patrick.net

Ah, @ZZ611 is Dr. Zelenko on Gab.com:

https://gab.com/ZZ611

Not on Twitter.

Ah, now I get it:


original link

I'll put this in the OP.

The existing Pfizer jab was not approved by the FDA.

The FDA approved a different Pfizer jab which does not exist yet.

This is really the key to understanding the FDA statement:

"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."

The vaccine that was, and CONTINUES to be available is under EUA for individuals, INCLUDING these specific groups.

https://rumble.com/vlmd4g-pfizer-seeking-full-indemnification.html


original link

Robert W Malone, MD
@RWMaloneMD
11h
What is Pfizer so afraid of if these vaccines are perfectly safe?

https://twitter.com/RWMaloneMD/status/1430224705106202632#m

Tallystick
@tallystick
11h
Replying to @RWMaloneMD
That is telling to me. Corporations or government have no standing to mandate any medicine that it has not recourse attached to it. I see a bright shiny line coming into view.

Gary Wiggin
@GaryWiggin
11h
Replying to @RWMaloneMD
Why is Pfizer not mandating their employees get vaccinated?
6:11 PM · Aug 24, 2021

Barbara Martin
@BMartin0318
5h
Replying to @GaryWiggin @RWMaloneMD
Is that true... Pfizer not mandating their employees to get their vax?

Gary Wiggin
@GaryWiggin
4h
Yes. Watch the CEO interview with Lester Holt.

Alex Berenson
@AlexBerenson

1/ So now that Come-Here-Naughty is approved (ish), the @moderna_tx @JNJNews lose their Emergency Use Authorizations, right? Because there's an approved alternative and you can't have an EUA when there are "adequate, approved, and available alternatives."

2/ Or is this another reason @us_fda is going out of its way to say Comirnaty is not available?

"although COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) is approved... there is not sufficient approved vaccine available for distribution to this population."

3/ Whatever game(s) they are playing here, they're being too clever by half.

SOURCE: Footnote 9

Patrick says

Ah, now I get it:


original link

I'll put this in the OP.

The existing Pfizer jab was not approved by the FDA.

The FDA approved a different Pfizer jab which does not exist yet.

Holy shit

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/mainstream-media-fda-approval-pfizer-vaccine/
Interesting article about approved vaccine

WookieMan says

I'm concerned about what is happening at the higher levels and what is trying to be hidden at this point.

You, me and almost everyone on pat.net knew this almost a year ago. Hell, I had all my big fights with family and friends over Covid (from trying to get them to use logic and critical thinking) 14 months ago.

Patrick says

The FDA approved a different Pfizer jab which does not exist yet.

Now we investigate how/why the hell the FDA would approve something that doesn't exist. Who will oversee the approved product to make sure it is, in fact, what was approved? Meaning, how will we KNOW that the product won't be chemically different?

Ok, so I have it on authority that the FDA approved the clot shot for everyone 16+. The 12-15 ages are still under the EUA, which is part of what triggered the confusion.

Minime says

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/mainstream-media-fda-approval-pfizer-vaccine/
Interesting article about approved vaccine

Americans, told that the Pfizer COVID vaccine is now licensed, will understandably assume 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 the FDA has not licensed any Moderna vaccine, nor any vaccine from Johnson & Johnson — so the vast majority, if not all, of vaccines available in the U.S. 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.

But Pfizer has liability for “Comirnaty”, for now, so they are not likely to supply it and risk lawsuits.

https://uncanceled.news/were-the-pfizer-vaccines-approved-because-they-establish-a-perpetual-need-for-booster-shots/

Were the Pfizer ‘Vaccines’ Approved Because They Establish a Perpetual Need for Booster Shots?

Is there any doubt in your mind?

Shaman says

Ok, so I have it on authority that the FDA approved the clot shot for everyone 16+. The 12-15 ages are still under the EUA, which is part of what triggered the confusion.

Glad my kids are younger than that for a little bit more. Unvaccinated home here and hoping to keep it that way (for Covid).

Shaman says

Ok, so I have it on authority that the FDA approved the clot shot for everyone 16+. The 12-15 ages are still under the EUA, which is part of what triggered the confusion.

No they didn't. See my explanation of the confusing English they intentionally used in their statement. Also, if there is an approved, available treatment, all EUA's would immediately be revoked(see Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine).

No one has mentioned MIS-C, which is a more likely outcome than death for COVID-19 in minors. I think that is the main factor you're balancing again myo- and pericarditis in when you're thinking about vaccinating the 12 and up crowd.

Fuck, @ceffer that’s brutal.
And it’s a completely fair metaphor for the vaccine mandates. The society-wide madness that led to “witch burnings” is exactly the same sort of madness that’s taking hold now.

EBGuy says

No one has mentioned MIS-C, which is a more likely outcome than death for COVID-19 in minors. I think that is the main factor you're balancing again myo- and pericarditis in when you're thinking about vaccinating the 12 and up crowd.

Fair point, but only 4500 cases with 4.6 Million positive tests. That would give you 0.1% chance (probably lower since many more kids have been exposed but never showed symptoms and thus never got tested), with the Pfizer jab having a 1 in 9 chance of SAE, that's still a 100 fold risk of getting maimed by the jab.

Patrick says

But Pfizer has liability for “Comirnaty”, for now,

Do they? Remember that leaked purchase agreement between them and some Eastern European nation, the one where it went on and on about how the purchasing government would protect the company from ANY and ALL liability, including changing their laws if those got in the way?

Your only option in a lawsuit is the government buffer. At that point, you're getting compensation from other taxpayers if you manage to win. There is no legal avenue against these companies.

mell says

the Pfizer jab having a 1 in 9 chance of SAE, that's still a 100 fold risk of getting maimed by the jab.

Still trying to figure out what you're referring to mell. Is it this, or something else? If something else, a link would be helpful.
Severe adverse reactions (grade ≥3, defined as interfering with daily activity) occurred more commonly with the vaccine (10.7%) compared with placebo (1.9%). The most common grade 3 symptoms reported by vaccine recipients were fatigue (3.5%), fever (3.0%), headache (2.7%), chills (2.1%), and injection site pain (1.5%). Generally, grade ≥3 reactions were more commonly reported after the second dose than after the first dose.
Adverse events classified as serious† were reported in more recipients of vaccine than placebo, overall (0.4% vs. 0.2%) and by system organ class; they represented medical events that occur in the general population at a frequency similar to that observed in the study. No specific safety concerns were identified.

EBGuy says

mell says

the Pfizer jab having a 1 in 9 chance of SAE, that's still a 100 fold risk of getting maimed by the jab.

Still trying to figure out what you're referring to mell. Is it this, or something else? If something else, a link would be helpful.
Severe adverse reactions (grade ≥3, defined as interfering with daily activity) occurred more commonly with the vaccine (10.7%) compared with placebo (1.9%). The most common grade 3 symptoms reported by vaccine recipients were fatigue (3.5%), fever (3.0%), headache (2.7%), chills (2.1%), and injection site pain (1.5%). Generally, grade ≥3 reactions were more commonly reported after the second dose than after the first dose.
Adverse events classified as serious† were reported in more recipients of vaccine than...

No it's here:

https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-risk-statement/

"In terms of safety, the Pfizer clinical trial recorded severe adverse events in 1 in 91 vaccinated subjects age 16 years or older and in 1 in 9 subjects age 12 to 15 years. The CDC recorded"

Keep in mind that you can probably safely assume that 40 Million kids have come in contact with sars cov 2 since only the few symptomatic get tested. Now so many kids have already natural immunity which is much better and does not have the risk of ADE, and those who don't may never acquire covid. So the absolute risk of MIS-C is miniscule. Also interesting would be how many of those with MIS-C had comorbodities. Either way it simply doesn't make sense by a long shot for kids to take an agent with such high risks of SAE for a miniscule risk of severe covid.

There is one - albeit small - argument for the clot shot and that is that the US government is actively suppressing proven treatments and instructing MDs and hospitals to do nothing until it's time for the ICU, i.e. actively murdering patients. And they are choking the supply of proven treatments at every level, domestically and overseas. Still the odds are stacked against most of those taking the clot shot imo. You can bitch about de santis but at least he is actively sponsoring and allowing for/instructing treatments that work, albeit the most expensive ones. See a pattern here?

Btw. The do nothing murderous approach is installed worldwide in many countries. When close elderly family overseas came down with it, the MD said on the phone he would never show up cause he needed a space suit (of course they were also barred from visiting the office), they were both placed under house arrest for weeks and told to call the ambulance for a ride to the ER/ICU if it got really bad. If I ever cross paths with that coward MD again may the Lord have mercy on his soul ;) I mean we forgive as we forget, but a long time will have to pass for this and luckily a larger pond is separating us. I can't believe what this society has come to and what bunch of sniveling cowards most modern MDs have become, yes men and bought and paid for tools for big pharma.

mell says

No it's here:

Interesting. Let the record show that "Physicians for Informed consent" actually links to the CDC data I posted (so we both referring to the same data set). The 1 in 9 SAEs (severe adverse events) refer to fatigue, fever, headache, chills and injection site pain. That said, these SAEs do occur MUCH MORE often in youths (12 to 15 years old) than adults (about on order of magnitude more often). The 10x factor was probably why 12-15 age range is still operating under EUA and did NOT get the full approval. YMMV.

HunterTits says

The entire government is corrupt. The Law doesn't mean shit. At. All.

So start doing whatever the fuck you want.

There's still that little issue with arbitrary and selective enforcement (aka invidious persecution for fake cause).

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/mainstream-media-fda-approval-pfizer-vaccine/

Ceffer says

There's still that little issue with arbitrary and selective enforcement

Exactly.

This totally undermines respect for the law.

Fauci just outright lied to Congress about his gain-of-function research in Wuhan.

Rand Paul asked that charges be brought, because lying to Congress is a crime.

What do we get from the DOJ? Crickets...

@Patrick Just read Booger's link, and that's one of the most complete explanations I've heard outside the Malone interview. Should add to OP.

https://leohohmann.com/2021/08/25/fda-playing-bait-and-switch-with-americans-tricking-them-into-believing-shots-currently-being-offered-have-been-granted-full-approval-when-they-have-not/

Erik A.G. Hanon
@HanonErik
4h
Replying to @RWMaloneMD
If they are playing switcheroo games with the product approvals, they are obviously not 100% confident they will always be extrajudicial.

https://twitter.com/HanonErik/status/1430945738968772614#m

https://usawatchdog.com/comirnaty-cv19-vax-approval-is-actually-fraudulent-chris-martenson/

Dr. Chris Martenson holds a PhD in toxicology from Duke University and is a futurist and economic researcher. Martenson says the FDA just approved a Pfizer CV19 vaccine named Comirnaty, but the public is not getting it. This is classic bait and switch because the public is still getting the same Pfizer jab they have been getting all along. It’s still experimental (Emergency Use Authorization or EUA), and it still gives Pfizer total immunity from liability. Dr. Martenson explains, “For all practical purposes, there are two identical drugs. One stays under EUA, and one has been given approval. The problem is the one given approval, and if you are in the United States, you can’t get it. There is none here. So, they approved something that doesn’t exist.

Patrick says

https://usawatchdog.com/comirnaty-cv19-vax-approval-is-actually-fraudulent-chris-martenson/


Dr. Chris Martenson holds a PhD in toxicology from Duke University and is a futurist and economic researcher. Martenson says the FDA just approved a Pfizer CV19 vaccine named Comirnaty, but the public is not getting it. This is classic bait and switch because the public is still getting the same Pfizer jab they have been getting all along. It’s still experimental (Emergency Use Authorization or EUA), and it still gives Pfizer total immunity from liability. Dr. Martenson explains, “For all practical purposes, there are two identical drugs. One stays under EUA, and one has been given approval. The problem is the one given approval, and if you are in the United States, you can’t get it. There is none here. So, they approved somethi...

Isn't it pretty much a matter of slapping a different label on the vial?

Yes, it is, but with massive legal differences.

The current "vaccine" is still NOT approved and Pfizer has zero liability for it if it kills you, as it has killed so many already (minimum 11,000 in the US, probably actually well over 50,000).

But the approved "vaccine" is not available, exactly because they are making Pfizer liable for the death and destruction it causes.

The reported "approval" is simply a corporate media lie of intergalactic proportions.

Every injection is still with the unapproved label.

But it's interesting - why didn't the obvious corrupt FDA just approve it under all labels and remove all liability from their masters as Pfizer? There must be some legal hitch they are worried about. What is that hitch exactly?

I love this line:

"Pfizer is therefore unlikely to allow any American to take a Comirnaty vaccine until it can somehow arrange immunity for this product. 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."

You must always have the right to refuse injections or you are not a free human being.

There's a strange rumor from citizen journalists on Bitchute that perhaps 50 percent of the vaccines have been replaced by 'White Hats' with saline. They also state the 'true' vaccination rate is about 36 percent, so only 18 percent have gotten the 'real' vaccine. Is this why some people are 'fine' after vax?
They also state (more than a few ?circular gossip?) that the FDA approval was a trap, because to get things the way they wanted, they approved a clause that means that Pfizer MUST reveal the contents of their vaccines, which they have not had to do so far.
They think when the contents are published (14 days from 'approval') that Pfizer will be toast, because they will have to show the nano tech that they put in vaccines. Also, the nano tech is designed to react to 5G radiation. 5G was always designed for social control modalities and to implement pathology and even death through transhumanism.

Of course, this could just be more daft hopium. I guess we'll see, I'll try to post links later.

Here's one of at least two independent sources:

@Ceffer You do realize that sounds bat guano crazy? I'm not saying your wrong, BTW. But on the face of it sounds ludacrious. 5G radiation and nanotechnology? That's some next level conspiracy right there...

5G is on my 'conspiracy theory' research index. I think there could be something to it, but it is too early to reach conclusions, but not too early to spitball and speculate.