April 28, 2025 – In court documents submitted on behalf of the US Government in the case of Brook Jackson v. Pfizer/Ventavia, government attorneys admit Pfizer broke the rules during their 2020 clinical trials. In 2020, Jackson was an employee at Ventavia, the company conducting Pfizer’s clot shot clinical trial. During the trial, she witnessed data being falsified and trial protocols being violated, including the unblinding of trial participants, the suppression of adverse events, proof of negative efficacy, and vaccines being improperly stored (not to mention a poorly-trained staff). On September 25, 2020 she reached out to the FDA to tell them about what she had been witnessing, and ended up being fired within hours. Jackson subsequently decided to sue Pfizer under the False Claims Act on behalf of the United States (for more case details click here). On pages 11-12 of documents submitted today to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, government attorneys wrote in part, “In its motion to intervene and dismiss, the government explained that it had ‘investigated and evaluated’ relator’s claims, and that while ‘a defendant’s fraud in inducing FDA to authorize or approve a product’ could serve as the basis for a claim under the FCA, the government had concluded that relator’s claim was not viable for two reasons… First, the FDA was aware of the protocol violations allegedly witnessed by relator [Jackson] before it granted Pfizer emergency use authorization for its vaccine… Second, the government explained that it has ‘had continued access’ to the Pfizer vaccine clinical trial data, and in the FDA’s view, Pfizer’s vaccine is effective… The government further explained that discovery and litigation obligations associated with the case would place significant burdens on FDA, HHS, and the Department of Justice, and that the government should not be required to bear such burdens on a case ‘inconsistent with its public health policy.’” In other words, the FDA knew Pfizer allowed Ventavia to run bad trials, alter data and suppress adverse events, and then decided to give their product an emergency use authorization anyway. This is the complete opposite of what the FDA is supposed to do. Moreover, the government is claiming that simply because they have a “health policy” in place, they shouldn’t be forced to meet any of the obligations associated with the case because it might interfere with their rubber-stamping normal responsibilities – which they didn’t do in the first place when they approved the “vaccine” for emergency use. It’s almost hard to believe. Update (5/4/25): Jackson joins Maria Zeee on the Daily Pulse to discuss developments in the case.
Original post with update: March 12, 2024 – Alex Berenson publishes an important article at his Substack about the “insane overreach of the PREP Act.” The piece tells the story of a 14-year-old boy named Tanner Smith who went into a local high school in North Carolina in August of 2021 for a COVID test while his stepdad waited outside. Unfortunately for him, the location also doubled as a COVID vaccination center. When the supposed do-gooders inside told him he needed the shot, he responded by telling them he was just there to take a test. But because a simple “no” is never good enough for those who claim to “follow the science,” one of the dupes administering the jabs called his mother to get authorization – but she didn’t answer. Another dupe then suggested they “give it to him anyway,” without first trying to contact Tanner’s stepdad who, as I mentioned, was right outside. Fast forwarding a bit, Tanner and his mother sued the county’s board of education, and the company responsible for vaccinating him, for battery and for violating his constitutional rights in August of 2022. And while you would think the suit should have been a no-brainer, NC state judge Lora Cubbage thought otherwise and dismissed the suit with prejudice in February of 2023 – which means the suit cannot be filed again. The family appealed, but to no avail. Last week, a three judge panel serving on North Carolina’s Court of Appeals unanimously upheld Cubbage’s ruling citing the PREP Act. For the court’s reasoning, and some details on a couple of other cases that were recently dismissed, check out Berenson’s article. Update (3/21/25): The North Carolina Supreme Court overturns the court of appeals decision, paving the way Emily Happel and her son Tanner Smith to sue. (Added 4/13/25)
Original post with update: December 22, 2022 – The Florida Supreme Court approves Governor Ron DeSantis’ request to impanel a grand jury for the purpose of investigating COVID vaccine injuries and the companies manufacturing the COVID vaccines in order to “bring legal accountability for those who committed misconduct.” Update (1/7/25): The grand jury releases their final report revealing they found no evidence of criminal wrongdoing. The report reads in part, “While we did not find criminal activity, we did find a pattern of deceptive and obfuscatory behavior on the part of sponsors and regulators that often straddled the line between ethical and unethical conduct. More importantly, however, not finding any indictable criminal activity does not mean we did not find any problems. On the contrary, there are profound and serious issues involving the process of vaccine development and safety surveillance in the United States. Some of those are acute, COVID-19-era problems that are unlikely to occur outside the context of another once-in-a hundred-year pandemic. Others, however, are systemic; they will occur over and over until someone fixes them. Unfortunately, all these complications have something in common: They involve multinational corporations and federal regulators. The ability of sovereign states like Florida to resolve these issues or even influence these entities directly may be limited. This Grand Jury finds itself in the awkward position of advocating for a series of changes to a group of private and public entities who did not ask for them and are unlikely to be particularly interested in adopting them. Still, we feel compelled to point to what we have seen, if only to make the general public aware of the extent to which the massive systems upon which we depend for our health and welfare [have] failed to serve their interests.
Regarding the clinical trials and pharmacovigilance of MRNA-1273and BNT162b2, it was genuinely striking to us just how many of the problems we found occurred at either the direction or acquiescence of the FDA, CDC and other federal regulators. Nearly every time we found an issue with MRNA-1273 or BNT162b2, the fingerprints of these agencies were all over the scene, advising that the flagship and surrogate clinical trials be performed in specific ways, authorizing dose after dose and formulation after formulation based on out-of-date immunogenicity comparisons and observational results, and even running interference for sponsors by misleading the American public about validated safety signals. These regulatory issues are magnified in the context of vaccines, where consumers have effectively zero ability to hold manufacturers legally responsible for their injuries.” (Added 2/18/25)
Original post with updates: November 30, 2023 – Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issues a press release announcing he has sued Pfizer “for unlawfully misrepresenting the effectiveness of the company’s COVID-19 vaccine and attempting to censor public discussion of the product (the full petition can be read here). Pfizer engaged in false, deceptive, and misleading acts and practices by making unsupported claims regarding the company’s COVID-19 vaccine in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. The pharmaceutical company’s widespread representation that its vaccine possessed 95% efficacy against infection was highly misleading. That metric represented a calculation of the so-called ‘relative risk reduction’ for vaccinated individuals in Pfizer’s initial, two-month clinical trial results. FDA publications indicate ‘relative risk reduction’ is a misleading statistic that ‘unduly influence[s]’ consumer choice. Pfizer was also put on notice at that time that vaccine protection could not accurately be predicted beyond two months. Nevertheless, Pfizer fostered a misleading impression that vaccine protection was durable and withheld from the public information that undermined its claims about the duration of protection. And, despite the fact that its clinical trial failed to measure whether the vaccine protects against transmission, Pfizer embarked on a campaign to intimidate the public into getting the vaccine as a necessary measure to protect their loved ones. In fact, Pfizer’s product failed to live up to the company’s representations. COVID-19 cases increased after widespread vaccine administration, and some areas saw a greater percentage of deaths from COVID-19 among the vaccinated population than the unvaccinated. When the failure of its product became apparent, Pfizer then pivoted to silencing truth-tellers.” Is it any wonder why the death cult and their army of miscreants have been going after this guy with both barrels? Update (12/6/23): American Thinker publishes an article about why the lawsuit will likely fail. Update 2 (12/30/24): Citing the PREP Act, Northern Texas District Judge Sam Cummings dismisses the case. Update 3 (1/8/25): Paxton appeals the decision. (Added 1/23/25)
Considering the “vaccine” NEVER prevented COVID, I’d say Tweets like this one (link here) from Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla are quite misleading. Then, of course, there’s this…
November 30, 2024 – An article is published at the An Insult to Intuition Substack titled, “Another Desperate Move By Pro-Vax Propagandists.” Back in 2019, a book was published in Israel titled Turtles All The Way Down: Vaccine Science and Myth (the book was subsequently published in English and that version has been available since July of 2022). The book references more than 1,200 scientific studies from mainstream medical journals and health institutions like the CDC, the FDA and the WHO, which has ultimately made it difficult to refute. To get around that, a new book was published earlier this month with a very similar title – Turtles All The Way Down: In Search of Turtles Truth in All Vaccination. The book even has near-identical cover art (see below). According to Madhava Setty, author of the linked article, the book “has so far received 17 reviews on Amazon, all 1-star (the lowest possible rating) by readers who thought they were buying Mary Holland’s book and instead ended up with 260 pages of pro-vaccine propaganda written by Mira Holden with a nearly identical title and cover. I don’t know who author Mira Holden is. It’s obviously a nom de plume chosen for obvious reasons but by whom? More importantly, who paid the hidden author for their time and effort to engage in such blatant misdirection? The effort will most certainly backfire. That’s how desperate they are getting.” Desperate is one way to put it, shameful and pathetic would be another… For some background on the original book see this. (Added 1/2/25)
