7 hours ago, 248900_1469958220 said:

Oh god....TRUMP!!! This is NOT  about Trump...HE IS GONE. This is about openness and transparency from a very large multinational pharmaceutical company....Nothing to hide, nothing to worry about right? Lets see......I am interested in what comes from this.  

It’s not “about openness and transparency from a very large multinational pharmaceutical company”.

 

Pfizer we’re not respondents in this case.

 

 

1 hour ago, Negita43 said:

Well the data isn't being hidden now is it - but are you capable of interpreting what it means or will you just rely on the interpretation of who knows who?

This!

 

Anti-vaxxers frequently demonstrate two traits..

 

1. Their inability to understand short reports or the simplest of statistical data.

2. Their adherence to cookie cutter copies of pre-canned misinformation they consume elsewhere then blindly repeat.

 

Brace yourself for more of the same.

1 hour ago, fjb 24 said:

Happy you like them. There's MUCH more in the pipeline, enough to keep you mired in ecstasy.

And this is the whole point.

 

Clog the conversation with data then misrepresent what the data is actually saying.

 

 

3 hours ago, fjb 24 said:

"It’s also worth noting that the FDA did not send an agency representative to the scheduling conference."

https://sarahwestall.com/breaking-court-orders-fda-to-produce-55000-pages-per-month-of-pfizer-covid-19-data/

2 lawyers didn't show up because they had COVID-19.

 

 

20 hours ago, rabas said:

Your file is not accessible, at least to me. Here is another reference via an external link:
https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/022-FDA-Brief-in-Advance-of-Scheduling-Conference.pdf

 

Whoa, this link is also not accessible from here. If you copy the link to your home browser it should work.

 

I just tried to download now, and it downloads for me.

1 hour ago, Banana7 said:

I just tried to download now, and it downloads for me.

Maybe a permission issue? When I click on it I get the following AN error:

 

 

A post from an unapproved source has been removed along with a reply.

 

Interesting from the WHO , especially point number 7: 

 

https://www.who.int/news/item/19-01-2022-statement-on-the-tenth-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-pandemic

19 minutes ago, 248900_1469958220 said:

Interesting from the WHO , especially point number 7: 

 

https://www.who.int/news/item/19-01-2022-statement-on-the-tenth-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-pandemic

But their grounds for opposing vaccine certification were not medical but rather that vaccine distribution has been inequitable and most of the world hasn't been able to be vaccinated. 

That really doesn't apply to the foolish few in countries where vaccines are readily available, does it?

Still, it's good to see that you are a supporter of the WHO's efforts to fight covid.

31 minutes ago, placeholder said:

But their grounds for opposing vaccine certification were not medical but rather that vaccine distribution has been inequitable and most of the world hasn't been able to be vaccinated. 

That really doesn't apply to the foolish few in countries where vaccines are readily available, does it?

Still, it's good to see that you are a supporter of the WHO's efforts to fight covid.

Cheers!!!