Are you aware, or is anybody aware, of any lawsuits for contamination that involve the Covid-19 countermeasures? Is the intent of this post to suggest that this is a path and methodology for future lawsuits? I believe that if it is to work, the defendents have to be the manufacturer and the administrator of the shot. The manufacturer wou…
Are you aware, or is anybody aware, of any lawsuits for contamination that involve the Covid-19 countermeasures? Is the intent of this post to suggest that this is a path and methodology for future lawsuits? I believe that if it is to work, the defendents have to be the manufacturer and the administrator of the shot. The manufacturer would not be Pfizer. As Hedley Rees points out, Pfizer is just a front company, holding patents and providing advertising. DOD funded the manufacturing, ATI held the contract, Pfizer was a middle agent, but the manufacturers are "nonames" to most people. Those nonames would have to be cited. Where it would really get interesting is if the "safe and effective" pushers would be named as codefendents for providing misinformation that led to mandates or economic coercion to get the shot. The charge would be malfeasance or derelection of duty. Those pushers would be the state health departments, in addition to the administrators of the shot (failure to provide informed consent). What do you think?
Specifically, what about the change in manufacturing process to allow mass production using E.Coli with SV 40, and the nano lipid adjuvant that allows these novel gene sequences access into every cell (and human DNA). My understanding as a non-vaccine scientist, is that the EUA was granted based on the C.T.s using synthesized vaccine, a prohibitively expensive method, too expensive and time consuming to allow roll out of a mass produced vaccine needed to vaccinate the world. Pharma/FDA then used old regulations regarding acceptable levels of DNA contamination that did not account for the new nanolipid adjuvant technology. Any issues with this DNA contamination were obviously kept under the radar. Dr. Burckholts (MUSC) has proven that some of the vaccines injected into S.C citizens had extremely high levels of contaminant DNA. Does anyone see this as a possible way to proceed against the vaccine manufacturers?
Please correct any mistakes in my thinking. I'm here to learn not to instruct.
This is uncharted legal territory but as noted in my comment below this case does suggest that toxic contaminants in the mRNA product may be a path around the PREP immunity statute. The SV40 and other DNA fragments in the vials would have to be proven to be harmful (like the shards of glass in Remdesivir). The Michigan case is only a lower court case that could be appealed to a higher court that could always decide the PREP Act authorizes gross negligence and homicide, but the manufacturers would likely settle out of court before taking a chance on an appeal going against them.
Thanks for the clarification. It will all come down to proof of harm and that Pharma knew it and did not disclose it. Not likely to happen. The eventual outcome might be large class action payouts (a large amount necessarily consumed by the legal work required); no "justice" done. Just speaking for a skeptical friend.
I don't think one has to even prove Pharma knew they were doing something wrong. All that is needed under tort law is violation of a duty of care. Allowing Remdesivir to be contaminated with glass shards is plain and simple negligence and damages can be collected if harm can be shown. Same thing with DNA/oncogenic SV40 in the shots. The wild card is whether the PREP Act gives them an absolute shield of immunity. I spent 40 years practicing law and medicine and I am considering coming out of retirement to hold the Pharma monsters legally responsible, along with the politicians and media conglomerates that enabled them. Personally I don't care if I make a dollar from it. I want these monsters brought to justice.
I encourage you to go for it. Only someone with your background and passion for retribution can take this on. Many have been harmed and the future only promises more of the same from Pharma/WHO/WEF for humanity.
Are you aware, or is anybody aware, of any lawsuits for contamination that involve the Covid-19 countermeasures? Is the intent of this post to suggest that this is a path and methodology for future lawsuits? I believe that if it is to work, the defendents have to be the manufacturer and the administrator of the shot. The manufacturer would not be Pfizer. As Hedley Rees points out, Pfizer is just a front company, holding patents and providing advertising. DOD funded the manufacturing, ATI held the contract, Pfizer was a middle agent, but the manufacturers are "nonames" to most people. Those nonames would have to be cited. Where it would really get interesting is if the "safe and effective" pushers would be named as codefendents for providing misinformation that led to mandates or economic coercion to get the shot. The charge would be malfeasance or derelection of duty. Those pushers would be the state health departments, in addition to the administrators of the shot (failure to provide informed consent). What do you think?
Specifically, what about the change in manufacturing process to allow mass production using E.Coli with SV 40, and the nano lipid adjuvant that allows these novel gene sequences access into every cell (and human DNA). My understanding as a non-vaccine scientist, is that the EUA was granted based on the C.T.s using synthesized vaccine, a prohibitively expensive method, too expensive and time consuming to allow roll out of a mass produced vaccine needed to vaccinate the world. Pharma/FDA then used old regulations regarding acceptable levels of DNA contamination that did not account for the new nanolipid adjuvant technology. Any issues with this DNA contamination were obviously kept under the radar. Dr. Burckholts (MUSC) has proven that some of the vaccines injected into S.C citizens had extremely high levels of contaminant DNA. Does anyone see this as a possible way to proceed against the vaccine manufacturers?
Please correct any mistakes in my thinking. I'm here to learn not to instruct.
This is uncharted legal territory but as noted in my comment below this case does suggest that toxic contaminants in the mRNA product may be a path around the PREP immunity statute. The SV40 and other DNA fragments in the vials would have to be proven to be harmful (like the shards of glass in Remdesivir). The Michigan case is only a lower court case that could be appealed to a higher court that could always decide the PREP Act authorizes gross negligence and homicide, but the manufacturers would likely settle out of court before taking a chance on an appeal going against them.
Thanks for the clarification. It will all come down to proof of harm and that Pharma knew it and did not disclose it. Not likely to happen. The eventual outcome might be large class action payouts (a large amount necessarily consumed by the legal work required); no "justice" done. Just speaking for a skeptical friend.
I don't think one has to even prove Pharma knew they were doing something wrong. All that is needed under tort law is violation of a duty of care. Allowing Remdesivir to be contaminated with glass shards is plain and simple negligence and damages can be collected if harm can be shown. Same thing with DNA/oncogenic SV40 in the shots. The wild card is whether the PREP Act gives them an absolute shield of immunity. I spent 40 years practicing law and medicine and I am considering coming out of retirement to hold the Pharma monsters legally responsible, along with the politicians and media conglomerates that enabled them. Personally I don't care if I make a dollar from it. I want these monsters brought to justice.
I encourage you to go for it. Only someone with your background and passion for retribution can take this on. Many have been harmed and the future only promises more of the same from Pharma/WHO/WEF for humanity.