The FDA's "Commitment to Transparency": Part 1
The FDA's "Commitment to Transparency": Part 1
LOL transparency.
Euphoric Recall is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
The FDA has a "Transparency Initiative." Which is a bit rich, really. That's like saying under Tony Fauci’s leadership, the NIH has an "Honesty Initiative.”
But yes, the FDA does have a Transparency Initiative™, not to mention a glib habit of referencing this supposed "commitment to transparency" whenever it floats their boat even though the truth is that the agency is about as transparent as a brick wall. One need only review the FDA’s conduct during the pandemic, particularly over the past six months or so, to learn as much.
Millions of people, myself included, would very much like to see the data they relied on in licensing the vaccines. You’d think that given only 44% of Americans trust the FDA’s sister agency, the CDC, after its credibility has been more than likely permanently marred because of a combination of demonstrable incompetence and constantly changing messaging with unchanging certainty, the FDA wouldn’t wait to disclose this information.
Well, you’d be wrong. And the backstory is worth the read.
How To Encourage The Public To Lose Complete Faith In You: A Step-By-Step Guide From The FDA
The vaccine was stamped with the FDA’s imprimatur on August 23, 2021.
“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. 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.” — Acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock
I’m not a lawyer. My knowledge of judicial practice goes no further than what I was able to glean from watching My Cousin Vinny. I can, however, read. And the (federal) law states that once licensed, “data and information in the biological product file are immediately available for public disclosure.”
It would appear that there’s been a delay. The FDA did not immediately release this information. Nor did they release it four days later when a long list of scientists and public health professionals submitted a polite request that the FDA at least expedite the affair, since, you know, the whole “immediately” thing didn’t happen.
So, a few weeks passed. And then a few weeks turned into a month. Which turned into months. And now here we sit with bated breath approximately half a year later, holding out hope that the “leaders” of the FDA — honorable folks all, to be sure — remember their Transparency Initiative™ and all the times they’ve used the word transparency in press releases and oh yes let’s not forget the whole “immediately” thing and what that word means.
Perhaps as well someone should at least mention the effect that each additional passing day of delay has on their cratering credibility amongst the citizenry they’re supposed to be serving.
(In Gallup’s annual Business and Industry Sector poll, the Pharmaceutical industry was ranked 23/25 in terms of trust and favorability amongst Americans—and for good reason. The honor of absolute bottom was reserved for the federal government…)
Immunity For The Companies Profiting Off Vaccines That Don’t Provide Immunity
“Our vaccines are working exceptionally well. They continue to work well for Delta with regard to sever illness and death. . . what they can’t do anymore is prevent transmission.” — CDC Director Rochelle Walensky
Ironically, the only immunity that can be attributed to the vaccines is the immunity Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J have been given for any injury caused by said vaccines.
So, while their product doesn’t give you immunity from the coronavirus, the manufacturers have full immunity and aren’t liable if anything happens to you.
You can read the fine print for yourself in the “Declaration pursuant to section 319F-3 of the Public Health Service Act to provide liability immunity for activities related to medical countermeasures against COVID-19.”
It gets worse, though. Even more absurd. Because the immunity goes further than adverse reactions and physical injuries: It even includes willful misconduct.
What this means is that you can only sue Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J for willful misconduct if the federal government sues first.
What do you think the odds are that the Biden administration, which has been running a virtual PR campaign for these vaccines and even pushing lies about their efficacy from day one, would sue if a manufacturer were found to have engaged in willful misconduct?
Slim to none sounds about right.
And, considering Big Pharma is probably the most corrupt industry on the planet, it’s not exactly outside the realm of possibility that some willful misconduct might indeed take place, if it hasn’t already. I mean, Pfizer, for God’s sake, has entered into not one, not two, but three deferred prosecution deals for everything from bribing managed care companies to illegally promoting off-label medications, only to be busted a fourth time for bribing doctors and medical journals, a quadruple whammy leading to the biggest judicial fine ever at $2.3 billion.
Does This Sound Right To You?
Right now. . .
In many locations across the country you cannot enter a building without proving you’re “fully vaccinated.”
It’s now standard practice for the vaccine hesitant and decliners alike to be maligned and castigated and censored and to even have their deaths celebrated in national newspapers.
You can be fired for not getting the vaccine if your employer mandates it. Labor laws grant employers the right to set terms and conditions of employment, and if a worker doesn’t comply, the company can axe them. This also applies for Covid vaccinations, per the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
And all this is true in spite of the fact that. . .
The vaccines do not prevent transmission, and there’s effectively no difference between the symptomatic vaccinated and unvaccinated in terms of who carries, and therefore spreads, the virus.
If you get vaccinated and anything happens to you or a loved one due to an adverse reaction/vaccine-caused medical issue, you can’t sue. The government has granted the vaccine manufacturers — Big Pharma companies literally making $1,000 profit every second, a windfall that’s minted 9 new pharma billionaires as of May ‘21 — blanket immunity from liability.
We’re still not able to see the data underlying the government’s claim that the vaccines are safe and effective; the FDA has been allowed to flout the law for nearly half a year.
The only possible answer to the above that’s even remotely plausible, but which is still not reason enough to serve as justification for making civil rights contingent on an unwanted medical procedure, is that the government wants you to get vaccinated “for your own benefit.”
When even the CDC director admits on CNN that whether or not you decide to get vaccinated has no impact on anyone else and therefore even the spazzes who’ve been arguing this entire time that the unvaccinated are putting them “at risk and in danger” no longer have any ground to stand on, any other “reason” for still enforcing mandates and passports is outright authoritarianism.
Think about it. You can’t say no without potentially losing your job or being segregated and discriminated against (i.e. - you can’t go to a Lakers game); you can’t sue if the vaccine ends up harming you; and you can’t see the data that the FDA used to determine the vaccines were safe to license.
This is some 1984-level dystopia we’re talking about here.
“Don’t worry,” assures the federal government as the FDA looks on with a syringe in hand and the CDC stands by checking its watch and Tony Fauci smiles smugly in the foreground and the vaccine manufacturers, in the background, count their ungodly profits. “It’s totally safe.”
“Well, I mean…can I sue if something bad happens? Or at least get some kind of compensation?”
“No.”
Your eyes fall on the mountains of $100 bills that the Pfizer, J&J, and Moderna CEOs are now jumping around in like little kids in autumn leaf piles.
“Okay…do you think I—I mean, is it alright if I at least see the data you guys used, like the information and studies showing it’s safe and stuff?”
“No.”
“…Why not?”
“Because.”
“Yeah but you guys have been wrong about a ton of shi—”
“Stop stalling and roll up your sleeve!”
Public Health And Medical Professionals For Transparency (PHMPT) Sue For Transparency
PHMPT submitted a freedom of information request (FOIA) for data and information on the approval of Pfizer-BioNTech's vaccine, which was the first authorized for public use and then mandated by the Biden administration.
The FDA more or less said, “LOL, f*** off.”
Whereupon, Mr. Aaron Siri of Siri & Glimstad filed a federal lawsuit against the FDA on behalf of PHMPT. (Siri is a shark and there’s blood in the water, folks.) The group asked the FDA to satisfy their FOIA request by no later than March 3, 2022, giving the agency the same 108 days "from when Pfizer started producing the records for licensure on May 07, 2021, to when the product was licensed on August 23, 2021.”
And you know what the FDA did? They asked the federal judge to make the public wait until 2076 before they disclosed all the requested information. Specifically, they requested permission to produce the more than 329,000 pages of documents Pfizer provided the FDA to license its vaccine at a rate of 500 pages a month. Meaning the request wouldn’t be fulfilled until 55 years from now, the 300th anniversary of our nation’s inception.
According to the FDA, the 329,000 pages of documents must first be processed and redacted for exempt information, “a time-consuming process.” But if the FDA actually completed an exhaustive, comprehensive analysis and a meticulous review of these documents in order to confirm that the vaccine was worthy of licensure — safe and effective and okay for public use — then why is it asking for 19,892 more days to fulfill the FOIA request?
