Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Reno89519

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?


14 posted on 12/24/2021 4:26:04 AM PST by DugwayDuke (Most pick the expert who says the things they agree with.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: DugwayDuke

You have not yet achieved the ability to doublethink, Citizen.


15 posted on 12/24/2021 4:39:05 AM PST by null and void (Unvaccinated=control group, vaccinated=controlLED group...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: DugwayDuke
Now how can something be different and identical?

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.

16 posted on 12/24/2021 4:43:48 AM PST by noiseman (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: DugwayDuke

The fda reported “same formulation” not identical.

They did assure everyone that they were interchangeable though. I guess we should just trust them on that - since they are hiding so much of the information from FIOA inquiries.

Right!

Not!!!!!


40 posted on 12/25/2021 11:02:46 AM PST by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: DugwayDuke
The FDA has reported that they are identical and interchangeable. Now how can something be different and identical?

What's not "interchangeable" is the legal distinction of who can administer the drugs.

The EUA drug must, by the terms in the EUA, be administered ONLY by approved technicians at approved locations. This means NOT at your preferred doctor's office, unless they registered with an EUA-approved COVID-19 Emergency Response Stakeholder as a Vaccine Provider.

Your family doctor can administer the COMIRNATY drug, but not the Pfizer-BioNTech drug. Why is that?

From the December 16 Revised EUA for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine:

II. Scope of Authorization

I have concluded, pursuant to Section 564(d)(1) of the Act, that the scope of this authorization is limited as follows:


20 “Authorized Distributor(s)” are identified by Pfizer Inc. or, if applicable, by a U.S. government entity, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and/or other designee, as an entity or entities allowed to distribute authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID‑19 Vaccine.

21 For purposes of this letter, “emergency response stakeholder” refers to a public health agency and its delegates that have legal responsibility and authority for responding to an incident, based on political or geographical boundary lines (e.g., city, county, tribal, territorial, State, or Federal), or functional (e.g., law enforcement or public health range) or sphere of authority to administer, deliver, or distribute vaccine in an emergency situation. In some cases (e.g., depending on a state or local jurisdiction’s COVID-19 vaccination response organization and plans), there might be overlapping roles and responsibilities among “emergency response stakeholders” and “vaccination providers” (e.g., if a local health department is administering COVID-19 vaccines; if a pharmacy is acting in an official capacity under the authority of the state health department to administer COVID-19 vaccines). In such cases, it is expected that the conditions of authorization that apply to emergency response stakeholders and vaccination providers will all be met.

22 For purposes of this letter, “vaccination provider” refers to the facility, organization, or healthcare provider licensed or otherwise authorized by the emergency response stakeholder (e.g., non-physician healthcare professionals, such as nurses and pharmacists pursuant to state law under a standing order issued by the state health officer) to administer or provide vaccination services in accordance with the applicable emergency response stakeholder’s official COVID-19 vaccination and emergency response plan(s) and who is enrolled in the CDC COVID-19 Vaccination Program. If the vaccine is exported from the United States, a “vaccination provider” is a provider that is authorized to administer this vaccine in accordance with the laws of the country in which it is administered. For purposes of this letter, “healthcare provider” also refers to a person authorized by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (e.g., under the PREP Act Declaration for Medical Countermeasures against COVID-19) to administer FDA-authorized COVID-19 vaccine (e.g., qualified pharmacy technicians and State-authorized pharmacy interns acting under the supervision of a qualified pharmacist). See, e.g., HHS. Fourth Amendment to the Declaration Under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act for Medical Countermeasures Against COVID-19 and Republication of the Declaration. 85 FR 79190 (December 9, 2020).

-PJ
50 posted on 12/26/2021 2:51:42 AM PST by Political Junkie Too ( * LAAP = Left-wing Activist Agitprop Press (formerly known as the MSM))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson