Attorney General Sues Pfizer for Misrepresenting COVID-19 Vax Efficacy and Conspiring an

Attorney General Ken Paxton Sues Pfizer for Misrepresenting COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy and Conspiring to Censor Public Discourse.

Yep, the other shoe drops! I expect to see a lot more! here


Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has sued Pfizer, Inc., for unlawfully misrepresenting the effectiveness of the company’s COVID-19 vaccine and attempting to censor public discussion of the product.

Pfizer engaged in false, deceptive, and misleading acts and practices by making unsupported claims regarding the company’s COVID-19 vaccine in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

The pharmaceutical company's widespread representation that its vaccine possessed 95% efficacy against infection was highly misleading. That metric represented a calculation of the so-called “relative risk reduction” for vaccinated individuals in Pfizer’s initial, two-month clinical trial results. FDA publications indicate “relative risk reduction” is a misleading statistic that “unduly influence” consumer choice. Pfizer was also put on notice at that time that vaccine protection could not accurately be predicted beyond two months. Nevertheless, Pfizer fostered a misleading impression that vaccine protection was durable and withheld from the public information that undermined its claims about the duration of protection. And, despite the fact that its clinical trial failed to measure whether the vaccine protects against transmission, Pfizer embarked on a campaign to intimidate the public into getting the vaccine as a necessary measure to protect their loved ones.

In fact, Pfizer’s product failed to live up to the company’s representations. COVID-19 cases increased after widespread vaccine administration, and some areas saw a greater percentage of deaths from COVID-19 among the vaccinated population than the unvaccinated. When the failure of its product became apparent, Pfizer then pivoted to silencing truth-tellers. The lawsuit notes: “How did Pfizer respond when it became apparent that its vaccine was failing and the viability of its cash cow was threatened? By intimidating those spreading the truth, and by conspiring to censor its critics. Pfizer labeled as ‘criminals’ those who spread facts about the vaccine. It accused them of spreading ‘misinformation.’ And it coerced social media platforms to silence prominent truth-tellers.”

“We are pursuing justice for the people of Texas, many of whom were coerced by tyrannical vaccine mandates to take a defective product sold by lies,” said Attorney General Paxton. “The facts are clear. Pfizer did not tell the truth about their COVID-19 vaccines. Whereas the Biden Administration weaponized the pandemic to force illegal public health decrees on the public and enrich pharmaceutical companies, I will use every tool I have to protect our citizens who were misled and harmed by Pfizer’s actions.”

The lawsuit follows Attorney General Paxton’s investigation into Pfizer and other vaccine manufacturers announced earlier this year.

 

Had editing problems link here

 

Well I believe you have already heard my girlfriend's account of her experience with this so-called vaccine.... If not, I will provide a brief synopsis....

This would have been probably the early part of 2021... She got the first vaccine and she was fine and then she got the second one a few months later and her arm immediately swelled up like a baseball and she got a sore throat that same day and lumps developed in her throat...

That turned out to be cancer of the lymph nodes. After 9 weeks of chemo and radiation for that, It spread to her larynx.... Now she has had a complete laryngectomy and breaths and speaks through a stoma..... Then about 5 months ago they found a spot on her lungs and near her collarbone.... If it ain't one damn thing it's another.

Now people will argue that there's no evidence that the vaccine was involved but my argument is that there is more evidence that it may have been involved then that it was not, because she was fine before she got the vaccine and then suddenly she wasn't.

Of course we will never know the whole truth because no one really wants to know it.

 

When an AG gets a hold of these things you can bet we will know much more before the Genocide Joe/Phizer parade is over.

Sorry to hear about your gf, no I havent been around here much lately due to issues beyond my ability to amicably deal with.

This part really makes a statement:

and some areas saw a greater percentage of deaths from COVID-19 among the vaccinated population than the unvaccinated.

 

It sucks but what can you do?

She was 60 at the time of her vaccination and she had great teeth for her 60-year-old and now she has to go and get all of them pulled because the radiation killed them.

Like I said.... If it ain't one damn thing it sure as hell will be another.

All because of this stupid ass fake vaccine

 

https://anandamide.substack.com/p/f...896&isFreemail=true&r=2wlp2h&utm_medium=email

Fact Checker Response

"Many fact checks have been written about the DNA contamination topic and I expect many more to to follow given the recent announcement from Dr. Joe Ladapo.

I have addressed these all before on various forums but I will give particular attention to one authored by Ana Benacic regards in protest of the Croatian Parliament presentation I gave."

@Betamax101
@MuchAdo
@Giftedone
@yardmeat

comments?

 

Sorry, man, but Ladapo isn't exactly impressive.

 

Pfizer MRNA vaccines are contaminated with foreign DNA?

There is a DNA FRAGMENT Called SV40 used in the process of making the vaccine and SOME MAY be present in the finished product but
1. There is no way for SV40 to integrate with people that get the vaccine
2. The amount would be so small as to be irrelevant.

Prior to the MRNA technology ALL vaccines "contained foreign DNA" that's how they worked for crying out loud.

 

Pretty easily explained. Initial efficacy was determined using early strains of covid. Subsequent strains, it was less effective against. The part about more death in more vaccinated areas is likely a matter of not controlling for confounding variables but would need to see a more detailed citation there.

Coincidence. How do I know? Because there's no plausible mechanism linking the vaccine to leukemia/lymphoma developing in a few months. Even for clear causes of cancer, this process takes years.

 

You haven't demonstrated that my opinion is batshit with any relevant evidence. It's just your opinion which adds nothing to the debate. May I request that you stop patronizing and just stick to the facts?

 

You didn't read the link, clearly. Maybe you can do it in full before commenting?

 

So not a single rational reason, just ad hom?

 

You only brought up one person's claims, so that was all there was to talk about. If you want more than so called "ad homs" (a term you didn't even use correctly), then bring up something other than a hom.

 

You didn't talk at all about the claims and what was presented, just did an ad hom hit and run. No argument, no countering his points. Why should anyone consider that as a reasonable argument? We all know it's not.

 

You say "likely" which indicates that you're really just hoping that is true. Otherwise, how can you prove it?

Except there is. And those presenting evidence never said it happened overnight, just accelerated. Doctors told my wife's friend that her newly discovered auto immune issue was likely underlying for years and it's possible that the vaccines effect on "suppressing immunity to build immunity to C19" could have brought it to the surface quicker but was not the cause.

It's a really kind way of saying "yep, but it was going to happen anyway!"

 

I don't need to read a link claiming that witnesses saw Spider-Man swinging through downtown Manhatten to know it's BS.

 

I used likely because the post I responded to wasn't specific in where they were even talking about, so it's hard to talk in certainties when I don't fully know where we're talking about so can't look up the data. But when this was raised in the past, it was due to not controlling for confounders.

I was responding to a case where a woman developed lymphoma (I think, no specific diagnosis cited) months after getting her covid shot. The covid shot could not have been the cause of the cancer. What you're talking about is fairly speculative and difficult to even assess, but not the cause either way. And besides, if the vaccine suppressed immunity in this way, the disease would too, and so unless one had a foolproof plan to definitively avoid getting covid, the vaccine was the better plan.

 

Are you doing this deliberately to yank my chain? You asked my comments on something when I had already done so and you ignored it! I gave you a simple to click link.

Nauseating irony.

Yes. May I request that you stop complaining about obvious observations and start providing some facts. Up until now it appears you simply ignore every piece of science that refutes your poor choice of opinion and keep digging into the well of batshit.

 

I appreciate that you own that it is solely your opinion.

It's hard to know if it's not being actively investigated but like I said above it's not just a few "fringe" doctors who are now saying it's more than likely that underlying issues may come to the surface sooner and a growing number of legitimate oncologists that are more than a little concerned with what they call an epidemic of turbo cancers.

Difficult to assess when you're not even trying. On the second point, that's your opinion, not universally shared with other experts.

Based on what? There's a reason why it was advised that that who took the shot try to isolate for 2 weeks afterwards so as to not contract opportunistic pathogens while immunity is suppressed. It's not unreasonable to suggest that works the same way on diseases festering in the body that need a health immune system to keep at bay. That's the very logic that doctors are providing right now.

 

I have. I gave you many well reasoned posts (links) for you to present your country arguments on.

You haven't. You're just ad hom attacking the source as batshit crazy, then insulting me. Anyone who understands what you're doing can see it's an invalid argument strategy.

Look, all you're doing is indirectly implying I'm batshit crazy. If I were to guess, then yes, I think your doing this deliberately because you never attack any of the arguments that the sources I present are making. Just ad hom, which is an unreliable argument strategy and you know it.

Ok now I've said it twice. It is what it is.

You're basically using my argument on your position, mirrored back at me. (See above)

How is that valid in anyway?

It's not.

 

I do know she was perfectly fine before the vaccine and had an immediate reaction to the second dose .

So you think the reaction was just a big coincidence?

Getting a sore throat the same day her arm swelled up like a baseball and then lumps shortly developing thereafter?

That's more evident than it was involved then that there is any evidence that it wasn't.

 

Straw man argument = invalid argument
Dismissive and patroizing.

At least you're admitting you didn't read any of the contents in the post and therefore no one should really take your critique seriously.

 

I'm just saying how cancer works. She had the cancer developing for years before she showed symptoms. The abnormal cells had accumulated mutations that disrupt safety checks for cell division, and a new subclone acquired another mutation that accelerated things further and she became symptomatic. This happened to coincide with covid. Much of the world got the covid shot and continued to have their previous health problems - thousands, if not millions of coincidences were bound to occur.

 

My mother lives nearly across the continent from me.

Recently she has been admitted to long term care.

She originally got the first two shots in 2021. Modena in both cases.

On the second, almost exactly three weeks later, she was admitted to hospital for shortness of breath and being unable to think clearly.

She was in for a little over two weeks and received medication for heart inflammation.

She was not told it was a myocarditis to the best of her recollection. July 2021.

She also never had or tested + for covid before or after vaccination, also to the best of her knowledge based on no symptoms or sickness.

In the last two years her health has deteriorated. She no longer can take care of herself. She's 73. In October 5 days after my uncle died, she collapsed. I'm certain the shock and subsequent depression that was likely was a contributing factor. She was already pretty weak to begin with.

Luckily someone who regularly takes her for blood work found her on the floor. She didn't remember what happened.

After nearly 6 weeks in hospital, also fighting a urinary tract infection and two doses of Digoxin, they were able to remove fluid in her heart, as it was explained to me, and bring her heart rate from an average of 130-150BPM when to something manageable. They were also able to fast track a long term care facility.

I'm grateful that they were able to keep her alive but I'm asking myself now if her current suffering and condition was worth it. I say yes, but she's really in tough shape right now.

It's mandatory that all patients get flu and covid shots at her long term care. She did so in early December.

Yesterday I got a call that she tested positive for covid. Briefly spoke with her. No lung symptoms but extremely tired. No worries says the doctor, they're giving her paxlovid

Great vaccine, right?

Every single word I've said is true.

Doctors online here, explain this to me.

 

Have you considered a career in oncology?
What qualifications do you have to make these statements?

Maybe it was developing and maybe it would still be developing dormantly if she hadn't have gotten the stupid vaccine.

You don't know anymore than I do