New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science
In November 2020 a Pfizer employee posted the following tweet, which was retweeted by a number of senior Pfizer employees, including the Medical Director of Pfizer UK, Dr Berkeley Phillips.
Our vaccine candidate is 95% effective in preventing COVID-19 and 94% effective in people over 65 years old. We will file all of our data with health authorities within days. Thank you to every volunteer in our trial and to all who are tirelessly fighting this pandemic.
The Pfizer executives promoting their product’s effectiveness on Twitter / X had to know the basic dishonesty of using relative risk reduction rather than absolute risk reduction. As described succinctly by the Canadian Covid Care Alliance, both vaccinated (0.04%) and unvaccinated (0.88%) had a less than 1% absolute risk of testing positive for COVID-19 in the two month period that the trial tested for. The absolute risk reduction for a positive COVID-19 PCR test between the two groups was 0.84% in favour of the vaccinated.
The trial referred to was funded by Pfizer and designed, run, analysed, and authored by Pfizer employees. Pfizer and their contract research organisations were in possession of the raw data which they attempted to hide from public scrutiny for 75 years. Thanks to Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency and the Informed Consent Action Network, court action was successful in requiring all raw data to be released.
Many other statistical and analytical tricks have been detected by an independent evaluation of the data, most famously the Daily Clout reports being researched and published by thousands of medical, data, science and public health volunteers. Read more at How Pfizer Hid Nearly 80% of COVID Vaccine Trial Deaths From Regulators. As we have written (for example here, here and here), our own authorities are also using statistical dishonesty to deceive the general public, which appears to be in lockstep with authorities across the globe.
In February 2023 a complaint was received by the UK pharmaceutical watchdog, Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA), about the dishonest tweet which was posted by Pfizer employees. The 4 March 2024 case report provides detail of the complaint, and the Code of Practice Panel investigation and ruling.
The panel ruled that Pfizer had breached five clauses of the 2019 Code of Practice for the Pharmaceutical Industry, administered by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI). Their offences are summarised as:
- Bringing discredit upon, and reducing confidence in, the pharmaceutical industry
- Promoting an unlicensed medicine
- Making a misleading claim
- Making claims that did not reflect the available evidence regarding possible adverse reactions
- Failing to maintain high standards
PMCPA charged Pfizer a total in administrative costs of £34,800 for these breaches.
This seems satirical given the US$81.3 billion of revenue earned in 2021 alone. This paltry sum is a tiny ‘cost of doing business’ and pharmaceutical companies factor the cost of financial penalties for fraud into their calculations and tax credits. We agree with the response from Ben Kingsley, head of legal affairs at the UK grassroots campaign organisation UsForThem.
It is astonishing how many times Pfizer senior executives have been found guilty of serious regulatory offences. Yet the consequences for Pfizer and the individuals concerned continue to be derisory. This hopeless system of regulation for a multi-billion dollar life and death industry has become a sham, in dire need of reform.
In addition to the horrific harms experienced by victims of the pharmaceutical industry across the globe, being synchronously ignored and denied by almost every relevant official department and agency, this so-called “penalty” reads as a further signal that human life holds little value to the powers imposing their ideologies onto humanity under the euphemistic guise of health and safety. This is no surprise given what is known about the World Health Organization’s One Health agenda, which plans to integrate human health, animal health and environmental concerns into a single entity, under imperious global authority.
Referencing the WHO One Health philosophy, once-eminent medical journal The Lancet stated in a January 2023 editorial, that “… all life is equal, and of equal concern. … we are as concerned about the welfare of non-human animals and the environment as we are about humans.“. The popular call to arms of equity, diversity and inclusiveness is becoming rightfully revealed as age-old eugenics with a smiling face, and it’s best to heed a very sensible warning at Your Daughter For a Rat? The Corrupting of One Health, where physician David Bell calls out the tyrannically-inspired diminution of human rights:
If the public health industry truly views the world through this lens, then the public should consider whether they can be trusted with any influence or authority. If they view the world otherwise, then they should cease the false rhetoric. The idea that fellow humans are to be held at a higher level than other animals underpins virtually all human ethical systems. These include the Nuremberg Codes developed after the medical profession led the degradation of human sanctity before and during World War Two.
However, before the executed worst of the Nazi doctors had even stopped swinging, it seems the baton was passed into the grasping fists of what is now Big Pharma, with its lust for profits and fear of only one thing – its big shareholders. Nearly a century later, look at the consequences. Data analyst Ed Dowd lays out the current landscape brilliantly.
We are not without power and there are actions we can take against this advancing anti-human empire. Signatures are needed on a letter to the World Health Organization, calling for an extension of “the deadline for the adoption of the amendments to the International Health Regulations and a new Pandemic Agreement at the 77th WHA to safeguard the rule of law and equity.” If you agree, please add your signature and share the letter far and wide.
