It is incredibly interesting, is it not, that suddenly everyone during today’s VRBPAC meeting is referring to the original injection formulation as ‘the prototype’. Has anyone ever heard them refer to the original formulation as a ‘prototype’ before? Does anyone think there would have been so much compliance and trust if they had truthfully referred to these injections as ‘prototypes’?
This is the power of lawsuits to bring the truth to light.
That and they're legally distancing themselves from ANY responsibility for shoddy clinical trials. Insane that they KNOW their clinical trials were corrupted, and now they are pushing to remove any further clinical trials. This is just evil.
They're using the 'prototype' status as being the reason why Brook Jackson's case should be dismissed. Because it is under an 'Other Transactional Authority' agreement which does away with all those annoying little constraints of all of the regulatory laws that are in place to prevent exactly this kind of abuse.
Their argument is essentially: Yeah, there was fraud, but we don't actually need to have a non-fraudulent trial because this is a 'prototype' under an OTA.
Yep. The motion to dismiss is absolutely insane. This Thursday night Warner will be on Steve Kirsch again with Brook Jackson and Robert Barnes - they will for sure talk about exactly how nuts this is.
I have read hundreds of articles and watched videos, listened to audios, and have never heard someone refer to them as “the proptype.” No one would have been fooled to take them had they used that language.
Exactly. They've said it dozens of times so far today. I smell a video compilation coming.
I'm also going to do a transcript search on the April 6th meeting where they previously discussed changing the composition. I highly doubt we'll see that word AT ALL
Jun 28, 2022·edited Jun 28, 2022Liked by Kathryn Huwig
I agree! They are trying to do damage control as if they said this all along. Dewine and his health department never said anything like this when they were threatening everyone to get jabbed, along with all the other mouth pieces. This should prove interesting going forward. Every doctor who pushed it with the words “trust the science,” didn’t conclude that its just the prototype! Edit: I started searching prototype for drugs. Interesting what it comes up with.
According to the Marine Corps they gave my 18 year old son a double dose of “Comernaty” because it was FDA approved. I would attach the correspondence, but it won’t let me.
Oh I would love to see that! Can you message me on FB? Because there was a recent court case that ruled that they CANNOT remove military members for removal due to the fact that Comirnaty is not available at all.
Dr. Jane Ruby was on Stew Peters recently. She talked about some military members who contacted her about weird vials that were shipped to the base. They were labeled Comirnity, but the lot numbers were not consistent, the labels were strange, the temperature monitor on the boxes indicated they got too warm and the email they received stated they are getting a shipment of Moderna, but the Comirnity arrived. She's still looking into it.
One of my best friends has a son in the Army who was forced to take one of the shots. He will be medically discharged in September because a parade of health conditions ensued which prohibited him from doing his field work/drills even without all of his equipment. They, of course, won’t even entertain that it is shot related. 🤬
Some lawyer needs to get the absolute proof that Comirnaty was never used and the given shot was only EUA. This would negate its mandatory use as an approved shot and therefore cannot be mandated.
Warner has that and has used that. There was also a recent Navy case that was decided on exactly that - Comirnity is not available. Full stop. It will NOT be available until all of the original doses are used up.
Jun 28, 2022·edited Jun 28, 2022Liked by Kathryn Huwig
Yay re using the "prototype" language.
Perhaps they read Pfizer’s request for dismissal of the Brooke Jackson lawsuit:
"Because of pandemic-related exigencies, the agreement was not a standard federal procurement contract, but rather a ‘prototype’ agreement executed pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2371b[.] … The [contract’s Statement of Work] describes a ‘large scale vaccine manufacturing demonstration’ that imposes no requirements relating to Good Clinical Practices (‘GCP’) or related FDA regulations."
Wrong on so many levels. Although "prototype" technically refers to the agreement, I'll take it as demonstration implies prototype.
I'm certain they read it and all got the memo to use the new term. It also does refer to the product itself, not just the agreement. I've gone cross-eyed reading the applicable rules around the OTA's - it's SO convoluted, and it was NEVER meant to be used in this way.
Jun 28, 2022·edited Jun 28, 2022Liked by Kathryn Huwig
Thanks for letting me know it also refers to the product. Pretty obvious they got the memo...makes it even more obvious everything's a mess. Cheers to that!
glad to hear someone else noticed this. I said the exact thing to my husband yesterday while listening to the meeting. a definite change in terminology (messaging shift perhaps??) for sure, at least from what I remember having heard in the past. plus thought it odd as I'm used to "prototype" being used in reference to devices, not consumable products.
That and they're legally distancing themselves from ANY responsibility for shoddy clinical trials. Insane that they KNOW their clinical trials were corrupted, and now they are pushing to remove any further clinical trials. This is just evil.
I feel this is adequate proof, in writing, for any lawyer seeking big bucks from the pharmacy, to start filing the lawsuits.
They're using the 'prototype' status as being the reason why Brook Jackson's case should be dismissed. Because it is under an 'Other Transactional Authority' agreement which does away with all those annoying little constraints of all of the regulatory laws that are in place to prevent exactly this kind of abuse.
Their argument is essentially: Yeah, there was fraud, but we don't actually need to have a non-fraudulent trial because this is a 'prototype' under an OTA.
What?
Yep. The motion to dismiss is absolutely insane. This Thursday night Warner will be on Steve Kirsch again with Brook Jackson and Robert Barnes - they will for sure talk about exactly how nuts this is.
ahhh...now I get it...
I have read hundreds of articles and watched videos, listened to audios, and have never heard someone refer to them as “the proptype.” No one would have been fooled to take them had they used that language.
Exactly. They've said it dozens of times so far today. I smell a video compilation coming.
I'm also going to do a transcript search on the April 6th meeting where they previously discussed changing the composition. I highly doubt we'll see that word AT ALL
I agree! They are trying to do damage control as if they said this all along. Dewine and his health department never said anything like this when they were threatening everyone to get jabbed, along with all the other mouth pieces. This should prove interesting going forward. Every doctor who pushed it with the words “trust the science,” didn’t conclude that its just the prototype! Edit: I started searching prototype for drugs. Interesting what it comes up with.
I'm afraid to ask!
What happened to Comirnaty? They are shooting up the military with it. Why only them?
As far as I know, NO ONE has ever been shot up with true Comirnity. Not even the military.
According to the Marine Corps they gave my 18 year old son a double dose of “Comernaty” because it was FDA approved. I would attach the correspondence, but it won’t let me.
I also believe he was injured as he ended up in the hospital after peeing blood. They couldn’t figure out why. 🙄
Oh I am so sorry to hear that! That's awful!
Oh I would love to see that! Can you message me on FB? Because there was a recent court case that ruled that they CANNOT remove military members for removal due to the fact that Comirnaty is not available at all.
Dr. Jane Ruby was on Stew Peters recently. She talked about some military members who contacted her about weird vials that were shipped to the base. They were labeled Comirnity, but the lot numbers were not consistent, the labels were strange, the temperature monitor on the boxes indicated they got too warm and the email they received stated they are getting a shipment of Moderna, but the Comirnity arrived. She's still looking into it.
Was he stationed in a country that offered Comirnity?
Nope. It was during boot camp in South Carolina this past fall.
So sad! I am so sorry. Does your son know of anyone else injured?
One of my best friends has a son in the Army who was forced to take one of the shots. He will be medically discharged in September because a parade of health conditions ensued which prohibited him from doing his field work/drills even without all of his equipment. They, of course, won’t even entertain that it is shot related. 🤬
Some lawyer needs to get the absolute proof that Comirnaty was never used and the given shot was only EUA. This would negate its mandatory use as an approved shot and therefore cannot be mandated.
Warner has that and has used that. There was also a recent Navy case that was decided on exactly that - Comirnity is not available. Full stop. It will NOT be available until all of the original doses are used up.
Yay re using the "prototype" language.
Perhaps they read Pfizer’s request for dismissal of the Brooke Jackson lawsuit:
"Because of pandemic-related exigencies, the agreement was not a standard federal procurement contract, but rather a ‘prototype’ agreement executed pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2371b[.] … The [contract’s Statement of Work] describes a ‘large scale vaccine manufacturing demonstration’ that imposes no requirements relating to Good Clinical Practices (‘GCP’) or related FDA regulations."
Wrong on so many levels. Although "prototype" technically refers to the agreement, I'll take it as demonstration implies prototype.
I'm certain they read it and all got the memo to use the new term. It also does refer to the product itself, not just the agreement. I've gone cross-eyed reading the applicable rules around the OTA's - it's SO convoluted, and it was NEVER meant to be used in this way.
Thanks for letting me know it also refers to the product. Pretty obvious they got the memo...makes it even more obvious everything's a mess. Cheers to that!
glad to hear someone else noticed this. I said the exact thing to my husband yesterday while listening to the meeting. a definite change in terminology (messaging shift perhaps??) for sure, at least from what I remember having heard in the past. plus thought it odd as I'm used to "prototype" being used in reference to devices, not consumable products.
It was hard NOT to notice! I think they used they word ''prototype' more than they used the word 'vaccine'
I remember the term ‘study intervention’ was used in the Pfizer docs. This is a first for prototype.
It’s all pretty shady 😂