Pfizer

Pfizer is a member organization of the World Economic Forum.¹⁾

The Upjohn pharmaceutical company was started by William Erastus Upjohn in 1885 and was a research and industry pillar in Kalamazoo until its merger with the Swedish company Pharmacia in 1995. The hybrid company was bought by Pfizer in 2003.²⁾

1999 LA Times - BLOOMBERG NEWS ST. LOUIS (note Agent Orange - PCB chemical giant Monsanto reference as a drug company)

Monsanto Co. and rival drug maker Pharmacia & Upjohn Inc. on Sunday agreed to merge in a $26.5-billion stock transaction and sell off part of the agriculture business that helped drag Monsanto’s share price down 12% this year.³⁾

Press Release - Pfizer Inc and Pharmacia Corporation began operating as a unified company on April 16, 2003, forging one of the world's fastest-growing and most valuable companies. With a research and development budget of $7.1 billion in 2003, the new Pfizer is now the world's leading research-based pharmaceutical company.⁴⁾

In 1952 two Upjohn biochemists, Dury Peterson and Herb Murray announced that they were able to introduce this crucial oxygen atom by fermentation of the steroid progesterone with the mold Aspergillus nigercans. Over the next several years a group of chemists headed by John Hogg developed a process for preparing cortisone from the soybean steroid stigmasterol. The microbiological oxygenation is a key step in this process. Monsanto was part of the acquisition and divesting scheme at Pfizer and ties to the soy interest.⁵⁾

PFIZER REPORTS FOURTH-QUARTER AND FULL-YEAR 2021 RESULTS ▪ Full-Year 2021 Revenues of $81.3 Billion, Reflecting 92% Operational Growth; Excluding Contributions from Comirnaty(1) and Paxlovid, Revenues Grew 6% Operationally to $44.4 Billion

▪ Fourth-Quarter 2021 Revenues of $23.8 Billion, Reflecting 106% Operational Growth; Excluding Contributions from Comirnaty(1) and Paxlovid, Revenues Declined 2% Operationally Driven Primarily by the Impact of Fewer Selling Days Compared to the Prior-Year Quarter

▪ Full-Year 2021 Reported Diluted EPS(2) of $3.85, Adjusted Diluted EPS(3) of $4.42; Fourth-Quarter 2021 Reported Diluted EPS(2) of $0.59, Adjusted Diluted EPS(3) of $1.08

▪ Provides Full-Year 2022 Record-High Guidance(4) for Revenues of $98.0 to $102.0 Billion and Adjusted Diluted EPS(3) of $6.35 to $6.55, Reflecting 23% and 46% Year-Over-Year Growth at the Midpoints, Respectively

– Raises 2022 Revenue Guidance for Comirnaty(1) to Approximately $32 Billion, Reflecting Doses Expected to be Delivered Under Supply Contracts Signed as of Late-January

– Issues Initial 2022 Revenue Guidance for Paxlovid of Approximately $22 Billion, Reflecting Treatment Courses Expected to be Delivered Primarily Under Supply Contracts Signed or Committed as of Late-January ▪ Provides Updates and New Data for Select Clinical Programs Spanning Vaccines, Hospital, Oncology, Rare Disease and Internal Medicine on Analyst Conference Call

NEW YORK, NY, Tuesday, February 8, 2022 – Pfizer Inc. (NYSE: PFE) reported strong financial results for fourth-quarter and full-year 2021 and provided 2022 total company financial guidance(4). In addition, Pfizer raised its previous 2022 revenue guidance for Comirnaty(1), the Pfizer-BioNTech SE (BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine, and provided for the first time 2022 revenue guidance for its oral COVID-19 treatment, Paxlovid. The fourth-quarter 2021 earnings presentation and accompanying prepared remarks from management as well as the quarterly update to Pfizer’s R&D pipeline can be found on the Pfizer website.

EXECUTIVE COMMENTARY Dr. Albert Bourla, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, stated: “In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, we committed to use all of the resources and expertise we had at our disposal to help protect populations globally against this deadly virus, as well as to offer treatments to help avoid the worst outcomes when infections do occur.

We put billions of dollars of capital on the line in pursuit of those goals, not knowing whether those investments would ever pay off. Now, less than two years since we made that commitment, we are proud to say that we have delivered both the first FDA-authorized vaccine against COVID-19 (with our partner, BioNTech) and the first FDA-authorized oral treatment for COVID-19.” ⁶⁾

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla has won this year’s Genesis Prize, the Genesis Prize Foundation announced Wednesday morning. The prize, referred to as the “Jewish Nobel Prize” by Time magazine, will be presented on June 29 by Israeli President Isaac Herzog at a ceremony in Jerusalem. ⁷⁾

Hospira, Inc., Anacor Pharmaceuticals Inc., Medivation, Wyeth Pharmaceuticals Inc., Bamboo Therapeutics, Inc., Baxter International Inc., ICU Medical, Inc., InnoPharma Inc., King Pharmaceuticals Research and Development, Inc, Zoetis Inc., OPKO Health, Inc., Pharmacia & UpJohn Company LLC, Pharmacia & UpJohn Company, Inc. Pharmacia & UpJohn LLC.⁸⁾

2007 NEW YORK, Jan. 19 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ – Pfizer Animal Health, a division of Pfizer Inc (NYSE: PFE) today announced the completion of its acquisition of Embrex, Inc. (Nasdaq: EMBX), an international agricultural biotechnology company.

Embrex, Inc., headquartered in Research Triangle Park, is an international agricultural bio-technological company founded in 1985. The facility will manufacture Embrex's Inovocox, a vaccine to prevent coccidiosis, a parasitic disease that afflicts birds' digestive systems. The vaccine is delivered to chicks before they are hatched via Embrex's Inovoject automated egg injection system.

Embrex, Inc., the Inovo Company™, held a ribbon-cutting ceremony in March with Gov. Mike Easley to commemorate the opening of a “first of its kind” biological manufacturing facility in Laurinburg, N.C. Embrex Poultry Health will use the facility to produce its novel Inovocox™ in ovo coccidiosis vaccine upon approval from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The plant's vaccine will be ready for Food and Drug Administration approval in 2005. Approval is expected, and the plant will begin production for sale in late 2005.⁹⁾

On 27 February 2009 Pfizer opened a new manufacturing facility at its Dalian site in Liaoning Province, northeast China. At the same time the company celebrated the 20th year of operations at Dalian, which first opened in 1989.

The facility supplies drugs to Europe, Asia and Africa and the categories include anti-infectives, antifungal agents, cardiovascular drugs, nervous system drugs and arthritis drugs. It remains to be seen whether Pfizer will supply drugs produced in China for the US market.

Pfizer is still investing in the Chinese market, although the company seems to be cost cutting in a number of its plants across the world in the light of generic competition for its best-selling anti-cholesterol drug Lipitor in 2011, which produces $12bn a year or 25% of the company's annual revenue.

More than 40 innovative Pfizer drugs have become available in the Chinese market and 13 additional new drugs are expected to be launched in the country by 2012. Pfizer has four manufacturing plants in China in Dalian, Suzhou and Wuxi. The company's strategy includes expansion in China, increasing its distribution operations from the current 110 cities to over 650.¹⁰⁾

Its growth continued in 2004 with a 17.2 percent increase in agency billings. Growth came from Rhea & Kaiser’s three largest clients, Bayer CropScience, Pfizer Animal Health and Caterpillar Inc. Pfizer Animal Health awarded the agency its REVOLUTION® (Selamectin) parasiticide business in 2003, and RIMADYL® (Carprofen) and Anti-infectives businesses in 2004. All work for Bayer CropScience, Pfizer Animal Health and Caterpillar are integrated advertising and public relations communication assignments.¹¹⁾

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is an mRNA gene therapy-based COVID-19 vaccine product developed by Pfizer and BioNTech.

• January 12, 2021: “Baby Announcement”¹²⁾

The Pfizer-BioNTech was approved for use in Canada under the name Comirnaty for individuals as young as 12 years old. The active ingredient is listed as “Tozinameran (mRNA encoding the Spike protein for the SARS-CoV-2 virus)”. ¹³⁾

The Art of Gaslighting: Confession Through Projection ~ The Kunlangeta Part VI by Mathew Crawford ~ Rounding The Earth

Does all this look like principles of “health” and “equity” to you?

https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/the-art-of-gaslighting-confession

https://twitter.com/9thfloor/status/1444636724672536576?s=20

https://twitter.com/Covid19Crusher/status/1450341870438133762?s=20

https://twitter.com/Mind_gone_One/status/1450482329466458125?s=20

https://twitter.com/indepdubnrth/status/1455879620318965763?s=20

This is a reproduction of an original article¹⁴⁾ by Philip Mattera.

Pfizer made itself the largest pharmaceutical company in the world in large part by purchasing its competitors. In the last dozen years it has carried out three mega-acquisitions: Warner-Lambert in 2000, Pharmacia in 2003, and Wyeth in 2009. Then, in 2015, Pfizer announced a $160 billion deal to merge with Allergan and move its headquarters to Ireland to avoid U.S. taxes.

Pfizer has also grown through aggressive marketing—a practice it pioneered back in the 1950s by purchasing unprecedented advertising spreads in medical journals. In 2009 the company had to pay a record $2.3 billion to settle federal charges that one of its subsidiaries had illegally marketed a painkiller called Bextra. Along with the questionable marketing, Pfizer has for decades been at the center of controversies over its pricing, including a price-fixing case that began in 1958.

In the area of product safety, Pfizer’s biggest scandal involved defective heart valves sold by its Shiley subsidiary that led to the deaths of more than 100 people. During the investigation of the matter, information came to light suggesting that the company had deliberately misled regulators about the hazards. Pfizer also inherited safety and other legal controversies through its big acquisitions, including a class action suit over Warner-Lambert’s Rezulin diabetes medication, a big settlement over PCB dumping by Pharmacia, and thousands of lawsuits brought by users of Wyeth’s diet drugs.

Also on Pfizer’s list of scandals are a 2012 bribery settlement; massive tax avoidance; and lawsuits alleging that during a meningitis epidemic in Nigeria in the 1990s the company tested a risky new drug on children without consent from their parents.

During the mid-1980s, watchdog organizations such as the Public Citizen Health Research Group charged that Pfizer’s widely prescribed arthritis drug Feldene created a high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding among the elderly, but the federal government, despite reports of scores of fatalities, declined to put restrictions on the medication. A June 1986 article in The Progressive about Feldene was headlined DEATH BY PRESCRIPTION.

The Food and Drug Administration expressed greater concern about reports of dozens of fatalities linked to heart valves made by Pfizer’s Shiley division. In 1986, as the death toll reached 125, Pfizer ended production of all models of the valves. Yet by that point they were implanted in tens of thousands of people, who worried that the devices could fracture and fail at any moment.

In 1991 an FDA task force charged that Shiley had withheld information about safety problems from regulators in order to get initial approval for its valves and that the company continued to keep the FDA in the dark. A November 7, 1991 investigation in the Wall Street Journal asserted that Shiley had been deliberately falsifying manufacturing records relating to valve fractures.

Faced with this growing scandal, Pfizer announced that it would spend up to $205 million to settle the tens of thousands of valve lawsuits that had been filed against it. Even so, Pfizer resisted complying with an FDA order that it notify patients of new findings that there was a greater risk of fatal fractures in those who had the valve installed before the age of 50. In 1994 the company agreed to pay $10.75 million to settle Justice Department charges that it lied to regulators in seeking approval for the valves; it also agreed to pay $9 million to monitor valve patients at Veterans Administration hospitals or pay for removal of the device.

In 2004 Pfizer announced that it had reached a $60 million settlement of a class-action suit brought by users of Rezulin, a diabetes medication developed by Warner-Lambert, which had withdrawn it from the market shortly before the company was acquired by Pfizer in 2000. The withdrawal came after scores of patients died from acute liver failure said to be caused by the drug.

In 2004, in the wake of revelations about dangerous side effects of Merck’s painkiller Vioxx, Pfizer agreed to suspend television advertising for a related medication called Celebrex. The following year, Pfizer admitted that a 1999 clinical trial found that elderly patients taking Celebrex had a greatly elevated risk of heart problems.

In 2005 Pfizer withdrew another painkiller, Bextra, from the market after the FDA mandated a “black box” warning about the cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risks of the medication. In 2008 Pfizer announced that it was setting aside $894 million to settle the lawsuits that had been filed in connection with Bextra and Celebrex.

With the acquisition of Wyeth (formerly American Home Products) in October 2009, Pfizer took on a new set of legal problems. The summary of legal proceedings in Wyeth’s last annual financial report before the deal was announced went on for 14 pages. Most of the lawsuits discussed were product liability cases involving hormone therapy, childhood vaccines, the anti-depressant Effexor, the contraceptive Norplant and, most importantly, the combination diet drug known as fen-phen, which had been withdrawn from the market after reports that its use was linked to possibly fatal heart valve damage. Those findings unleashed a wave of tens of thousands of lawsuits against the company.

Pfizer has been at the center of controversies over its pricing for more than 50 years. In 1958 it was one of six drug companies accused by the Federal Trade Commission of fixing prices on antibiotics. The company was also charged with making false statements to the U.S. Patent Office to obtain a patent on tetracycline.

In 1961 the Justice Department filed criminal antitrust charges against Pfizer, American Cyanamid, Bristol-Myers and top executives of the three companies. Two years later, the FTC ruled that the six companies named in its 1958 complaint had indeed conspired to fix prices on tetracycline. The commission also found that “unclean hands and bad faith played a major role” in the issuance of the tetracycline patent to Pfizer.

In 1964 the FTC ordered the six companies to reset their prices and told Pfizer to grant a production license for tetracycline to any company that applied for it. In 1967 a federal jury found Pfizer, American Cyanamid and Bristol-Myers guilty of conspiring to control the production and distribution of restraint of trade, conspiracy to monopolize and actual monopoly. The companies were each fined the maximum of $150,000, but payment was delayed while they pursued an appeal.

That effort was fruitful for the companies. In 1970 a federal appeals court ordered the case sent back to the district court for what it said were errors in the jury instructions by the judge. Three years later, another federal judge, sitting without a jury, dismissed the charges. In the interim, Pfizer and other companies had agreed to pay some $136 million to settle a class-action case and other civil suits that had been brought on behalf of consumers and state and local governments. Later settlements brought the amount to more than $150 million.

Pfizer, along with the other large pharmaceutical companies, were later targeted in a series of lawsuits brought by state attorneys general and other parties challenging the industry’s pricing practices. In 1996 Pfizer was one of 15 large drug companies that agreed to pay more than $408 million to settle a class action lawsuit charging that they conspired to fix prices charged to independent pharmacies.

In 1999 Pfizer pleaded guilty to criminal antitrust charges that its former Food Science Group unit took part in two international price-fixing conspiracies—one involving the food preservative sodium erythorbate and the other the flavor enhancer maltol. Pfizer agreed to pay fines totaling $20 million.

In 2000, amid widespread criticism of the high price of AIDS medications, Pfizer offered to donate a two-year supply of its drug Diflucan worth $50 million to the South African government. Yet in 2003, after acquiring Pharmacia Corp., Pfizer backed away from the company’s plan to license its AIDS drug Rescriptor for low-cost distribution in poor countries.

In 2002 Pfizer resisted cooperating with a General Accounting Office investigation of industry pricing practices but relented after chairman and CEO Henry McKinnell was served with a subpoena. Later that year, Pfizer agreed to pay $49 million to settle charges that one of its subsidiaries defrauded the federal Medicaid program by overcharging for its cholesterol-lowering drug Lipitor.

In 2003, as Congress was discussing legislation to legalize the importation of cheap prescription drugs from Canada, Pfizer sought to undermine the practice by telling major Canadian pharmacies that they would have to begin ordering directly from Pfizer rather than going through wholesalers. This put Pfizer in the position of cutting off supply if it suspected the pharmacies were selling to the U.S. market. The following year, Pfizer announced that it would begin requiring wholesalers to report on orders from individual drugstores.

After the Second World War, Pfizer caused a scandal when it circumvented the traditional drug distribution networks and began marketing its products (especially the antibiotic Terramycin) directly to hospitals and physicians, making unprecedented use of splashy advertisements in the Journal of the American Medical Association. A prominent article in the Saturday Review in 1957 denounced the company for tactics such as running ads for its antibiotics that displayed the names of doctors who were supposedly endorsing the product but who turned out to be fictitious.

In 1991 Pfizer paid a total of $70,000 to 10 states to settle charges relating to misleading advertising for its Plax mouth rinse.

1996 the Food and Drug Administration ordered Pfizer to stop making unauthorized and misleading medical claims for its antidepressant Zoloft.

In 2000 the FDA warned Pfizer and Pharmacia, co-marketers of the arthritis drug Celebrex, that the consumer ads they were running for the medication were false and misleading. Two years later, the FDA ordered Pfizer to stop running a series of magazine ads that the agency said misleadingly suggested that its cholesterol-lowering drug Lipitor was safer than competing products.

In 2003 Pfizer paid $6 million to settle with 19 states that had accused the company of using misleading ads to promote its Zithromax medication for children’s ear infections.

In 2004 Pfizer’s Warner-Lambert subsidiary agreed to pay $430 million to resolve criminal and civil charges that it paid physicians to prescribe its epilepsy drug Neurontin to patients with ailments for which the medication was not approved. Documents later came to light suggesting that Pfizer arranged for delays in the publication of scientific studies that undermined its claim for the other uses of Neurontin. In 2010 a federal jury found that Pfizer committed racketeering fraud in its marketing of Neurontin; the judge in the case subsequently ordered the company to pay $142 million in damages.

In 2007 Pfizer subsidy Pharmacia & Upjohn agreed to pay $34.7 million to settle federal charges relating to the illegal marketing of its Genotropin human growth hormone.

In 2009 Pfizer agreed to pay $2.3 billion to resolve criminal and civil charges relating to the improper marketing of Bextra and three other medications. The amount was a record for a healthcare fraud settlement. John Kopchinski, a former Pfizer sales representative whose complaint helped bring about the federal investigation, told the New York Times: “The whole culture of Pfizer is driven by sales, and if you didn’t sell drugs illegally, you were not seen as a team player.” As part of the settlement, Pfizer had to enter into a Corporate Integrity Agreement with the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services.

In 2010 Pfizer disclosed that during a six-month period the previous year it had paid $20 million to some 4,500 doctors and other medical professionals for consulting and speaking on the company’s behalf. This was the first time the company had made public its spending of this kind.

In 2011 Pfizer agreed to pay $14.5 million to resolve federal charges that it illegally marketed its bladder drug Detrol.

In 2011 the FDA told Pfizer that its “Online Resources” webpage on Lipitor contained misleading statements.

In July 2012 Pfizer agreed to remove claims related to breast and colon health from its advertising for Centrum multivitamins as part of an agreement to settle a lawsuit brought by the Center for Science in the Public Interest charging that the claims were unsubstantiated.

In November 2012 Pfizer disclosed that it had taken a charge against earnings of $491 million in connection with an “agreement in principle” with the U.S. Department of Justice to settle charges relating to the improper marketing of the kidney transplant drug Rapamune by Wyeth. That agreement was finalized in July 2013. Pfizer later reached a $35 million settlement of Rapamune charges brought by more than 40 state attorneys general.

In 1976 Pfizer was one of the many companies that disclosed that it had made questionable payments to foreign government officials. The company said that about $265,000 had been paid to officials in three countries but did not identify them.

In August 2012 the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announced that it had reached a $45 million settlement with Pfizer to resolve charges that its subsidiaries, especially Wyeth, had bribed overseas doctors and other healthcare professionals to increase foreign sales.

In 1971 the Environmental Protection Agency asked Pfizer to end its long-time practice of dumping industrial wastes from its plant in Groton, Connecticut in the Long Island Sound. The company was reported to be disposing of about 1 million gallons of waste each year by that method.

In 1991 Pfizer agreed to pay $3.1 million to settle EPA charges that the company seriously damaged the Delaware River by failing to install pollution-control equipment at one of its plants in Pennsylvania.

In 1994 Pfizer agreed to pay $1.5 million as part of a consent decree with the EPA in connection with its dumping at a toxic waste site in Rhode Island.

In 1998 Pfizer agreed to pay a civil penalty of $625,000 for environmental violations discovered at its research facilities in Groton, Connecticut.

In 2002 New Jersey fined Pfizer fined $538,000 for failing to properly monitor wastewater discharged from its plant in Parsippany.

In 2003, shortly after Pfizer acquired Pharmacia, the company (along with Solutia and Monsanto) agreed to pay some $700 million to settle a lawsuit over the dumping of PCBs in Anniston, Alabama.

In 2005 Pfizer agreed to pay $22,500 to settle EPA claims that the company failed to properly notify state and federal officials of a 2002 chemical release from its plant in Groton that seriously injured several employees and necessitated a major emergency response.

Also in 2005, Pfizer agreed to pay $46,250 to settle charges that its Pharmacia & Upjohn operation had violated federal air pollution rules at its plant in Kalamazoo, Michigan.

In 2008 Pfizer agreed to pay a $975,000 civil penalty to resolved federal charges that it violated the Clean Air Act at its former manufacturing plant in Groton, Connecticut in the period from 2002 to 2005.

Environmental groups in New Jersey have criticized as inadequate a clean-up plan devised by Pfizer and the EPA for the American Cyanamid Superfund site in Bridgewater, which is considered one of the worst toxic waste sites in the country. Pfizer inherited responsibility for the clean-up through its 2009 purchase of Wyeth.

Pfizer apparently engaged in questionable practices abroad as well. In 2000 the Washington Post published a major exposé accusing Pfizer of testing a dangerous new antibiotic called Trovan on children in Nigeria without receiving proper consent from their parents. The experiment occurred during a 1996 meningitis epidemic in the country. In 2001 Pfizer was sued in U.S. federal court by thirty Nigerian families, who accused the company of using their children as human guinea pigs.

In 2006 a panel of Nigerian medical experts concluded that Pfizer had violated international law. In 2009 the company agreed to pay $75 million to settle some of the lawsuits that had been brought in Nigerian courts.The U.S. case was settled in 2011 for an undisclosed amount.

Classified U.S. State Department cables made public in 2010 by Wikileaks indicated that Pfizer had hired investigators to dig up dirt on Nigeria’s former attorney general as a way to get leverage in one of the remaining cases. Pfizer had to apologize over the revelation in the cables that it had falsely claimed that the group Doctors Without Borders was also dispensing Trovan during the Nigerian meningitis epidemic.

In January 2012 a group of Pfizer employees in Puerto Rico filed suit against the company in federal court, charging that it failed to properly manage their pension plan and caused losses totaling hundreds of millions of dollars over the past decade.

In 2010 a federal jury awarded $1.37 million to a former Pfizer scientist who claimed she was sickened by a genetically engineered virus at a company lab and was then fired for raising safety concerns.

Pfizer is one of the numerous pharmaceutical companies that for many years took advantage of a provision in the Internal Revenue Code (Section 936) that gave special tax credits for their operations in Puerto Rico and was widely criticized as a form of corporate welfare. A 1992 report by the U.S. General Accounting Office found that Pfizer was enjoying $156,400 in tax savings for each of its 500 employees on the island. The amount was said to be 636 percent of the company’s compensation costs.

During the Clinton Administration there was a move to eliminate Section 936, but Pfizer and other drug companies managed to get the termination phased out over a decade. During that period, drug companies began registering their Puerto Rican operations as foreign entities, which allowed them to escape taxes entirely as long as they did not send the profits back to the mainland United States.

Then the companies pressed Congress to enact a repatriation tax holiday that would allow them to bring all their foreign profits back home and pay an artificially low tax rate on them, supposedly to spur domestic job creation. When such a holiday was put into effect for 2005, Pfizer repatriated more foreign profits than any other company—$37 billion—and enjoyed an $11 billion tax break while cutting rather than increasing its U.S. workforce.

In 2014 Pfizer launched an effort to take over AstraZeneca that was designed not only to swallow a competitor but also to cut its tax bill by locating the headquarters of the combined operation in Britain. When AstraZeneca resisted the controversial move, Pfizer abandoned the bid. Then in November 2015 Pfizer announced a similar deal, worth $160 billion, to merge with Allergan and move the headquarters of the combined company to Ireland.

Connecticut. In 2001 Pfizer opened a new $270 million research facility in New London with the help of a $60 million subsidy package from state and local officials. The city also used its power of eminent domain to assemble the site used by the company, angering local residents and leading to a court challenge that went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. In that case, Kelo v. New London, the Justices upheld the city’s right to take private property for economic development projects. In 2009, however, Pfizer announced that it would close its New London operation and relocate 1,400 jobs to its campus in nearby Groton, Connecticut.

Michigan. In 2001, the company committed to an $800-million expansion of its Ann Arbor research laboratories after receiving a state and local tax subsidy package worth more than $70 million. Five years later, however, the company announced that it was abandoning the facility and eliminating more than 2,000 jobs. The company also said it would eliminate 250 jobs in Kalamazoo, where in 2003 it received a 20-year subsidy package worth up to $635 million.

New York. In 2003 New York City and State officials offered Pfizer up to $47 million in the hope that the company would create 2,000 new jobs at its Manhattan headquarters and other New York City locations while retaining more than 5,000 positions. By 2010 Pfizer had, instead, eliminated large numbers of jobs in the city, in part from the closing of its longtime manufacturing plant in Brooklyn. In December of that year, Pfizer agreed to pay the city a penalty of $24.7 million—twice the tax subsidies it had received.

NCBI US National Library of Medicine - National Institutes of Health Abstract

The appointment of Dr. Bernard Prigent, vice-president and medical director of Pfizer Canada, to the Governing Council of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, outraged many Canadian health researchers. Pfizer has been a “habitual offender,” persistently engaging in illegal and corrupt marketing practices, bribing physicians and *suppressing adverse trial results*. Since 2002 the company and its subsidiaries have been assessed $3 billion in criminal convictions, civil penalties and jury awards. The $2.3-billion settlement in September 2009 – a month before Dr. Prigent's appointment – set a new record for both criminal fines and total penalties. A link with Pfizer might well advance the commercialization of Canadian research – unhindered by law or morality. Is that now the only mandate, Dr. Beaudet?¹⁵⁾

summary page ¹⁶⁾

With the European Commission

With Albania

With Brazil (in Portuguese)

With Columbia

With Chile

With the Dominican Republic (accessed through an FOI request)

With Peru

With the UK (redacted)

Pfizer and BioNTech Announce Data from Preclinical Studies of mRNA-based Vaccine Candidate Against COVID-19 Wednesday, September 09, 2020 - 07:45am

Immunization of non-human primates (rhesus macaques) with BNT162b2, a nucleoside-modified messenger RNA (modRNA) candidate that expresses the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein, resulted in strong anti-viral effects against an infectious SARS-CoV-2 challenge

BNT162b2 immunization prevented lung infection in 100% of the SARS-CoV-2 challenged rhesus macaques, with no viral RNA detected in the lower respiratory tract of immunized and challenged animals. The BNT162b2 vaccination also cleared the nose of detectable viral RNA in 100% of the SARS-CoV-2 challenged rhesus macaques within 3 days after the infection

The BNT162b2 vaccine candidate induced SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies in rhesus macaques, pseudovirus neutralizing antibodies in mice, and strong, antigen-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in mice and macaques

Importantly, BNT162b2 induced potent SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies in vaccinated-macaques, and viral antigen-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Rhesus macaques (2-4-year-old males) were immunized by intramuscular (IM) immunization with 30 µg or 100 µg of BNT162b2 or saline control on Days 0 and 21 (2 doses). After two immunizations, neutralization titers were detectable in rhesus macaques sera with geometric mean titers of 962 (on Day 35 for the 30 µg group) or 1,689 (on Day 28 for the 100 µg group). Neutralizing antibody titers persisted to at least day 56, with higher geometric mean titers (GMTs) than those in a panel of human convalescent sera. BNT162b2 vaccination elicited a high frequency of CD4+ T cells that produced IFN-ɣ, IL-2, and TNF-α, and almost no IL-4 producing CD4+ cells were detectable, indicating a TH1-biased response, which is an immune profile thought to promote vaccine safety. BNT162b2 also elicited spike-specific IFN-ɣ producing CD8+ T cell responses, which is thought to promote an anti-viral effect.

In a preclinical murine model, a single IM immunization of BNT162b2 (0.2, 1, or 5 µg) generated B-cell and T-cell immune responses in BALB/c mice, and SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralizing activity increased steadily to Day 28, the last day for which titers are reported. CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells from splenocytes isolated from BNT162b2-immunized mice were strongly positive for IFNγ and IL-2, producing high levels of the TH1 cytokines but minute amounts of TH2 cytokines, suggesting a robust, TH1-biased T cell adaptive immune response.

Many of these preclinical data and the Phase 1 clinical results contributed to the decision by Pfizer and BioNTech to commence the global (except for China) Phase 2/3 safety and efficacy portion of the clinical study to evaluate potential prevention of COVID-19 disease by BNT162b2. The Phase 2/3 study has enrolled over 25,000 participants 18 to 85 years of age in the U.S., Argentina and Brazil. Additional enrollment is planned in Germany, Turkey and South Africa. The study is an event-driven trial.¹⁷⁾

STORY AT-A-GLANCE (taken from this Kanekoa Substack article)

• Dr. Robert Malone says he was kicked off Twitter for this 40-minute video presentation and PDF created by the Canadian Covid Care Alliance, which consists of over 500 independent doctors, scientists, and health care practitioners.
• The video and PDF are a deep-dive into Pfizer’s own vaccine trial data which conclusively shows an INCREASED risk of illness and death for the vaccinated group compared to the placebo group. For example, there were 20 total deaths in the vaccinated group versus 14 total deaths in the placebo group with nearly double the amount of cardiovascular deaths among the vaccinated.
• Furthermore, Pfizer unblinded the trial participants, tested the Covid-19 vaccine on healthy and young individuals rather than the sick and elderly and did not track any subclinical biomarkers which would be valuable early warning signs of disease caused by the vaccines.
• Pfizer reported a 95% efficacy, which sounds like it protects you 95% of the time, but that 95% actually refers to the Relative Risk Reduction, while the Absolute Risk Reduction was only 0.84%. Moreover, the Pfizer clinical results are unreliable because Pfizer introduced immense subjectivity into the trial by leaving it up to the discretion of investigators whether or not to test participants for covid-19. There were a total of 3,410 participants who had Covid-19 symptoms but were not tested for Covid-19.
• Pfizer reported one of their 12-year-old trial participants (Maddie de Garay) who has been paralyzed to a wheelchair and forced to eat from a feeding tube for the last 10-months as “functional abdominal pain”. Another whistleblower who was a regional director of Pfizer’s clinical trials also reported to the FDA that Pfizer had falsified data, unblinded participants, and not followed up on testing participants who reported symptoms, but neither the FDA nor Pfizer ever investigated the issue.
• Pfizer’s report authors had conflicts of interest with 84% of them either employed by Pfizer, owning Pfizer stock, receiving grants from Pfizer, hired as consultants by Pfizer, or previously running clinical trials for Pfizer. For example, two of the Pfizer report authors actually made $9B in stock market profit directly from the Pfizer vaccines because they also happened to be the co-founders of BioNTech.

The following is a developing list of individuals and organizations that Pfizer has given money to related to the COVID-19 pandemic. People and groups included on this list are relevant due to positions of authority or influence in the crisis, and are of note in considering how Pfizer may have manipulated the COVID-19 response through a payment network. Inclusion on this list does not constitute an accusation of wrongdoing without substantiating evidence.

In their second-quarter 2021 financial statement, Pfizer noted an increase in $500,000.00 to $1,000,000.00 - or 10% - for “Adjusted SI&A Expenses” (in other words, marketing).³⁵⁾ The company spent more money in this quarter on marketing than on research.³⁶⁾

Data Access Requests

Pfizer will provide access to anonymized patient-level data in response to scientifically valid research proposals.

Data from Pfizer-sponsored global interventional clinical studies are available from;

• Trials conducted for medicines, vaccines and medical devices for indications that have been approved in the US and/or EU.
• Trials conducted for medicines, vaccines and medical devices that have been terminated (i.e. development for all indications has been discontinued)
• Data from these trials will be made available 24 months after study completion.

Pfizer will make reasonable efforts to fulfill all data requests for legitimate research purposes, but there may be instances in which retrieval or delivery of data is not feasible (for example, if Pfizer does not have legal authority to provide the data, if costs of retrieval of older or pre-electronic data are prohibitive, etc. – see details below.

To access patient-level data, researchers should submit a research proposal. An internal committee, composed of Pfizer colleagues who are familiar with the data, reviews all applications. If the application is denied or only partially approved, an Independent Review Panel of outside experts will review the application. The Independent Review Panel’s decision is considered final and binding.

In considering an application, both the internal review committee and the Independent Review Panel will assess a number of criteria, including the scientific rationale for the research and whether there is a well-documented and rigorous statistical analysis plan. All those receiving access to data will be required to enter into a data access agreement.

To submit your data access request, please click the following link; Submit your request for patient-level data

We encourage you to contact CTD@Pfizer.com and provide the following information prior to your submission, in order to assess the feasibility of your request-

• Study number(s) requested (NCT ID number and/or Pfizer-sponsored study number)
• Synopsis of your proposed analysis/research

To ensure that requests for patient-level data from Pfizer-sponsored clinical trials are handled fairly, impartially, and consistently, an Independent Review Panel reviews any requests for clinical data not initially approved, in whole or in part, by Pfizer’s internal review committee. The final decision rests with the Independent Review Panel and is binding.

The responsibilities and decision-making processes of the Panel, including the criteria used to evaluate data requests, are outlined in the Independent Review Panel charter.

Members of the Independent Review Panel were selected by Pfizer based on their experience, training, and expertise in aspects of clinical research conduct, from ethics to statistical analyses. Three of the Independent Review Panel members are on Pfizer's Bioethics Advisory Committee. Independent Review Panel Members

• Stephen Senn, PhD (Chair) - Head of Competence Centre for Methodology and Statistics at CRP-Santé, Luxembourg
• Bartha Knoppers, PhD, MA, LLB/BCL, Director of the Centre of Genomics and Policy, McGill University, Montreal (Quebec), Canada
• James Lavery, PhD, Research Scientist, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital and University of Toronto, Toronto (Ontario), Canada
• Johan Karlberg, MD, PhD, Managing Director, Clinical Trial Magnifier Limited, Hong Kong SAR, PR China; Vice-President, Alliance for Clinical Research Excellence and Safety (ACRES), Cambridge, MA

= Circumstances under which it may not be possible for Pfizer to fulfill data requests may involve =

• Clinical data for which anonymisation is difficult, there is a reasonable likelihood of re-identification (e.g. small studies, single-center studies, studies terminated early for lack of enrollment, clinical studies of rare diseases, or studies for which data does not exist in a format that can be readily anonymised), or there is a reasonable likelihood of otherwise violating the privacy rights of individuals;
• Clinical data that have been collected subject to legal, contractual or consent provisions that prohibit transfer to third parties;
• Locally administered studies in which data and results are only available in languages other than English;
• Case narratives, documentation for adjudication, imaging data (e.g. x-rays, MRI scans, etc.), genetic data and exploratory biomarker data;
• Or substantial practical constraints to providing technical data access (e.g. older, pre-electronic data for which files cannot be located).

Where Pfizer has a co-research, co-development or co-marketing/co-promotion agreement or where the product has been out-licensed, it is recognized that the responsibility for disclosure may be dependent on the agreement between parties. Under these circumstances, Pfizer will endeavor to gain agreement to share data in response to requests. ⁸²⁾

ICAN Legal Update Apr 12, 2022

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 ⁸³⁾, 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.⁸⁴⁾

Official bio - Frank D’Amelio is the executive vice president, business operations and chief financial officer of Pfizer, responsible for finance, business development and business operations, including IT, procurement and real estate. Frank led the acquisition and integration of Medivation, Inc., Anacor Pharmaceuticals Inc., Hospira Inc., King Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Wyeth, as well as the split-off of Pfizer’s animal health business, Zoetis, and the sale of its nutrition business to Nestle and its Capsugel business to KKR.

Prior to the merger of Alcatel and Lucent Technologies in 2006, Frank was the chief operating officer of Lucent Technologies. In 2001, he was appointed executive vice president and chief financial officer of Lucent, where he helped lead the company through one of the most challenging periods in the telecom industry’s history and returned the company to profitability.

In 2005, 2006, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2016, Frank was ranked among America’s top CFOs by Institutional Investor magazine. In 2002, he was recognized by Treasury & Risk Magazine as one of America’s Top CFOs.

He currently serves on the Board of Directors of Zoetis, Inc. and Humana, Inc. and is chair of the Humana Audit Committee; and the Independent College Fund of New Jersey. ⁸⁵⁾

Reference for Frank's Lucent chapter..

February 1, 2005 - How Lucent Lost It The telecommunications manufacturer was a Potemkin village. by Roger Lowenstein ⁸⁶⁾

August 23, 2007

Pfizer has plumped for an outsider, Frank D’Amelio, to be its new chief financial officer, and highlighted his experience in working with companies that have been undergoing “rapid and complex changes”.

He also has “extensive knowledge of the capital markets as well as broad experience working with the investment community, regulatory bodies and rating agencies” and will be brought up to speed in the healthcare business with Pfizer vice chairman David Shedlarz as his guide…..

The shareholders of the firm will be pleased to hear that as some of them have been concerned by the lack of new drugs coming to market as patent expirations and generic competition on a number of blockbusters, including the antihypertensive Norvasc (amlodipine), the antidepressant Zoloft (sertraline) and the antibiotic Zithromax (azithromycin), start savaging earnings. The effect of patent losses on the firm’s revenues is expected to be around $20 billion by 2011.

Pfizer's next key recruitment task will be to find a replacement for John LaMattina, head of global research, who said in May that he intends to step down by the end of the year. ⁸⁷⁾

August 22, 2007 - Pfizer's New CFO by Matthew Herper, Forbes Staff

Pfizer has chosen Frank A. D’Amelio, an executive credited with slashing jobs and executing a turnaround at embattled telecom-equipment maker Lucent, as its new chief financial officer.

The choice highlights the role that financial engineering is likely to play in Pfizer’s future, and the challenges facing the drug giant. Pfizer chief Jeffrey Kindler, who came to Pfizer from McDonald’s and has helmed the company for only a year, is turning to outsiders to try to figure out how to fix the world’s largest drug giant. And a former colleague’s memories of D’Amelio reveal that he may also represent a more investor-friendly style at Pfizer, a contrast with the imperious style of former Chief Executive Henry McKinnell.

All those skills will be needed. Pfizer, which sports a market capitalization of $170 billion and annual sales of $48 billion, faces a massive wave of patent expirations, including the loss of Lipitor, the world’s best-selling drug, just three years from now. Already, Pfizer has cut 10,000 jobs. Several top executives have departed, including former CFO Alan Levin, who resigned in May.

D’Amelio, 49, started work at AT&T in 1979 as part of the financial team at Bell Labs, the famed research and development hothouse that invented the transistor, the laser and the UNIX computer operating system. When Lucent was spun off from AT&T in 1996, D’Amelio helped design the new company’s financial structure.⁸⁸⁾

Frank D'Amelio, Executive Vice President, Business Operations and Chief Financial Officer of Pfizer Inc., arrives at Portcullis House to attend a parliamentary business and enterprise committee hearing on the future of AstraZeneca, in central London, May 13, 2014. REUTERS/Andrew Winning

Nov 17 (Reuters) - Pfizer Inc (PFE.N) said on Wednesday Frank D'Amelio will retire from his position as chief financial officer and executive vice president of global supply after nearly 15 years at the company.

The drugmaker said it has started an external search for a new CFO and D'Amelio will stay on board through this process. Reporting by Manojna Maddipatla in Bengaluru; Editing by Aditya Soni

Our Standards - The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. ⁸⁹⁾

NOTE 'Trust Standards' are detailed in Propaganda wiki - Trusted News Initiative ⁹⁰⁾

This video includes;

Television news stories of;

• Brandy McFadden, paralysed from the neck down
• Rachael Cecere, paralysed from the neck down
• Dr. Gregory Michaels, deceased
• Lisa Jones, died an hour after her second Pfizer shot
• Thomas Bolds, Gillain-Barre Syndrome
• David Carlin, pulmonary embolism in both lungs
• Everest Romney, clots in the neck and brain
• Tim Zook, deceased

Then there is the heart-breaking testimony from Stephanie de Garay, mother of Maddie.

It also honours some of those who have died, seemingly as a result of the Pfizer shot;

• Joe Hayes, 87
• David Burns, 79
• Shirel Hilel, 22
• Sara Ann Stickles, 28
• Nathan Emmanuel Esparza, 16
• Hadley Huffman, 20
• Lloyd Campbell, 87
• Maxime Beltra, 22
• Marilio Costa Leite, 48
• Kamrynn Thomas, 16
• Maria Ilva Biolcati, 81
• Luke Garrett, 21
• Renne Elaine Campbell, 54
• Drene Keyes, 58
• Robin 'Pebbles' Spring Saunders, 45
• Jacob Michael Clynick, 14

The video ends with a short summary of just a sample of the Pfizer 'rap sheet' over the years.

The CEO of Pfizer, Albert Bourla, is seen here admitting on camera that “we know two doses of the vaccine offer very limited protection, if any”.⁹¹⁾

There is currently a lawsuit against Pfizer over claims of funding terrorism in Iraq.⁹²⁾

May 29, 2013 Pfizer’s Centers for Therapeutic Innovation Partners with UCSF to Expand Drug Discovery Capabilities

UCSF Becomes First Partner in Both Small-Molecule and Biologics Discovery

By Kristen Bole

Pfizer has announced the expansion of its Centers for Therapeutic Innovation (CTI) into the development of small-molecule drug candidates through a partnership with UC San Francisco.

This partnership provides investigators from UCSF with access to Pfizer’s industry-leading small-molecule drug development capabilities, working side-by-side with Pfizer scientists with the goal of jointly translating promising basic research into drug candidates that have the potential to bring innovative new therapies to patients.

“This expansion is part of the natural evolution of CTI as we continue to drive forward the next generation of innovative, differentiated medicines. With Pfizer’s strong heritage in medicinal chemistry, it makes perfect sense to expand CTI’s mandate to include small-molecule projects,” said Jose Carlos Gutierrez-Ramos, PhD, group senior vice president and head of biotherapeutics R&D at Pfizer. “UCSF has been a great collaborator and has an established history in this area. I am confident that together we are better positioned to deliver faster and more efficient drug discovery with the aim of bringing new medicines to patients more quickly.

The collaboration builds upon an October 2010 agreement between CTI and UCSF in large-molecule – also called biologics – discovery, with both agreements aiming to accelerate the translation of biomedical research into new medications and therapies. ⁹³⁾

See Ashmedai article at Substack or Hydroxychloroquine in wiki. ⁹⁴⁾

TO give some added perspective, the FDA’s evidence that HCQ does NOT work is EXCLUSIVELY regarding hospitalized covid patients - precisely the same folks for which Pfizer is recommending HCQ!!

Pfizer is so transcendently theophanic that its pronouncements are the embodiment of the scientific method, as we all witnessed when the CDC Director herself understood that a CNN report of Pfizer’s proclamation of its vaccine trial’s results amounted to an official communique of eternally settled Scientific fact.

If Pfizer declares that HCQ works to treat covid - we can limit their revised catechism to late stage severe covid if you really want to be nitpicky here - then doesn’t this mean that the formerly heretical position that HCQ can treat covid is now fundamental doctrinal truth??

Alternatively, if we can’t trust Pfizer, the oracle of science, who can we trust????

Pfizer pdf Wayback⁹⁵⁾