Tag: pfizer

Pfizer Freezes Air Traffic Control Funds in Poland and Romania Over COVID Vaccine Contract Dispute

Pfizer has frozen funds owed to air traffic control agencies in Poland and Romania as part of a contract dispute over COVID-19 vaccine deliveries, according to a report published July 31 by Children’s Health Defense [1]. The freeze followed an April 1 ruling by a court in Brussels that ordered Poland to pay about $1.5 billion and Romania about $640 million, plus interest and fees, for vaccine doses ordered under a 2021 European Union contract.

Polish and Romanian authorities stopped accepting further deliveries in 2022, citing falling demand. Both governments have said they will appeal the ruling. The enforcement action has raised questions about the financial stability of the two countries’ air navigation agencies, which rely on the funds.

Contract Origins and Refused Deliveries

The contract was signed between the European Commission and Pfizer in 2021, and it obligated participating member states to purchase additional doses. By 2022, Poland and Romania refused scheduled deliveries as demand declined. Poland cited financial pressure from hosting refugees fleeing Ukraine. Romanian political scientist Dragos Moldoveanu said Romania ordered 120 million doses despite a population below 20 million and had one of the European Union’s lowest vaccination rates.

Pfizer filed suit in 2023 after the countries did not pay for doses they declined to accept. Earlier contract terms had already drawn criticism. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism reported in February 2021 that Pfizer was demanding countries put up sovereign assets as collateral for expected vaccine injury lawsuits [2].

Legal Enforcement and Appeals

Because the contract is governed by Belgian law, the case is being heard in Brussels. Polish public broadcaster TVP World reported that Poland asked the Belgian court to delay enforcement while it appeals, but the request was rejected.

Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst called the action “outrageous and unethical” and said it could endanger flights. Lukasz Wojdyga of the Warsaw Enterprise Institute said the creditor has a legal right to enforce the judgment but called targeting air-safety funding “disproportionate and irresponsible.” Both governments have said they will protect the financial stability of the agencies and keep services running.

Transparency and Contract Scrutiny

The dispute has revived scrutiny of the EU vaccine procurement. Brussels Signal reported the EU-Pfizer contract was worth 35 billion euros ($40 billion), one of the largest contract awards in EU history. Governments and Pfizer have declined to release contract terms, saying the information is commercially confidential [3].

The European Court of Justice ruled in 2024 that the European Commission violated EU law when it denied The New York Times’ request to review text messages between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla [4]. In 2025, a court ordered the disclosure of concealed texts related to the deal [5]. European Parliament member Gheorghe Piperea said the contract “ought never to have existed” because the EU exceeded its treaty powers. Transparency activist Frederic Baldan said von der Leyen negotiated directly with Bourla through self-destructing Signal messages, and that a Belgian Federal Police anti-corruption report found sufficient elements to establish offenses. Baldan said the European Public Prosecutor’s Office moved to have the investigation annulled.

The scale of the purchases also drew criticism from public health writers. Michel Chossudovsky questioned how a vaccine that normally takes years to develop was launched within months [6]. Joseph Mercola and Ronnie Cummins noted that the trials’ only criterion of success was a reduction of moderate to severe symptoms, not prevention of infection [7].

Keep reading

Clinical Trial Results Were Clear: Pfizer’s COVID Vaccine Delivered More Risk Than Benefit

U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s recent decision to terminate the COVID-19 emergency use authorization (EUA) declarations invites reconsideration of the evidence that launched this extraordinary regulatory chapter.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) first EUA for a COVID-19 vaccine rested on its determination that the known and potential benefits of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine outweighed its known and potential risks. Yet the pivotal trial report did not bring those benefits and risks together within a common quantitative framework.

Better late than never: more than five years later, I did — and what I found was startling.

At first glance, the famous 95% efficacy against protocol-defined, laboratory-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 — based on eight versus 162 cases in a trial that randomized 43,548 participants — seems highly promising.

But when this finding is considered alongside the broader set of participant-relevant outcomes (dispersed across the trial publication, its Supplementary Appendix, and the contemporaneous FDA review materials), the overall clinical picture looks markedly different.

Depending on the counting period used, the vaccine group had 2-8 fewer cases of severe COVID-19, whereas the safety data showed numerical excesses of 4-101 participants across clinically consequential adverse-event categories. These categories are not directly comparable, and some may overlap.

Even so, the evidence did not establish that the vaccine’s clinically consequential benefits outweighed its potential harms. Nor did the trial establish that vaccination reduced the overall burden of COVID-19-like symptoms, let alone that it reduced person-to-person transmission.

Crucially, this conclusion does not rest on hindsight: the relevant evidence was already before the FDA when it issued the EUA.

The full basis for this conclusion is presented in my comprehensive reassessment of the evidence, currently available as a preprint. That reassessment is necessarily detailed because the relevant data are complex, scattered across multiple documents and subject to important methodological and interpretive qualifications.

The present column is not intended to replace that analysis, but to distill several of its central findings and implications for a broader readership.

Keep reading

CDC Awards Pfizer $1.24 Billion for COVID Vaccines for Kids and Adults

The roughly $735 million pediatric and $505 million adult COVID-19 vaccine grants cover 2026 and 2027, according to federal records. The monetary infusion has revived debate among critics and public health experts around the safety and efficacy of the vaccines and reliance on mRNA technology.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) recent decision to award Pfizer $1.24 billion for COVID-19 vaccines has renewed debate over the government’s continued investment in mRNA technology.

The contracts, awarded on June 1, include about $735.7 million for pediatric COVID-19 vaccines and nearly $505.3 million for adult doses for fiscal year 2026-2027.

Critics say the funding reflects a continued commitment to vaccines associated with high rates of serious injuries and deaths, and a lack of adequate safety testing and monitoring.

Public health experts argue the investment is necessary to protect vulnerable populations and prepare for future outbreaks.

The latest contracts come as mRNA technology expands beyond COVID-19.

A recent review in Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics found that mRNA-based therapeutics were identified in more than 550 registered clinical trials. The authors reported that more than 90% of the projects involved mRNA vaccines and that most products remain in early-stage testing before broader adoption.

‘Unnecessary and often harmful injections’

The procurement of monetary resources signals that federal officials intend to continue investing heavily in mRNA technology despite declining public demand and ongoing controversy over vaccine safety monitoring, critics say.

Jeffrey Tucker, president and founder of the Brownstone Institute, told The Defender there was “no scientific justification” or “market demand” for the latest mRNA vaccine funding.

“This raises a serious question concerning how these captured agencies really work,” Tucker said. “We are talking about vast amounts of tax dollars flowing to support unnecessary and often harmful injections.”

Keep reading

CDC Awards Pfizer $1.24 Billion For COVID Vaccines For Kids And Adults

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) recent decision to award Pfizer $1.24 billion for COVID-19 vaccines has renewed debate over the government’s continued investment in mRNA technology.

The contracts, awarded on June 1, include about $735.7 million for pediatric COVID-19 vaccines and nearly $505.3 million for adult doses for fiscal year 2026-2027.

Critics say the funding reflects a continued commitment to vaccines associated with high rates of serious injuries and deaths, and a lack of adequate safety testing and monitoring.

Public health experts argue the investment is necessary to protect vulnerable populations and prepare for future outbreaks.

The latest contracts come as mRNA technology expands beyond COVID-19.

A recent review in Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics found that mRNA-based therapeutics were identified in more than 550 registered clinical trials. The authors reported that more than 90% of the projects involved mRNA vaccines and that most products remain in early-stage testing before broader adoption.

‘Unnecessary and often harmful injections’

The procurement of monetary resources signals that federal officials intend to continue investing heavily in mRNA technology despite declining public demand and ongoing controversy over vaccine safety monitoring, critics say.

Jeffrey Tucker, president and founder of the Brownstone Institute, told The Defender there was “no scientific justification” or “market demand” for the latest mRNA vaccine funding.

“This raises a serious question concerning how these captured agencies really work,” Tucker said. “We are talking about vast amounts of tax dollars flowing to support unnecessary and often harmful injections.”

Keep reading

Lyme Vaccine Clinical Trials: History Repeating?

Why is there so much controversy surrounding Lyme disease? Why does it seem you can’t get an accurate Lyme disease test?

The State of Lyme

The incidence of Lyme disease is approaching half a million cases per year in the United States, according to a 2021 Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) report based on data from commercial insurance claims. Yet fewer than 40,000 cases are reported to the CDC in any given year, exposing a massive discrepancy between the actual prevalence of the disease and the few cases that meet the CDC’s surveillance reporting definition.

Despite its alarming incidence rate and often catastrophic effects on human health, there has been little advancement in diagnostic and therapeutic technologies for Lyme in the last 40 years. The CDC and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) continually support only the use of outdated serological techniques that are known to be inadequate, while simultaneously acknowledging that better tests are needed. The reasons for such double-speak and neglect are inextricably intertwined with the sordid history of Lyme disease vaccines.

Lyme vaccine development has continued for the last three decades despite evidence that the causative organism—the spirochetal bacteria Borrelia burgdorferi—evades immunity in multiple ways that may make it impossible for a vaccine to prevent infection. The most recent effort, a candidate known as VLA-15 from Pfizer and French biotech Valneva, is now in phase III trials. Last February it was revealed that due to alleged violations of good clinical practice, Pfizer had shut down all trial sites run by contractor Care Access, eliminating roughly half of the enrolled participants.

Pfizer’s record of “engaging in illegal and corrupt marketing practices, bribing physicians and suppressing adverse trial results” may alone warrant suspicion about their recent actions. But in the context of a Lyme vaccine, suspicion should be heightened. The last Lyme vaccine on the market, SmithKline Beecham’s LYMErix, was withdrawn in 2002 amid numerous injury claims, federal agency hearings, and class action lawsuits. Which begs the question, is history repeating?

Stepping back three decades

In June 1994, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) devoted a lengthy meeting to the three companies that had Lyme vaccines in development. According to the official meeting transcript, the primary order of business was to answer the question, “Is the CDC case definition for Lyme disease appropriate for a pivotal efficacy trial?”

Why would this even be a question? The standard diagnostics at the time—mainly the ELISA, a serologic assay that measures antibodies produced against the bacteria—were known to produce a large proportion of false negatives. When the CDC discontinued routine testing of samples in its labs in 1988, it stated in a letter to the Oregon Public Health Laboratory that the sensitivity of the ELISA ranged from 13% to 27% in clinically recognized cases. Obviously, this would hamper any trial operator’s ability to assess possible Lyme infection and the vaccine’s overall effectiveness. If you can’t diagnose cases, how can you determine whether your vaccine works?

Keep reading

Secret Trial of Pfizer RSV Vaccine Killed Two Infants in the 1960s — Their Families Just Sued the U.S. Government

The families of two Black infants who died during a 1960s experimental RSV vaccine trial have filed a federal lawsuit against the U.S., alleging government researchers enrolled the babies in a dangerous medical experiment without their parents’ knowledge or consent, The New York Times reported.

The lawsuit, filed May 22 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleges the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and other researchers, in 1965 and 1966, subjected dozens of infants — most or all of them from low-income Black families — to testing of Pfizer’s Lot 100 experimental vaccine for respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV.

Two infants, Victor Marcellus King and Ross Otto Hambrick, later died after developing vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD), a severe respiratory illness caused by the vaccine.

VAERD occurs when a vaccinated child who never had RSV is exposed to the virus and develops a more severe case of RSV than they would have if they hadn’t received the vaccine.

The suit was filed by Sharlette Hambrick and Darius King, acting as representatives of the estates of their deceased brothers. They allege federal researchers failed to obtain informed consent from the children’s parents, withheld critical information about prior vaccine failures, and continued the study despite mounting evidence that the vaccine was causing severe reactions in participants.

The complaint also alleges that the tissue samples from the babies who died were later used to develop the RSV vaccines and monoclonal antibody shots that have been approved in the last several years — providing a financial boon for drugmakers.

“Medical research in the United States has a long, troubled racial history,” the complaint states, comparing the alleged conduct to other notorious examples of unethical experimentation involving Black Americans, including the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and the exploitation of Henrietta Lacks.

The infants’ families were unaware the babies had been subjected to the experiment until a reporter from Undark magazine contacted them while investigating the story in 2023.

The reporter found the babies’ names in a doctor’s government-issued laboratory notebook and other paperwork from the clinical trial, the Times reported.

Parents not told infants were being enrolled in trial for experimental vaccine

Keep reading

Elon Musk Reveals COVID Vaccine Injury After Former Pfizer Official Admits Shots Likely Killed Tens of Thousands in Germany

In an X post that went viral Sunday, Elon Musk said he “felt like I was dying” and almost went to the hospital after taking his second COVID-19 vaccine.

Musk was responding to an X post about how Dr. Helmut Sterz, Pfizer’s former chief toxicologist, admitted last month during a German COVID-19 Inquiry that an estimated 60,000 people have died in Germany from Pfizer’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, Comirnaty.

According to Sterz, the Paul Ehrlich Institute, Germany’s regulatory and research institute for vaccines and biomedicines, has received 2,133 reports of death following Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.

He said, “These spontaneous reports likely have a high number of unreported cases due to underreporting. The true number is therefore much higher.”

“In the U.S., it is assumed that there is an underreporting factor of 30 by which the registered cases would have to be multiplied. For Germany, this would correspond to 60,000 deaths from the vaccination,” Sterz said.

Sterz told the German commissioners that Pfizer’s post-marketing report mentioned 1,200 suspected deaths within just two months of the shot’s approval.

“At that point, Comirnaty should have been withdrawn from the market,” Sterz said.

Pfizer skipped key safety studies due to ‘time constraints’

Sterz also testified that “due to time constraints,” Pfizer didn’t conduct vital safety checks on its COVID-19 vaccine before rolling it out to the public. For instance, the vaccine maker skipped carcinogenicity studies that would have examined whether the shots had cancer-causing properties.

Pfizer also failed to study the vaccine’s impact on pregnancy.

Sterz called for a new and independent scientific review of the COVID-19 vaccines’ long-term effects. “We need proper independent safety studies to understand what really happened. Without full transparency, people will not trust the conclusions,” he said, according to GB News.

He said the high number of negative side effects associated with the vaccines warrants pausing them, and other vaccines that use similar technology, until independent studies show they are safe.

Keep reading

Big Pharma Giants Pfizer and BioNTech Forced to Shut Down COVID-19 Booster Shot Trials After Americans Refuse to Be Guinea Pigs

Major Big Pharma companies have abruptly halted their latest COVID-19 mRNA “booster” trial because they literally couldn’t find enough willing participants.

After years of gaslighting the American public, raking in hundreds of billions in profits from experimental shots that were shoved down our throats under the guise of “public health,” the same corporations that partnered with the Biden regime, Anthony Fauci, and the lying mainstream media are now facing the cold, hard reality: Americans are done being lab rats.

According to internal letters sent to trial investigators and obtained by Reuters, Pfizer is ending its study of “updated” shots in healthy adults aged 50 to 64.

The company admitted it was “unable to generate relevant data” because recruitment had effectively hit a brick wall.

Reports indicate that more than 80% of potential recruits didn’t even make it past pre-screening, or simply refused to participate.

The trial, which aimed to enroll a massive 25,000 to 30,000 participants, folded after failing to meet even the most basic enrollment targets.

This comes at a time when the “science” is being scrutinized like never before. Under the current administration, the FDA has been pressured to actually require randomized placebo-controlled trials, the very thing skeptics have been demanding for years.

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

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