Tag: pfizer

We know exactly how and why the DNA is in the Moderna and Pfizer vials

This past week has been epic for me. Not only did I have the extreme pleasure of volunteering alongside Kevin McKernan and Charles Rixey at Medicinal Genomics, but we have pretty much confirmed how the DNA is in the Moderna and Pfizer COVID shot vials.

Ages ago, when I was presenting the original findings that there was DNA in these vials, I was sleuthing how this happened by looking into the N1-methylpseudouridine modified RNA synthesis pathway as part of Process 2 manufacturing. Process 2 involved using a plasmid/E. coli system, don’t forget. And also don’t forget that this methodology was bait ‘n’ switched and was not safety tested.

N1-methylpseudouridine has a higher melting temperature than Uridine.1 (Higher thermal energy or specific enzymatic activity is required to disrupt base pairing.) What this means in terms of it binding a cognate base is that it will require a very high temperature to rip them apart. Either that, or it will require a specific enzyme. Two examples of such specific enzymes are RNase-H (in us) and RNase-XT (on bench). It is well-known in nerdy science circles that DNase1 – the enzyme the COVID shot manufacturers used to chop up the DNA for endpoint synthesis cleaning – does not work on DNA:RNA hybrids.

Keep reading

Smoke, Mirrors, and the Pfizer Deal

Iam a mother. I have never been vaccinated myself. I believe deeply in informed consent. And I want to say clearly that I am hopeful about Bobby’s leadership at HHS. I want to believe that he can bring real transparency and accountability to a government that has too often cozied up to the corporations it is supposed to regulate.

But when I read the headlines about Trump’s “landmark” deal with Pfizer, I don’t feel hopeful. I feel misled.

We are told that Pfizer has committed $70 billion to research, development, and production here in the United States. That sounds impressive, like a historic victory for the American people. But the truth is, Pfizer already spends billions every year on research and development. That is simply the business they are in. Without that constant pipeline, they do not survive.

So what is really new here? Nothing at all. It is the same budget they were already going to spend, repackaged and sold as a bold new commitment. The difference now is that Pfizer gets something in return: tariff relief, political cover, and a government-backed direct-to-consumer program called TrumpRx.

That is what makes this deal so frustrating. Pfizer is not changing its behavior. They are not suddenly sacrificing profits or doing more for patients. They are being rewarded for business as usual, only now with added advantages that strengthen their market position even more. And we are being asked to celebrate it as if it is some great victory for ordinary families.

Every producer wants to cut out the middleman. I know this from my own life. As a meat producer, I do not want to pay one. As a vegetable producer, I do not want to pay one. As a content creator, I do not want to pay one. Nobody does. And now Pfizer, of all companies, is getting the official blessing of the US government to do exactly that.

This is the same Pfizer that misled the public during Covid. That is not a rumor, it is documented. Whistleblowers from trial sites described falsified records, patients who were not properly followed up after adverse events, and unqualified staff handling sensitive data. State attorneys general have accused Pfizer of downplaying serious risks, including heart inflammation in young men and pregnancy complications in women. 

Kansas has even claimed the company hid internal studies that showed risks while telling the public something different. And the most central promise of all, that the vaccines would stop transmission, simply was not true, even though the marketing never caught up to that reality.

Keep reading

Pfizer Left COVID-19 Vaccine Data Out Of Submissions To FDA, Documents Show

Data on how parts of a Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine spread in the bodies of mice were withheld from regulatory submissions to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, according to a new comparison of those submissions and similar documents sent to Japanese regulators.

Byram Bridle, who has a PhD in immunology and is an associate professor of immunology and virology at the University of Guelph in Canada, authored the comparison. It was dated Aug. 13 and released on Oct. 4 by Dr. Robert Malone, a vaccine adviser to the U.S. government.

“The findings of this report raise serious questions about the integrity of the health regulatory process during the declared COVID-19 pandemic,” Bridle said in his conclusions.

During a September meeting, under questioning by Malone, a Pfizer representative said that its studies of the spread of vaccine elements, known as biodistribution, were done in consultation with the FDA.

“Pfizer does not have a further comment other than we did our work in close consultation with the FDA on all our of biodistribution studies that were approved for our licensed product,” the representative said.

As Zachary Stieber details below, Malone told The Epoch Times that the images in the submissions appear to have been manipulated “to hide the fact that the biodistribution was much broader than the initial narrative that was promoted, which is that it stays at the site of injection and draining lymph nodes.”

He added: “That was clearly a lie, and it was a lie that we now know was supported by editing data that were presented to the FDA. And, according to what the Pfizer representative stated, that editing of data was done in cooperation and consultation between Pfizer and the FDA. That is completely unacceptable.”

Pfizer, BioNTech, and the FDA did not respond to requests for comment.

Keep reading

TrumpRx Is Obamacare in Trump’s Handwriting

This week, President Donald Trump announced the next in a long line of vanity projects: TrumpRX, a forthcoming, federally branded website where Pfizer sells steeply discounted drugs in exchange for a three-year exemption from his proposed 100 percent tariffs on imported pharmaceuticals. Imagine a strip mall furniture store with a permanent, flashy 70-percent-off sale, masking the fact that prices were inflated in the first place. TrumpRx, slated to launch in early 2026, is no different—a government-run platform that promises savings while hiding costs.

But this isn’t just another Trump-branded vanity project like the ill-fated Trump Steaks or Trump University. It’s a wild pivot in right-leaning political thought on health care, and it’s a gut punch for those who see where this road leads.

Flash back to 2016: Trump hammering the Affordable Care Act, calling it a “disaster” and suggesting that the government’s only role should be to ensure these companies have “plenty of money.” He was channeling what economists had long warned: Government-run health care distorts markets, creates perverse incentives, and collapses under its own weight. Now, the president is embracing the very heavy-handed tactics he once trashed.

Keep reading

Pfizer Strikes $70 Billion Deal with U.S. to Expand Its mRNA Empire, Lower Drug Prices

Today, Pfizer announced a “landmark agreement” with the Trump Administration. The press release promised lower drug costs and a revival of U.S. manufacturing. President Donald Trump touted that Pfizer would cut Medicaid drug prices for low-income Americans and sell new medicines at a “most-favored-nation” price — but only in exchange for tariff relief.

In reality, it appears to be a multi-billion dollar effort to entrench Pfizer’s failed gene-transfer platforms for decades to come.

The deal secures a $70 billion commitment to U.S. R&D — a down payment on Pfizer’s next wave of gene-based products:

  • Cancer “vaccines”
  • Obesity injections
  • Expanded vaccine portfolio (flu, RSV, bird flu, more)
  • Chronic disease biologics in inflammation & immunology

Pfizer itself spelled it out:

“With this agreement in place, Pfizer can fully focus on delivering the next generation of cures… in areas like oncology, obesity, vaccines, and inflammation and immunology.”

This comes after Pfizer’s COVID-19 gene-based products have already been linked to catastrophic injuries, deaths, and disabilities worldwide. Instead of scrutiny, the company is rewarded with protection and growth.

Keep reading

VAX EYE SYNDROME: Pfizer COVID vaccine spike prions enter the EYES and CORNEA, causing serious damage

The researchers focused on the corneal endothelium, the innermost layer of the cornea responsible for maintaining corneal clarity by pumping out excess fluid. Using specialized tools such as specular microscopy and Sirius corneal topography, they observed changes in corneal thickness, a decline in endothelial cell count and alterations in cell size and shape — indicators of stress or damage to this delicate structure.

Specifically, corneal thickness increased by approximately 14 micrometers (a 2 percent rise), which in itself is not harmful but could signal inflammation or fluid retention. More concerning was the eight percent drop in endothelial cell density — from 2,597 to 2,378 cells per square millimeter — still within the safe range for healthy individuals, but potentially risky for those with already compromised eye health.

The study also found that the vaccine led to increased variability in cell size, known as the coefficient of variation, which rose from 39 to 42. This suggests some cells may have died and others stretched to fill the gaps, a typical response to stress. Additionally, the percentage of hexagon-shaped cells, which are vital for maintaining a healthy endothelial layer, dropped slightly from 50 percent to 48 percent.

Although none of the participants reported noticeable vision issues during the two-month follow-up, scientists caution that these microstructural changes could have long-term consequences, especially for people with existing eye problems or a history of eye surgeries such as corneal grafts. If the damage to the endothelium is permanent or worsens over time, it could result in conditions like corneal edema, bullous keratopathy or corneal decompensation — disorders that may lead to chronic vision impairment or even blindness if untreated.

Despite these findings, the researchers did not advise against COVID-19 vaccination. They emphasized the need for ongoing monitoring and further long-term studies to determine if the observed changes persist or resolve over time. Importantly, the study confirmed a high likelihood that the changes were directly associated with the vaccine and not random occurrences.

This research adds to a growing list of safety concerns surrounding COVID-19 vaccines. In May, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration expanded warning labels on Pfizer and Moderna vaccines to more clearly highlight the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, particularly in young men aged 16–25.

While the short-term effects of the Pfizer vaccine on eye health appear to be mild, the study underscores the importance of ongoing post-vaccination surveillance and personalized medical care for individuals at risk. As evidence continues to evolve, health agencies and physicians may need to consider more tailored guidance for those with existing ocular conditions.

Keep reading

Ghost Shot: Pfizer quietly admits it will never manufacture original FDA approved COVID vaccines

The August 23, 2021 FDA approval of Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine was a cause for celebration. Marked as a turning point in the battle against COVID19, the announcement was highly publicized by the Biden Administration with the clear intention to extinguish “vaccine hesitancy” and boost uptake.

It was celebrated as a cause for national relief, and many Americans arrived at their local pharmacies under the impression, via government and pharmaceutical propaganda, that they were receiving an FDA-approved COVID vaccine. Yet that legally distinct product, as we know it, never existed. And now we know, via Pfizer, that it will never exist.

For the uninitiated:

Comirnaty is a legally distinct product from the emergency use authorization (EUA) shots, and It has never made its way to market. For months on end, no such vaccine has ever become available. Those who received the “Pfizer shot(s)” have been injected with the emergency use authorization (EUA) version of the shots.

Keep reading

3 New Plaintiffs Ask to Join COVID Vaccine Injury Lawsuit Against Bill Gates

Three COVID-19 vaccine injury victims are asking to join a Dutch lawsuit against Bill Gates, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla and 15 other defendants, alleging they misled the public about the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines.

The lawsuit was filed last year by seven COVID-19 vaccine injury victims, one of whom has since died.

According to a filing by the plaintiffs’ attorney, Peter Stassen, the three new victims “were healthy people” who began experiencing health problems after receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

“The applicants are of the opinion that the serious side effects that occurred after having the Covid-19 (mRNA) injections are the direct result of the content / composition of these Covid-19 (mRNA) injections,” the filing states.

Doctors have repeatedly refused to diagnose a link between vaccination and their injuries, Stassen said.

During a hearing today at the District Court of North Netherlands in Leeuwarden, Stassen also asked the court to approve five expert witnesses who will testify about the risks and dangers of the COVID-19 shots:

  • Catherine Austin Fitts, founder and publisher of the Solari Report and former U.S. assistant secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
  • Sasha Latypova, a former pharmaceutical research and development executive.
  • Joseph Sansone, Ph.D., a psychotherapist who is litigating to prohibit mRNA vaccines in Florida.
  • Katherine Watt, a researcher and paralegal.
  • Mike Yeadon, Ph.D., a pharmacologist and former vice-president of Pfizer’s allergy and respiratory research unit.

Another proposed witness, Francis Boyle, J.D., Ph.D., who agreed in January to testify on behalf of the plaintiffs, has since died. Boyle was a professor of international law at the University of Illinois and a bioweapons expert who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989.

Keep reading

Pfizer bribery probe dropped after ex-company lawyer Pam Bondi takes over DOJ in February 2025.

The DOJ dropped its Pfizer bribery probe in China and Mexico soon after Pam Bondi, a former Pfizer legal consultant, became Attorney General in February 2025. The investigation’s closure, evident from Pfizer’s latest filings, has raised concerns about Bondi’s influence and DOJ impartiality.

For the past several years, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer has been under investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice for potential foreign corruption violations related to its activities in China and Mexico, according to the company’s financial filings.

But that appears to have changed after the Trump administration tapped Pam Bondi — previously an outside legal counsel for Pfizer — to lead the Justice department as attorney general.

In the company’s most recent annual report, filed three weeks after Bondi took office in early February, there was no longer any reference to the Justice Department investigations into the company’s potential violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practice Act. A quarterly a report in May also contains no reference to these investigations.

Keep reading

Pfizer’s Delayed Myocarditis Study

This headline has garnered so much attention on social media that I was asked to participate in an interview last night to discuss the topic. First, I had to clarify that I cannot be interviewed about ACIP issues without prior clearance from HHS Communications. Once that was understood, at 6:00 PM (dinner time!) I dialed in via Zoom, and we talked on the record. No, I do not know if or when the interview will be aired. Before the interview, as usual, I did the necessary diligence to avoid embarrassing myself due to ignorance, keeping in mind the first rule of social media.

It is often better to stay quiet and have people wonder if you are ignorant than to tweet and remove all doubt.

Let’s dive into the details. I think that this particular situation provides a great example of how bias, combined with insufficient background and subject matter experience, can lead to unjustified clickbait headlines. This is a chronic problem on both sides of the mRNA “vaccine” safety debate, one which makes it so, so much harder to get to the bottom of all of this.

I will try to explain so that most can understand, but it may get a little technical. The nuances of clinical research study design and implementation are complicated. Please try to stick it out, if for no other reason than it does lead back to some statements from CDC’s Captain Dr. Sarah Meyer (CDC/NCEZID) during her recent presentation titled “COVID-19 safety update” regarding long-term outcomes from COVID-19 mRNA product myocarditis. Consider that an embedded easter egg.

Keep reading