[Pollard]

Not this shit again.

The FDA says it’s FDA approved.

It doesn’t matter how some right wing news blogs say. It doesn’t matter what Dr Malone says. The FDA is the FDA and they are not.

[NoLibZone]

I get it.

you trust the Biden administration

[mosaicwolf]

"The FDA says it’s FDA approved. It doesn’t matter how some right wing news blogs say. It doesn’t matter what Dr Malone says. The FDA is the FDA and they are not."

Simple solution to this dilemma.

Never believe anything from the government, its agencies, or the media. Now go create a nice day.

[Political Junkie Too]

Here is what I would like to know. Maybe you can explain it to me.

It seems that the FDA approved a product called COMIRNATY, which Pfizer says is not yet available.

The Biden administration is using this FDA approval to mandate vaccinations to the military, and is encouraging businesses to do the same for their employees.

Since the only available vaccine is not COMIRNATY, but the one only approved for emergency use only, isn't the mandate unenforceable?

Isn't it truly a bait and switch to use the authorization of one vaccine to mandate the use of another one?

-PJ

[NicoDon]

you forgot the html tags for sarcasm.

otherwise, people are going to think you’re a moron.

[Petrosius]

There is a legal distinction here. Legally there are two different product although they are identical in composition: 1) the Pfizer vaccine that is under a Emergency Use Authorization, and 2) the licensed COMIRNATY vaccine that is FDA approved. Although they are identical products, legally if you are vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine you cannot sue for any adverse effects since it is administered under a EUA. You will only be able to sue for adverse effects if you are vaccinated with the FDA approved COMIRNATY vaccine, but this is not yet available. Thus the FDA can say that the form of the vaccine has been approved and yet still shield Pfizer from product liability lawsuits.