Ping
RFK is correct.
make of this what you will. writer is huge Trump fan btw.
comments can be ignored; they add nothing to the story:
20 June: RichardsonPost Australia: WE CAUGHT PFIZER IN ANOTHER LIE—RIGHT HERE IN POLAND!
By Howell Woltz
Now Pfizer says Comirnaty was never produced—yet we got it here in Poland—what are they covering up?...
https://richardsonpost.com/howellwoltz/27479/we-caught-pfizer-in-another-lie-right-here-in-poland/
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/iis/covid-19-related-codes.html
Pfizer, Moderna, JJ are NOT APPROVED except for emergency use.
Experimental. DOH! 🔬💉💊😷🐎💩
Like we didn’t know this already. 🙄
You’re an IDIOT if you took these Clot Shots!!!!
Latest survey shows the COVID vaccines are a disaster: ~750,000 dead in US
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/latest-survey-shows-the-covid-vaccines
Based on this post, it looks like no progress has been made at all.
All the mRNA vaccines are still experimental.
Wiki treats "Comirnaty" like its just a synonym for the Pfizer Covid vaccine which became available in December 2019.
Incredible.
If I were a doctor or pharma person, I would be confused by this FDA table. There are 2 listings for COMIRNARTY, with different NDCs:
* one in the table mentioned in the article (”will not be manufactured”) stating “original formula”
* one in the top “BLA-licensed” table that says “Same as EUA tris sucrose formula”.
Is there a different formula than approved that’s now here?
If I showed this to a FRdoctor or FDA-worshipper, they would say, “See it’s in Table 1; COMIRNARTY is available.”
W.T.F.?
Identical and interchangeable with.
Slowly the truth is coming out.
Just here for the artillery duel…
This issue gets into wordplay.
A substance is both approved and not approved, depending on the brand-label it is given.
For purposes of legal remedy (the vaccine reparations system), the substance labeled “not approved” leads to an exceptionally stingy statutory remedy. The same substance administered under the “approved” brand label (which I get, this is a practical impossibility) would lead to a different statutory remedy.
People who trust the substance, or aim to push it onto others, will advance the “same as approved”, or even “is approved, just a different label.” Wordplay.
People who don’t trust the substance don’t care what the label says, and find the approval to be a sham. My point of view is that when any issue involves sneaky wordplay, it is almost certainly a sham.
The day the FDA “approval” letter was released, I posted that it wasn't the vaccine that was being used and the approved vaccine didn't exist. I was told I had a reading comprehension problem.