27 March 2021  /  Updated 17 July 2021
Can Vaccines be Man...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Can Vaccines be Mandatory once Emergency Use Auth expires?

Page 1 / 2

Dr Michael Taylor
Posts: 1
Topic starter
(@dr-michael-taylor)
Joined: 8 months ago

Ive been studying a lot recently on the ability of an individual to mount a legal challenge against mandatory vaccinations in the workplace (no jab no job etc). It seems that the law can most likely be relied upon currently - but Im concerned that once the experimental phase status expires (2023) then how will that impact the status of law in respect of coercion? - really need some help here. I watched a great video (USA) today by AFLDS

https://americasfrontlinedoctors.org/videos/white-coat-summit-the-one-year-anniversary/

AFLDS.org/Summit

the legal stuff is aroubd 30minute + in the video - but it remains unclear how this translate to UK law and also what happens when the vaccines get their full licence. How do we stand in 2023?

16 Replies
JohnK
Posts: 100
(@johnk)
Joined: 9 months ago

A sceptic might observe that "if" is more appropriate than "when".

Reply
2 Replies
ewloe
(@ewloe)
Joined: 3 months ago

Posts: 339
jmc
 jmc
(@jmc)
Joined: 1 year ago

Posts: 578
Posted by: @ewloe
Posted by: @johnk

A sceptic might observe that "if" is more appropriate than "when".

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/08/26/fact-check-fda-fully-approved-pfizers-coronavirus-vaccine/5594543001/

 

 

Ah yes "fact checkers". In this case a copy editor with a "journalism" degree. The natural go to expert on the intricacies of FDA regulatory system and the various statuary paths to regulatory approval. In other words a totally ignorant non-entity who is just parroting  press releases.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dpfunke

 

All vaccines used in the US and approved for general distribution are approved under a 505(b)1 approval process. And occasionally 505(b)2 in special cases. All of them

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2010-title21/html/USCODE-2010-title21-chap9-subchapV-partA-sec355.htm

Thats the law. All of the many many billions of vaccines given were approved under this Act. Not one single SARs CoV 2 vaccines in the US currently has either 505(b)1 or 505(b)2 approval.

NONE.

 

The Pfizer vaccine used so far in the US for vaccination is used under an EUA. An emergency use wavier. It is still NOT approved under either 505(b)1 or 505(b)2. The German version of the same vaccine formulation has been granted an approve to manufacture and distribute under 21 CFR 601.2, a BLA. 

https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/development-approval-process-cber/biologics-license-applications-bla-process-cber

Neither the US version of the German version of the mRNA vaccines BNT162b2 has been given FDA approval under 505(b)1 or 505(b)2. An approval process which normally  takes 4 to 6 years.

 

NONE OF THESE VACCINES HAVE 505(b) APPROVAL. THAT IS WHAT FDA APPROVAL FOR VACCINES MEANS. LEGALLY.

 

So your "fact checker" with a journalism degree and paid just over minimum wage is not only wrong but is lazy and stupid. A quick background information check with any pharma lawyer would have quickly told him the FDA press release was deliberately written to be misleading for political purpose. Which is what genuine reporters used to do in the old days. None of whom had "journalism " degrees I might add.

 

Reply
anapaularocha
Posts: 5
(@anapaularocha)
Joined: 11 months ago

Hello , just saw your post and I wrote something related to it. Based on what you mentioned above, vaccines are still on trial correct?!

Reply
6 Replies
jmc
 jmc
(@jmc)
Joined: 1 year ago

Posts: 578
Posted by: @anapaularocha

Hello , just saw your post and I wrote something related to it. Based on what you mentioned above, vaccines are still on trial correct?!

Yes. The are all still in early trail stage.  The normal time line for regulatory approval of a completely novel vaccine type is 4 to 6 years.  To get accurate  information about efficacy and adverse response takes that long.  But due to the completely politicization of the SARs CoV 2 vaccines I expect governments will try to ram through some kind of regulatory approval very soon.

All the current vaccines used in western countries have such high adverse response rates and probable low long term efficacy that for any other vaccine candidate in the past they would have abandoned the approval process after Phase I/ early Phase II trials.  All vaccine candidate with such serious problems would never get regulatory approval in the normal run of things. No vaccines candidate in the past has gained full regulatory approval with such bad numbers.

The only SARs CoV 2 vaccines used at the moment that would get full regulatory approval as a matter of course pre 2020 are the ones used outside western countries. The attenuated virus vaccines. The type of vaccines used for many generations. The very safe vaccines that work so well.

The only attenuated virus vaccines currently in the regulatory process in western countries is the French one VLA2001, and the Indian one BBV152 (Covaxin). No other SARs CoV 2 vaccine used in western countries could hope to gain full regulatory approval if the vaccine safety standards used for all other vaccines in the past was applied. The only safe SARs CoV 2 vaccines likely to be available any time soon in western countries are VLA2001 and BBV152 .

Reply
Freeman Exiled
(@freeman-exiled)
Joined: 1 year ago

Posts: 33

@jmc Yeah I dont think so....

Pfizer Jab Receives Full Approval From FDA, Pentagon Mandates Vaccinations For All Troops.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/pfizer-vaccine-receives-full-approval-fda

The FDA listens to the money now, not a stuffy regulatory process.

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine

Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the first COVID-19 vaccine. The vaccine has been known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, and will now be marketed as Comirnaty (koe-mir’-na-tee), for the prevention of COVID-19 disease in individuals 16 years of age and older. The vaccine also continues to be available under emergency use authorization (EUA), including for individuals 12 through 15 years of age and for the administration of a third dose in certain immunocompromised individuals.

And they're not content with thus as they looking at getting booster shots approved as well

 

Reply
jmc
 jmc
(@jmc)
Joined: 1 year ago

Posts: 578
Posted by: @freeman-exiled

@jmc Yeah I dont think so....

Pfizer Jab Receives Full Approval From FDA, Pentagon Mandates Vaccinations For All Troops.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/pfizer-vaccine-receives-full-approval-fda

The FDA listens to the money now, not a stuffy regulatory process.

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine

Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the first COVID-19 vaccine. The vaccine has been known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, and will now be marketed as Comirnaty (koe-mir’-na-tee), for the prevention of COVID-19 disease in individuals 16 years of age and older. The vaccine also continues to be available under emergency use authorization (EUA), including for individuals 12 through 15 years of age and for the administration of a third dose in certain immunocompromised individuals.

And they're not content with thus as they looking at getting booster shots approved as well

 

Now this is where it gets interesting, legally speaking.

If you actually read the FDA information sheet not the press release.

https://www.fda.gov/media/150386/download

The legal situation is very different from the press release.  The domestic version of the vaccine is still under EUA (so not actually legal for other reasons) the "approval" is of the licensed version of the Europe version that Pfizer manufactures in the US. Now the wording of this "approval" looks like it is not actual regulatory approval as understood for all other FDA approved therapeutics but a legal slight of hand where they recognized under international agreements the European "Conditional Marketing Authorisation ".

The press releases was not run by the FDA lawyers, that information sheet was.  The exact wording is interesting because thats what the FDA lawyers though would give them best legal defense in future lawsuits.

So what you quoted was just a White House generated press release. 

The FDA press release means little legally speaking as the vaccine is still very EUA. Its 99.99% politically motivated. The "approval" looks like it may have more to do with trying to force out almost 1/3 of the current military who overwhelming dont support Biden.  Plus the WH desperately need some news this week to distract from the unrepresented debacle in Kabul. I remember April 1975 very well. This is much much worse than Saigon. 

 

Reply
Farrah L
(@farrahlux280)
Joined: 4 months ago

Posts: 15
Posted by: @freeman-exiled

@jmc Yeah I dont think so....

Pfizer Jab Receives Full Approval From FDA, Pentagon Mandates Vaccinations For All Troops.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/pfizer-vaccine-receives-full-approval-fda

The FDA listens to the money now, not a stuffy regulatory process.

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine

Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the first COVID-19 vaccine. The vaccine has been known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, and will now be marketed as Comirnaty (koe-mir’-na-tee), for the prevention of COVID-19 disease in individuals 16 years of age and older. The vaccine also continues to be available under emergency use authorization (EUA), including for individuals 12 through 15 years of age and for the administration of a third dose in certain immunocompromised individuals.

And they're not content with thus as they looking at getting booster shots approved as well

 

Now this is very interesting! Like how the hell they approved the vaccine, it normally takes 4 to 6 years to get approval. I guess FDA really listens to some $$$ now. Good luck to us and to our future!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current Telehealth Certification Standpoint https://curogram.com/blog/telehealth-certification

Reply
MikeAustin
(@mikeaustin)
Joined: 1 year ago

Posts: 1193
Posted by: @farrahlux280

Now this is very interesting! Like how the hell they approved the vaccine, it normally takes 4 to 6 years to get approval. I guess FDA really listens to some $$$ now. Good luck to us and to our future!

The following clip is interesting.

https://www.redvoicemedia.com/2021/08/former-pfizer-employee-checkmate-game-over-we-win/

Karen Kingston is of the opinion that the approval means that the jab's contents must be declared within two weeks and Pfizer will be exposed to legal action.

Reply
ewloe
(@ewloe)
Joined: 3 months ago

Posts: 339

@mikeaustin The share price is riding high:

1630164132-Screenshot-2021-08-28-at-162054.png
Reply
Nobody
Posts: 658
(@nobody)
Joined: 1 year ago

What is so concerning is that the vaccines have wide ranging effects on the immune system and generally throughout the body.  Given the well documented rate of adverse effects, to say nothing of the scientific evidence showing that even when people are unaware of any adverse effects, there are markers for inflammation and clotting, as well as lowered efficacy of the immune system generally, with the vaccines lowering T-cell response and antibody count, it appears yet more evidence of the malign nature of the state's interest in vaccination.  Dr Zelenko says in the video I linked on the previous thread, that only a government that wished to kill people would mandate the vaccines.

  We all have to accept that, for the rest of our lives, our 'public' institutions are compromised.  We are back in the world where working people feared the work-house and any professional medicine.  Hospital is now akin to prison and the furlough scheme is just to stop unrest.

  We are now facing the effects of four decades of social organisation meant to pit person against person in a competition for resources via education and the labour market and the attendant isolation involved in these trends and now we face the result: we are powerless to contest any of it.  You reach for the law when you've already lost.  Given that our rights require recognition, when you have to assert them, they've gone.

Reply
anapaularocha
Posts: 5
(@anapaularocha)
Joined: 11 months ago

Thank you for such the thorough response! Much appreciated 

Reply
Page 1 / 2
Share: