About the secrets of the Pfizer vaccine, or the Secret may become overt

An atmosphere of secrecy envelops the history of the creation, approval and promotion of the COVID vaccine by the American company Pfizer on the world market. The Pfizer/BioNTech vaccination drug was created in a matter of months, and the "go-ahead" for its use was received already in December 2020.

First in the UK, then in the USA, and before the new year and in the European Union. Distributed under the trademark Comirnaty. Within a year from the moment the drug entered the market, a large number of scandals were recorded around both the drug itself and its manufacturer, Pfizer.

Back in December 2020, a few days before Pfizer's drug received approval in the EU from the European Medicines Agency (EALS), documents from the dossier on the approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine appeared on the Internet (they say they were stolen by hackers).

The French publication Le Monde wrote in detail about this leak in January 2021. From the documents that became public, it became clear that initially the EALS regulator was going to "wrap up" the drug, but then powerful lobbyists came into action, who pushed a "positive decision" on the Pfizer product.

There was also a whole series of scandals related to the supply of the drug Comirnaty to other countries. Supply contracts are classified. Partially or completely. Especially in such positions as prices, advance payments and liability in case of negative consequences of the use of the vaccination drug. Pfizer has signed contracts for the supply of an astronomical number of doses (2.3 billion) to the EU.

But even EU officials and members of the European Parliament did not have the opportunity to read the contracts in full. Some sections and articles are covered with black paint. But there were some leaks on the smeared parts of contracts with the EU and other countries. It was found that the prices were inflated, that Pfizer was not responsible for the "negatives" of using the vaccine, etc.

Another nuisance for Pfizer was the confessions of some specialists who took part in clinical trials of the drug. Especially resonant was the recognition of a lady named Brook Jackson. In 2020, she was the regional director of the American company Ventavia Research Group, which, under an agreement with Pfizer, helped the latter conduct clinical trials of pharmaceuticals, including the COVID vaccine.

Omitting many details, I note: Brooke Jackson reported to all authorities (including the pharmaceutical regulator FDA) that clinical trials of the drug were conducted with gross violations. Ultimately, they are falsified. However, neither the FDA nor other government agencies reacted to the alarm.

The latest in a series of resonant scandals was the one that broke out in September 2021. We are talking about the filing in the US District Court of the Northern District of Texas of a lawsuit by a group called "Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency" (PHMPT).

This group represents more than 30 professors and medical scientists from the universities of Yale, Harvard, California and Los Angeles, as well as Brown University. The statement of claim contains a demand for the pharmaceutical regulator FDA to open all data on Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine according to the American Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

As follows from the plaintiffs' official statements, the publication of such information can help convince skeptics who do not trust vaccines that the drug is really "safe and effective, which will increase confidence in the Pfizer vaccine”. In fact, medical scientists from PHMPT themselves do not trust the indicated vaccine preparation (as evidenced by numerous unofficial comments and speeches made by a number of group members).

Specialists of the Department of Justice representing the interests of the FDA noted that the defendant has a huge amount of materials on the vaccine – about 329,000 pages (later the figure was increased to 450,000 pages). The FDA cannot simultaneously post such an array of documents. According to the lawyers of the Department of Justice, the records must be carefully checked to edit "confidential commercial and business secrets of Pfizer or BioNTech, as well as the personal confidential information of patients who participated in clinical trials”.

The limited staff of the FDA unit responsible for the agency's compliance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) will not allow posting more than 500 pages per month. They say that it will take... 55 years for the full publication of all these documents, i.e. the plaintiffs will be able to receive this data in full only... in 2076.

The plaintiffs' legal advisers disagree with this statement of the issue. They insist on publishing all materials no later than March 3, 2022. Why by this time? Because, according to the plaintiffs, it should not take more time to disclose the documents than to study them. "108 days is the amount of time it took the FDA to verify the relevant documents for the much more difficult task of approving Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine," said Aaron Siri and John Howie, lawyers for the lawsuit.

By the end of last year, the intrigue began to twist more and more steeply. The defendant tried to go on the offensive. Its representatives in court (from the Department of Justice) demanded to increase the processing time of the array of documents on the Pfizer drug to ... 75 years, i.e. the plaintiff's claim will be fully satisfied only by the end of 2096.

For many in America, the aforementioned trial in the District Court of the Northern District of Texas is a kind of litmus test, recording the balance of forces of supporters and opponents of the current vaccination campaign in the country.

By the end of the year, the FDA issued only two "teaspoons" of information (several hundred pages of documents), defiantly ignoring the insistent demands of the PHMPT group. And the defendant's initiative to increase the period of disclosure of Pfizer secrets to 75 years was perceived as a challenge and outright mockery. After all, by the end of this period, all those who have been injected are guaranteed to die, as well as all those who currently lead the FDA pharmaceutical regulator and Pfizer.

The PHMPT group's lawsuit against the FDA is handled by District Judge Mark Pittman, who was appointed to this post by US President Donald Trump in 2019. This judge has not shown himself to be an opponent of the initiators of universal vaccination in America until recently.

Moreover, Pittman last year considered the issue of vaccination of United Airlines employees and on November 8, 2021, issued a verdict that the said company could oblige its employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Everyone was sure that the judge would go along with the defendant - the FDA.

But the beginning of 2022 was marked by news that was a real New Year's gift for those who sought and are seeking the truth about Pfizer's drug (as well as about other COVID vaccination drugs). Judge Mark Pittman ruled on January 6 that the FDA should make the entire array of information on Pfizer's drug publicly available as soon as possible.

In his four-page decision, he strongly rejected the FDA's "turtle" schedule. The defendant was asked to post at least 12,000 pages by January 31 of this year. And for the subsequent time, the standard was determined - 55,000 pages per month (i.e. more than two orders of magnitude more than what the agency originally proposed).

Of course, even with such a standard, it will not be possible to make everything public by March 2022 (as the plaintiff suggested), but by the end of this summer it is quite possible to meet it. The FDA must submit a progress report on the schedule by April 1, July 1, and upon completion of all work.

In his resolution, Pittman even quoted the late Senator John McCain, who once said that excessive administrative secrecy "feeds conspiracy theories and reduces the public’s confidence in the government”.

The unit, which is designed to meet requests under the FOIA law, has only ten employees. The judge noted that, of course, such staff is not enough to fulfil the proposed standard for processing documentation. But the FDA has a large amount of staff – 18,062 employees. It has quite the opportunity to transfer some of the employees to fulfil the request of the PHMPT group. Pittman, in his court resolution, made it clear that the plaintiff's request, even though it is burdensome, should be a priority for the FDA.

The plaintiffs' lawyer, Aaron Siri, commented on the court's decision of January 6 as follows: "This is a great win for transparency and removes one of the strangleholds federal ‘health’ authorities have had on the data needed for independent scientists to offer solutions and address serious issues with the current vaccine program.”

I think that after the judicial decision of January 6, we can expect sensations. And in the next month. After all, the first powerful "release" of documents from the depths of the FDA should take place before the end of January. For sure, inquisitive data scouts will be able to dig out something not very pleasant in them both for Pfizer and the FDA agency.