIONTECH TO SUPPLY THE EUROPEAN UNION WITH UP TO 1.8 BILLION ADDITIONAL DOSES OF COMIRNATY®. The 1.8 billion includes the 600 billion that had already been distributed to the European Union. Notice the registered trademark on these Pfizer announcements, well before most Americans ever knew of this name.
They Plan to Keep Using the Old Stock of the Pfizer Vaccine, Which is Still Under EUA
COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) is now licensed for individuals 16 years of age and older. There remains, however, a significant amount of PfizerBioNTech COVID-19 vaccine that was manufactured and labeled in accordance with this emergency use authorization. This authorization thus remains in place with respect to that product for the previously-authorized indication and uses (i.e., for use to prevent COVID-19 in individuals 12 years of age and older with a two-dose regimen, and to provide a third dose to individuals 12 years of age or older who have undergone solid organ transplantation, or who are diagnosed with conditions that are considered to have an equivalent level of immunocompromise).FDA EUA Extension Letter
Although COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) is approved to prevent COVID-19 in individuals 16 years of age and older, there is not sufficient approved vaccine available for distribution to this population in its entirety at the time of reissuance of this EUA.FDA EUA Extension Letter
In other words, if you go down to the pharmacy today to get an injection of what you think will be the newly FDA licensed product, you will instead be getting the EUA product that is “legally distinct, with certain differences.”
How many doses do they have left of the EUA version of Pfizer?
According to Pfizer’s website, they brought in an additional 200,000,000 doses on July 23, 2021. Pfizer: All COVID Updates
It Appears that They PLANNED to Dose Many More Americans with the EUA Product Under the Guise that it was FDA Approved
Pfizer delivered 200 million doses to the United states, their largest lot total since they began injecting people in our country in December 2020, just before getting FDA approval on Comirnaty. Notice the announcement dates on Pfizer’s website:
July 16, 2021, Pfizer knew that the United States FDA was prioritizing their Biologics License Application (BLA) and that they would probably be getting FDA approval soon. Still, one week later, Pfizer distributed a batch of doses of their EUA vaccine that was double the amount they had ever distributed in the country.
On December 23, 2021, Pfizer announced: PFIZER AND BIONTECH TO SUPPLY THE U.S. WITH 100 MILLION ADDITIONAL DOSES OF COVID-19 VACCINE which put the US total supply at 200 million doses.
February 12, 2021, Pfizer announced: PFIZER AND BIONTECH TO SUPPLY THE UNITED STATES WITH 100 MILLION ADDITIONAL DOSES OF COVID-19 VACCINE. Total vaccines allocated in the United States at this point were 300 million.
With the July 23 distribution, the United States has had a total of 500 million doses of Pfizer in distribution. According to the CDC, 206,901,538 doses of Pfizer have been given to date.
I wondered if any have expired or have been thrown away. I looked for all of the headlines that contained information regarding “Pfizer doses expire” and “Pfizer doses thrown away.” I read through these articles. Even the articles that state “thousands of doses set to expire” in the headline actually only refer to 120 doses (like this CBS article) or 440 doses (like this article about Odessa, Texas). One ABC article claimed that 5,700 doses of Pfizer were about to expire, but there is no confirmation that these 5,700 were actually wasted, since the article also mentioned a rise in people getting vaccinated.
July 23 is when Pfizer announced the additional 200 million doses to distribute throughout the US (40% of the total doses ever distributed by Pfizer), YET, three days earlier, July 20, “a colonel in the Arkansas Air National Guard who is leading that state’s Covid-19 vaccine distribution drive,” Robert Ator, said, regarding doses of the Pfizer vaccine:
We’re drowning in this stuff.States are sitting on millions of surplus Covid-19 vaccine doses as expiration dates approach
Why in the world would Pfizer distribute an additional 200 million (200 MILLION!) doses when there were so many sitting around? The “millions of surplus” doses that the article references that were going to expire in August will still be usable, because the day after Pfizer’s EUA extension and the FDA approval of Comirnaty, this was announced: FDA extends Pfizer COVID-19 shot’s shelf life.
With all of this information in mind, let’s look at the numbers.
- 500 million doses of the Pfizer EUA vaccine have been distributed around the country
- 206,901,538 doses of the same shot have been administered
- To be conservative, let’s assume that 20,000 doses have been thrown away due to low demand and expiration
If all of these numbers are correct, there are 293,078,462 doses of the EUA Pfizer product still left in the United States.
So, how many people in the United States will need to be injected with these shots before the new Comirnaty vaccine is distributed?
According to Census.gov the current US population is 332.5 million–or 332,500,000. According to the CDC, 172.2M, or 172,200,000 of those people are fully vaccinated and 643,000 people have received a third dose since August 13.
Let’s subtract the fully vaccinated 172.2 million people from the total US population of 332.5 million to see how many of us are left that they want to dose with “shots in arms.” There are approximately 160.3 million people left who have not had the vaccine (160.3 million “organic humans” according to some of the memes I have seen).
If Pfizer wanted to dose the 160.3 million “organic humans” who have decided not to participate in their experiment thus far, they have enough stock to give everybody 1 dose and 132,788,362 could get a second dose.
Pfizer has enough current stock of their EUA shot to vaccinate 83% of the unvaccinated US population with two full doses and a single dose for the remaining 17%.
They have zero reason to distribute the FDA approved Comirnaty vaccine, they have plenty of stock of the EUA version.
Given these numbers, I worry that more mandates and possibly even government mandates are coming, and that they were planning for these mandates all along.
The Approval of Comirnaty Allows for Vaccine Mandates
There is question about whether FDA approval truly means that companies or the government can legally mandate that people get the shot. Biden seems to believe that FDA approval does mean that mandates are legal. On the day of Comirnaty’s FDA approval, Biden said:
Today I’m calling on more companies in the private sector to step up the vaccine requirements that’ll reach millions more people. If you’re a business leader, a nonprofit leader, a state or local leader, who has been waiting for full FDA approval to require vaccinations, I call on you now to do that.
That same day, the Pentagon announced a requirement for all service members to get the shot. (Pentagon to mandate COVID-19 vaccine, as Pfizer is approved)
According to NBC, there were already several companies mandating. the the shot before FDA approval, and they expect several more to mandate it now.
Former Governor Cuomo of New York claimed that mandating EUA vaccines was illegal:
You cannot mandate vaccines because the vaccines are approved under something called an emergency use authorization, EUA, and by law, you can’t mandate a vaccine approved under an EUA. So you can’t, say for example, college students must have a vaccine. You cannot mandate a vaccine under an EUA. You can mandate measles which had a full approval, but you can’t mandate these vaccines which are still all under emergency use authorization.
The governor then proceeded to break that law by mandating EUA vaccines.
The FDA’s Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which allows them to give Emergency Use Authorization to products makes it clear that people have a choice when it comes to using an EUA product:
(II)of the significant known and potential benefits and risks of such use, and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown; and
(III)of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.21 U.S. Code § 360bbb–3 – Authorization for medical products for use in emergencies
Note that there is an option to accept or refuse administration of the product. Of course, this doesn’t specify whether a company has the right to terminate employees who do refuse the product.
The FDA’s “Emergency Use Authorization of Medical Products and Related Authorities” also states:
For an unapproved product (section 564(e)(1)(A)(ii)) and for an unapproved use of an approved product (section 564(e)(2)(A)), the statute requires that FDA ensure that recipients are informed to the extent practicable given the applicable circumstances:
• That FDA has authorized emergency use of the product;
• Of the significant known and potential benefits and risks associated with the emergency use of the product, and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown;
• That they have the option to accept or refuse the EUA product and of any consequences of refusing administration of the product; 46 and
• Of any available alternatives to the product and of the risks and benefits of available alternatives.Emergency Use Authorization of Medical Products and Related Authorities
Again, this doesn’t clarify: could the “consequences of refusing administration of the product” include the termination of one’s job?
When my husband spoke to an attorney about his company’s Covid vaccine mandate, the attorney encouraged him not to argue that the mandate was unlawful because of the lack of FDA approval. The attorney said that if the vaccine was FDA approved, this argument would no longer be valid.
While it isn’t perfectly clear that a mandate is illegal under EUA, many companies with mandates seem to have set their dates of required vaccination for after the date they anticipated FDA approval. Here are some examples of the mandate dates:
- Amtrak, November 1
- Citibank, September 13
- CVS, October 31
- Deloitte, October 11
- Equinox, September
- Facebook, October
- Goldman Sachs, September 7
- Google, October 18
- Kaiser Permanente, September 30
- MGM, October 15
- Microsoft, September
- NBCUniversal, September 13
- Netflix, October 18
- New York Times, September 7
- TJX (TJ Maxx, Home Goods, Marshalls), November 1
- Tyson Foods, October 1
- Uber, October 25
- Union Square Hospitality Group, September 7
- United Airlines, October 25
- ViacomCBS, October 18
- Walgreens, September 30
- Walmart, October 4
- Walt Disney Company, October 22
- Washington Post, October 18
Interestingly, many of these mandates came out well before the FDA approval of Comirnaty, but with dates set out as if they knew when FDA approval was coming. Whether or not the FDA approval allows for mandates to happen legally, it has certainly given large companies (and their legal teams, I presume) confidence that they are in the clear to mandate the shot.
The Only Vaccine with Any Liability will be a Vial that is Labeled Comirnaty, Because the Pfizer Doses are Still Under EUA
The way that the FDA and Pfizer have handled this situation, ultimately, protects the company but not the patient.
Once the FDA issues an EUA to permit any COVID-19 vaccine, a plaintiff’s options are limited pursuant to the PREP Act. Vaccine manufacturers lobbied for this legislation to preempt state vaccine safety laws in the case of an emergency declaration by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
White Paper: Experimental Vaccines Covid-19
America’s Frontline Doctors go on to explain:
The PREP Act provides liability immunity to certain “covered persons” against any claim of loss
cause by (or arising out of, relating to, or resulting from) the manufacture, distribution, administration, or use of medical countermeasures, which includes a COVID-19 vaccine. This Act shields the pharmaceutical companies from liability, making it difficult to hold them financially responsible. In other words, it is much more difficult than a regular products liability case. The pharmaceutical company can only be liable if there is “willful misconduct” as defined by the Act, which results in death or serious physical injury.White Paper: Experimental Vaccines Covid-19
Note that “The PREP Act does not shield employers or businesses as “covered persons” and should they attempt to mandate vaccination, they may be liable for resulting harms,” which is very likely why so many companies seem to have synchronized the dates in which they have mandated the vaccine, after the suspected FDA approval.
Since there are nearly 300 million doses of Pfizer’s EUA product still in circulation in the United States, Pfizer would still be immune to liability for most circumstances of death or injury from their product.
Dr. Robert Malone explains it this way:
“The products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness. (page 2, Pfizer letter) So here FDA quietly admits that the licensed Pfizer vaccine and the authorized
Pfizer vaccine are identical with regard to safety/efficacy, but they are “legally distinct.” That’s code for one has manufacturer liability, while the other doesn’t.
It is also code for “we don’t want to impose a mandate on the EUA product cause it is illegal, but we can probably get away with a mandate on the licensed product.”FDA Pfizer authorization (Comirnaty): Key points to consider and discuss
Also note that these new vaccines have been offered even more protection than previously given to EUA products:
In February, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar invoked the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act. The 2005 law empowers the HHS secretary to provide legal protection to companies making or distributing critical medical supplies, such as vaccines and treatments, unless there’s “willful misconduct” by the company. The protection lasts until 2024.
This document applies to EUA products, for four years. This makes me wonder how long Pfizer will produce and distribute their EUA product under the guise that it is FDA approved, will shielding themselves from liability.
The FDA Skipped the Advisory Committee and Public Comment Usually Required for Licensure
The advisory committee is a big deal, and skipping this provides evidence that this “FDA approval” is smoke and mirrors and meaningless.
FDA approval of a Pfizer product (though not the same one we have stocked in the United States) leads people to the conclusion that the vaccine is totally safe and effective. A CVS spokesman said:
the FDA approval underscores the vaccine’s safety and effectivenessCompanies move to mandate coronavirus shots as FDA grants full approval to Pfizer vaccine
But this isn’t necessarily the case. Typically, a new medication must go through the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. This committee, which includes 15 voting members and a Chair, does the following:
The Committee reviews and evaluates data concerning the safety, effectiveness, and appropriate use of vaccines and related biological products which are intended for use in the prevention, treatment, or diagnosis of human diseases, and, as required, any other products for which the Food and Drug Administration has regulatory responsibility.Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee
This seems like a pretty important role! It is alarming that the FDA chose to skip this crucial step in the approval of Pfizers Comirnaty vaccine.
According to Dr. Robert Malone:
The FDA bypassed/disregarded the normal advisory committee and public comment process for this license. See p2 “We did not refer your application to the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee because our review of information submitted in your BLA, including the clinical study design and trial results, did not raise concerns or controversial issues that would have benefited from an advisory committee discussion.”FDA Pfizer authorization (Comirnaty): Key points to consider and discuss
I cannot find information about what the “public comment process” for the license involves. I imagine it is a time period in which the public can give statements to the FDA for or against the product. Maybe.
The FDA didn’t meet to approve the Pfizer Comirnaty product. In fact, the FDA has not had a meeting since their December 10, 2020 meeting when they gave Pfizer their Emergency Use Authorization. It seems as though the approval of an investigational medication, given to more than 2 million Americans thus far, should have been worth a meeting. In fact, I believe that the FDA should have been meeting regularly since the EUA in order to discuss the safety.
The FDA Claim that Pfizer’s Product is “Effective”
It’s disturbing that the FDA is quoting Relative Risk data, relevant for headlines, but not true scientific information. It’s as if they’re marketing the product right alongside Pfizer. The FDA requires that companies report on Absolute Risk Data, which puts Pfizer’s efficacy number at 1% instead of the 95% they claim, but the FDA has gone against their own requirements in the marketing of Pfizer’s product. Here’s a video that explains Relative Risk vs. Absolute Risk.
While the FDA claimed that the vaccines are “effective” in the approval statement, I find it interesting that these vaccines were once marketed (and still being mandated) under the premise that they stopped transmission. They don’t. Even the CDC Director, Rochelle Walensky, has said that the shot does not stop transmission of the Delta variant.
Walensky claims in this video that the vaccines did prevent transmission of the now obsolete original strand of Covid-19, but the truth is that the vaccine trials never even tested for transmission.
If they were testing for transmission, and believed in “asymptomatic spread” as they’ve all told us is a true phenomenon (and why we have had to wear masks and get PCR tests), then they should have had vaccine recipients and placebo recipients and the people they lived with getting PCR tests regularly. They didn’t.
Instead, trial participants submitted voluntary information to an electronic diary about symptoms. Only people with Covid-like symptoms were ever tested. How do we know if asymptomatic shot recipients were spreading the virus to their friends and family without noticing any symptoms? We don’t.
Yet, we are being told that we should all receive this shot “for the good of society,” and because it’s a way of “loving our neighbor.” This is hogwash. You or I getting this shot does not stop anyone around us from getting the virus. In fact, we may become silent superspreaders if we take a shot that simply reduces our symptoms.
An article recently published in the Lancet, Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Delta Variant Among Vaccinated Healthcare Workers, Vietnam, showed that completely vaccinated healthcare workers were transmitting the Delta variant to each other and seemed to spread it even without symptoms. Nasal swabs showed 251 times more viral load than was seen in people before the vaccine rollout. Whether this proves that the Delta variant is more virulent or whether vaccinated people have more chance of a viral load in their nose is not clear from this study, and a distinction should be made in future studies. Had the trials included regular pcr sampling, we may have this information.
Deaths Did Not Decrease
If the vaccines were effective, you would think that the US would have seen a large drop in cases and deaths after 50% of the country was vaccinated. This is not the case. The ultimate goal would have been to see less deaths–that’s the reason for the shot, right? To reduce or eliminate deaths from the virus? This is what we actually saw:
Note that Pfizer’s vaccine was available in December 2020 and the trials for Covid vaccines began in April. In fact, worldwide, cases of Covid appear to have spiked after the vaccines were introduced:
If these vaccines were proven to be effective, these graphs should look very different!
Hospitalizations Did Not Decrease
Many claim that the vaccines have reduced hospitalizations and deaths. Deaths went up after the shots, as we see in the graph up above of deaths in the United States–then they dropped–as viruses do, even without intervention.
According to data from The Covid Tracking Project, hospitalizations did not decrease, either.
The first case came to the US on January 20, 2020. From that date through all of March 2020, the average number of hospitalized patients per day across the country was 1,368.
Between April and December 2020, human trials were happening in the United States, so thousands of people were being dosed with vaccine candidates. Hospitalizations soared up to 48,150 per day on average.
After December 12, and up through March 2021 (the last dates The Covid Tracking Project has recorded), at minimum, all elderly people and a majority of healthcare workers were vaccinated against Covid-19. Hospitalizations went up like CRAZY to 121,534 per day average.
If the shots were working, we should have seen a drastic decrease in hospitalizations. Instead, we saw the opposite effect.
If the Vaccines are Safe, Why is Pfizer (and the FDA) Using this Shady Process to Protect Pfizer?
Why is the FDA allowing Pfizer to pull this bait and switch on us if they have nothing to hide? Dr. Robert Malone said:
Unfortunately, our federal governments would prefer us to be without recourse if we are injured, rather than have Pfizer defend its product in court. So, the feds want us to THINK the vaccine we are receiving is licensed, which will make people submit because they think it can now be mandated, but instead we are almost certain to receive the EUA vials instead, to save Pfizer’s behind. Yes, a stingy CICP injury program exists, but it has not paid out for a single COVID vaccine injury yet.FDA Pfizer authorization (Comirnaty): Key points to consider and discuss
Sadly, we know that these shots have caused harm to people in the United States and around the world.
According to the Emergency Use Authorization, Pfizer is supposed to be submitting adverse events to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS):
Pfizer Inc. will report to Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS):
• Serious adverse events (irrespective of attribution to vaccination);
• Cases of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in children and adults; and
• Cases of COVID-19 that result in hospitalization or death, that are reported to Pfizer Inc.
These reports should be submitted to VAERS as soon as possible but no later than
15 calendar days from initial receipt of the information by Pfizer Inc.Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine EUA LOA reissued August 23 2021
I can’t say whether Pfizer has followed through on this requirement thus far. Pfizer has a page for customers to report any reactions from the shots: REPORTING ADVERSE EVENTS. I have heard testimonies from people who said that they never heard back from Pfizer.
This is what has been reported to VAERS so far:
The Pfizer shots have caused at least 9024 deaths.
There are thousands of injuries, sometimes permanent, reported from the Covid shots, though a breakdown is not available to show which vaccine caused each effect. If 56% of shots administered in the United States were Pfizer’s vaccine, as CDC data reports, then we can assume that a significant number of permanent disabilities, Bells Palsy, Myocarditis, miscarriage, Thrombocytopenia and anaphylaxis have also been caused by the Pfizer shot.
Given the significant amount of deaths, I am really not sure why this drug is still able to remain on the market.
If the company’s product was perfectly safe, there would be no reason to FDA approve one product and then offer another, which the company is not liable for.
Pfizer is Raking in the Dough
Pfizer estimated 33.5 billion dollars in sales from the doses of the vaccine that have already been administered. (Yahoo News: Pfizer raises 2021 outlook on surging Covid-19 vaccine sales)
With approximately 300,000,000 extra doses of their EUA product sitting around, they will make at least double that amount (likely quite a bit more) if they can just get “shots into the arms” of the rest of the American population. This is a giant financial incentive.
What Do We Do With This Information?
Don’t fall for their deception. First, don’t go sign up to get the shot just because they’re now claiming it is “FDA approved.” All vials, nearly 300 million doses, available in the United States today are still under the Emergency Use Approval.
If you want to get the FDA approved shot, you will need to specifically request Comirnaty. Read the packaging and the vial yourself to verify. It is likely that many healthcare workers will not realize that what they are administering is a different product. It took a lot of time to research this information, and most people, especially busy, frontline healthcare workers, don’t have the time to learn the details behind the claims.
STAND UP! If your company is mandating the shot based on FDA approval, let them know that there is no such FDA approved vaccine in the United States at this time! Be careful, though–because as soon as Pfizer claims to distribute vials of Comirnaty, your company may hold you to getting the shot (or you may lose your job). I don’t anticipate that will happen anytime soon. It has taken 8 months for Pfizer to get through about 200 million doses. If they move at the same pace, it will take approximately 11 months to get through the remaining doses of Pfizer’s EUA product that is currently available in the Untied States, unless something drastic happens.
STAND STRONG, friends. If we give in now, we lose our chance of freedom for so many things. Be equipped with the truth, and STAND STRONG.