Jump to content

Covid Conflicts of Interest


Macnamara
 Share

Recommended Posts

11/24/21
14 ACIP Members Who Voted to Jab Your Young Children — and Their Big Ties to Big Pharma

On Nov. 2, members of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s vaccine advisory committee voted 14–0 to recommend Pfizer’s pediatric COVID shot for children 5 –11 years old. Were their decisions driven by science and conscience — or their ties to drugmakers?

EDITOR’S NOTE: Following the Oct. 26 meeting of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), Children’s Health Defense argued it is time to shun the individuals — and institutions — that are selling out America’s children without even a prick of conscience. At the close of this article about the members of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), we reiterate our list of suggestions for shunning.

On Nov. 2, the members of ACIP voted 14–0 to recommend Pfizer’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) COVID shot for children 5 –11 years old.

Committee members readily voted “yes” despite many unknowns about long-term safety, including a complete lack of data on the risk of heart problems like the ones experienced by some adolescents who received COVID vaccines.

Neither the disgracefully unscientific vote nor CDC Director Rochelle Walensky’s prompt endorsement came as a surprise. Though billed as “independent,” the 14 ACIP members — like the 17 members of FDA’s VRBPAC who voted the same way the previous week — have deep ties to pharma, with careers that hinge on promoting and rubber-stamping the United States’ destructive one-size-fits-all vaccination agenda.

Describing the VRBPAC and ACIP meetings as “a total sham,” Children’s Health Defense President Mary Holland said, “Sadly, approval from these committees means nothing in terms of safety.”

Political scientist Toby Rogers agreed, stating the ACIP meeting “was not a scientific review. It was banal bureaucrats announcing plans for a Blitzkrieg and the bought white coats were cheering them on.”

With their vote to give young children the dangerous injections, ACIP members signaled that they, too, deserve to be shunned, along with the powerful institutions with which they are affiliated. The latter include the nation’s top universities and leading pediatric hospitals.

Without exception, all the universities at which ACIP members have appointments — Brown, Drexel, Harvard, Michigan State, Ohio State, Stanford, University of Maryland, University of Washington, Vanderbilt and Wake Forest — have mandated COVID vaccines.

Pediatric hospitals, meanwhile, are playing a frontline role as COVID vaccination sites. Promoting the injection for 5-year-olds, First Lady Jill Biden visited Texas Children’s Hospital straight away, applauding the hospital for the 39,000 pediatric vaccine appointments it had already scheduled.

Also worthy of shunning are the 20,000 individual vaccine providers who were pre-positioned to “hit the ground running” and “get shots in little arms.”

Within two days of ACIP’s and Walensky’s verdicts, these providers had administered the jab to thousands of 5- to 11-year-olds, and within the first week, according to the White House, 900,000 children had been injected.

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/cdc-acip-pfizer-pediatric-covid-vaccine-big-pharma/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=ea40470a-d7b8-4046-b710-4abb772537b9

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Conflict Of Interests: Pfizer Board Members Include Ex-Facebook Director and Ex-CEO of Reuters

Pfizer’s latest board member, appointed in 2020, not only was the CEO of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation from 2014 to 2020, but also served as the lead independent director of Facebook.

Dr. Susan Desmond-Hellmann’s present and previous positions make for a cosy relationship for Pfizer, but questionable conflict of interest in that Facebook has routinely censored posts related to Covid injections while Gates and his foundation promote Covid injections as the answer to disease. “Potentially presenting another conflict of interest, Hellmann also serves on President Joe Biden’s council of advisers on science and technology,” The National Pulse added.

In related news, the Pulse pointed out that the chairman and former CEO of Reuters news agency, James C. Smith, is also a Pfizer board member and top investor who serves on Pfizer’s corporate governance and science and technology committees.

“The news raises serious conflict of interest concerns as corporate media outlets such as Reuters continue to promote Pfizer products, defend pharmaceuticals companies from criticism and move to silence sceptics,” The National Pulse said.

https://dailyexpose.uk/2021/12/10/conflict-of-interests-pfizer-board-members-include-ex-facebook-director-and-ex-ceo-of-reuters/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

As Mandates Rolled Out, Dozens of Politicians Invested Vax Companies, Directly Profiting from Their Own Policies

December 19, 2021

According to the report:

In 2020, at least 13 senators and 35 US representatives held shares of Johnson & Johnson, the medical behemoth that produced the single-shot COVID-19 vaccine that more than 15 million Americans have received.

At least 11 senators and 34 representatives also held shares in 2020 of another COVID-19 vaccine manufacturer, Pfizer. Two representatives or their spouses held shares of Moderna during the same year that the world went on lockdown in response to the pandemic.

Lawmakers held these investments in COVID-19-minded companies as Congress was at the center of pandemic relief efforts. In 2020 and 2021, members of Congress voted on six relief bills together worth nearly $6 trillion. Congress also authorized more than $10 billion to help drug companies develop and distribute vaccines and forced health insurers to cover the cost of getting the shot.

https://www.activistpost.com/2021/12/as-mandates-rolled-out-dozens-of-politicians-invested-vax-companies-directly-profiting-from-their-own-policies.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blackrock, Vanguard and Pharma Executives Are Making a Killing from A Crisis They Helped to Create

Stockholders banking on the Covid injections to line their pockets have very merry news this holiday season as they rake in the returns from a raging bull market on Moderna and Pfizer shares.

Big pharma executives and shareholders saw their wealth skyrocket in the week after Omicron was “discovered,” with eight top Pfizer and Moderna shareholders making a combined $10.3bn, City A.M. reported on 6 December, less than two weeks after Omicron was announced.

The two drug companies manufacture mRNA Covid injections and with Omicron sweeping the world, investors are sweeping the returns into their bank accounts. The eight top Pfizer and Moderna shareholders alone made a combined $10.3 billion.

Pfizer CEO, Albert Bourla, personally made $339,236 on the value of shares he holds in the week after the announcement of Omicron.

Moderna’s CEO, Stephane Bancel, raked in $3.19 million all by himself by selling off 10,000 shares for $319 each on 26 November, the day after Omicron was announced.  And just under two weeks later, by 5 December, became more than $1,7 billion richer with the value of his remaining shares rising.

Blackrock investment company made $2.5 billion just in the one week following the Omicron announcement. And Vanguard made a whopping $1.01 billion from its shares in Moderna and $1.5 billion from Pfizer.

All this came within days of the UK government cutting a deal on 2 December with Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna for 114 million doses of injections (54m of Pfizer and 60m of Moderna) securing doses for two years.

At the same time, Pfizer’s CEO, Albert Bourla, predicted that booster injections are here to stay. Pfizer and BioNTech released results from an initial lab study on 8 December.  In an interview with CNBC Bourla said the preliminary studies were based on a synthetic, lab-created copy of Omicron and real world results were expected in the following two weeks.  While results may show that a third injection could fight the variant, Bourla said, “I think we will need a fourth dose.”

On 10 December, Channel 4’s Dispatches aired their investigation, ‘Vaccine Wars: Truth About Pfizer’, which accused Pfizer of funding educational presentations in Canada that said its UK rival AstraZeneca was ineffective and even dangerous for some people in the population.  Dispatches investigation also revealed an analysis by a biological engineering expert that the manufacturing costs of Pfizer’s injection is 76p per dose but is being sold to the UK government for £22.

Pfizer was “disappointed to hear” of the documentary and accused Channel 4 of “unbalanced reporting” and that the 76p per dose cost was “grossly inaccurate.”  Pfizer’s response to Channel 4 proves one thing at least – the “vaccine wars” are real.

There are a lot of misconceptions and myths about Pfizer. The first is that it created a Covid injection. It did not. They marketed it. The only thing Pfizer has created is a money-making machine, Dr Vernon Colman said, Pfizer is talking of $80 billion in forecast revenues.

Contrary to Pfizer’s claims that a third injection could fight Omicron, on 12 December scientists in Hong Kong published their research which found Covid injections were not effective against Omicron.  Malik Peiris, a virologist at the University of Hong Kong, stated: “We can see most individuals had high level of virus-killing activity against the original SARS-CoV-2, but this ability was markedly reduced by 32-fold or more against the omicron variant.”

https://dailyexpose.uk/2021/12/21/blackrock-vanguard-and-pharma-executives-are-making-a-killing-from-a-crisis-they-helped-to-create/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Following Complaints from Customers, a UK Covid Test Provider Admits Tests Cannot Be Used to Diagnose Covid

DnaNudge is an Imperial College London spinout company whose founder and CEO is a professor at Imperial College.  At the end of December 2020 in response to complaints from its customers, who at the time was mainly the NHS, DnaNudge admitted a final Covid diagnosis should consider symptoms and not rely on the test result alone.

A list of field safety notices (“FSNs”) from medical device manufacturers is maintained by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”).  In a previous article we attached a list of 24 FSNs relating to “SARS” devices between 1 January and 30 November 2021 – 15 of them relate specifically to PCR Tests and at least one relates to a lateral flow antigen test, two of these were issued by DnaNudge.

DnaNudge has a creepy sales pitch: “Here at DnaNudge, we’ve pioneered something completely new – the ability to nudge your everyday shopping choices through your DNA,” their online shop says.  It is a company that was formed in 2015 and founded by Chris Toumazou, Regius Professor of Engineering Imperial College London, and Dr. Maria Karvela.  DnaNudge’s two recently appointed directors are: Sir Richard Sykes, chair of the UK’s Vaccine Taskforce who was appointed as director of DnaNudge in December 2021; and, Mohammed (“Mo”) El Husseiny, founder of Ventura Capital.

Their ‘lab in a cartridge’ device was approved for clinical use by the MHRA at the end of April 2020 and in August 2020, the UK government purchased 5.8m DnaNudge Covid tests, at a cost of £161m or just under £28 each, to be rolled out in patient care and elective surgery settings.

A couple of months later, in October, DnaNudge entered into a deal with manufacturer Jabil Healthcare to produce 1.4 million “CovidNudge” test cartridges per month by early 2021.  A move to expand their customer base is motivated by money.  The units are being sold to NHS hospitals at cost price, Prof. Toumazou said, “We’ve sold it at cost to the NHS as a philanthropic thing, but our consumer business [on other products] is suffering because we haven’t put the resources into that.”

In August 2021, DnaNudge secured a £43.6 million investment led by Ventura Capital – the company founded by Mo El Husseiny  who is also, since May 2021, the Vice Chairman of DnaNudge.

Despite clinical settings not being able to rely on it for diagnosis and that outside a clinical setting only healthy people are able to use it – both scenarios rendering the test useless – in December 2021, “consumer genetic testing pioneer DnaNudge” announced a key partnership with DAM Health that will see DnaNudge’s 90-minute PCR Covid-19 test deployed across more than 100 clinics in the UK and internationally in 2022.

https://dailyexpose.uk/2022/01/02/following-complaints-from-customers-a-uk-covid-test-provider-admits-tests-cannot-be-used-to-diagnose-covid/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Public Accounts Committee Blasts Government for Spending £329 Million on Quarantine Hotels

At least £486 million of taxpayers’ money was spent on implementing the ‘traffic light system’ for international arrivals during the coronavirus pandemic. But the Government “does not know” whether it worked or not, according to a powerful committee of MPs. The Guardian has more.

The traffic light system set the rules for arrivals from every country depending on whether it was on the red, amber or green list. Arrivals from red list countries had to stay in a quarantine hotel for at least 10 days.

The testing and quarantine requirements for people arriving in the U.K. were changed 10 times between February 2021 and January 2022, according to the report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) published on Tuesday.

The report said the Government “does not know whether the system worked or whether the cost was worth the disruption caused”.

Airlines and holiday companies blamed ministers for the slow recovery of foreign travel due to the rules, with many European countries imposing fewer restrictions.

“Managing cross-border travel was an essential part of health measures introduced by government during the pandemic,” the report said. “Despite spending at least £486m on implementing its traffic light system to manage travel, [the] Government did not track its spending on managing cross-border travel or set clear objectives, so does not know whether the system worked or whether the cost was worth the disruption caused.”

Taxpayers subsidised £329m of the total £757m cost of quarantine hotels, according to the report. That is despite the bill for individuals rising to more than £2,200 for a single adult. Only 2% of guests in hotel quarantine tested positive.

Dame Meg Hillier, chair of the PAC, said: “The approach to border controls and quarantine caused huge confusion and disruption with 10 changes in a year. And now we can see that it is not clear what this achieved.

“We can be clear on one thing – the cost to the taxpayer in subsidising expensive quarantine hotels, and more millions of taxpayers’ money blown on measures with no apparent plan or reasoning and precious few checks or proof that it was working to protect public health.”

Hillier said the Government was not learning the lessons from the pandemic fast enough, missing opportunities to react faster to new variants and the spread of monkeypox.

“We don’t have time and it is not enough for Government to feed these failures into its delayed public inquiry,” she said.

https://dailysceptic.org/2022/07/26/public-accounts-committee-blasts-government-for-spending-329-million-on-quarantine-hotels/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...