Medical director of Pfizer UK, Dr Berkeley Phillips tweeted a promotion of the Pfizer mRNA product back in November 2020. The promotion of an unlicensed medicine or unauthorised indication is a criminal offence and can receive a penalty of a fine or imprisonment for up to two years. The tweet also breached the code of practice set out by the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA), according to Dr Carl Heneghan and Dr Tom Jefferson. However, Pfizer’s penalty was a fine of just £34,800 which equates to 0.00005% of Pfizer’s 2021 revenues.

This is hardly a surprise to most of us who have knowledge of Pfizer’s’ ‘previous.’ We are therefore “wiser to pfizer” and know that it is not unusual for Pfizer to receive a penalty for their unethical, criminal practices that hardly even equate to a slap on the wrist for the pharmaceutical giant.

However, this latest fine is much smaller than other, larger fines that have been issued to them over the years but, they didn’t serve as a deterrent to them and their continuation of what has been judged as their “criminal practices” an almost laughable 34,800 pounds is certainly not going to either.

Since 2009, Pfizer has been found guilty of numerous offences and fraudulent practices including:

• Corruption and Blackmail.
• Spinning’ negative data to place it in a more positive light
• Negligence.
• Failing to warn of drug risks.
• Acting fraudulently with a blatant disregard of human lives and the law.
• Stalking and terrorising whistleblowers and their families

Pfizer’s action have even been judged to be “highly unethical, harmful to science, wasteful of public resources, and potentially dangerous to the public’s health.” Yet over the years ‘consequences’ for Pfizer have been miniscule compared to the massive profits they have earned and they have continued on regardless.

Dr Carl Heneghan and Dr Tom Jefferson, have recently asked “When Will Bosses Face Real Consequences?” and wrote the following article in their substack Trust the Evidence

In November 2020, Dr. Berkeley Phillips, the Medical Director of Pfizer U.K, shared a post from a fellow employee on Twitter that said:  “Our vaccine candidate is 95% effective in preventing COVID-19 and 94% effective in people over 65 years old. We will file all of our data with health authorities within days. Thank you to every volunteer in our trial and to all who are tirelessly fighting this pandemic.” Four other Pfizer U.K. colleagues re-tweeted the same post. Pfizer also identified four more U.K.-based colleagues who liked the tweet. 

In the U.K., the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA) is the self-regulatory body which administers the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) Code of Practice for the industry.

In a recent report, the PMCPA Panel noted the “tweet clearly referred to the outcome of the Pfizer and BioNTech’s vaccine being developed to protect against COVID-19. The Panel noted that Clause 3.1 prohibited the promotion of a medicine prior to the grant of its marketing authorisation”.

AUTH/3741/2/23 – Complainant v Pfizer: Promotional use of Twitter

In breach of the code, the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA) charged Pfizer administrative costs of £34,800 for this breach. To put this into context, Pfizer’s revenues jumped to $81.3 billion in 2021, up from $41.7 billion in 2020. So, £34,800 equates to 0.00005% of Pfizer’s 2021 revenues. Or, to put it another way, Pfizer earned about $154,680 per minute in 2021, so the fine equates to roughly 17 seconds of Pfizer’s revenues.   

Pfizer has already been reprimanded six times for its promotion of the COVID-19 vaccine.

• AUTH/3437/12/20 – Complainant v Pfizer: Alleged promotion of Covid vaccine on LinkedIn
• AUTH/3422/11/20 – Complainant v Pfizer: Alleged promotion of unlicensed Covid vaccine on LinkedIn
• AUTH/3519/5/21 – Member of the public v Pfizer: Misleading press release
• AUTH/3721/1/23 – Complainant v Pfizer: Allegations about Pfizer U.K. tweets
• AUTH/3438/12/20 – Complainant v Pfizer: Alleged promotion of COVID-19 vaccine on LinkedIn
• AUTH/3591/12/21 – A complaint on behalf of UsForThem v Pfizer

This latest fine comes after Pfizer’s Chief Executive, Dr. Albert Bourla, was found guilty in November 2022 of misleading U.K. parents over the safety of the Covid vaccine for children. 

Bourla told the BBC, “People will be likely to need to have annual Covid vaccinations for many years to come.” He thought this would be necessary to maintain a “very high level of protection”. He also told that bastion of truth the BBC that immunising children in the U.K. and Europe would be a ”very good idea”.

“Covid in schools is thriving,” he said.

“This is disturbing, significantly, the educational system, and there are kids that will have severe symptoms. So there is no doubt in my mind that the benefits, completely, are in favour of doing it.”

Dr. Albert Bourla thought this would be needed to maintain a “very high level of protection”.

The U.K. regulator found Pfizer guilty of violating three PMCPA code of practice sections. 

But do you think this mattered to Dr. Albert Bourla? By the way, Albert is a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine; he’s done very well out of the pandemic. In 2021, he was named CEO of the Year by CNN Business. His estimated net worth is at least $35.6 Million as of February 23rd 2024. Albert owns over 127,674 units of Pfizer stock worth over $12,123,852, and over the last 10 years he has sold stock worth over $5,557,386. But this is chicken feed compared to his remuneration of $17,929,000 as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer at Pfizer.

But a month after Bourla had taken the BBC for a ride, he was back on the stock exchange’s trading floors: the largest trade he ever made was exercising 222,328 units of Pfizer stock on December 15th 2022, worth over $6,058,438. 

Dr. Phillips, the U.K.’s Medical Director for Pfizer, said the social media post was “accidental and unintentional”. Yet, everything at this level is fine-tuned to promote the stock price and further the pharmaceutical agenda. 

Promoting an unlicensed medicine or unauthorised indication is a criminal offence. The penalty is a fine or imprisonment for up to two years. We think it’s about time someone faced an actual penalty rather than pennies for breaches of the code.

Dr. Carl Heneghan is the Oxford Professor of Evidence Based Medicine and Dr. Tom Jefferson is an epidemiologist based in Rome who works with Professor Heneghan on the Cochrane Collaboration. This article was first published on their Substack, Trust The Evidence, which you can subscribe to here.

This amount Pfizer paid in penalties for an illegal act is laughable, to Pfizer who are quite accustomed to paying much larger fines over the years following guilty verdicts to various acts that have shown a blatant disregard for our health. Below is an excerpt of an article published here at the Expose in 2022.

Negligence, Fraud, Malice – Shouldn’t We All Be Wiser to Pfizer?

Those Who Seek to Earn A Profit Through Fraud.

In 2009 Pfizer paid “$2.3 billion in the largest health care fraud settlement in the history of the Department of Justice. for “mis-promoting” medicine Neurontin for uses not approved by medical regulators, and paying “kickbacks” to compliant doctors, the Guardian newspaper reported. Pfizer had pleaded guilty and settled civil allegations concerning improper payments to doctors who prescribed nine other pharmaceutical products, and was to pay record sums in an out-of-court deal with the US department of justice.

Pfizer whistleblower John Kopchinski, exposed Pfizer for mis-promoting their drugs and putting patients at risk of heart attacks, strokes, and blood clots. Kopchinski reportedly said that while working for Pfizer, he was expected to increase profits at all costs, even when sales meant endangering lives.

Prosecutors said Pfizer’s crimes had been carried out over an “extensive period of time” a government attorney added  “such blatant and continued disregard of the law will not be tolerated […] “it was a victory for the public over those who seek to earn a profit through fraud”.

Unfortunately, the $2.3 billion fine against Pfizer according to the New York Times  amounted “to less than three weeks of Pfizer’s sales.”

Illegally Promoting Drugs & Putting Lives at Risk

This was just pocket change to Pfizer and undeterred by the huge fine, they were sued again in 2009 for illegally promoting their drug  Neurontin which was promoted as an epilepsy treatment.

The New York Times had published extensive evidence that Pfizer “manipulated the publication of scientific studies to bolster the use the drug for other disorders while suppressing research that did not support those uses. 

Pfizer had delayed the publication of studies that had found no evidence the drug worked, ‘spinning’ negative data to place it in a more positive light, and bundling negative findings with positive studies to neutralize the results.” 

Additionally, Pfizer’s own studies showed a placebo was more effective than Neurontin on neuropathic pain, the study was suppressed and Neurotonin was still illegally promoted.

The case was instigated by whistle-blower Dr, Franklin who had previously testified in another Neurontin case in 2004 which resulted in Pfizer pleading guilty and paying a $430 million settlement. the 2004 case did not cover everything and new unsealed court documents were produced evidence that not only did the company, and its subsidiaries push Neurontin for unapproved uses, they did so – “knowing that the drug was ineffective“.

Outright Deception and Suppression of Scientific Truth

According to the documents, Pfizer engaged in “outright deception of the biomedical community, and suppression of scientific truth” and more, Pfizer were said to be guilty of “stalling or stopping the publication of negative study results; manipulating both trial designs and data to make the drug look more effective than it was, and using questionable tactics to enhance the drug’s image and increase its sales.

The author of the documents was also the director of the Center for Clinical Trials at John Hopkins University, Kay Dickersin who wrote that the Pfizer practices were “highly unethical, harmful to science, wasteful of public resources, and potentially dangerous to the public’s health.”

The Pfizer Ex-CIA Agent

As a result of the case Pfizer showed their true colours, mafioso style, as the night before the case Pfizer stalked whistleblower Dr Franklin and sent an ex-CIA agent to his home, where the Pfizer investigator called Franklin’s wife repeatedly, blocked the driveway, looked through the windows shouting at his wife, and would not leave until his wife called the police,” This was terrifying for the family including an eight-year-old child., they would not leave until his wife called the police.

Dr. Franklin told the judge that Pfizer’s investigator told the family on the phone, “‘We know all there is to know about you,’ and then cited the location of my daughter 200 miles away at college. “How the hell am I supposed to remain unbiased when you do that? It feels like a threat.” The judge placed a restraining order on Pfizer for “any private eye with respect to Dr. Franklin or his family.”  

Trovan Children & Blackmail.

Pfizer has shown their disregard for children previously when they administered an experimental drug Trovan on 200 children after a deadly outbreak of meningitis in Nigeria in 1996. The drug pushers never told the parents that their children were the subjects of an experiment. Eleven of the children died & many suffered side effects such as brain damage and organ failure.

Pfizer was sued by the Nigerian state and federal authorities, but did not want to pay out to settle the two cases, one civil and one criminal, but came to a tentative settlement with the Kano state government costing them $75m (source).

Although it was leaked that Pfizer again hired investigators in an attempt to “unearth evidence “of corruption against the Nigerian attorney general in order to blackmail/persuade him to drop legal action according to a leaked US embassy cable. Also, eligibility was dependent on DNA tests carried out on the children. to prove that they are victims, which was felt was to deny the victims of the money. Watch the video to find out more. here:

Rezulin -FDA Fast Track Approval

The FDA had approved a drug Rezulin, for the treatment of diabetes in January 1997, on the basis of a “fast-track” review of six months. It marked the agency’s most rapid approval to that date of a diabetes pill. Years later the effects of that “approval” were seen in court claims, as in 2009, Pfizer paid $750 million to settle 35,000 claims that Rezulin, was responsible for 63 deaths and dozens of liver failures. Pfizer had 105 class-action suits in state and federal courts seeking either medical monitoring of people who had taken Rezulin or damages or restitution for those patients.

They also said it faced individual lawsuits on behalf of 4,500 Rezulin patients and about 8,400 claims for compensation, but a Pfizer spokesman at the time Bob Fauteux said Pfizer is “confident about the future course of litigation because FDA figures show that, of an estimated 1.9 million diabetes patients who were prescribed Rezulin”, there have been fewer than 100 reports of liver failure leading to death or transplant at the time the drug was withdrawn.

Unbelievably, (or not so much these days), the FDA stood behind the drug despite a mounting death toll and absence of life-saving benefits and interestingly with this case the Rezulin controversy was reported to have also “cast a shadow” on the Food and Drug Administration, (FDA) which gave the drug fast-track approval despite concerns within the agency over its safety.

Chantix – Incomplete Trials & Psychological Disorders

The FDA was a little stricter with Pfizer smoking cessation drug Chantix in 2013 after it was reported to have caused suicide, suicide attempts, and severe psychological disorders. According to The Guardian, one man had committed suicide in April 2013 only 8 days after taking the medication, adding to the 24 more people who had committed suicide since its launch in 2006.

Pfizer’s Chantix trials had improperly excluded patients with a history of depression or other mental disturbances resulting in around 2,700 lawsuits being filed against Pfizer March 2013, Pfizer agreed to settle the state and federal lawsuits against Chantix, costing Pfizer almost $300 million.

This led to the FDA requirement of a “black box” warning on the drug, Chantix, alerting patients and doctors to the risk of psychiatric side effects. (yes it was still available after) .

It was also determined by the FDA that Chantix is probably associated with a higher heart attack risk.

Pfizer disputed the FDA’s research and continued to stand by the drug’s risk-benefit balance, but in July 2021, Pfizer announced that it was recalling two lots of the smoking cessation treatment after discovering the presence of N-nitroso-varenicline that can potentially increase the risk of cancer in humans. Only 15 years after its launch? (source).

Protonix – Lack of Warnings

Also in 2013, Pfizer agreed to pay $55 million to settle criminal charges of failing to warn patients and doctors about the risks of kidney disease, kidney injury, kidney failure, & acute interstitial nephritis caused by its proton pump inhibitor, Protonix. It was argued that Pfizer had not done enough to warn patients and medical professionals about the possible risks as the companies became aware of them (source).

Pfizer & Bribery

In 2012, Pfizer was charged with violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act when its subsidiaries bribed foreign government doctors in Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Czech Republic, Italy, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Serbia in order to win business.

“Pfizer subsidiaries in several countries had bribery so entwined in their sales culture that they offered points and bonus programs to improperly reward foreign officials who proved to be their best customers,” said Kara Brockmeyer, Chief of the SEC Enforcement Division’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Unit. Pfizer consented to the entry of a final judgment ordering it to pay disgorgement of $16,032,676 in net profits and prejudgment interest of $10,307,268 for a total of $26,339,944 .(source).

Prempo – Pfizer Withheld Information

In 2012, Pfizer had paid $1.2 billion to settle claims by nearly 10,000 women that its drug, Prempro, caused breast cancer. This included punitive damages for the drug maker’s actions in withholding information about the risk of breast cancer (source).

Epi Pen Greed

Pfizer continues to be sued for fraud.  In 2021, Pfizer agreed to pay $345 million “to resolve claims by consumers who say they overpaid for EpiPens due to anticompetitive practices by Pfizer and the company that markets the emergency allergy treatment, Mylan.More. The litigation followed a public outcry in 2016 after Mylan, which owns the rights to market and distribute the devices, raised the price of a pair of EpiPens to $600, from $100 in 2008, putting it in the centre of an ongoing U.S. debate over the high cost of medicines.

Evil Corporation

Pfizer is certainly not a corporation governments worldwide should have trusted with our health, arguably, that’s because they didn’t. They would have known that Pfizer ethics aligned very much with their own making them a perfect choice to aid the worldwide agenda. Pfizer therefore have been enabled to continue on with their disregard for human life in order to promote a cash cow.

Funnily enough when an undercover investigation by Project Veritas in 2021 revealed a Pfizer official admitting that the company’s history of greed and deceiving the public continued with its COVID-19 jab.  Chris Croce, a senior Pfizer scientist stated:

“I still feel like I work for an evil corporation because it comes down to profits in the end.  …”

You don’t say??

Sources:

Dr Heneghan and Dr Jefferson Substack, Trust The Evidence,

The Expose – Negligence, Fraud, Malice-Shouldn’t we all-be Wiser to Pfizer?