https://www.gov.uk/government/public...ion-foi-21-624
:sherlock:
Printable View
So what?Quote:
Originally Posted by TWGL1
Great answer , nice to see the blinded masses asking questions
Ok, let me rephrase as you are not keen to answer. Dare I suggest that you may be questioning the independence of the MHRA?
I think it’s questionable how it’s funded , but will I lose sleep over it, no.
It’s not surprising though is it …. Let’s see how this plays out.
As I understand it the vast majority of funding for the MHRA comes from the fees which the organisation charges for licensing medicines in the UK, carrying out GMP inspections etc.
See: https://www.gov.uk/government/public...lications-fees
I suppose there is always the argument that as it is the pharmaceutical industry that pays the fees, then there can be the suspicion that this is open to corruption. From my own direct experience as a pharmacist working in regulatory affairs all I can say is that I have always found the medicines regulators (both in the MHRA and the EMEA) to be scrupulously honest in their work.
What is the alternative? Would you or I as tax payers expect to pay the fees on behalf of the pharmaceutical companies? Somehow I think not.
The alternative is a completely independent agency funded by the tax payer banning political lobbying, and an industry that’s not funded by themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gofer Blue
Billions made on a drug , and then fined 1% ( £500m sounds a lot) of the profit if anything goes wrong. Maybe in this country is better but once the NHS is privately owned, the safeguards will be different.
Big Pharmaceutical pay the regulators.
What’s your personal view on the fact that Pfizer have tried to bury their results of vaccine trails for 70 years?
When you say "Big pharma pay the regulators" that is a loaded statement. Big pharma (and little pharma!) pay various licence fees just as you or I might pay government departments for our driving licences or passports - that is not to say that these departments are somehow in our pockets!Quote:
Originally Posted by TWGL1
The whole medicines regulatory system relies on trust. The regulators can't be blamed if a particular pharmaceutical company chooses to falsify data. This would be very difficult to do anyway IMO as it would require huge cooperation from many different individuals within a company, people who would not see any personal gain. Withholding data is a different issue. I don't know how any medicine can be approved until ALL the required data is made available?
I don't know about Pfizer and vaccine trails (trials?) data going back 70 years - what vaccines are those?
Pfizer FOI requestQuote:
Originally Posted by Gofer Blue
https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/...vid-19-vaccine
There has been a small data drop as we speak (although it says 55 years in this article)
Instead, the FDA has proposed to release 500 pages per month. "By processing and making interim responses based on 500-page increments, FDA will be able to provide more pages to more requesters, thus avoiding a system where a few large requests monopolize finite processing resources," the agency's defense said.
Ah, it's about COVID, what a surprise! I have had both Astra Zeneca and Pfizer jabs in the full knowledge that these vaccines were produced in record time and therefore long term safety data would not be available. If there had been any serious issues during the initial clinical trials then the studies would have been halted (as indeed happened with the A-Z vaccine until it was properly investigated). So, yes, there was a risk. The alternative was catching COVID and I well remember those interviews with folk in hospitals who were near deaths-door urging the unvaccinated to have the jab asap.
I think these "heroes" who are strongly anti-vaccine should thank those people who did have it as the latter saved the NHS from being rapidly overwhelmed, potentially leading to apocalyptic scenes of people dying unattended on stretchers in hospital car parks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gofer Blue
People near death well enough to be interviewed :hehe:
Just for reference the government told us that 99% of people would have mild or moderate symptoms and that was prior to the roll out and the latest data suggest and IFR rate similar to good old flu
I think this interview should be pulled for misinformation
https://twitter.com/gbnews/status/15...vrBsgTc3VLkBwA
Anti vax as in a person who has had MMR ,typhoid , tetanus etc ?
Worrying news coming out of Israel if true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gofer Blue
I wasn't at all surprised to read your final sentence given everything you typed prior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gofer Blue
Pfizer are notorious shysters. So much so they were hit with a then world record corporate fine of 2.3 billion dollars in 2009 for falsifying data and bribing health authorities along with doctors. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justi...nt-its-history
Pfizer wanted to conceal their Covid-19 'vaccine' trial data for the next 75 years. If that doesn't raise a giant red flag at your end in view of their previous form then I have some 30 carat gold jewellery you might be interested in purchasing for a bargain price.
Here's more on that company's long history of skulduggery. https://www.dmlawfirm.com/crimes-of-...ll-documented/
Here’s a brief glimpse of Pfizer’s track record for safety and ethics. This is a short list, by no means inclusive of the company’s entire rap sheet.
Pfizer received the biggest fine in U.S. history as part of a $2.3 Billion plea deal with federal prosecutors for mis-promoting medicines (Bextra, Celebrex) and paying kickbacks to compliant doctors. Pfizer pleaded guilty to mis-branding the painkiller Bextra by promoting the drug for uses for which it was not approved.
In the 1990s, Pfizer was involved in defective heart valves that lead to the deaths of more than 100 people. Pfizer had deliberately misled regulators about the hazards. The company agreed to pay $10.75 Million to settle justice department charges for misleading regulators.
Pfizer paid more than $60 Million to settle a lawsuit over Rezulin, a diabetes medication that caused patients to die from acute liver failure.
In the UK, Pfizer has been fined nearly €90 Million for overcharging the NHS, the National Health Service. Pfizxer charged the taxpayer an additional €48 Million per year for what should have cost €2 million per year.
Pfizer agreed to pay $430 Million in 2004 to settle criminal charges that it had bribed doctors to prescribe its epilepsy drug Neurontin for indications for which it was not approved.
In 2011, a jury found Pfizer committed racketeering fraud in its marketing of the drug Neurontin. Pfizer agreed to pay $142.1 Million to settle the charges.
Pfizer disclosed that it had paid nearly nearly 4,500 doctors and other medical professionals some $20 Million for speaking on Pfizer’s behalf.
In 2012, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announced that it had reached a $45 Million settlement with Pfizer to resolve charges that its subsidiaries had bribed overseas doctors and other healthcare professionals to increase foreign sales.
Pfizer was sued in a U.S. federal court for using Nigerian children as human guinea pigs, without the childrens’ parents’ consent. Pfizer paid $75 Million to settle in Nigerian court for using an experimental antibiotic, Trovan, on the children. The company paid an additional undisclosed amount in the U.S. to settle charges here. Pfizer had violated international law, including the Nuremberg Convention established after WWII, due to Nazi experiments on unwilling prisoners.
Amid widespread criticism of gouging poor countries for drugs, Pfizer pledged to give $50 million for an AIDS drug to South Africa. Later, however, Pfizer failed to honor that promise.
Pfizer’s Covid vaccine is being rolled out with nothing but positive press from every mainstream media outlet in the country. Meanwhile, more than half of Americans surveyed have said they will not take a Covid vaccine. The plain fact is that many questions remain unanswered regarding this, or any other, Covid vaccine’s safety and efficacy.
What we do know, from legal history, is that Pfizer’s past transgressions might lead some reasonable people to question whether or not they will submit to any vaccine made by the company.
OM - what you have written is indeed a damning indictment of Pfizer but tends to confirm the gist what I wrote i.e. that regulators cannot be blamed if a company submits falsified data. If ultimately Pfizer's vaccine has been proven to be seriously damaging to public health due to falsified reporting, then certainly heads should roll and relevant personnel sent to jail.
Many of the examples you quote would have involved the cooperation of many people outside Pfizer - where were the whistleblowers I wonder? Perhaps quite happy with the bribes?
Top post. Exactly right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gofer Blue
It was Pfizer in association with the US Food and Drug Administration who were desperate to hide their clinical trial data for 75 years.
And why? Because both knew those trials showed their jab was anything other than safe and effective. It's also why corporate media keep mum about the details of what a judge forced them to publish.
FDA Knew 44% Of Pregnant Women In Pfizer Trial Suffered Miscarriages - https://greatgameindia.com/pfizer-trial-miscarriages/
It is indisputable that neither Pfizer nor the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is at all concerned about adverse events related to Pfizer’s clinical trial data. After all, they sought to hide it from the general public for 75 years. While blatantly unacceptable, the fact both parties knew that 44 percent of pregnant women participating in the Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 “vaccine” trial suffered miscarriages is immoral and seems incredibly corrupt.
Shockingly, as the FDA releases Pfizer trial data each month per court order, a Pfizer adverse events report transferred on July 1, 2022, reveals that after the women lost their babies, the billion-dollar big pharma giant reported that the heartbreaking miscarriages were unrelated to the trial. The volunteer team at Daily Clout discovered the intentional deceit by scouring through the thousands upon thousands of Pfizer trial documents released each month that form the rationale behind the FDA’s emergency use authorization (EUA) and subsequent August 23, 2021, “approval” of Pfizer’s mRNA COVID-19 “vaccine” product.
According to an article in Daily Clout, the women listed in Listing of Subjects Reporting Pregnancy After Dose 1 each received between one and four of Pfizer’s mRNA injections. Forty-two received the trial drug right away, and eight received the placebo and were then unblinded and given the vaccine. Thus, by March 31, 2021, all of the pregnant women in the trial—there were 50 of them—had received Pfizer’s BNT162b2 version of its experimental “vaccine.” Summarizing Pfizer’s deceptive efforts after the miscarriages, the article explained:
With access to this startling data by April 1, 2022, the article points out that the FDA was aware that a “significant percentage of pregnancies ended in ‘Abortion Spontaneous.’” Yet, despite this, the agency “failed in its duty to study the data and investigate what basis Pfizer had for marking the fetal deaths as unrelated to the vaccine and having ‘Other’ causes.” Moreover, the FDA failed to inform the public of this life-changing, serious adverse event. Most importantly, Daily Clout’s Berberine wrote, “without that information, women were not able to give informed consent for receiving Pfizer’s mRNA COVID vaccine.”
I think around 50% of all pregnancies miscarry in any given situation, so this could well have been well within the bounds of what was expected.Quote:
Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.
I asked google for Yank miscarriage stats. This was the first answer:
For women who know they're pregnant, about 10 to 15 in 100 pregnancies (10 to 15 percent) end in miscarriage. Most miscarriages happen in the first trimester before the 12th week of pregnancy. Miscarriage in the second trimester (between 13 and 19 weeks) happens in 1 to 5 in 100 (1 to 5 percent) pregnancies.
The second link (here: https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-...s/syc-20354298) reports:
About 10 to 20 percent of known pregnancies end in miscarriage.
Meanwhile, this US billionaire said on Fox News he believes "hundreds of thousands" of Americans have been killed by Covid vaccines. Their excess mortalities (excluding Covid deaths) is currently running at 19,600 per week.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">1/2<br>FOX News Stuns The World With Unfiltered Truth: “This Vaccine Is The Most Dangerous Vaccine Ever Created” <a href="https://t.co/uMDSxGXddL">pic.twitter.com/uMDSxGXddL</a></p>— Leo The Patriot (@4CaesarLeo) <a href="https://twitter.com/4CaesarLeo/status/1557572027862630400?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 11, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Quote:
Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s415...0in%20the%20UKQuote:
Pregnant people were excluded from the trials and participants were asked to avoid becoming pregnant, but, nonetheless, 57 pregnancies occurred across the trials of the three vaccines that have so far been approved in the UK. The outcomes of these pregnancies, so far as they have progressed, are summarized in Table 1. There was no significant difference in the rate of accidental pregnancies in the vaccinated groups compared with the control groups, which indicates that the vaccines do not prevent pregnancy in humans. Similarly, the miscarriage rates are comparable between the groups, indicating no detrimental effect of vaccination on early pregnancy.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s415...525-y/tables/1
I must say I find that an unbelievable statistic. Most references I can find on the Internet suggest much lower rates but the one from the WebMD.com is the one that quotes 50%. This is a bit misleading in a way because it reports that many miscarriages take place before the woman is aware that she is pregnant so I would ask how would that woman be able to report having a miscarriage under those circumstances? The article* goes on to say that 12 - 25% of "recognised pregnancies" end in miscarriage which is more realistic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rjk
* https://www.webmd.com/baby/guide/pregnancy-miscarriage
and the miscarriages in the vaccine studies were apparently in line with thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Gofer Blue
I wonder how that squares then with OM's reference that FDA and Pfizer "knew" that 44% of pregnant women who had had the COVID vaccine subsequently miscarried? If this is true, once again I would ask, where were the whistleblowers?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rjk