The explanation they provided in Court was "We can't release more than 5K pages per month because the documents have sensitive data that needs to be redacted before being made public."
Here is why that is BS: anyone who has ever worked in an office that manages tens of thousands of documents knows you can use OCR software to recognize text and make automatic redactions for words, phrases, and names.
Let's assume it would take the OCR 60 days to scan every document (it is a time consuming process.) On day 61, you could have documents that were properly redacted.
Pfizer and the FDA made it sound like one unpaid intern was going to go through all the docs with a sharpie and that "takes time."
to be fair, i work in data protection and do redactions every day. You canno rely on auto redactions. That is a recipe for a gigantic data loss. It has to be done line by line manually.
I was asking rhetorical questions. We shouldn't have to have FOIA; we shouldn't have to ask permission. All documents that interface with government or run with with government or the least bit funded by government should be public; period.
That explains why Pfizer can't produce 50,000 pages of documents per month as per the original court order.
It takes time to change documents as part of a coverup.
Why can't we just FOIA the FDA for the docs? Why can't they just save them to a Dropbox folder? Who is John Galt?
The explanation they provided in Court was "We can't release more than 5K pages per month because the documents have sensitive data that needs to be redacted before being made public."
Here is why that is BS: anyone who has ever worked in an office that manages tens of thousands of documents knows you can use OCR software to recognize text and make automatic redactions for words, phrases, and names.
Let's assume it would take the OCR 60 days to scan every document (it is a time consuming process.) On day 61, you could have documents that were properly redacted.
Pfizer and the FDA made it sound like one unpaid intern was going to go through all the docs with a sharpie and that "takes time."
to be fair, i work in data protection and do redactions every day. You canno rely on auto redactions. That is a recipe for a gigantic data loss. It has to be done line by line manually.
I was asking rhetorical questions. We shouldn't have to have FOIA; we shouldn't have to ask permission. All documents that interface with government or run with with government or the least bit funded by government should be public; period.
It's also called "tamper with evidence".
They committed fraud. The documents no doubt contain evidence of said fraud.
Their legal immunity isn't valid if they committed fraud.
This is Enron levels of corruption and will result in the same outcome if you can prove it.
You're goddamn right they're tampering with evidence.
They should be arrested immediately for falsification of records.
No... Not Pfizer! They would never do something like that! /S
it is unsafe because it is intended to be so. they are making a scapegoat of some " poor quality " practices.
Pfenron.
Get on the short train for Pfizer. Moderna I'm sure is the same.