the u.s. food and drug administration’s announcement monday that it had granted “full approval” to the covid shots being offered by pfizer is riddled with deceptions meant to trick the american public into thinking they have no choice but to take the jab while at the same time protecting a major pharmaceutical company from legal liability.  what was actually given full approval was a separate pfizer-biontech vaccine product which goes by the name comirnaty.  but comirnaty is not even currently available in the u.s.  this is part of a cynical plot to protect pfizer from broad legal liability and also to snooker u.s. employers into mandating the vaccine for their employees.  watch dr. robert malone, inventer of the mrna technology on which the covid vaccines are based, explain the chicanery the fda is using to fool the american people.  the fda on monday approved a biologics license application for the pfizer comirnaty vaccine. the biden white house, with cover from its corporate media shills, immediately reported that vaccine mandates are now legal for military, healthcare workers, college students and employees of just about any business.  but as children’s health defense reports, “there are several bizarre aspects to the fda approval that will prove confusing to those not familiar with the pervasiveness of the fda’s regulatory capture, or the depths of the agency’s cynicism.”  the fda acknowledges that while pfizer has insufficient supplies of the newly licensed comirnaty vaccine actually available, there is “a significant amount” of the pfizer-biontech covid vaccine — which has been produced under emergency use authorization (eua) and will continue to be offered under the same eua status, chd reports.  the fda in its convoluted letter of approval for the pfizer vaccine under the eua should remain unlicensed but can be used “interchangeably” (page 2, footnote 8) with the newly licensed comirnaty product [which is currently unavailable].  according to the fda, the newly licensed pfizer comirnaty vaccine and the existing vaccine, while “legally distinct,” are not any different in terms of their “safety or effectiveness.”  here is the pertinent quote from footnote 8 that proves we are talking about two separate shots and not just a “rebranding” of the same shot as the mainstream media is reporting:  “the licensed vaccine has the same formulation as the eua-authorized vaccine and the products can be used interchangeably to provide the vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns. the products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness.”  the “certain differences” are not specified, but it is perfectly clear that the two jabs are legally distinct.  the below analysis by children’s health defense explains the trickery in which the fda has engaged — all for the legal benefit of the big pharma giant pfizer and the detriment of american citizens.  there is a huge real-world difference between products under an eua compared with those that fda has fully licensed. eua products are experimental under u.s law.  both the nuremberg code and federal regulations provide that no one can force a human being to participate in this experiment. under 21 u.s. code sec.360bbb-3(e)(1)(a)(ii)(iii), “authorization for medical products for use in emergencies,” it is unlawful to deny someone a job or an education because they refuse to be an experimental subject. instead, potential recipients have an absolute right to refuse eua vaccines.  u.s. laws, however, permit employers and schools to require students and workers to take licensed vaccines.  eua-licensed vaccines have an extraordinary liability shield under the 2005 public readiness and preparedness act. vaccine manufacturers, distributors, providers and government planners are immune from liability. the only way an injured party can sue is if he or she can prove willful misconduct, and if the u.s. government has also brought an enforcement action against the party for willful misconduct. no such lawsuit has ever succeeded.  the government has created an extremely stingy compensation program, the countermeasures injury compensation program, to redress injuries from all eua products.  the program’s parsimonious administrators have compensated under 4% of petitioners to date — and not a single covid vaccine injury — despite the fact that physicians, families and injured vaccine recipients have reported more than 600,000 covid vaccine injuries.  at least for the moment, the pfizer comirnaty vaccine has no liability shield. vials of the branded product, which say “comirnaty” on the label, are subject to the same product liability laws as other u.s. products.  when the centers for disease control and prevention’s (cdc) advisory committee for immunization practices places a vaccine on the mandatory schedule, a childhood vaccine benefits from an generous retinue of liability protections.  but licensed adult vaccines, including the new comirnaty, do not enjoy any liability shield. just as with ford’s exploding pinto, or monsanto’s herbicide roundup, people injured by the comirnaty vaccine could potentially sue for damages.  and because adults injured by the vaccine will be able to show that the manufacturer knew of the problems with the product, jury awards could be astronomical.  pfizer is therefore unlikely to allow any american to take a comirnaty vaccine until it can somehow arrange immunity for this product.  given this background, the fda’s acknowledgement in its approval letter that there are insufficient stocks of the licensed comirnaty, but an abundant supply of the eua pfizer biontech jab, exposes the “approval” as a cynical scheme to encourage businesses and schools to impose illegal jab mandates.  the fda’s clear motivation is to enable pfizer to quickly unload inventories of a vaccine that science and the vaccine adverse events reporting system have exposed as unreasonably dangerous, and that the delta variant has rendered obsolete.  americans, told that the pfizer covid vaccine is now licensed, will understandably assume that covid vaccine mandates are lawful. but only eua-authorized vaccines, for which no one has any real liability, will be available during the next few weeks when many school mandate deadlines occur.  the fda appears to be purposefully tricking american citizens into giving up their right to refuse an experimental product.  while the media has trumpeted that the fda has approved covid vaccines, the fda has not approved the pfizer biontech vaccines, nor any covid vaccines for the 12- to 15-year age group, nor any booster doses for anyone.  and fda has not licensed any moderna vaccine, nor any vaccine from johnson & johnson — so the vast majority of vaccines available in the u.s., if not all, remain unlicensed eua products.  here’s what you need to know when somebody orders you to get the vaccine:; ask to see the vial. if it says “comirnaty,” it’s a licensed product. if it says “pfizer-biontech,” it’s an experimental product, and under 21 u.s. code 360bbb, you have the right to refuse.  if it comes from moderna or johnson & johnson (marketed as janssen), you have the right to refuse.  the fda is playing bait and switch with the american public — but we don’t have to play along. if it doesn’t say comirnaty, you have not been offered an approved vaccine.  source: children’s health defense  leohohmann.com is not supported by corporate advertisers or sponsors, but depends solely on reader contributions. donations of any size may be sent c/o leo hohmann, po box 291, newnan, ga 30264, or via credit card below.
fda ‘playing bait and switch’ with americans, tricking them into believing shots currently being offered have been granted full approval when they have not