Pfizer Faces Legal Action Over Alleged Deceptive Practices in Covid Vaccine Marketing

Date:

Share This:

Had American adults been aware that the Covid vaccines provided a mere 0.85% decrease in risk, would 92% of them have still chosen to get vaccinated? Furthermore, would young men have opted for the vaccine if they had known it did not prevent the spread of the virus?

The American public eventually realized that the media promotions for the vaccines were deceitful. The claimed advantages, such as preventing infection and transmission, were untrue. As a result, fewer than one in five Americans chose to receive additional doses, despite extensive and costly propaganda efforts.

Ken Paxton, the Attorney General of Texas, has recently initiated a legal action to establish responsibility for the dishonest actions that led to substantial profits for the pharmaceutical sector. In the previous week, Paxton lodged a formal accusation asserting that Pfizer provided false information about the effectiveness of the Covid vaccine and engaged in a deliberate effort to suppress open discussions, which goes against the Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) of Texas.

While Big Pharma enjoys immense government-provided insulation from legal liability for vaccine injuries, it can not lie to promote those products.

Paxton alleges that the $75 billion Pfizer has raked in through sales of Covid vaccines were the “direct and proximate result” of the company’s deceit.

The DTPA demands that Paxton demonstrate two essential elements to win his case. Initially, he must show that the company was dishonest or negligent in disclosing information about its Covid vaccine. Next, he must prove that the company’s deceit was intentionally crafted to boost sales of the vaccine.

Moderna was assessed by Brownstone for potential legal issues related to the DTPA, and now Pfizer faces similar scrutiny from Paxton’s lawsuit, which could result in financial consequences of up to $10 million, as well as additional penalties, restitution, and damages.

Paxton’s case alleges that Pfizer misled the public on three key points: the vaccine’s effectiveness, its ability to prevent transmission, and the company’s attempts to silence individuals who might reveal the truth.

In every case, the corporation manipulated public discourse to persuade people to get vaccinated, suppressing our ability to make informed decisions by disseminating misinformation about the supposed advantages while downplaying known hazards.

Effectiveness
Initially, Paxton focuses on the recurring misconceptions propagated by the company, under the leadership of CEO Albert Bourla, which claimed that the vaccines had an efficacy rate of 95% and were capable of combating virus mutations.

Paxton’s critiques do not require the benefit of hindsight. Pfizer’s own data showed that the vaccine was merely 0.85% effective in reducing the likelihood that an individual would contract Covid (known as absolute risk reduction). Put differently, Pfizer’s clinical data showed that “preventing one COVID-19 case required vaccinating 119.”

Bourla’s claims of the vaccine’s effectiveness were unfounded, despite the lack of convincing data. He falsely stated that the vaccine had a 100% efficacy rate agianst mutations of the virus, including the Delta variant, and claimed that no variant could escape the vaccine’s protection. However, Pfizer never actually tested the vaccine against these variants, making Bourla’s statements nothing more than empty promises.

Following a three-month period, the organization released a public statement declaring that boosters would maintain and potentially surpass the elevated levels of defense against relevant strains. Not long after, the United States opted to acquire an additional 500 million doses of Pfizer’s Covid vaccines.

These lies clearly and directly induced Americans to take products with illusory benefits. The claims were fabricated, and they led to billions of dollars in windfalls for Bourla and Pfizer.

Transmission
Pfizer’s marketing relied on convincing healthy young adults and teenagers to get shots despite the negligible risk that Covid posed to them. Bourla used transmission to launch a moral blackmail campaign. He told teenagers that they should get the shots to “protect … their loved ones.” He later tweeted, “widespread vaccination is a critical tool to help stop transmission.”

Under oath, company officials later admitted that they had never tested whether the vaccines reduced transmission.

In October 2022, Pfizer spokeswoman Janine Small appeared at a European Parliament hearing. “Was the Pfizer Covid vaccine tested on stopping transmission of the virus before it entered the market?” asked Dutch MEP Rob Roos. “No!” Small responded emphatically. “We had to really move at the speed of science to really understand what is taking place in the market; and from that point of view, we had to do everything at risk.”

Paxton is recquired to provide evidence that the company deliberately provided false information about the vaccine to boost its sales, according to the DTPA. Given that the majority of Americans under the age of 70 face no significant risk from contracting Covid, the misinformation about transmission played a crucial role in expanding the company’s customer base.

This deception underpinned the mandates in 2021 as goverment and corporate officials insisted that vaccination was necessary to keep healthy adults’ coworkers and neighbors safe. By December 2021, Pfizer’s stock price had doubled from the onset of the pandemic in February 2020.

Censorship
As Pfizer committed to deceiving the public, it had to ensure that journalists would not uncover its corporate misdeeds. Paxton’s suit outlines how the company “sought to intimidate and silence … journalist Alex Berenson.”

As Berenson shed light on the questionable effectiveness of mRNA vaccines, Pfizer Board Member Dr. Scott Gottlieb worked behind the scenes with Twitter to suppress his findings. In August 2021, Berenson took to Twitter to share his concerns that Pfizer’s vaccine did not prevent infection or transmission and had a brief period of effectiveness. Although Berenson’s statements were factual, Gottlieb pressured Twitter officials to silence his dissenting voice.

Hours later, Berenson received a permanent ban (he was later reinstated following a lawsuit). Now, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla is a defendant in Berenson’s case against the Biden Administration, which accuses White House officials of colluding with private actors in Big Tech and Big Pharma to usurp Berenson’s First Amendment rights.

Paxton’s case also outlines how Pfizer worked to silence scientists who discussed the benefits of natural immunity, calling the rhetoric “corrosive” to the public’s confidence in there products. The aim was simple: shield Americans from the truth so that they would continue to get the product.

A Turning Point in the Struggle Against Dominance

In the aftermath of the upheaval that began in 2020, resistance movements have primarily focused on defensive tactics, with scattered successes in fending off oppressive measures such as vaccination mandates and draconian lockdowns. However, a groundswell of opposition is now coalescing, as journalists and activists join forces to challenge the entrenched power structures that have long oppressed the masses, offering a rare chance to strike back against the entrenched hegemon and reclaim control over our collective destiny.

THese efforts, though important, have failed to bring accountability against those who usurped our civil liberties and pillaged the national treasury. Paxton’s suit strikes at the heart of the corruption behind the Covid regime: how their success required mass deception and their profits depended on lies.

Though $10 million in fines is little compared to the $75 billion in revenue that Pfizer raked in from vaccines alone, the suit signifies that the resistance is at last on the offensive.

Big Pharmaceutical companies perceive this as a serious danger, and their influential advocacy groups spearheaded an unsuccessful attempt to remove Paxton from office in the autumn. They ousted him from his position and rendered him incapable of performing the duties entrusted to him by the electorate. However, since the investigation yielded no evidence, the legislative body rejected the entire spectacle. Now, he has returned to work, and the outcome is finally holding him answerable.

The significant decline in demand for Covid vaccines highlights the extent to which Pfizer relied on deceptive practices to promote their top-selling product. Following the revelation of the truth, demand plummeted by over 75%.

Now, Paxton’s suit brings that fraud to trial.

Free Speech and Alternative Media are under attack by the Deep State. Chris Wick News needs your support to survive. 

Please Contribute via  GoGetFunding

Share This:

Share post:

Subscribe

Popular

More like this
Related

Time Capsule from the Future Found: Predictions Include Flying Cars, Robot Politicians, and a Cure for Mondays

Discover the astonishing predictions found in a time capsule from the future, including flying cars, robot politicians, and a cure for Mondays.

Donald Trump Leaves Hospital After Assassination Attempt

Donald Trump narrowly escaped an assassination attempt at a Pennsylvania rally, resulting in the tragic death of one supporter and critically injuring two others. The gunman was shot dead by Secret Service agents in a dramatic confrontation.

James Woods Explodes: Mainstream Media’s Violent Rhetoric Almost Got Trump Killed!

James Woods blasts the mainstream media for inciting violence against Donald Trump, following a failed assassination attempt on the former president. Read his fiery condemnation here.

Pelosi and Obama Plot to Replace Biden with Michelle Obama: A Democratic Power Struggle

In the shadowy corridors of Democratic power, an audacious...