Posted on 12/23/2021 11:24:21 PM PST by zeestephen
Pfizer and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration last week failed to directly address questions by two media outlets about whether Pfizer's Comirnaty vaccine is available in the U.S. [This is the core legal issue concerning government and employer vaccine mandates.]
(Excerpt) Read more at childrenshealthdefense.org ...
"Two media outlets last week requested, but failed to obtain, clarity from Pfizer on whether its fully licensed Comirnaty COVID vaccine is available in the U.S."
"The Star reported that despite asking multiple times whether the Comirnaty vaccine is in use, Pfizer would not answer the question."
This is a giant red flag.
This should be nothing more than a simple label change on the bottles.
That it’s not - that both Pfizer and the FDA claim these are both the same but won’t dispense under the commercialized label indicates that the FDA and Pfizer are in collusion to defraud the public of the United States.
A billboard here in Reno touts the “fully approved” Pfizer vax. What’s on the label probably isn’t what folks are mislead to believe.
😨😷💉🐂💨💩
ping to TexasGator
The Conservative news media have begun to ask the same question I have been asking for several months.
I have been hearing radio ads in the last few days promoting this Comirnaty vaccine implying that if you get jabbed, this is what you will get.
“Fact checkers” are saying the EUA jab and Comirnaty are actually the same thing, it’s just that they are using up old inventory that doesn’t have the new label.
If the explanation is so simple, why isn’t Pfizer saying it?
PING
I do think anyone faced with a vaccine mandate needs to consider responding, "Sure, happy to take the approved vaccine once and if it becomes available." What can anyone say to that since no one can apparently be forced to take an experimental vaccine?
Are they actually saying the word "Comirnaty" in the ads?
What part of the country is this?
Thanks.
Comirnaty and the EUA Pfizer vaccine are manufactured at separate facilities.
Also, Comirnaty contains several non-active ingredients that are not in the EUA vaccine.
Yes, they used that word. Philadelphia area.
Reno89519 wrote: “FDA has previously reported they were distinctly different, legally different, and I think also the same formulation but they have never said they were the same thing.”
The FDA has reported that they are identical and interchangeable. Now how can something be different and identical?
You have not yet achieved the ability to doublethink, Citizen.
One-word answer: Lawyers.
Longer answer: I think this is all about protecting Pfizer from liability for the negative effects of the shot. The FDA appears to be conspiring with Pfizer, aided by a moronic and compliant media, to pull a gigantic con. They’re tricking everyone into going along with mandates by leading them to believe that the “non-experimental” FDA-approved version is available and is what everyone is receiving, while keeping secret the fact that they’re all actually receiving the experimental, liability-exempt version.
If in fact you do get a Comirnaty shot, which wont happen for years, and you have adverse effects, you can sue Pfizer. but that’s why it’s not available.
I heard it in Phoenix last week on a radio ad.
noiseman wrote: “Longer answer: I think this is all about protecting Pfizer from liability for the negative effects of the shot. The FDA appears to be conspiring with Pfizer, aided by a moronic and compliant media, to pull a gigantic con. They’re tricking everyone into going along with mandates by leading them to believe that the “non-experimental” FDA-approved version is available and is what everyone is receiving, while keeping secret the fact that they’re all actually receiving the experimental, liability-exempt version.”
You’re being scammed. This claim is being advanced by two of the biggest proponents of misinformation about the vaccines, Malone and Kennedy jr. Read this:
(Quotations from the linked article)
“Malone, a physician who bills himself as having played a key role in creation of mRNA vaccines, is a prominent skeptic of the coronavirus vaccines that have been crafted using the technology. Shortly after the Food and Drug Administration fully authorized the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, he appeared on a program hosted by Stephen K. Bannon, a one-time adviser to former president Donald Trump, and claimed that the full authorization was a bait-and-switch game played by the FDA.”
“One again the mainstream media has lied to you,” he said. “Sorry to say that. I know it’s a shock to this viewership.”
“In essence, his argument was that the approved vaccine would no longer have liability protections so Pfizer would simply keep distributing in the United States the product that had been authorized for emergency use.”
“A similar claim was made by Robert F. Kennedy, a leading anti-vaccine campaigner.”
Even Malone admits this claim is false: “These claims are false, based on a misunderstanding of the law, as Malone acknowledged after we contacted him.”
“Indeed, contrary to the claims of Malone and others, the Comirnaty vaccine has the same liability protection as the vaccine approved under the EUA. That’s because of a law known as the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act).”
IOW, what you thought is incorrect.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
