The U.S. federal government is desperate to give one of the experimental COVID-19 jabs the full stamp of FDA approval.
An FDA fully-approved injection removes a lot of legal red tape to enforce vaccine mandates.
It’s a system rife with corruption that screws those who refuse to be a participant in this Big Pharma medical experiment.
And to clarify, the Pfizer jab set to gain full FDA approval is still an experimental jab.
However, this will make the fight against vaccine mandates much harder.
American citizens who don’t want the jab must prepare to fight and draw a line in the sand.
Private and public sectors jobs will say get the jab or you’re fired.
Universities will deny you in-person schooling.
Sadly, children will almost surely face mandated COVID-19 jabs to attend public schools.
What’s most infuriating is the same person who will oversee the approval of the Pfizer COVID-19 jab also approved OxyContin and Fentanyl.
The two most dangerous drugs in America that have caused thousands of deaths.
That’s the real epidemic.
The person responsible is Janet Woodcock.
Janet Woodcock is the Acting Commissioner of the FDA, and she got the appointment to rush the approval of the Pfizer COVID-19 jab.
Woodcock was the Director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER).
OxyContin and Fentanyl gained approval under her watch and an opioid epidemic has spiraled out of control ever since.
Here’s the latest:
FDA BOMBSHELL. ONLY from me. 😉 pic.twitter.com/RDcsnb74xS
— Chris Sky🧱 (@chrissaccoccia1) August 22, 2021
https://twitter.com/Reflexospuros/status/1429593310381985795
https://twitter.com/Tweetweetbeyoch/status/1429611866859479040
https://twitter.com/Tweetweetbeyoch/status/1429611871120855043
https://twitter.com/Tweetweetbeyoch/status/1429611873926844420
Woodcock gained the nod for FDA Acting Commissioner when Biden entered the Oval Office.
But don’t expect Woodcock to hold the position permanently.
She’ll likely be out by November 15th.
That’s just enough time for her to approve at least one of the experimental COVID-19 jabs.
The Biden administration has ruled out nominating Janet Woodcock as permanent head of the FDA https://t.co/1iI17WX7hi
— Bloomberg Asia (@BloombergAsia) August 19, 2021
President Biden's administration has ruled out nominating Janet Woodcock as the permanent head of the FDA, Bloomberg News reported. Woodcock has served as acting commissioner since Biden took office. #opioidcrisis https://t.co/p0zmzXkB2K
— FED Up! Coalition (@FEDUpRally) August 22, 2021
Enough said.https://t.co/1gFoVxxQCx
— Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) August 19, 2021
Bloomberg reported:
President Joe Biden’s administration has ruled out nominating Janet Woodcock as permanent head of the Food and Drug Administration, people familiar with the matter say, as the search continues for a leader during a crucial period for full approval of coronavirus vaccines.
Woodcock, who has served as acting commissioner since Biden took office, has faced firm opposition on Capitol Hill for the job from lawmakers including Democratic Senator Joe Manchin, a key swing vote in the evenly divided chamber who criticized the agency over the controversial accelerated approval this year of an Alzheimer’s drug.
The White House hasn’t publicly ruled out Woodcock, but officials have privately concluded that she won’t be the nominee, said the people, who discussed the matter on condition of anonymity.
Woodcock is eligible to serve as acting commissioner until November 15th, unless Biden nominates someone else before then, in which case she can remain in charge of the agency while the nomination proceeds, according to an official familiar with the matter. Woodcock, 72, who has been at the FDA for 35 years, declined to comment.
The process has dragged on at a time when the FDA is presiding over several aspects of the pandemic response, including review of drugmaker applications, inspection of batches of doses and decision-making over approval of vaccines that have so far been distributed only under emergency authorization.
White House spokesman Chris Meagher declined to comment specifically on Woodcock’s future, but said: “We have strong acting leadership in place that is playing an important role in our Covid-19 response and beyond, and look forward to sharing a nominee with the requisite expertise and leadership for this job.”
On Aug. 10, Biden was asked when he’d name a commissioner and hinted that the likelihood of confirmation was a factor.
“We’re working on that very hard to make sure we can get it passed,” he said of the appointment.
As Biden weighs his options, the FDA faces a lengthy and pressing series of choices that will steer the Covid-19 pandemic.
Biden’s administration this week announced that it would begin offering Covid-19 booster shots on September 20, an announcement that was signed by Woodcock but which the administration claims is subject to FDA approval. They’re also deferring to the FDA on whether to extend boosters to minors.
Earlier this year, the USA Today outlined Woodcock’s failures:
When the Biden administration tapped Janet Woodcock as the acting commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, it seemed a good pick. Woodcock had spent 23 years as chief of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, a unit the FDA describes as its “consumer watchdog” in America’s health care system. The CEDR is tasked with making certain that drugs are “safe and effective,” and “that the health benefits outweigh known risks.”
The administration made it clear that Woodcock’s interim role was an audition for the full-time position. “Six people familiar with the deliberations” told Politico that Woodcock is one of three on a shortlist, the others being ex-FDA Deputy Commissioner Joshua Sharfstein and current Deputy Commissioner Amy Abernethy.
Woodcock’s appointment, however, is a potential land mine for the new administration. The possibility she could be nominated as the permanent commissioner has sparked a firestorm among anti-opioid advocacy groups and victims of the opioid crisis. They charge that she was a central figure responsible for the FDA’s failure over a quarter-century to adequately control the opioid epidemic.
Dr. Andrew Kolodny, a senior scientist and medical director of Brandeis’ Opioid Policy Research Collaborative, told me, “It’s no exaggeration to say that she presided over the worst medical regulatory failure in U.S. history.”
Allowing opioid epidemic to happen
During five years of reporting into a history of the American pharmaceutical industry, I discovered there was plenty of blame to go around in the opioid epidemic. Those culpable were not just pharmaceutical companies that aggressively promoted their addictive products, but also overprescribing doctors, multibillion dollar drug distributors who hid the high volume of orders to so-called pill mills and even national pharmacy chains, where secret bonuses prompted druggists to direct patients to higher profit narcotic painkillers.
I also came across evidence that the FDA was partly responsible for the epidemic. Unlike the others who were motivated by greed, the fault of the FDA was that it repeatedly failed to fulfil its role as the nation’s guardian of public health. Instead, the opioid crisis is filled with instances of the FDA’s timid enforcement, too easy approval of narcotic painkillers and regulatory decisions friendly to drug manufacturers. Some of its worst lapses were with Purdue Pharma and its blockbuster narcotic painkiller, OxyContin.
Janet Woodcock — often referred to as “the top drug cop” — had been in charge of CEDR for only a year in 1995 when the FDA considered approving OxyContin for sale to the public.
Purdue managed several significant victories. Despite safety studies demonstrating Oxy was safe for “short term” use, mostly severe end-of-life pain, the FDA approved Oxy for much broader treatment of chronic pain, everything from fibromyalgia to back pain. And while Purdue had not conducted any clinical trials to determine whether OxyContin was less likely to be addictive or abused than other opioid painkillers, the FDA allowed Purdue to claim on Oxy’s insert that its delayed absorption was “believed to reduce the abuse liability.” The drug’s label declared that addiction “is rare.” That freed Purdue’s marketing team to push their drug as much safer than any opioid competitor.
Someone personally responsible for the opioid crisis will approve an experimental injection that’s led to thousands of American deaths.
Is it safe to say the government is trying to kill Americans yet?
Join the conversation!
Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!