Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 31 Posted January 31 (edited) 28 minutes ago, JaCrispy said: So I got the actual name of the company wrong…The premise of my argument still stands, in that we should be questioning Big Pharma at every turn and not just rubber stamping everything they want to do…wouldn’t you agree? 👍 28 minutes ago, JaCrispy said: So I got the actual name of the company wrong…The premise of my argument still stands, in that we should be questioning Big Pharma at every turn and not just rubber stamping everything they want to do…wouldn’t you agree? 👍 You got the company wrong, the date wrong and the ruling wrong. you didn't get anything right. Edited January 31 by Joe Ferguson forever
JaCrispy Posted January 31 Author Posted January 31 (edited) 58 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: You got the company wrong, the date wrong and the ruling wrong. you didn't get anything right. This is little bit of misinformation… Pfizer In 2009, Pfizer paid $2.3 billion to settle charges of illegally promoting Bextra, Geodon, Lyrica, and Zyvox. Let’s add a little context, shall we? I said 20 years ago, when it was actually 16… I also said largest ever, when at the time, it WAS the largest (if not one of the largest) up that point in time… So, again, we can go back and forth with the semantics all day long… But again, in the end, my premise still stands… By you posting even larger Big Pharma settlements in recent years, you only further prove RFK’s point, why simultaneously dismantling your own argument… We should not be completely relying on what these corporations are telling us, and should question them at every turn, while demanding greater testing…👍 Please tell me your next comeback is not gonna be that it was actually 15 years, 9 months, instead 16 years…😉 Edited January 31 by JaCrispy 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 31 Posted January 31 38 minutes ago, JaCrispy said: This is little bit of misinformation… Pfizer In 2009, Pfizer paid $2.3 billion to settle charges of illegally promoting Bextra, Geodon, Lyrica, and Zyvox. Let’s add a little context, shall we? I said 20 years ago, when it was actually 16… I also said largest ever, when at the time, it WAS the largest (if not one of the largest) up that point in time… So, again, we can go back and forth with the semantics all day long… But again, in the end, my premise still stands… By you posting even larger Big Pharma settlements in recent years, you only further prove RFK’s point, why simultaneously dismantling your own argument… We should not be completely relying on what these corporations are telling us, and should question them at every turn, while demanding greater testing…👍 Please tell me your next comeback is not gonna be that it was actually 15 years, 9 months, instead 16 years…😉 it was for fraud, not "malpractice". They illegally promoted the drugs for off label use. It actually is pretty common but at the time was systematically done by Pfizer drug reps under direction of management. Of course, we should not take pharma's word as gospel. And we don't. That's why they were found guilty and fined billions in these 2 cases. Additionally, there are checks and balances from regulatory bodies such as the FDA and for vaccines, the aforementioned VAER program and others mentioned in the piece I reproduced here. Finally, physicians who prescribe the products act as watchdogs by reporting adverse reactions. Vioxx and Phen-fen were pulled from the market for just this reason. The FDA is not perfect but is generally more conservative about approving drugs than European regulatory bodies. My big complaint with Big Pharma is drug costs. We should have a national formulary with negotiated prices for all Medicare patients and eventually all patients under single payor. Biden started the ball rolling for Medicare. I don't have much faith in trump continuing it. 1
JaCrispy Posted January 31 Author Posted January 31 Just now, Joe Ferguson forever said: it was for fraud, not "malpractice". They illegally promoted the drugs for off label use. It actually is pretty common but at the time was systematically done by Pfizer drug reps under direction of management. Of course, we should not take pharma's word as gospel. And we don't. That's why they were found guilty and fined billions in these 2 cases. Additionally, there are checks and balances from regulatory bodies such as the FDA and for vaccines, the aforementioned VAER program and others mentioned in the piece I reproduced here. Finally, physicians who prescribe the products act as watchdogs by reporting adverse reactions. Vioxx and Phen-fen were pulled from the market for just this reason. The FDA is not perfect but is generally more conservative about approving drugs than European regulatory bodies. My big complaint with Big Pharma is drug costs. We should have a national formulary with negotiated prices for all Medicare patients and eventually all patients under single payor. Biden started the ball rolling for Medicare. I don't have much faith in trump continuing it. 3 things… First, I had complete, and utter confidence you would use a semantics argument in your response…Thanks for not letting me down…😉 Second, the regulatory bodies for checks and balances are bought and paid for by the pharmaceutical industry…That’s why their standards for testing are not as high as they used to be decades ago… Third, many physicians are intimidated, and in many cases, threatened that they will lose their license to practice, if they speak negatively about pharma drugs or vaccines…I know, because this is what happened to my doctor during COVID, when I shared my concerns… Your idea on negotiated pricing is intriguing… I’ve heard prescription drugs are far cheaper in other countries… I’m curious if opening up other drug markets, in other countries, could help in the negotiating down of prices, by creating competition…And if so, I could see why Big Pharma might not like that… The main issue is that we are fighting a battle where not everyone has the same interest…You and I want lower drug costs, Big Pharma doesn’t…Who has more influence over our elected officials? Big Pharma…I think that’s the real issue here… 1 1
Steve O Posted February 1 Posted February 1 (edited) 19 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: from the actual HHS VAERS site: VAERS accepts reports of adverse events that occur following vaccination. Anyone, including Healthcare providers, vaccine manufacturers, and the public can submit reports to the system. While very important in monitoring vaccine safety, VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness. Vaccine providers are encouraged to report any clinically significant health problem following vaccination to VAERS even if they are not sure if the vaccine was the cause. In some situations, reporting to VAERS is required of healthcare providers and vaccine manufacturers. VAERS reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable. Reports to VAERS can also be biased. As a result, there are limitations on how the data can be used scientifically. Data from VAERS reports should always be interpreted with these limitations in mind. The strengths of VAERS are that it is national in scope and can often quickly detect an early hint or warning of a safety problem with a vaccine. VAERS is one component of CDC's and FDA's multifaceted approach to monitoring safety after vaccines are licensed or authorized for use. There are multiple, complementary systems that CDC and FDA use to capture and validate data from different sources. VAERS is designed to rapidly detect unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse events, also referred to as “safety signals.” If a possible safety signal is found in VAERS, further analysis is performed with other safety systems, such as the CDC’s Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) and Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Project, or in the FDA BEST (Biologics Effectiveness and Safety) system. These systems are less impacted by the limitations of spontaneous and voluntary reporting in VAERS and can better assess possible links between vaccination and adverse events. Additionally, CDC and FDA cannot provide individual medical advice regarding any report to VAERS. Key considerations and limitations of VAERS data: The number of reports alone cannot be interpreted as evidence of a causal association between a vaccine and an adverse event, or as evidence about the existence, severity, frequency, or rates of problems associated with vaccines. Reports may include incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental and unverified information. VAERS does not obtain follow up records on every report. If a report is classified as serious, VAERS requests additional information, such as health records, to further evaluate the report. VAERS data are limited to vaccine adverse event reports received between 1990 and the most recent date for which data are available. VAERS data do not represent all known safety information for a vaccine and should be interpreted in the context of other scientific information. VAERS data available to the public include only the initial report data to VAERS. Updated data which contains data from medical records and corrections reported during follow up are used by the government for analysis. However, for numerous reasons including data consistency, these amended data are not available to the public. Additionally, reports to VAERS that appear to be potentially false or fabricated with the intent to mislead CDC and FDA may be reviewed before they are added to the VAERS database. Knowingly filing a false VAERS report is a violation of Federal law (18 U.S. Code § 1001) punishable by fine and imprisonment. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing... Correct, vaers is an open forum. It aggregates all information, and the information is reported voluntarily, not in a 'scientific study' manner. Still, there is a common factor in that information, that being people who had adverse effects following vaccines. I personally feel that the information gathered and quantified by openvaers is eye opening even if not done scientifically. You are entitled to think that it is meaningless that well over 20x more adverse effects from vaccines were reported to vaers in 2021 than in any previous year. Edited February 1 by Steve O
Steve O Posted February 1 Posted February 1 (edited) 20 hours ago, JaCrispy said: Thank you…now tell this to Joe, because based on his arguments, you’d think he was being paid by Pfizer 😉 Took a while, but I just did. He seems to think the data is meaningless because the forum for the data is open, not a scientific study. Edited February 1 by Steve O
T master Posted February 1 Posted February 1 On 1/31/2025 at 8:01 AM, JaCrispy said: RFK exposes the corruption rotting our government… Jimmy Dore is fast becoming a favorite ! He calls them out and shows us just how crooked they all are .
Joe Ferguson forever Posted February 1 Posted February 1 (edited) 7 hours ago, Steve O said: Took a while, but I just did. He seems to think the data is meaningless because the forum for the data is open, not a scientific study. Not meaningless but not nearly as meaningful as you implied. The limitations are very well defined by the site that provides the data. some great examples here https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2022/what-vaers-is-and-isnt For example, by January 10, 2021, VAERS logged 1,266 reports of adverse events following the Moderna vaccine. The CDC and FDA flagged 108 of those cases for further review. Ultimately, 10 of those cases turned out to be anaphylaxis, a severe allergic reaction, with nine of the affected people having a history of allergic reactions or allergies—including five of those nine with a history of anaphylaxis specifically. This screening allowed doctors to advise vaccination sites to continue following CDC guidance for administering vaccines as they had been. Edited February 1 by Joe Ferguson forever
Recommended Posts