6.8 SPC Forums banner
21 - 40 of 86 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,965 Posts
What is this "UAFreport.com" ?

I tried to look it up and I kept getting University of Alaska Fairbanks. What is this source?
Somehow you are getting uafreport.edu and not uafreport.com. The article is syndicated via nationalfile.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
A Left wing hack who calls himself a judge took it on himself to do this. The women has had bad reactions to vaccines in the past, what would be different here.

Look how many people are being fired for not having the vaccine. I thought the medical community was short handed, doesn't seem to stop the hospitals from firing Dr.s and Nurses for not having the vaccine. I myself am out of a job at Ft Polk because the Post commander deemed that all contractors have to be vaccinated. There are no exceptions for the people who already have antibodies, vaccine or you are out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
992 Posts
By federal law, you cannot require a person to take a drug/vaccine that has not been given full FDA approval. None of the current vaccines have been given that approval except the Phizer "Comirnaty" vaccine. That is NOT the same as the currently being given Phizer MRna vaccine. It has not been given full approval. We are being duped again. Go figure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
By federal law, you cannot require a person to take a drug/vaccine that has not been given full FDA approval. None of the current vaccines have been given that approval except the Phizer "Comirnaty" vaccine. That is NOT the same as the currently being given Phizer MRna vaccine. It has not been given full approval. We are being duped again. Go figure.
The Comirnaty vaccine is indeed the Phizer MRna vaccine that got an Emergency Use Authorization last year. In fact the letters "r-n-a" are in the name. "Comirnaty" is one of those made-up words that is supposed to sound comforting, and supposedly make people think of "community." Yeah....sure.
FDA Press Release: FDA Approves First COVID-19 Vaccine

More technical FDA info on this vaccine: (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
992 Posts
The Comirnaty vaccine is indeed the Phizer MRna vaccine that got an Emergency Use Authorization last year. In fact the letters "r-n-a" are in the name. "Comirnaty" is one of those made-up words that is supposed to sound comforting, and supposedly make people think of "community." Yeah....sure.
FDA Press Release: FDA Approves First COVID-19 Vaccine

More technical FDA info on this vaccine: (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA)
Not according to this article that says it is "legally different" enough to be afforded protection from lawsuits but not the original version given EUA.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
Some light reading on the subject:

Thank you for this bit of information. I will do some additional research on this. The question is, why are they pushing the vaccine so much? Population control? Government authoritarianism? Regardless there's something not right with this.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,532 Posts
Thank you for this bit of information. I will do some additional research on this. The question is, why are they pushing the vaccine so much? Population control? Government authoritarianism? Regardless there's something not right with this.
Yes. It is all about control. Same as with the attempt to ban Russian made ammo. They say it is to punish the Russians but we all know it is about controlling the ammo supply.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,668 Posts
Not according to this article that says it is "legally different" enough to be afforded protection from lawsuits but not the original version given EUA.

All vaccines have some protection from lawsuits. If you are injured your case goes before a "vaccine court" staffed by the vaccine companies. After years you may get $8-10K and a non-disclosure agreement to sign.

The pfizer shots are indeed the same BUUUUT... the approval by the FDA was hoped to generate more mandates. The approved one is not even being manufactured yet because they have like 30 million doses of the the "old" shot to use up. Here's the rub: if you get the "old" shot, as noted above, legally different, but chemically the same, and are injured pfizer has no liability because the "old" stock falls under the EUA.

That said, a person cannot legally be forced to take the "old" shot because it is EUA and and not FDA approved.

Clear as mud? lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
I was writing a detailed point-by-point analysis of the American Thinker article (a big part of my career was interpreting federal gobbledygook), but Greentick summarized the issue better. It is a matter of liability. As soon as some party with sufficient legal authority reduces the liability to Pfizer, the "new, legally distinct" labels will go onto bottles.

Now, this does not greatly change the debate on IF people should be forced to get the vaccine, it mainly points out that the "Bait and Switch" argument is BS.

Here is the short version of my analysis: The author of the American Thinker's article "The FDA did not grant full approval to the Pfizer shots" merely does not understand the drug approval process. It is complicated. He writes: "This license to label and manufacture is not a full approval of the drug, which clearly is still subject to many years of clinical trials."

Here, he is simply wrong. He apparently noticed that the FDA's "BLA Approval" letter for Comirnaty has a section entitled "Postmarketing Requirements." He states that this means that the drug is not fully approved. In fact, postmarketing requirements are normal for newly approved drugs, especially if there are specific areas of concern. There are indeed, areas of concern with this vaccine, including myocarditis and pericarditis.

Here is the section of the FDA's "BLA (Biologics License Application) Approval" letter that actually points out that postmarketing requirements are normal and written into the law:
"POSTMARKETING REQUIREMENTS UNDER SECTION 505(o) Section 505(o) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) authorizes FDA to require holders of approved drug and biological product applications to conduct postmarketing studies and clinical trials for certain purposes, if FDA makes certain findings required by the statute (section 505(o)(3)(A), 21 U.S.C. 355(o)(3)(A))."

Ironically, the link to this letter is in the American Thinker's article "The FDA did not grant full approval....". https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download
Apparently, he either did not read the letters or did not understand them. It is admittedly easy to get confused when reading government gobbledygook.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
992 Posts
Thanks for clearing that up. But as you say, the argument of if people SHOULD be required to take any drug by the government is going to go on for a long time. Legally the "anti-vaxxers" have solid legal protections, unfortunately those laws are being totally ignored by so many institutions and government entities that it is mind boggling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
992 Posts
BTW, we have a niece who's best friend since childhood who was a perfectly healthy 40 ish year old woman and mother of 2 had a heart attack 2 hours after getting the vaccine and probably won't make it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
I hate to hear that, sorry for her and her family. One of the problems, with the law, is the courts are backing up the government and institutions forcing this vaccine on everyone. It's hard to fight a corrupt government when the courts and businesses back them up. Hmmm, sounds like something from history. Can you say Nazi Germany? Call it Fascism, Socialism, Communism or Authoritarianism, but it's wrong. It was wrong then and it is wrong today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,362 Posts
Discussion Starter · #35 ·
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,965 Posts
BUT.......

Those over 65 and others at high risk are still supposed to get the 3rd booster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,362 Posts
Discussion Starter · #37 ·
About 3-4 min of an FDA meeting worth listening to:

 
21 - 40 of 86 Posts
Top