Jump to content
Check your account email address ×

Texas Sues Pfizer For Fraud


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Highmark said:

FDA but dude the claims were ALL OVER the news by almost anyone pro jab.   It went on for months and months.   You have to be really pro vaccine bias to not remember what they were saying about the vaccine. 

Or anti-vaxxx to think that everyone was claiming that.  :dunno:

 

 

16 minutes ago, Highmark said:

The phrase get vaccinated for others was everywhere. 

Well that's not untrue. Lower your risk and lower those around you.

 

 

17 minutes ago, Highmark said:

The posts cite remarks by Pfizer’s president of international developed markets, Janine Small, while testifying on behalf of Bourla before the European Parliament’s COVID-19 committee on Oct. 10. 

During the session, a conservative Dutch member of the Parliament, Rob Roos, asked Small if Pfizer had tested the vaccine for transmission prevention before the vaccine entered the market (see the 15:23:00 mark of the video). Small said: “No. We had to really move at the speed of science to really understand what is taking place in the market” (see the 15:31:45 mark).

Following the hearing, Roos posted a two-minute video statement on Twitter that included his exchange with Small. 

“BREAKING: In COVID hearing, #Pfizer director admits: #vaccine was never tested on preventing transmission. ‘Get vaccinated for others’ was always a lie. The only purpose of the #COVID passport: forcing people to get vaccinated. The world needs to know. Share this video!” said the post, which got 232,600 likes and 138,500 shares in less than two days.

“I find this to be shocking, even criminal,” Roos said in his video statement. 


Yeah, we went through this like a year ago. Fortunately we know that all vaccines help prevent transmission by lowering viral loads. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, akvanden said:

Or anti-vaxxx to think that everyone was claiming that.  :dunno:

 

 

Well that's not untrue. Lower your risk and lower those around you.

 

 


Yeah, we went through this like a year ago. Fortunately we know that all vaccines help prevent transmission by lowering viral loads. 

That's total bullshit, but lets say that's true.  Is that grounds to force mandates and fire those who refuse?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
9 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

That's indeed what I am talking about.

Developing of symptoms is the the best way to describe something as a disease.  If you have the virus, but zero symptoms that would be better described as a virus carrier than a sufferer of the disease, do you not agree?

I totally agree that the vaccines were being  push with data showing minimal impact of later strains.  It was however very good at early strain efficacy, you agree, correct?

Neal

 

Agree on first question however I don't feel that is how it was being pushed.   I can show video's of Biden, Fauci and others saying it prevents transmission.  They flat out were saying you won't get it and again this is where the clarity of what....the infection or the disease.  Maybe they were being intentionally vague and that in itself was wrong. 

Well the efficacy of the early variant was based off looking at general data and not actual trials where that would be the focus.  It was somewhat effective on the earliest variant....I just don't agree with the 90%.   I don't think there is a way to calculate that based off the information they were using.

Remember how much they pushed "pandemic of the unvaccinated" which was a complete crock of shit. 

Edited by Highmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

Donald disagrees with you, but he is known to lie quite often.

 

 

 

Are you calling Donny a liar?  :snack:

 

 

He never mandated anything nor would he have.

He was lied to by Fauci and Brix.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

That's indeed what I am talking about.

Developing of symptoms is the the best way to describe something as a disease.  If you have the virus, but zero symptoms that would be better described as a virus carrier than a sufferer of the disease, do you not agree?

I totally agree that the vaccines were being  push with data showing minimal impact of later strains.  It was however very good at early strain efficacy, you agree, correct?

Neal

 

They can nail the first strain on a Weekend at Bernies, but failed to provide protection on subsequent ones after 4 years at it?

You sure are one dumb brainwashed motherfucker.:lol:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Highmark said:

Agree on first question however I don't feel that is how it was being pushed.   I can show video's of Biden, Fauci and others saying it prevents transmission.  They flat out were saying you won't get it and again this is where the clarity of what....the infection or the disease.  

Well the efficacy of the early variant was based off looking at general data and not actual trials where that would be the focus.  It was somewhat effective on the earliest variant....I just don't agree with the 90%.   I don't think there is a way to calculate that based off the information they were using.

I agree, people shouldn't blindly follower Trump, Biden, or Faucci on the vaccine.  They should work on their own understanding and information gathering.

In the end, there was very minor negative impact from the vaccine, and the virus wasn't as deadly as was somewhat promoted.  We lucked out, not because of the MSM or government.

What data can you provide to show that it was "somewhat effective on the earlier variant" but not 90%?

What are you calling "somewhat effective"?

Neal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
Just now, NaturallyAspirated said:

I agree, people shouldn't blindly follower Trump, Biden, or Faucci on the vaccine.  They should work on their own understanding and information gathering.

In the end, there was very minor negative impact from the vaccine, and the virus wasn't as deadly as was somewhat promoted.  We lucked out, not because of the MSM or government.

What data can you provide to show that it was "somewhat effective on the earlier variant" but not 90%?

What are you calling "somewhat effective"?

Neal

I've looked at some information where they made the claim of 90% effective and again it boils down to what they are examining.   Infection or disease. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Highmark said:

I've looked at some information where they made the claim of 90% effective and again it boils down to what they are examining.   Infection or disease. 

Let's go with disease.  Infection would be unreasonable, as you could breathe in a single virus in your nostril and be considered infected.

Neal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SkisNH said:

Your response is to point out the typo and ignore the statement was factually correct. 

Sorry I didn't see it was a typo...

The vaccine very much did have the intended result on the first couple strains it was developed on.  The vaccine had very high efficacy rates.

Neal

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

Sorry I didn't see it was a typo...

The vaccine very much did have the intended result on the first couple strains it was developed on.  The vaccine had very high efficacy rates.

Neal

After 4 years they couldn't get any of the strains, but did the first one in a weekend?

What a gullible fool.:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, ArcticCrusher said:

He was lied to by Fauci and Brix.

So you're now saying he failed the Global IQ test. But only because he was lied to. Sounds reasonable :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
31 minutes ago, ArcticCrusher said:

 

He never mandated anything nor would he have.

He was lied to by Fauci and Brix.

He's still pushing "his" vaccine though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HSR said:

So you're now saying he failed the Global IQ test. But only because he was lied to. Sounds reasonable :lol:

He did his job to get a vax out.

He also claimed it wasn't needed as IVM and HCL worked.

Biden mandated the vax and you along with the other morons fell for it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
Just now, ArcticCrusher said:

He did his job to get a vax out.

He also claimed it wasn't needed as IVM and HCL worked.

Biden mandated the vax and you along with the other morons fell for it. 

 

Wait a minute. You've said many times the vax was out before covid was a thing. Now it wasn’t?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ArcticCrusher said:

He did his job to get a vax out.

He also claimed it wasn't needed as IVM and HCL worked.

Biden mandated the vax and you along with the other morons fell for it. 

 

 

Screenshot_20231204_133613_Samsung Internet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...