Sign into an existing account

Everyone involved in this mess is retarded - including the media.

First off, it isn't that (((pharma))) is saying "we won't give any data for 75 years"

The issue at hand is that this is a release to the public, and as such, is not currently covered by their typical workforce allocations.

They are asking that a general standard of 500 pages per month be set for release - which then the reporters do the math on and say it will take 75 years, etc.

Yes, it will take that long, but they aren't directly hiding anything, just asking for a limit on an additional workload.

Now, since (((big pharma))) has made at least 20billion off this vaccine nonsense, they should be able hire many more people to offset this added workload, and release the data faster, in the interest of the public good.

However, the jewdicial system would never think to cut into their profits by making such a common sense ruling - rather tending toward letting the public be without the data for decades.

I think there is merit to the argument that since the (((fda))) only needed 108 days to review the "entirety" of the data before making their ruling on safety, that the public should also get the data within a short time frame.

Unfortunately, there is probably lots of personal info scattered throughout that should be redacted for privacy.

Yep, unfortunately most of my extended family got jabbed before I could even say anything to them. But, I have been talking to them about it, and have at the very least gotten a few to refuse the "boosters".

That being said, to give you an idea of what I'm dealing with, one of my cousins said they love their job so much that they would inject bleach into themselves to keep it. So, it's an uphill battle with them, but it's a uphill battle that I'm slowly winning.

deleted

Not sure one way or the other on that one, but it IS the same Gottlieb that used to be head of the FDA. And James (Jim) Smith was the CEO OF REUTERS NEWS before joining the board at Pfizer.