Tag Archives: NHI

Conflicts of Interest in Pfizer Vaccine Trial

Oh what a tangled web pharma weaves with its arbiters of vaccine safety. Appointed in secret, meeting in secret, identities kept secret, and all paid by the companies they are supposed to oversee. What could possibly go wrong?!

ICAN’s attorneys have done some more digging since we warned in 2020 that the Data and Safety Monitoring Boards (DSMBs) overseeing vaccine trials were compromised by financial ties to Big Pharma. Now, thanks to the dogged FOIA efforts of ICAN’s attorneys to research documents produced from Pfizer’s biological product file, we see just how deep the corruption goes.

Among the latest cache of documents extracted from the FDA is a 61-page document, entitled Investigational BNT162 Vaccine Program, which describes Pfizer’s internal-review mechanism for the Covid-19 vaccine trials it conducted in 2020 and 2021. Pages 51 and 52 list five original members of Pfizer’s ‘External Data Monitoring Committee’ (EDMC), its own DSMB, with two more members added in February 2021. (Interestingly, these two members are both Maternal Fetal Medicine doctors).

Of the original five members, we knew of one early on because a CBS article revealed in September 2020, apparently by mistake, the inclusion of Kathryn Edwards, MD, a professor at Vanderbilt University. In case you missed our earlier briefing about her, here’s a brief recap: She was a paid advisor to Pfizer directly before joining the DSMB. She has also received payments, speaking fees, or funding from numerous pharmaceutical companies, including Moderna, Merck, and Smith-Kline Beecham, while Sanofi provided her with trips to Paris, Dublin, Amsterdam, and Cancun, among other destinations. Nice work if you can get it!

But surely she would be forthcoming about all such connections, right? Well, in her July 2020 presentation to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), titled COVID’19 Vaccine Safety Considerations, the conflict conveniently was never disclosed despite the fact that she had been on a COVID-19 DSMB for over 3 months at that point!

Now, we finally have the names of the other DSMB members too. But before we look at them, here’s a reminder of what NIAID director Anthony Fauci, told an interviewer in September 2020. The DSMBs, he said, are “beholden to no one, not to the president, not to the vaccine companies, not to the FDA. Not to me.”

Well, this certainly doesn’t stand up in the case of Kathryn Edwards, but how accurate is Fauci’s pronouncement when it comes to the other members of Pfizer’s DSMB reviewing vaccine trial data? Here’s a thumbnail sketch:

Jonathan Zenilman, MD, of Johns Hopkins University, was the chair of the committee. He received consulting fees from Pfizer in every year from 2014 to 2020 to the tune of $78,279 ($28,168 in 2020 alone). Beyond that, he received $6,045.09 in compensation from being wined and dined, and travelling at Pfizer’s expense between 2014 and 2019. His other Big Pharma patrons over these years include GSK, Merck, Smith & Nephew, Cubist, Siemens Medical Solutions, Cipla, Tetraphase Pharma, The Medicines Company, K2M, Becton, Dickinson and Company, Perrigo, and Theravance. Between 2014 and 2020, Dr. Zenilman received an astonishing $91,257.69 from these pharmaceutical companies (including Pfizer) excluding research funding. In addition, Zenilman has received
NIH funding.
Robert Belshe, MD, founder of the Center for Vaccine Development at Saint Louis University School of Medicine, received various consulting fees and compensation from Pfizer, GSK, Dermira, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Merck, Emergent Biosolutions, Comsort, Seqirus, Novartis, and Viiv Healthcare during every year from 2014 to 2020, and from AstraZeneca every year from 2014 to 2018. “How much” you ask? An incredible total of $452,794.26, excluding research funding. Pfizer was especially forthcoming with consulting fees, speaking fees, and generous helpings of “Food and Beverage” and “Travel and Lodging,” compensating him $36,225 in 2020 alone. Dr. Belshe disclosed his own conflicts in a 2019 article: Belshe has been a consultant and/or speaker for GSK, Medimmune, Sanofi, Flugen, Novavax, Merck, and Moderna; owns stock/stock options in Flugen; is a scientific board member for Flugen; and has served on data safety monitoring board for GSK, MedImmune, Vical, and Vaxart.
Lawrence Stanberry, MD, of Columbia University, received more than $23,000 from Pfizer in 2020, as well as research funding from the NIH, CDC, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.   He reports consulting fees from Janssen, GSK, and Novartis and is a member of the scientific advisory board of Abivax. Nothing to see here!
Robert Philips Heine, MD, of Wake Forest Baptist Health in Winston-Salem, NC, received $27,450.28 in payments from pharmaceutical companies between 2014 and 2020 for travel and lodging, food and beverage, and consulting fees. Pfizer provided the bulk of these payments with $4,812.50 for consulting fees in 2020 alone. Heine has been a consultant and speaker for GSK and Merck and has received research funding from GSK. His work has been funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Heather S. Lipkind, MS, MS, of Yale School of Medicine, accepted consulting fees and research funding from Pfizer during 2019 and 2020, for a total of $21,660.

Steve Self, PhD, a statistician at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, is also a board member of Health Stream Analytics, an organization developing “novel easy-to-use biometric sensors.”

We’ve said it before, but now we’re saying it again, and louder: the individuals involved with overseeing and green-lighting Covid-19 injections are a cozy club of insiders whose pockets are now further richly lined with Big Pharma spoils.

To share this legal update, please use this link: https://www.icandecide.org/ican_press/conflicts-of-interest-in-pfizer-vaccine-

Source: https://www.icandecide.org/

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

NHI vs EcoHealth Alliance

The NIH is now trying to evade responsibility by shifting blame for the unlawful research onto EcoHealth Alliance, saying they violated the grant rules. https://bit.ly/2Z6hK5o

#TheDefender: SIGN UP TODAY–> https://bit.ly/2Qi3Qc8

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

DOCTOR DAN STOCK DESTROYS THE CDC AND NIH COVID-19 NARRATIVE

Dr. Dan Stock: “Everything Being Recommended by the CDC and State Board of Health Is Actually Contrary to All the Rules of Science”. MUST WATCH ”

 CDC DIRECTOR: THOSE WHO GOT VACCINATED EARLY WILL GET SEVERE DISEASE, BE HOSPITALIZED, DIE…WHAT?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/OoOTut1x2vlF/

Dr David Martin and Dr Reiner Fuellmich: A manufactured illusion! There is no variant… not novel… no pandemic!” https://www.bitchute.com/video/MkxGq0agfgIb/ “Top Doctor Peter McCullough on with top lawyer Reiner Fuelmich June 11, 2021” https://www.bitchute.com/video/cG8ddpo2z8RS/
“The Manufacturing of a Mass Psychosis – Can Sanity Return to an Insane World?” https://www.bitchute.com/video/WnQEHxIGcBO1/
NO RECORD FOUND! https://tinyurl.com/norecordfound
SHOW US THE VIRUS: https://www.showusthevirus.info

“The Nuremberg Code” (pdf) https://tinyurl.com/volutaryinformedconsent

Reiner Fuellmich (June 9, 2021) Interview – Worldwide Legal cases & what’s coming this Fall & Winter: https://www.bitchute.com/video/TbC8dY3J40cd/

MUST WATCH “Nürnberg/Nuremberg 2.0 – For perpetrators in pharma, politics, media and judiciary (nowhere to hide)” https://www.bitchute.com/video/WhNKhe6XpVIM/
“Excellent interview with Lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich” https://www.bitchute.com/video/ecb9KF9SSdhP/
“Dr. Reiner Fuellmich powertalk: “WE HAVE THE EVIDENCE!” – We Need A Nuremberg 2.0!” https://www.bitchute.com/video/lNcDxtHFZgbq/
“Covid-19 CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY – Dr. Reiner Fuellmich” https://www.bitchute.com/video/pk8FEJJ5V4yb/
“To all Members of the European Union: Make a wise choice! (25/04/21)”: https://tinyurl.com/toEUmembers and Download (pdf) “Euthanasia-planned”: https://tinyurl.com/euthanasia-planned

“Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: Truth about PCR-tests!”: https://www.bitchute.com/video/J2dwctgxFeqh/
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJB8ANhWVhgQf9Rw-KJo26Q
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich website: https://www.corona-schadensersatzklage.de/

 

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

FEDERAL COURT RULES IN ICAN’S FAVOR AND ORDERS COVID-19 SAFETY DATA TO BE DISCLOSED

After months of NIH objecting, and after seeking Court intervention, ICAN’s attorneys have won a motion which now forces the NIH to unredact and disclose safety-related data they tried to withhold from Moderna’s Phase 1 clinical trial report.
 
As a result of a FOIA request, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) provided ICAN a copy of an internal 322-page Safety Summary Report along with over 700 pages of Appendices to that report, detailing safety data from Moderna’s Phase I clinical trial for its and NIAID’s COVID-19 vaccine. This report was previously shared with ICAN supporters and was the first and only time we are aware of that this report was made public. It can be downloaded here.
After reviewing the report, ICAN challenged the redactions made within the document, explaining their importance to the public. NIH fought back but the Court, in its June 24, 2021 decision, ultimately ruled in ICAN’s and the public’s favor holding that the “NIH cannot articulate a sufficient privacy interest to justify redacting” the information that it did and that “the public interest in seeing the full data outweighs any individual privacy concerns” of the clinical trial participants. The unredacted data will be provided within a few days and ICAN will immediately make it available so that everyone can see what information is being withheld from the public.

ICAN also challenged the adequacy of the agency’s search and believes there are likely more responsive documents in NIH’s possession. To address this issue, ICAN has now filed additional FOIA requests to obtain copies of these documents, and any new productions will be shared. ICAN will never rest in its fight to expose the truth regarding these products or in demanding full transparency and full informed consent for any and all vaccines, especially as these manufacturers seek FDA licensure for these experimental COVID-19 vaccines.

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

Contract signed by Baric and Moderna regarding delivery of “mRNA-coronavirus vaccine candidates

Daily reminder: You can find Ralph Baric’s signature here on page 105 – 107, contract signed by Baric and Moderna regarding delivery of “mRNA-coronavirus vaccine candidates” – SIGNED 12th Dec 2019.

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/6935295/NIH-Moderna-Confidential-Agreements.pdf

Source Inquiry, reference [27]:
https://www.citizen.org/article/the-nih-vaccine/#_ftn27

NIH-Moderna-Confidential-Agreements

Fair Use Notice: Images/logos/graphics on this page contains some copyrighted material whose use has not been authorized by the copyright owners. We believe that this not-for-profit, educational, and/or criticism or commentary use on the Web constitutes a fair use of the copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law).

Vaccine Related Grants

 

Vaccine Related Grants

GAVI–>Bill Gates Foundation–>Moderna

Bill Gates Foundation–>CDC–>NHI

Bill Gates Foundation–>INOVIO

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use

NIH AND MODERNA RELEASE DATA IN RESPONSE TO ICAN LAWSUIT

Repost from The Highwire with Del Bigtree.

After months of objections, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Moderna have capitulated and provided ICAN a copy of their internal 322-page Safety Summary Report and now over 700 pages of the Appendices to that report, for the Phase I trial of their COVID-19 vaccine (mRNA-1273).  A full copy of this report and its appendices is available below and this is the first time it is being made available to the public.
We shared a few weeks ago that ICAN received the first 332 of over 1,000 pages of Moderna’s safety data from its Phase I trial, which it stated in its press release was “positive interim clinical data” that “substantiate[d] [their] belief that mRNA-1273 has the potential to prevent COVID-19 disease.”
ICAN has now received the complete report which contains an additional 714 pages of Appendices.  It can be downloaded here.  ICAN and its subscribers are the first people in the world, outside of NIH and Moderna, to actually see this data.  Like last time, we will be carefully studying all of the disclosed data but ICAN wanted to widely disseminate it immediately so that others have the opportunity to do the same.
This report and its appendices were produced to ICAN in response to ICAN’s original FOIA request, and resulting litigation, for: “All safety and efficacy data and information regarding mRNA-1273, including from the Phase I clinical trial of this experimental vaccine conducted by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.”
What ICAN has received provides important information for the public to know in evaluating Moderna’s vaccine, which just this week was claimed to be 94.5% effective.  The Appendices contain, among other things, a breakdown of all local and systemic adverse events and categorize them as mild, moderate, and severe.
ICAN’s legal team are still seeking additional documents responsive to its original request as this report and its appendices do not address efficacy (only safety) despite Moderna’s initial press release comments about efficacy.  ICAN will also challenge some of the redactions made within the document.
ICAN will never rest in its fight to expose the truth regarding these products or in demanding full transparency and full informed consent for any and all vaccines, especially as we get closer to these manufacturers seeking FDA authorization or licensure for these experimental COVID-19 vaccines.
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

NIH and Moderna Phase 1 Clinical Trial

Repost from  The Highwire with Del Bigtree

After months of objections, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Moderna have capitulated and provided ICAN a copy of their internal 322-page Safety Summary Report for the Phase I trial of their COVID-19 vaccine (mRNA-1273). A full copy of this report is available below and this is the first time it is being made available to the public.

On May 18, 2020, Moderna issued a press release claiming the data from its Phase I trial “substantiate our belief that mRNA-1273 has the potential to prevent COVID-19 disease.” Since this trial was actually conducted by the NIH, ICAN submitted a FOIA request on May 22, 2020 to NIH for: “All safety and efficacy data and information regarding mRNA-1273, including from the Phase I clinical trial of this experimental vaccine conducted by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.” ICAN requested that NIH grant expedited processing for this request. 

On June 8, 2020, NIH recognized the “compelling need” to expeditiously release to the public the information ICAN sought by granting its request for expedited processing. But then NIH failed to produce anything. Therefore, ICAN sued the NIH on August 13, 2020 in federal court to force NIH to release this data. NIH then finally sent a “final response” to ICAN stating: “The safety data for this study comprises 1,093 pages. I have determined to withhold those records in their entirety pursuant to [exemptions that] protect information that constitutes trade secret information and information that is confidential and commercial or financial in nature.” 

ICAN did not accept this objection and its attorneys, led by Aaron Siri, informed the court that we would argue for the documents via briefs to the court. NIH’s opening brief – explaining why it should not produce this data – was set to be due to the Court on October 30, 2020. Eight days before that due date, on October 22, 2020, NIH and Moderna abruptly reversed their position and advised that they would produce all of the data. 

On October 29, 2020, ICAN received the first 332 of 1,093 pages — the remainder of which will be produced shortly. It can be downloaded here. ICAN and its subscribers are the first people in the world, outside of NIH and Moderna, to actually see this data. We will be carefully studying all of the disclosed data but ICAN wanted to widely disseminate it immediately so that others have the opportunity to do the same.  

Despite only receiving a portion of the data, what ICAN has already received provides important information for the public to know in evaluating Moderna’s vaccine. For example, the documents ICAN received reveal that approximately 70% of participants reported unsolicited adverse events, many of which are extremely concerning.  

Just as the pharmaceutical companies will never rest when it comes to promoting and selling their vaccine products, we will never rest in exposing the truth regarding these products or in demanding full transparency and full informed consent for any and all vaccines.

Fair Use: In some instances, we include someone else’s footage that is covered in Fair Use for Documentary and Educational purposes with the intention of driving commentary and allowing freedom of speech.