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?
A sceptic might observe that "if" is more appropriate than "when".
A sceptic might observe that "if" is more appropriate than "when".
A sceptic might observe that "if" is more appropriate than "when".
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
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.
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.
Hello , just saw your post and I wrote something related to it. Based on what you mentioned above, vaccines are still on trial correct?!
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 .
@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
@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.
@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 $$$ now. Good luck to us and to our future!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current Telehealth Certification Standpoint https://curogram.com/blog/telehealth-certification
Now this is very interesting! Like how the hell they approved the vaccine, it normally takes 4 to 6 years to get approval. I guess FDA really listens to some $$$ 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.
Thank you for such the thorough response! Much appreciated
FDA also approves the chemical in processed food, other medications which are also harmful for health. So in this sense, nothing new.
