The Brooke Jackson case against Ventavia Research Group, a Pfizer contractor, may also have some new life breathed into it because of this issue over "contamination." There were problems with the initial trials conducted by Ventavia that translated into faulty data - data that was then given to the FDA in order to receive an EUA. Expand the faulty data collected from the trials and then add the questionable manufacturing of the jabs, a two pronged approach for piercing the immunity shied. What did Pfizer know and when did they know it.

Essentially, the product that was used in the Pfizer trials was not legally the same product distributed to the public in mass. What makes it a different product? The manufacturing process. In order to ramp up production, a different process had to be used. This is the point where all the genetic contamination comes into the picture because of the production methods used to make this soup in mass - quickly. Technically, because of this change in how the jabs were manufactured, it is a different product by legal definition and the regs require that it should have been treated as such. Warp Speed does not bypass this and cannot be used to cover their butts. Pfizer distributed a "new product" without proper testing - and Pfizer knew it.

Therefore, because the jabs given to the public were a legally new product, there is no informed consent for the public about this product. None of the previous trial data applies. All the contrived data given to the FDA to achieve EUA cannot be applied to this new product - especially if the original trial data can be proven a fraud as in the Jackson case. It was a bait and switch. The PREP Act liability shield is effectively broken. This loss of protection for the manufacturers of these death shots could be the catalyst that can potentially bring down the entire vaxxine industry - especially with a plethora of new genetic lipid nanoparticle platform jabs already in the pipeline. The ramifications of this could be massive.

Pfizer, like all other pharm companies, think Purdue, will attempt to reshuffle the deck to get out from under the lawsuits or fines. Pfizer is already publicly projecting losses and the need to downsize. However, all the other downstream players that pushed this poison on the public have their asteroids hanging out completely exposed. They have no more legal protection and victims will be able to go after them - hospitals, providers, colleges, businesses, etc. There could also be some criminal prosecutions if it can be shown as intentional criminal fraud - but until it happens, I will not hold my breath on that one. The Jackson case has now expanded from a wrongful termination suit to an ex rel case for the citizens of the United States of America via Jackson listed as plaintiffs. This now takes not only the data collected on the original trials, but has in view the bait and switch product given to the public. We shall see if the revised case can make it past Pfizer's petition for dismissal.

The Brooke Jackson case against Ventavia Research Group, a Pfizer contractor, may also have some new life breathed into it because of this issue over "contamination." There were problems with the initial trials conducted by Ventavia that translated into faulty data - data that was then given to the FDA in order to receive an EUA. Expand the faulty data collected from the trials and then add the questionable manufacturing of the jabs, a two pronged approach for piercing the immunity shied. What did Pfizer know and when did they know it.

Essentially, the product that was used in the Pfizer trials was not legally the same product distributed to the public in mass. What makes it a different product? The manufacturing process. In order to ramp up production, a different process had to be used. This is the point where all the genetic contamination comes into the picture because of the production methods used to make this soup in mass - quickly. Technically, because of this change in how the jabs were manufactured, it is a different product by legal definition and the regs require that it should have been treated as such. Warp Speed does not bypass this and cannot be used to cover their butts. Pfizer distributed a "new product" without proper testing - and Pfizer knew it.

Therefore, because the jabs given to the public were a legally new product, there is no informed consent for the public about this product. None of the previous trial data applies. All the contrived data given to the FDA to achieve EUA cannot be applied to this new product - especially if the original trial data can be proven a fraud as in the Jackson case. It was a bait and switch. The PREP Act liability shied is effectively broken. This loss of protection for the manufacturers of these death shots could be the catalyst that can potentially bring down the entire vaxxine industry - especially with a plethora of new genetic lipid nanoparticle platform jabs already in the pipeline. The ramifications of this could be massive.

Pfizer, like all other pharm companies, think Purdue, will attempt to reshuffle the deck to get out from under the lawsuits or fines. Pfizer is already publicly projecting losses and the need to downsize. However, all the other downstream players that pushed this poison on the public have their asteroids hanging out completely exposed. They have no more legal protection and victims will be able to go after them - hospitals, providers, colleges, businesses, etc. There could also be some criminal prosecutions if it can be shown as intentional criminal fraud - but until it happens, I will not hold my breath on that one. The Jackson case has now expanded from a wrongful termination suit to an ex rel case for the citizens of the United States of America via Jackson listed as plaintiffs. This now takes not only the data collected on the original trials, but has in view the bait and switch product given to the public. We shall see if the revised case can make it past Pfizer's petition for dismissal.