As you probably heard, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) supposedly issued “approval” to Pfizer for a Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccine” that goes by the name of Comirnaty. The mainstream media claims that this injection is the same one that is already being widely administered under emergency use authorization (EUA), but is it?
Comirnaty, first off, is not the same as the Pfizer-BioNTech gene therapy drug currently being plunged into people’s arms. Beyond that, nobody can force you to take either of the injections.
Despite what the lying fake news media claims, covid vaccine “mandates” are not legal. The FDA also did not “approve” Comirnaty in the way that people think the agency did, as it is currently limited to adults over the age of 16.
“Vaccination with the EUA Pfizer-BioNTech or the Comirnaty vaccine in the 12- to 15-year age group, or providing a third booster dose of either, are still considered an unapproved use – however, those uses remain authorized under EUA,” reports The Defender.
“FDA made some clear but cagey statements about the differences between the Comirnaty vaccine and the Pfizer-BioNTech EUA vaccine.”
According to the FDA, the licensed vaccine from Pfizer “has the same formulation” as the EUA-authorized jab currently being administered, which suggests that the two products can be used interchangeably.
“The products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness,” the agency further contends.
FDA admits in “fact sheet” that covid vaccines cannot be mandated
Okay, but what does it all mean? What are the “certain differences” that make the two injections “legally distinct?” The FDA has not yet answered these questions, it turns out, which has created a gray area of understanding.
What we do know is that EUA injections are designated as “experimental” or “investigational” according to the law. They cannot be mandated, either, meaning anyone can refuse them without consequence.
“EUA vaccines have a huge liability shield that protects everyone involved with the product from being sued,” The Defender reports.
“If you are injured by an EUA vaccine, the only way to obtain compensation for damages is to apply to the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), which might cover unpaid medical expenses and lost wages only. However, only 3% of claims made have been compensated, and so far the program has approved no claims for COVID vaccine injuries.”
While some argue that the CICP, a program of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), does not give petitioners the right to a judge or jury, it turns out that this is the only pathway through which an injured party can seek help for adverse events caused by an EUA injection.
In a nutshell, it is always your choice whether or not to take an experimental drug. Nobody can force you to take it, even if they insist that they have this right. You are the one who maintains the right to just say no if that is what you choose to do.
“We believe it is likely the FDA was instructed to find a way to both license the Pfizer vaccine – so mandates would be legally supported – while also retaining the vaccine’s liability shield,” The Defender says. “The FDA could not find a way to do this under existing law.”
An FDA fact sheet states this plainly, assuming people take the time to actually read it. Comirnaty, just like the current EUA injection from Pfizer-BioNTech, is liability-free, meaning it cannot be mandated no matter what the government or your employer says.
“We suggest you print it out, highlight the relevant passages and present it to anyone who tries to force vaccinations on employees,” The Defender says about this important FDA fact sheet.
The latest news about Chinese Virus injections can be found at ChemicalViolence.com.
Ethan Huff
Sources for this article include:
Related Posts
- Moderna’s mRNA injections are an “operating system” designed to program humans and hack their biological functions
- Covid-19 injections are spreading new “variants” of coronavirus
- US begins study of allergic reactions from mRNA coronavirus vaccines, proving covid vaccine long-term safety studies have never been conducted
- Bill Gates, Microsoft, mRNA vaccines, and the global plot to turn human DNA, protein synthesis, and immune function into a programmable operating system
Dr. Eddy Bettermann MD 
I did not find anything in the Fact Sheet that states the vaccines can not be mandated. I also did not find anything that states both vaccines are liability free.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Look up EUA authorizations it says it there none of them can be held liable. The Verbiage they use for Cominarity when they added it to the current EUA is something along the lines of…. We’re adding this here to give it coverage under this EUA that is not covered for the approval. Something along those lines basically they’re granting it both EUA and approval but try getting it where they are giving jabs no one has Cominarity. Also the reason they’re interchangeable, is liability no one will be given 2 Cominarity it will always be combined with the EUA version so no one can go after the name brand one for injury because they’ll then say well you didn’t get only Cominarity so…. It’s pretty brilliant of them but very very sketchy and scary.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is great and all but the fact sheet states EUA… the vaccine mandates are now being pushed because Pfizer was “approved”. It changes what employers can mandate. This is great info for Moderna and J&J. But not for Pfizer. I would love for someone to provide me solid proof that an employer can’t mandate Pfizer because my husband is about to lose his job over this
LikeLiked by 1 person