Tag: big pharma

Bayer’s Monsanto sues mRNA COVID-19 vaccine makers

Bayer’s agrochemicals unit Monsanto has filed lawsuits in the US against the manufacturers of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, claiming that they used its patent-protected technology in their products.

One lawsuit – filed in a federal court in Delaware – asserts that Pfizer/BioNTech’s Comirnaty and Moderna’s Spikevax vaccines, which generated tens of billions of dollars in revenues during the pandemic, used technology developed by Monsanto in the 1980s designed to eliminate ‘problem’ coding sequences in the building blocks of cells “to improve mRNA stability and the amount or quality of protein produced” in crops.

The technology was awarded a US patent in 2010 (No. 7,741,118) and is not due to expire until June 2027. According to the suit, Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna used it to stabilise their mRNA vaccines.

“To develop effective mRNA medicines, defendants needed to stabilise the mRNA molecule and optimise its protein expression,” it claims, adding that they “optimised and manufactured their infringing mRNA vaccine products starting with a DNA template” and using Monsanto’s patented process.

Meanwhile, Reuters has also reported that Bayer independently filed a similar lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson in a New Jersey federal court, contending that a DNA-based process the company used in manufacturing its adenovirus vector-based COVID-19 vaccine also infringes the patent.

The shot – known as the Janssen vaccine – won emergency authorisations in the US and other markets and made blockbuster sales in the pandemic before its use diminished due to concerns about rare clotting side effects. It was withdrawn from sale in the US in 2023.

While sales are well down on their peak, Comirnaty brought in worldwide revenues of more than $3.3 billion for Pfizer and BioNTech last year, with Moderna earning $3.2 billion from Spikevax.

Bayer has said it does not intend to do anything that would restrict the commercial use of the COVID-19 vaccines – although, that is already being achieved due to changing immunisation policies in the US under the Trump administration – but is seeking damages “in an amount adequate to compensate” for the infringement of its intellectual property and royalties on sales.

Keep reading

Pfizer Says Lyme Vaccine Missed Trial Target, Will Still Seek Approval

Pfizer and its partner Valneva said on March 23 that their experimental Lyme disease vaccine did not meet the target in a clinical trial, but that the results were strong enough that the firms will seek regulatory approval for the shot.

The vaccine, known as LB6V, was about 75 percent efficacious in reducing confirmed Lyme in recipients compared with placebo recipients, the companies said. The efficacy was measured one day after the fourth vaccine dose, and was similar to the 73 percent efficacy observed 28 days after the fourth shot.

The drugmakers said that because there were fewer Lyme cases than expected during the trial, dubbed VALOR, the predetermined statistical target was not met. However, because the efficacy was “clinically meaningful,” the companies expressed confidence in the shot and said they would be filing for approval.

“The efficacy shown in the VALOR study of more than 70 percent is highly encouraging and creates confidence in the vaccine’s potential to protect against this disease that can be debilitating,” Annaliesa Anderson, Pfizer’s chief vaccines officer, said in a statement.

Valneva CEO Thomas Lingelbach said: “[The results] bring us a step closer to our goal of delivering a much-needed vaccine.

“We are grateful to our partner Pfizer for their strong commitment which we both share in developing this vaccine as quickly as possible.”

Keep reading

Owners and CEO of Wholesale Pharmaceutical Company Sentenced for Distributing More Than $92M of Black-Market HIV Drugs

Two owners of a pharmaceutical wholesale company were sentenced Friday to a total of 38 years in prison for orchestrating a complex, nationwide drug diversion scheme that harmed vulnerable HIV-positive patients, placed countless others at risk, and corrupted the supply chain for prescription drugs in the United States.

“Patrick and Charles Boyd did not just commit fraud and cost taxpayers millions of dollars, they preyed upon some of the most vulnerable members of our society: HIV patients who depend on life-saving treatments to manage their disease,” said Assistant Attorney General A. Tysen Duva of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “Fraud schemes like this one undermine the integrity of our supply chain for necessary prescription drugs. These defendants will rightly spend years in prison for their reprehensible conduct, which took advantage of people for illicit profit. This case is another example of how the Criminal Division, our United States Attorney partner in the Southern District of Florida, and law enforcement will pursue and seek convictions of those who defraud our systems, endanger our citizens, and seek to line their pockets with fraud proceeds.”

“These defendants treated life-saving HIV medication like street contraband,” said U.S. Attorney Jason A. Reding Quiñones for the Southern District of Florida. “They bought drugs off the street from black-market suppliers, shipped them in dirty boxes and discarded packaging, falsified paperwork, and pushed those medications back into the legitimate pharmaceutical supply chain. The consequences were real. HIV patients received bottles containing the wrong drugs, and at least one patient lost consciousness after ingesting medication that should never have been in that bottle. As a former military prosecutor, federal prosecutor, and trial judge, I have seen how greed can drive dangerous schemes. When criminals gamble with patient safety for profit, federal prison is the result.”

“Friday’s sentence underscores the extreme danger these defendants created,” said Acting Deputy Inspector General for Investigations Scott J. Lampert of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General (HHS‑OIG). “They took life‑threatening actions that showed an alarming disregard for human life in service of nothing more than a payday. Their criminal scheme endangered vulnerable patients, put entire communities at risk, and undermined the integrity of Medicare and Medicaid. HHS‑OIG will continue working with our law enforcement partners — and using every tool in our arsenal — to pursue and dismantle illegal black‑market rings that seek to corrupt the nation’s drug supply and exploit taxpayer‑funded health care programs.”

Keep reading

AP Shills For Big Pharma Antidepressants With ‘Bewildering’ Hit Piece

Cruising through X last week a weird story caught my eye: it reported that The Food and Drug Administration’s top drug regulator, Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg, was trying to hire a “friend” who wants the FDA to add warnings to antidepressants about “unproven pregnancy risks.” The story makes several claims that are bewildering and appear to be fabricated. I sent several questions to AP’s global health editor Jonathan Fahey, but he did not respond to repeated requests to explain the article’s puzzling errors.

AP reporter Matthew Perrone later blocked me on X. I’ve pasted my email to Fahey at the bottom of this article.

The person AP’s Matthew Perrone identifies as a “friend” of FDA’s Hoeg is Dr. Adam Urato, chief of maternal-fetal medicine at Metro West Medical Center in Massachusetts.

One passage in the AP story stood out to me:

Within the agency, Hoeg’s close relationship with Urato is viewed as a clear conflict of interest that, under normal FDA standards, would result in her recusing herself from any work on the petition. But Hoeg is actively working to speed up the agency’s review of her friend’s proposal, according to the people familiar with the situation.

I have never seen the term “friend” defined as a “conflict of interest” by any federal agency. Nor have I run across “friend” defined as a “conflict of interest” in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. It’s a conflict of interest that doesn’t seem to exist.

And I happen to know quite a bit about conflicts of interest in science, because I’m an expert on the matter.

While I was a Senate staffer, I wrote a law on conflicts of interest called the Physicians Payments Sunshine Act. The bill I wrote was later passed into law and you can now go look up doctors on the government’s Open Payments website to see who is giving them money. I’m sure AP reporters use this website all the time. During my time in the Senate, I also helped to reform conflicts of interest at the National Institutes of Health. This took thousands of hours, untold numbers of meetings, and years of work to complete.

When I left the Senate and joined the Safra Ethics Center at Harvard, I was celebrated as the “Father of Sunshine” for this work to reform conflicts of interest in medicine.

Confused by the AP’s confusing reporting, I contacted Health and Human Services (HHS) and FDA, sending them almost the exact same questions that I sent to AP’s Jonathan Fahey.

“Being a friend is not a violation of ethics or conflicts of interests’ laws,” wrote HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon, in an email. Several senior FDA officials told me that HHS doesn’t even have a legal definition for what a “friend” is and no government conflict of interest form asks people to identify who their friends are.

“It’s a hit piece from industry against Dr. Hoeg, who is doing an amazing job at the FDA,” said one FDA official.

Hoeg did not respond to requests for comment, but during a phone call, Urato told me the AP story was filled with fake facts. The FDA has not offered him a full-time job as AP reported, and if they did, he couldn’t take it as he has a full-time clinical practice with hundreds of patients. FDA has expressed interest in offering him a limited, part-time position as an “advisor,” but nothing has been formalized.

He’s known Hoeg for only a couple years, and met her once when he went to DC to testify in favor of a labelling change for antidepressants that warns pregnant women about the documented risks for fetuses.

“This whole thing is being made up, and it’s an absurdity,” Urato said. “I’m not close friends with her as we’ve only discussed work. But If I say I’m not friends with her, then it’s like saying I’m her enemy.”

Keep reading

Unlike other industries, vaccine manufacturers are shielded from safety design defects

The entire vaccine programme is one giant depopulation and profit extraction scam, with the childhood schedule being especially devastating in terms of both its fraud and potential lifelong harms.

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (“NCVIA”) of 1986 allowed for Big Pharma and its intelligence-industrial complex handlers to ramp up their injectable democide offerings without any consequences or even a need to bother pretending that they were not openly maiming and murdering innocents by producing a single randomised controlled trial (“RCT”) with placebo control; to wit:

It is painfully obvious by now that all vaccines are all risk and no reward whatsoever.  Read more: If All Vaccines Are Unsafe And Ineffective, Then Why Are They Being Foisted on Humanity?, 2nd Smartest Guy in the World, 2 February 2025

Keep reading

Declassified CIA files reveal chilling blueprint to manipulate Americans’ minds through covert drugging with vaccines

A newly released CIA document reveals a chilling blueprint to manipulate minds through covert drugging experiments.

The report, added to the CIA’s reading room in 2025, details the government’s once top-secret Project Artichoke that ran from 1951 to 1956, focusing on behavior control, interrogation techniques and psychological manipulation.

The seven-page document, titled ‘Special Research for Artichoke,’ with an attachment labeled ‘Suggested Fields for Special Research Relative Artichoke,’ outlines proposals to develop chemicals capable of altering human behavior.

It discusses drugs designed for both immediate effects, like truth serums and long-term influence, potentially administered through food, water, alcohol or cigarettes.

Researchers also suggested that such substances could be disguised in medical treatments such as vaccinations or injections.

The CIA was also looking into methods beyond chemicals, listing hypnosis, sensory deprivation, gases and other psychological methods for interrogation and behavioral control.

Artichoke served as a precursor to the CIA’s MKUltra program, which later broadened mind-altering experiments on a larger scale.

Many files were destroyed in the 1970s, leaving the full extent of the research and how far it progressed unknown.

The document was declassified in 1983, but has resurfaced on social media, where users are shocked to see the CIA discussing methods for ‘drugging entire populations.’

Project Artichoke emerged during the early Cold War, a period marked by intense anxiety over communist powers and reports of brainwashing techniques used on American prisoners of war in Korea. 

Internal CIA memos suggested that US intelligence feared enemy nations had developed ways to control human thought and behavior, prompting the agency to explore its own capabilities.

The declassified document reveals the depth of this research, noting the need for a study ‘to determine what drugs are best suited for direct use on subjects along the lines of amytal and pentothal and which drugs are best for an indirect or long-range approach to subjects.’ 

The researchers involved in the secret program emphasized that long-term compounds should be capable of producing ‘an agitating effect (producing anxiety, nervousness, tension, etc.) or a depressing effect (creating a feeling of despondency, hopelessness, lethargy, etc.).’ 

They also outlined practical considerations for concealment, such as substances that could be introduced surreptitiously in ‘food, water, Coca-Cola, beer, liquor, cigarettes, etc.,’ highlighting the CIA’s focus on undetectable methods of influence. 

Moreover, the report recommended consulting with the Army Chemical Warfare Service, noting they have conducted ‘exhaustive studies along these lines’ that could provide specific guidance for the program.

Beyond drugs, Artichoke explored a wide range of psychological tools. 

Keep reading

Former Australian Member of Parliament Says Pfizer and AstraZeneca Paid Lobbyists to Direct Australia’s Leaders to Push Vaccine Mandates

A former Australian member of Parliament came out and said Pfizer and AstraZeneca are paying lobbyists to direct Australia’s leaders to push vaccine mandates.Clive Palmer, leader of the United Australia Party claimed ousted New South Wales Premier Gladys Berejiklian was told she wouldn’t be charged in a corruption probe if she imposed a vaccine mandate.Palmer made these statements a couple weeks ago but it has garnered a lot of attention this weekend after Berejiklian resigned in disgrace following a corruption probe.Two weeks ago, Palmer said Pfizer and AstraZeneca were paying lobbyists tens of millions of dollars to direct Australia’s liberal leaders to push the double jab.According to Palmer, Berejiklian, who was under a corruption probe by the ICAC at the time, was told if she imposed strict lockdowns and vaccine mandates, she wouldn’t be charged.Shortly before Berejiklian resigned, she told Sydney residents that if they don’t take the Covid jab, they face total social isolation indefinitely after the stay-at-home order ends in December.Berejiklian made history for overseeing one of the most fascistic regimes in modern history like nothing we have witnessed in the Western world.It appears she was bowing to Big Pharma lobbyists and special interest groups once again proving Covid mandates have NOTHING to do with science or saving lives.Clive Palmer told reporters of Berejiklian: “The only way she gets out of the inquiry is if she pushes the double jab.”A lefty reporter pushed back on Clive Palmer: “You think the premier of New South Wales is trying to destroy businesses?”“I do,” Palmer replied. “She’s being directed by lobbyists in Sydney, who is being paid by AstraZeneca and by Pfizer tens of millions of dollars to get these policies through, to make sure the vaccines get pushed…that’s my personal knowledge and I’m happy to make a statement here, to police, to anyone.”

Keep reading

Rand Paul Introduces Bill to Strip Vaccine Manufacturers of Nationwide Liability Immunity

On Wednesday, U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced federal legislation that would dismantle the long-standing liability protections shielding vaccine manufacturers from civil lawsuits in the United States.

CDC data confirm millions of injury reports submitted following vaccination, though an HHS–Harvard Pilgrim analysis concluded the agency’s vaccine tracking system captures fewer than 1% of adverse events.

The bill, S.3853, formally titled “A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to end the liability shield for vaccine manufacturers, and for other purposes,” was introduced on February 11, 2026, and referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP).

The measure is cosponsored by Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT).

If enacted, the legislation would amend federal law to remove legal protections that have insulated vaccine manufacturers from product-liability lawsuits since 1986.

The Legal Structure Targeted

The liability shield stems from the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, which created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP).

Under that framework, individuals claiming vaccine-related injury must generally pursue claims through a federal compensation system rather than through traditional civil litigation.

Manufacturers are broadly protected from design-defect claims and most tort actions in state courts.

The legal architecture was justified at the time as necessary to prevent vaccine market collapse amid rising lawsuits.

S.3853 would directly amend the Public Health Service Act to eliminate those protections.

Although the full statutory text has not yet been published, the bill’s title makes clear that its purpose is not procedural reform but termination of the federal liability shield itself.

Keep reading

Moderna threatens American jobs after FDA snubs mRNA flu shot, trial looked ‘scientifically lax’

For years before he became director of the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, epidemiologist Vinay Prasad openly railed against what he perceived as the shoddy design of drug trials and the deference regulators gave them, sending biotech stocks tumbling when Commissioner Marty Makary appointed him.

A vaccine maker that hit the federal jackpot during COVID-19 acted caught off-guard when the former University of California San Francisco medical professor put his gripes into practice, halting its FDA application for a new mRNA flu vaccine based on what he considered weak trial design.

Moderna accused Prasad, who described his predecessor Peter Marks as a “bobblehead” for drug approval, of changing the rules in the middle of the game by refusing to review its biologics license application (BLA) without citing “specific safety or efficacy concerns.”

Prasad’s Feb. 3 “refusal to file” letter – which Moderna posted a week later on its COVID resources page for some reason – says the FDA warned the company before it even started the mRNA flu trial that the proposed design raised red flags.

“CBER does not consider the application to contain a trial ‘adequate and well-controlled’ and the application is therefore, on its’ [sic] face, inadequate for review,” because the control arm “does not reflect the best-available standard of care in the United States at the time of the study,” Prasad said, which was “consistent with FDA’s advice” before the study.

This was just the agency’s “preliminary review of the application and is not indicative of deficiencies that would be identified later,” when the FDA conducts a “substantive review,” Prasad emphasized, implying fresh hurdles for Moderna even if it runs a new trial.

Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel responded with his own thinly veiled threat against Prasad, who had already left the administration once under assault from populist and corporate conservatives who blasted his avowed support for progressive policies and more regulation before Prasad joined the administration. 

CBER’s decision, which Bancel reiterated “did not identify any safety or efficacy concerns with our product, does not further our shared goal of enhancing America’s leadership in developing innovative medicines,” said the billionaire Frenchman, who came to Boston-based Moderna from French diagnostics company BioMerieux.

“We look forward to engaging with CBER to understand the path forward as quickly as possible so that America’s seniors, and those with underlying conditions, continue to have access to American-made innovations,” Bancel said, hinting the company would take jobs overseas if the FDA continued its current trajectory.

Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson Andrew Nixon told Just the News Moderna ignored “very clear FDA guidance from 2024 to test its product in a clinical trial against a CDC-recommended flu vaccine to compare safety and efficacy.”

Keep reading

The Most Unsettling Reality About Modern Medicine

There’s a reason doctors love pushing vaccines. The more they inject, the more money they make.

The foot traffic alone brings in big money, but there’s another perverse incentive, and once you hear it, it will make you angry.

RFK Jr. explains: “Pediatricians who vaccinate 80-85% of the kids in their office, get these giant bonuses… And that’s why they throw you out of the office if you fight back…You’ll lose them their bonuses.”

Sadly, these perverse financial incentives aren’t limited to vaccines but across many areas of medicine.

Dig a little deeper, and another disturbing pattern appears. And once you see it, you’re left gobsmacked by how dark modern medicine has become.

The video below is haunting—not because the doctor in it is malicious, but because she genuinely believes she’s helping.

She’s an MD with a Master’s in Public Health, a Fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics, and a former leader at Georgetown. Her language is warm. Her intentions seem pure.

Yet this interview perfectly captures how public health has lost its way.

After conquering most deadly contagious diseases, it turned toward chronic illness—and failed.

Instead of questioning why children are getting sicker, it doubled down on vaccinating more, earlier, and without dissent, often dismissing safety concerns as heresy.

Watch this video. Then ask yourself what matters more in modern medicine: children’s outcomes—or institutional certainty.

Keep reading