top of page

Covid vaccination: the reasons behind the mistrust


On the subject of vaccination, the public authorities - be they political or media influence - sing the same tune, to the point of tipping over into ideological propaganda. The newspaper Le Temps has not hesitated to take a clear side in its headline, leaving aside its role as an informant and becoming an influencer. The biggest newspaper editors in the country, as well as the national television channel are trying to answer the questions of the skeptics by interviewing the same "experts" since the beginning of the crisis. In the meantime, pharmaceutical companies are inflating the prices of their vaccines and leaks of contracts signed between the different countries and these entities give, once again, support to those who are still labeled as conspiracists.

"Buyer acknowledges that the vaccine and materials relating to the vaccine, and its components and constituent materials, are under rapid development due to the emergency circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and will continue to be studied after the vaccine is provided to Buyer under this Agreement. Buyer further acknowledges that the efficacy and long-term effects of the vaccine are not yet known and that there may be adverse effects of the vaccine that are not currently known."

This is an excerpt from the contract signed between Pfizer and Brazil (the Buyer), which was leaked on the internet. This clause also appears in the documents signed with Albania, as well as with the European Commission, which L'Impertinent has obtained. It reduces Pfizer's legal responsibility in case of side effects or even death, since the buyers acknowledge that they accept to buy a product whose safety is not assured by the seller. In addition, the signatory nations formally commit to take charge of the defense costs of the pharmaceutical company in case of a complaint. After the leak of these documents on Twitter, through a whistleblower specializing in web security named Ehden Biber, the social network suspended its account. These contracts have a confidentiality clause valid for ten years.

The question of the responsibility of Pharma in case of a glitch was raised earlier this year. Le Monde's Décodeurs stated, based on information provided by the European Commission: "It recalls that the contracts are concluded in accordance with EU rules, which "require that the responsibility always lies with the company": if a product is defective, it is the laboratory that is responsible. The french TV channel LCI, among others, had published an article reaching the same conclusion.

However, here is what we read in the contract signed between Pfizer and the EU, under the indemnification clause: "The Commission, on behalf of the participating Member States, declares that the use of the vaccines produced under this JPA will be carried out under epidemic conditions requiring such use and that the administration of the vaccines will therefore be carried out under the sole responsibility of the participating Member States. Accordingly, each Participating Contractor, licensor, and sublicensee, and the managing officers, employees, and other agents and representatives of each of them (collectively, the "Indemnified Persons") shall be indemnified against all liabilities incurred, settlements pursuant to Section I.12.6, and reasonable out-of-pocket direct legal expenses incurred in defending third party claims (including reasonable attorneys' fees and other expenses) relating to injuries, damages, and losses as defined in Section I.12.2."

How much does it cost?

These contracts cannot be broken, even if an effective treatment is discovered. This may explain why countries are not rushing to approve ivermectin, for example. It could also explain why it is difficult for governments to reverse course, given the money paid to pharmaceutical companies.


Para acessar o Conteúdo acima, acesse a Home Page aqui.

17 views0 comments

Related Posts

See All
bottom of page