The "FDA approved" vaccine never existed

[sigfan91]

Most people around me are still 100000000% sure it is approved. I tried to show approval letter with different name and Code numbers-it is like hitting concrete wall!

Libtards are usually impervious to logic.

[ProfChaos]

The entire point of the approval was to create media reporting that the Pfizer vax was fully approved immediately before vax mandates were announced. If you remember when the possibility of mandates was discussed, it was widely believed to be against the law to mandate an emergency use product.

So the approval of the nonexistent BioNTech vax was pushed through, and the FDA published that the emergency use version was interchangeable. This created cover for the mandates. I believe this was the only purpose of the approval.

Just like the moment an "approved" drug hits the market, all "emergency use" are to be pulled.

[gcvt]

You should do stand up.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

I'll be here all week. Please tip YSR's waitress

[johncage]

that's hilarious. i remember so many people using the argument that it's fda approved

[Creeping Incrementalism]

I remember too.
Argument was along the lines of is the same components made in the same factory and it's just a labeling thing.
But he could never answer why they didn't just relabel it with the new label then.
Response being about existing stockpiles etc... But given that was a year ago and these vials don't last as long, all new inventory should be correctly labeled now...

I thought the Rocketman made a pretty good case based on the actual legal language he found that the approval was specifically made to be retroactive to the previous experimental vials.

But like you say about the old stock having expired... yeah? What's up with that and nothing new that I'm aware of?

[sl0re10]

I remember when it happened they released a press release implying it was the same and everyone treated it like it was the approval document. The approval document straight up listed differences between the approved and emergency use vaxes... Making it clear they were different.

[Mauserguy]

I wouldn't take the "approved vaccine" even if it was available. It's still made with aborted baby cells and they skipped the testing too. Just because it's "approved doesn't mean good.
Mauserguy

[anthonyca]

Under EUA rhey don't have to tell anyone, even the corrupt FDA what is in the full list of ingredients. They can also change up to 50% of the ingredients for testing purposes. Now The Way Forward, they are allowed to add new mRNA for extinct and decreasing variants of omicron.

Plus the EUA has liability protection and the prep act further protects them. Even if it becomes accepted that these shots are killing and harming people, there is no perpetrator for murder since everyone who took these did so on thier own accord through implied consent.

This is the perfect crime and an example of Gobles' big lie.

[Creeping Incrementalism]

From what I gather the "active ingredient" is the same, but the stabilizing solution in the production version is supposed to be stable for a longer of period of time. It seems the Department of Defense ordered a run of Comirnaty proper just for themselves, but that's all that has been made. It sounds like Pfizer's long-term plan now is to adjust the active ingredient based on whatever is predicted to work the best against future strains, like the annual flu shot it.

But whatever. I never take the flu shot either. I just don't want to work somewhere where I get fired or banned from the office for not showing proof of an injection.

[anthonyca]

From what I gather the "active ingredient" is the same, but the stabilizing solution in the production version is supposed to be stable for a longer of period of time. It seems the Department of Defense ordered a run of Comirnaty proper just for themselves, but that's all that has been made. It sounds like Pfizer's long-term plan now is to adjust the active ingredient based on whatever is predicted to work the best against future strains, like the annual flu shot it.

But whatever. I never take the flu shot either. I just don't want to work somewhere where I get fired or banned from the office for not showing proof of an injection.

It appears there may be more fraud and its possible those were not the approved version. The military was illegally forcing people to take the EUA drug and then switched to what they said was the approved version. There are also reports of people being told to turn in cards with EUA lot # and then new cards with different lot #s being exchanged.

I'm not sure I'd this is true but these allegations need to be honestly investigated as these allegations are serious felonies.

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/sen-ron-johnson-sends-letter-pentagon-fda-cdc-inquiring-about-comirnaty

[theLBC]

https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/services/files/2266AE5A-027A-42F2-90E1-D4430F32BF37

[sl0re10]

Creeping Incrementalism

Real FDA approval is specific down to the molecule.

[Wherryj]

I seem to recall having quite the back and forth with a certain rocket scientist on this forum about this some time ago.

I'm sure he'll be in any minute to apologize...because he's clearly a stand up guy

I found it quite amusing as well. Even IF the officially approved vaccine ever hit the market, Pfizer was projecting it wouldn't be until some time in 2023.

While it may be considered "nit picking" by some, the way that FDA approvals work is that it must be for the SPECIFIC product and for SPECIFIC approved conditions.

While medications can be used for non-approved conditions ('off label"), they are only officially "FDA approved" for the conditions for which they were approved. Strangely, the only exception to "off label" use seemed to have been for treatments for Covid when the government decided to absolutely destroy anyone who tried to prescribe them, but that's another subject...

Even worse, the approved Covid vaccine was similar but not identical to the composition of the emergency use approved vaccine. That means that it is NOT the same product. Even with the same active ingredient, a generic formulation MUST undergo at the minimum testing to determine if it is "equivalent" to the approved product due to differences in absorption. It isn't just a free-for-all where anyone can make any sort of tablet/capsule/solution that contains the active ingredient.

Now we hear that Pfizer never intended to release the officially FDA approved vaccine in the first place. This was all manipulation and has destroyed my trust in the FDA, the NIH and all of the medical associations. I used to think that they were at least attempting to do "what's right", but they apparently are only doing what they need to "get paid".

[Wherryj]

It appears there may be more fraud and its possible those were not the approved version. The military was illegally forcing people to take the EUA drug and then switched to what they said was the approved version. There are also reports of people being told to turn in cards with EUA lot # and then new cards with different lot #s being exchanged.

I'm not sure I'd this is true but these allegations need to be honestly investigated as these allegations are serious felonies.
https://justthenews.com/politics-pol...bout-comirnaty

This is very likely. Pfizer has stated several times that the Comirnaty vaccine would not be available until at least 2023. I don't know how the military actually got ahold of it even if they put in a special order. If it's not ready, it's not available.

[Creeping Incrementalism]

Creeping Incrementalism

Real FDA approval is specific down to the molecule.

I don't know what "real FDA approval" is supposed to mean. Maybe you mean "normal" FDA approval. But whatever, that's not the specific question here. The specific question is -- were the EUA lots covered by the language in the approval, ignoring any shenanigans about the actual chemistry (chemistry, shmemistry). It very much seemed to me that the EUA lots were approved covered by the official approval, with the same legal enforcement