WATCH: Pfizer CEO Flops Attempting to Defend Vax Liability Shield
BEN BARTEE | ON MARCH 04, 2025
The very simple — and unexpected coming from CNBC, which usually runs cover for pharmaceutical corporations as a matter of course — question posed to Albert Bourla:
Vaccine makers like yourself [are] largely shielded from liability. If the products are safe and effective, what is the need to continue to shield, to have these liability shields, and what happens if those shields are changed or go away completely?
The very simple answer, assuming the vaccines are actually “safe and effective,” would be: “Nothing happens if we lose our liability shield. We don’t need it because our product is safe and effective, and we are willing to prove that in court if need be.”
That’s not what Bourla said. Instead, he offered a word-salad about how the trustworthy FDA would never approve a dangerous and ineffective vaccine. Therefore, by virtue of the fact that the FDA allowed the COVID shots to go to market, they are by definition “safe and effective.”
Also, he adds,American juries are too stupid to decide whether an injury was caused by a vaccine or a car accident.
If the product is not safe and effective, it would never get approval from the FDA or from the other health authorities… They are very strict when they are approving products, particularly for vaccines… However, in a system that litigations can flourish, anyone can create, demand that the accident in the car happened because of the vaccine, and uh, with a jury, it’s going to be flip of the coin. And this is, I think, why the Congress — it was not an administration — had passed this legislation that is protecting those that they have approval from the FDA from federal liabilities.
For so many reasons, Bourla’s defense of the indefensible falls upon under the mildest scrutiny. The company was recently kind enough to demonstrate one of them — the so-called “revolving door” between regulators at the agencies tasked with vetting pharma’s products and pharma itself — when it snagged a former top FDA drug regulator and installed him as its chief medical officer.
Via Stat News (emphasis added):
It’s only February, but my pick for the Worst Biopharma CEO of 2025 has already been decided: Albert Bourla of Pfizer.
Pfizer’s decision to hire Patrizia Cavazzoni, a former top drug regulator at the Food and Drug Administration, asits new chief medical officer is one of the dumbest, most damaging corporate screwups since the rollout of New Coke.
For months, the Make America Healthy Again movement and its titular leader, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — who also happens to now run the Department of Health and Human Services — have castigated the pharma sector for its all-too-cozy relationship with the FDA.
On top of the conflict of interest among regulators,the FDA frequently acknowledges it has no idea how the products it approves work. This is especially true of the COVID-19 shots, which were never approved through the standard process but instead granted “emergency use authorization” with a much lower threshold of safety demonstration.
(https://youtu.be/bY7dNgHpaOw
https://pjmedia.com/benbartee/2025/03/04/watch-pfizer-ceo-flops-attempting-to-defend-vax-liability-shield-n4937539