Latest News

Negligence, Fraud, Malice – Shouldn’t We All Be Wiser to Pfizer?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Many governments are offering pharma companies exemption from legal liability, but Pfizer has made indemnity demands that have gone way beyond that of other manufacturers. Pfizer has included additional indemnity from civil cases meaning that it would not be held liable for rare adverse effects, but also astonishingly, for its own acts of negligence, fraud, or malice including manufacturing errors. Acts that we show in this article, that is not out of the ordinary for Pfizer.

Why though has the government failed to let the public know this? Pfizer has a long history of committing acts that would question their drug safety, and the drug pushing company’s, honesty, and integrity, why has the public not been made aware of this fact?

We Rely on Testimonials

Scanning reviews and testimonials have become increasingly common practice for our nation of consumers, and there are even websites created specifically for the purpose of enabling us to read the experiences of others before purchasing anything and everything from a tin opener to a car.

This enables us to have an informed choice as a consumer knowing whether a particular company or product is of quality, good value trustworthy, and importantly, is it safe. It seems ridiculous to say, but if there were over 1000 reported deaths attributed to a new product, in the first two months of sales, chances are everyone would know about it and it would be very unlikely that the product would still be available.

Exempt From Public Review?

That is, unless it is a big pharma company, such as Pfizer, as we know that this has happened with the Pfizer COVID product, yet it is still available, despite there being evidence that it is ineffective and potentially deadly.

When it comes to deciding to have a pharma product injected into our bodies where a potential side effect is death, “testimonials” or reports of adverse events are either met with cries of “fake news” or just censored altogether.

This should ring the alarm bells, yet many people have trust in a company that certainly would not do well on a public review website, but individuals choose to ignore the shocking Pfizer track record and trust them with their rushed through experimental product.

Here are some of the Pfizer business which we shall call the Pfizer “Testimonials

Those Who Seek to Earn A Profit Through Fraud

We can start In 2009 when Pfizer paid “$2.3 billion in the largest health care fraud settlement in the history of the Department of Justice. for “mis-promoting” medicine Neurontin for uses not approved by medical regulators, and paying “kickbacks” to compliant doctors, the Guardian newspaper reported.

The investigation was sparked by Pfizer whistleblower John Kopchinski, who exposed Pfizer for mis-promoting their drugs, thus, putting patients at risk of heart attacks, strokes, and blood clots.  Kopchinski reportedly said that at Pfizer, he was expected to increase profits at all costs, even when sales meant endangering lives. “I couldn’t do that.’” he said/

Pfizer pleaded guilty and also settled civil allegations concerning improper payments to doctors who prescribed nine other pharmaceutical products, although it continues to deny these charges but was to pay record sums in an out-of-court deal with the US department of justice.

Prosecutors said Pfizer’s crimes had been carried out over an extensive period of time a government attorney added  “such blatant and continued disregard of the law will not be tolerated […] “it was a victory for the public over those who seek to earn a profit through fraud”.

Unfortunately, the $2.3 billion fine against Pfizer according to the New York Times  amounted “to less than three weeks of Pfizer’s sales.”

Illegally Promoting Drugs & Putting Lives at Risk

This was just pocket change to Pfizer who clearly undeterred by the huge fine, was sued again in 2009. for illegally promoting their drugs, this time regarding  Neurontin which was being promoted as an epilepsy treatment.

The New York Times had published extensive evidence that Pfizer “manipulated the publication of scientific studies to bolster the use of its epilepsy drug Neurontin for other disorders while suppressing research that did not support those uses. 

Pfizer had delayed the publication of studies that had found no evidence the drug worked, ‘spinning’ negative data to place it in a more positive light, and bundling negative findings with positive studies to neutralize the results.” 

Also, one of Pfizer’s own studies showed a placebo was more effective than Neurontin on neuropathic pain, the study was suppressed and Neurotonin was still illegally promoted.

The case was instigated by whistle-blower Dr, Franklin who had previously testified in another Neurontin case in 2004 which resulted in Pfizer pleading guilty and paying a $430 million settlement. the 2004 case did not cover everything and new unsealed court documents were produced evidence that not only did the company, and its subsidiaries push Neurontin for unapproved uses, they did so – “knowing that the drug was ineffective“.

Outright Deception and Suppression of Scientific Truth

According to the documents, Pfizer engaged in “outright deception of the biomedical community, and suppression of scientific truth” and more, Pfizer were said to be guilty of “stalling or stopping the publication of negative study results; manipulating both trial designs and data to make the drug look more effective than it was, and using questionable tactics to enhance the drug’s image and increase its sales.

The author of the documents was also the director of the Center for Clinical Trials at John Hopkins University, Kay Dickersin who wrote that the Pfizer practices were “highly unethical, harmful to science, wasteful of public resources, and potentially dangerous to the public’s health.”

The Pfizer Ex-CIA Agent

As a result of the case Pfizer showed their true colours, mafioso style, as the night before the case Pfizer stalked whistleblower Dr Franklin and sent an ex-CIA agent to his home, where the Pfizer investigator called Franklin’s wife repeatedly, blocked the driveway, looked through the windows shouting at his wife, and would not leave until his wife called the police,” This was terrifying for the family including an eight-year-old child., they would not leave until his wife called the police.

Dr. Franklin told the judge that Pfizer’s investigator told the family on the phone, “‘We know all there is to know about you,’ and then cited the location of my daughter 200 miles away at college. “How the hell am I supposed to remain unbiased when you do that? It feels like a threat.” The judge placed a restraining order on Pfizer for “any private eye with respect to Dr. Franklin or his family.”  

Trovan Children & Blackmail.

Pfizer has shown their disregard for children previously when they administered an experimental drug Trovan on 200 children after a deadly outbreak of meningitis in Nigeria in 1996. The drug pushers never told the parents that their children were the subjects of an experiment.

11 of the children died & many suffered side effects such as brain damage and organ failure.

Pfizer was sued by the Nigerian state and federal authorities, but did not want to pay out to settle the two cases, one civil and one criminal, but came to a tentative settlement with the Kano state government costing them $75m (source).

Although it was leaked that Pfizer again hired investigators in an attempt to “unearth evidence “of corruption against the Nigerian attorney general in order to blackmail/persuade him to drop legal action according to a leaked US embassy cable. Also, eligibility was dependent on DNA tests carried out on the children. to prove that they are victims, which was felt was to deny the victims of the money.

Watch the video to find out more. here:

Rezulin -FDA Fast Track Approval

The FDA had approved a drug Rezulin, for the treatment of diabetes in January 1997, on the basis of a “fast-track” review of six months. It marked the agency’s most rapid approval to that date of a diabetes pill.

Years later the effects of that “approval” were seen in court claims, as in 2009, Pfizer paid $750 million to settle 35,000 claims that Rezulin, was responsible for 63 deaths and dozens of liver failures. Pfizer had 105 class-action suits in state and federal courts seeking either medical monitoring of people who had taken Rezulin or damages or restitution for those patients.

They also said it faced individual lawsuits on behalf of 4,500 Rezulin patients and about 8,400 claims for compensation, but a Pfizer spokesman at the time Bob Fauteux said Pfizer is “confident about the future course of litigation because FDA figures show that, of an estimated 1.9 million diabetes patients who were prescribed Rezulin”, there have been fewer than 100 reports of liver failure leading to death or transplant at the time the drug was withdrawn.

Unbelievably, or not so much these days, the FDA stood behind the drug despite a mounting death toll and absence of life-saving benefits and it is interesting to note with this case that the Rezulin controversy was reported to have also “cast a shadow” on the Food and Drug Administration, (FDA) which gave the drug fast-track approval despite concerns within the agency over its safety.

ChantixIncomplete Trials & Psychological Disorders

The FDA was, however, a little stricter with a Pfizer product in 2013 after their smoking cessation drug was reported to have caused suicide, suicide attempts, and severe psychological disorders, and according to The Guardian, one man had committed suicide in April 2013 only 8 days after taking the medication, adding to the 24 more people who had committed suicide since its launch in 2006.

Pfizer’s Chantix trials had improperly excluded patients with a history of depression or other mental disturbances resulting in around 2,700 lawsuits being filed against Pfizer March 2013, Pfizer agreed to settle the state and federal lawsuits against Chantix, costing Pfizer almost $300 million.

This led to the FDA requirement of a “black box” warning on the drug, Chantix, alerting patients and doctors to the risk of psychiatric side effects. (yes it was still available after) . It was also determined by the FDA that Chantix is probably associated with a higher heart attack risk.

Pfizer disputed the research behind the FDA’s opinion and continued to stand by the drug’s risk-benefit balance, but in July 2021, Pfizer announced that it was recalling two lots of the smoking cessation treatment after discovering the presence of N-nitroso-varenicline that can potentially increase the risk of cancer in humans.

Only 15 years after its launch? (source).

I think we all can see just from a handful of “testimonials” that Pfizer is not a company with integrity and shows that for Pfizer, wealth is far more important than health, as long as they can get away with it.

There are lots more of these types of cases a few are mentioned below.

ProtonixLack of Warnings

Also in 2013, Pfizer agreed to pay $55 million to settle criminal charges of failing to warn patients and doctors about the risks of kidney disease, kidney injury, kidney failure, & acute interstitial nephritis caused by its proton pump inhibitor, Protonix. It was argued that Pfizer had not done enough to warn patients and medical professionals about the possible risks as the companies became aware of them (source).

Pfizer & Bribery

In 2012, Pfizer was charged with violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act when its subsidiaries bribed foreign government doctors in Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Czech Republic, Italy, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Serbia in order to win business.

“Pfizer subsidiaries in several countries had bribery so entwined in their sales culture that they offered points and bonus programs to improperly reward foreign officials who proved to be their best customers,” said Kara Brockmeyer, Chief of the SEC Enforcement Division’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Unit. Pfizer consented to the entry of a final judgment ordering it to pay disgorgement of $16,032,676 in net profits and prejudgment interest of $10,307,268 for a total of $26,339,944 .(source).

PrempoPfizer Withheld Information

In 2012, Pfizer had paid $1.2 billion to settle claims by nearly 10,000 women that its drug, Prempro, caused breast cancer. This included punitive damages for the drug maker’s actions in withholding information about the risk of breast cancer (source).

Epi Pen Greed

Pfizer continues to be sued for fraud.  In 2021, Pfizer agreed to pay $345 million “to resolve claims by consumers who say they overpaid for EpiPens due to anticompetitive practices by Pfizer and the company that markets the emergency allergy treatment, Mylan.More. The litigation followed a public outcry in 2016 after Mylan, which owns the rights to market and distribute the devices, raised the price of a pair of EpiPens to $600, from $100 in 2008, putting it in the centre of an ongoing U.S. debate over the high cost of medicines.

Largest Penalty for Dumping Pollutants

Pfizer held the record for paying the largest fine under the Clean Water Act when it paid $3.1 million in 1991 “for dumping pollutants into the Delaware River from 1981 to 1987. Federal officials said it was the largest penalty of its kind, but Pfizer disputed that it was the largest.” “The EPA said pollutants were discharged at levels toxic to aquatic life that depleted the river’s oxygen supply.  But Pfizer said it was ‘unaware of any evidence that Pfizer’s discharges caused any environmental harm or damage to aquatic life in the Delaware.’” 

Evil Profits

So right up to date, Pfizer have been shown to be continuing on with their disregard for human life in order to promote a cash cow..

This was seen in an undercover investigation by Project Veritas revealed Pfizer officials admitting that Pfizer’s history of greed and deceiving the public continues with its COVID-19 vaccine. 

Chris Croce, a senior Pfizer scientist stated, “I still feel like I work for an evil corporation because it comes down to profits in the end.  …Basically, our corporation is run on COVID money now.  It netted over $15 billion last year.”

Other Pfizer scientists described that natural immunity is stronger and more robust than immunity gained through Pfizer’s vaccine, but said they are trained by Pfizer that they “cannot talk about this.”  Croce described Pfizer’s culture as one of paranoia, where scientists wonder “who’s listening?” and stated, “You don’t talk about anything that can possibly implicate you or Big Pharma.” 

Is it any wonder, therefore, that Pfizer has demanded indemnity from the company can act negligent, fraudulent, or with malice, and expect not to be held liable!? How can they really expect to ask for indemnity for these things? It is not as if they are so unlikely to act in these ways either.

Why are they being trusted to jab the population with a rushed through, an experimental cocktail that has already shown to be harmful and deadly when they clearly cannot be trusted with our health?

Share this page to Telegram

Categories: Latest News

5 2 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

6 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anitra K. Mayfield
Anitra K. Mayfield
9 months ago

Hello

Vittorio
Vittorio
9 months ago

tra criminali (governi e Pfizer) si intendono molto bene…!

Charles B.
Charles B.
9 months ago

Just as citizens deserve the government they vote for, consumers get the pharma products they spend their money on.
The change will not come from outside, it has to come from within you.

trackback
9 months ago

[…] Wuhan (Covid-19) obtuvieron inmunidad legal total en caso de lesiones o muerte inesperadas. Tenemos ahora aprendido que la inmunidad legal de Pfizer es aún más amplia que eso, y cubre sus propios actos de […]

trackback
9 months ago

[…] “vaccines” were granted full legal immunity in the event of unexpected injury or death. We have now learned that Pfizer’s legal immunity is even more expansive than that, covering its own acts of […]

trackback
9 months ago

[…] “vaccines” were granted full legal immunity in the event of unexpected injury or death. We have now learned that Pfizer’s legal immunity is even more expansive than that, covering its own acts of […]