#team pfizer

[arkangelo-7]

Okay, but, BatAdvil.

At this point in his career, Bruce has developed more synthetic drugs than a Pfizer employee without health insurance—it just comes with the territory. Given his close proximity to the Rouge Gallery and Gotham’s semi-poisonous smog, he’s had to teach himself the art of medicinal drugs. There’s an entire fridge dedicated to his creations, but his magnum opus will always be BatAdvil.

Bruce designed it following a particularly godawful run-in with Killer Croc back in 2005, but it was Dick Grayson who actually coined the term. Alfred was suspicious but ever since BatAdvil’s creation, Bruce has kept a tiny bottle of it on him at all times; any time the Joker or Poison Ivy gets a particularly nasty hit in, he’ll pop a pill and suddenly he’s 25 years old again and pain’s only a distant memory.

Eventually, though, the Robins get their hands on it.

Dick routinely steals Bruce’s horde. It’s because he’s so generous with it; anytime he’s in a team up and his partner gets whacked around by one of Blüdhaven’s worst, Dick, guilty, offers up the pills to both superpowered and pedestrian hero’s alike. It’d made him extremely popular with the Justice League—there’s regular fights over who gets to assist Nightwing in hopes of getting their hands on some free BatAdvil.

Jason, once he’s adopted and learns the Secert, immediately sees the potential of dealing BatAdvil. He starts with the Titans, because their proximity to Dick means they’re already hooked, and goes on to dominate the Justice League as the leading BatAdvil dealer. He makes a killing off that stuff and keeps his cash stash locked away in a random chimney in Wayne Manor.

Tim knows about it. Tim knows everything, actually, but he’s acutely aware of Bruce’s miracle pills and Jason’s dealings with the JL. Once Jason’s dead, Tim not only takes over the Robin mantle, but also Jason’s superhero drug ring. He runs it so efficiently that when Jason comes back, he half considers hiring Tim for his criminal enterprises before he decides that trying to kill him would he more rewarding.

Side note: Tim 100% uses the chemical composition of BatAdvil to make a pain-relieving energy drink. It works great, but the problem is that it’s shit on his liver, so he has to go back to regular coffee after a few weeks to avoid losing another internal organ.

Damian and Steph are similar in that they both at first think BatAdvil is stupid. They stick to regular Advil or just go to hard drugs for when they’re seriously injured. But then they both have a scenario where they have some sort of project or test the next morning and have to study, but also just broke like three ribs fighting the Riddler two hours before. They take BatAdvil once and never go back.

Bruce, to this day, uses the stuff religiously. Like, on a daily basis. (He’s got eight kids, he’s forty-five, and he’s beating up criminals on the regular. It’s tough on his knees.) But like regular Advil, the more BatAdvil one takes, the more their immunity grows and the larger their dose has to be. Bruce accidentally gives Clark one of his every-day pills BatAdvils after he gets whacked during an alien invasion and Clark immediately passes out. The League freaks out and Batman awkwardly disappears and pretends like it wasn’t his fault. Dick cries tears of laughter when he hears.

[reality-detective]

The Pfizer Shot Is Contaminated With Plasmid DNA, It's Not Just mRNA, It's Got Bits Of DNA In it. 👇

"This DNA is the DNA vector that was used as the template for the invitro transcription reaction when they made the mRNA."

Professor Phillip Buckhaults.

Ph.D. in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.

He does cancer genomics research at the University of South Carolina. An expert on which changes to the genome cause cancer. His team is really good at detecting foreign pieces of DNA in places where they are not supposed to be. 🤔

[covid-safer-hotties]

Also preserved in our archive (Updates daily!)

A bit California specific in some cases, but generally good advice to follow: You want your vaccination to lead the wave by a month or two to get the best protection from your vaccination.

By Carly Severn

If you haven’t yet sought out your updated COVID-19 vaccine — or your flu shot — now might be a good time.

That’s because, after a lengthy COVID-19 surge this summer that lasted twice as long as 2023’s summer swell, the Bay Area is now about to enter the winter respiratory virus season.

In August, the updated 2024 COVID-19 vaccine was made available to everyone age 6 months and over, with shots from manufacturers Pfizer, Moderna and most recently, Novavax. These COVID-19 vaccines are now provided as annual fall vaccines, alongside the yearly flu shot, updated to target the latest strains and timed in order to offer maximum protection against the predicted winter surge of these viruses.

All of which means if you haven’t gotten either your COVID-19 or flu shot yet at this stage in the fall, seeking them out in the next few weeks is a good idea. Keep reading for what you need to know about fall vaccines, including the best time to get them, what to do if you got COVID-19 this summer and more.

When is the best time to get my COVID and flu shot? The recommendations medical professionals make about when to get a COVID-19 or flu shot are based on:

The fact that it takes about two weeks after you get vaccinated for antibodies to develop and provide protection against the virus When levels of the virus are predicted to rise that year Getting your COVID shot

Last year, the Bay Area���s fall and winter COVID-19 surge began in late October, according to Stanford University’s WastewaterSCAN team, which monitors levels of the virus in local sewage. And when it comes to the timing of your COVID-19 shot, you want to aim for what UCSF infectious disease expert Dr. Peter Chin-Hong called “the Goldilocks moment.”

“You don’t want to get it too soon because your antibodies might wane just when you need it the most,” Chin-Hong said. “And you don’t want to get it too late because you want to prevent infection. So generally, by Halloween or mid to late October is when most people say the right time is.”

The reason for this, explained Chin-Hong, is to ensure you get your full immunity ahead of the busy holiday season, from trick-or-treating at Halloween to holiday travel, Thanksgiving and beyond.

With your vaccine, “you not only get protection against serious disease, hospitalization and death, but you get a little bit of a buffer against infection itself,” Chin-Hong said. “So that if you want to have peace of mind while doing all of these things, it’s probably a good idea to peak your antibodies just when people are getting together again.”

Getting your flu shot

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that last year’s flu season caused between 17,000 and 100,000 deaths and up to 900,000 hospitalizations. Typically, flu season starts in November and peaks around January or February, Chin-Hong said.

The CDC recommends that everyone 6 months and older get an annual flu vaccine “ideally by the end of October.” Chin-Hong told KQED that his “optimal sweet point” for getting this shot is “sometime before Halloween�� — but that if you see flu cases start to rise earlier, you should hustle to seek out your flu shot even sooner.

Can I get my COVID and my flu shot at the same time? Yes — it’s totally fine and safe to get your flu shot at the same time as your new COVID-19 vaccine, and you’ll find many pharmacies offer appointments where you can get multiple vaccines at the same time.

A caveat: if you’re trying to schedule vaccinations for a child, the CDC advised in 2023 that you first talk to your pediatrician about the best schedule for the COVID-19 and flu vaccines (and now the RSV — respiratory syncytial virus — preventive treatment, too).

I got COVID over the summer. Do I still need a COVID shot? Yes, Chin-Hong said — although make sure you’re not getting a shot too soon after having COVID-19.

That’s because “after getting infected with COVID, in general, you have a force field for around three months,” Chin-Hong said, meaning your infection will give you a good level of immunity against getting COVID-19 again during that period.

That said, this immunity will wane, Chin-Hong said, so having “a little bit of a buffer” is something to consider. This means getting your COVID-19 shot even after two months “won’t be a bad idea if it coincides with the time when we expect COVID to come back.”

Where can I get my COVID and flu shot? For full information on how to find an updated 2024 COVID-19 shot, read our guide. If you have health insurance, the cost of your COVID-19 vaccine should be fully covered.

To learn more about where to find a flu shot with or without insurance, read our 2023 guide to locations offering flu vaccination around the Bay Area.

Remember that many locations — including pharmacies — will offer appointments where you can get both vaccines at the same time.

What about RSV? Should I get a vaccine for that? The CDC said that while RSV “does not usually cause severe illness in healthy adults and children,” older adults and infants younger than six months of age are especially at risk of becoming “very sick and may need to be hospitalized.”

The vaccine against RSV is accordingly recommended by the CDC for infants, young children and adults ages 60 and older, as well as for pregnant people.

The virus spreads in the fall and winter like other respiratory viruses and “usually peaks in December and January,” according to the agency, which recommends that vaccination against RSV “will have the most benefit if administered in late summer or early fall [August through October], just before the RSV season.”

Speak to your health care provider about getting the RSV vaccine, when might be the best time for you and whether to get it alongside other vaccines. And as ever, if you’re trying to schedule your kid’s vaccinations, the CDC advises that you first talk to your pediatrician about the best schedule for the COVID-19, flu and RSV vaccines.

[smoqueen]

I might have asked this before, but were you a part of FIRST robotics or did you get into robot combat through another avenue

funny story. i did lego robotics independently as a child in middle school (think 10/11 years old or so). when i got to high school, i really wanted to be either an engineer or work in biological sciences, and i took appropriate classes for it - and i excelled at engineering! but i went to a public school with plenty of money (where i was a 'poor kid'), and when i joined the robotics club, they 'pushed me out' by telling me i would only be allowed to make signs/cheer on the team until my senior year, and it was clear the rich parents who worked at pfizer did all the work for their dumbass shithead kids for the sake of 'resume building'. so i didn't ever actually participate in FIRST. i made one sign.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

COVID-19 vaccines may reduce risk of heart attack, stroke: Study

Urja Sinha at NewsNation:

(NewsNation) — The COVID-19 vaccine and its booster shots may help reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke, a new study reports. The study shows the rate of certain cardiac incidents like heart attack and stroke was up to 10% lower in the 13 to 24 weeks after the first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Following a second dose, the incidence was up to 27% lower after receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine and up to 20% lower after the Pfizer/Biotech vaccine. The study, published in Nature Communications, was conducted by a team of researchers from the Universities of Cambridge, Bristol and Edinburgh studied health data from nearly 46 million adults in England between December 8, 2020, to January 23, 2022.

COVID vaccines may reduce risk of heart attack and stroke, per a study from the Nature Communications journal in the UK.

[thoughtportal]

mRNA vaccines have gained widespread attention for their crucial role in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, even before the pandemic, researchers at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center were investigating the potential of mRNA vaccine technology in the fight against cancer.

Leading this innovative research is Dr. Vinod Balachandran, a physician-scientist associated with the David M. Rubenstein Center for Pancreatic Cancer Research, the Human Oncology and Pathogenesis Program, and the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy.

Dr. Balachandran's groundbreaking efforts have paved the way for a clinical trial focused on using mRNA vaccines to treat pancreatic cancer, offering new hope to patients confronting this challenging disease.

Neoantigens in Pancreatic Tumors

At the heart of this innovative approach lies the concept of neoantigens, proteins found within pancreatic tumors that serve as alarm bells, alerting the immune system to the presence of cancer cells. These neoantigens play a pivotal role in rallying the immune response to keep pancreatic cancer at bay.

Unlike traditional vaccines, which are one-size-fits-all, these mRNA vaccines are tailored to each individual, with the aim of stimulating the production of specific immune cells known as T cells. These T cells are trained to recognize and target pancreatic cancer cells, reducing the risk of cancer recurrence following surgical removal of the primary tumor.

Intriguingly, the results of this groundbreaking research have shown remarkable promise. Among the 16 patients studied, eight experienced activation of T cells that recognized their own pancreatic cancers.

Importantly, these patients demonstrated delayed recurrence of their pancreatic cancers, providing tantalizing evidence that the T cells activated by the vaccines may be effectively holding the cancer at bay.

Dr. Balachandran's work in pioneering mRNA vaccines for pancreatic cancer received a significant boost through collaboration with BioNTech, the company responsible for developing the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

When asked about the inspiration behind using a vaccine to combat pancreatic cancer, Dr. Balachandran explained, "There has been great interest in using immunotherapy for pancreatic cancer because nothing else has worked very well. We thought immunotherapy held promise because of research we began about seven years ago."

This research, spanning seven years, revealed that a select group of pancreatic cancer patients managed to defy the odds and survive after tumor removal surgery. Upon close examination, it was observed that these tumors harbored an unusually high number of immune cells, particularly T cells.

These immune cells were drawn to the tumors by signals emitted from within. These signals, as it turned out, were neoantigens—proteins that T cells recognize as foreign invaders, prompting an immune system assault on the cancer.

Even more intriguing was the discovery that T cells recognizing these neoantigens persisted in the bloodstream of these fortunate patients for up to 12 years after tumor removal.

This sustained immune response resembled an autovaccination, with T cells retaining a memory of the neoantigens as a threat, akin to the way vaccines confer long-term protection against pathogens. This finding sparked the idea of artificially inducing a similar effect in other pancreatic cancer patients.

Unlocking the Potential of mRNA Vaccines

To understand how mRNA vaccines can combat pancreatic cancer, one must delve into their intricate mechanisms. Dr. Balachandran and his team published their findings on immune protection in long-term pancreatic cancer survivors in the prestigious journal Nature in November 2017. During this time, they were also exploring methods to deliver neoantigens to patients in the form of vaccines, with a particular focus on mRNA vaccines.

Unlike traditional vaccines, which introduce weakened or inactivated pathogens into the body, mRNA vaccines leverage a piece of genetic code known as messenger RNA (mRNA).

This genetic code instructs cells in the body to produce a specific protein, thus triggering an immune response. Coincidentally, BioNTech's co-founder and CEO, Uğur Şahin, expressed interest in the research conducted by Dr. Balachandran's team, initiating a collaboration that would prove pivotal.

In late 2017, Dr. Balachandran and his team journeyed to Mainz, Germany, where BioNTech is headquartered. Over dinner, they discussed the potential of mRNA vaccines in the context of pancreatic cancer treatment. This marked the beginning of a journey that held immense promise for cancer patients worldwide.Scientist, CEO and co-founder of BioNTech Ugur Sahin. (CREDIT: BERND VON JUTRCZENKA/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

The intricacies of designing an effective cancer vaccine are manifold. Given that cancer arises from the body's own cells, distinguishing proteins in cancer cells as foreign entities is a formidable challenge for the immune system. Nevertheless, advances in cancer biology and genomic sequencing have paved the way for the design of vaccines capable of discerning the difference.

Dr. Balachandran's team, in conjunction with BioNTech and Genentech, capitalized on these advances, recognizing the critical role played by tumor mutations in triggering immune responses. Their optimism in the potential of mRNA vaccines for pancreatic cancer was well-founded, setting the stage for their groundbreaking research.

Personalized mRNA Vaccines: A Tailored Approach

The personalized nature of mRNA vaccines for pancreatic cancer is a testament to their efficacy. After a patient undergoes surgical removal of a pancreatic tumor, the tumor is genetically sequenced to identify mutations that generate optimal neoantigen proteins—those that appear most foreign to the immune system.

Subsequently, an mRNA vaccine is meticulously crafted, containing the genetic code specific to these neoantigens present in the individual's tumor.

During the vaccine production process, patients receive a single dose of a checkpoint inhibitor drug. This combination is intended to enhance the immune response to tumors. Once the mRNA vaccine is administered into the bloodstream, it prompts dendritic cells—an essential component of the immune system—to produce the neoantigen proteins.

These dendritic cells simultaneously educate other immune system components, including T cells, to recognize and attack tumor cells bearing the same neoantigen proteins. With T cells primed to seek out and destroy cells displaying these proteins, the chances of cancer recurrence are diminished.

Overcoming Challenges: The Road to Success

The road to realizing personalized mRNA vaccines for pancreatic cancer was fraught with challenges, not least of which was the complexity of the manufacturing process. Unlike mass-produced vaccines like those for COVID-19, the mRNA cancer vaccine had to be custom-made for each patient based on the unique characteristics of their tumor.Neoantigens are an important feature of cancer cells and help to stimulate anti-cancer immune responses. (CREDIT: Technology Networks)

This necessitated an intricate series of steps, including the surgical removal of the tumor, shipping the tumor sample to Germany for sequencing, manufacturing the vaccine, and returning it to New York—all within a tight timeframe.

Thankfully, Dr. Balachandran's team and their collaborators rose to the occasion, successfully enrolling the target total of 20 patients nearly a year ahead of schedule. Their unwavering dedication and meticulous planning ensured that the personalized mRNA vaccines could be provided to those in dire need.

As if the hurdles of personalized vaccine production weren't enough, the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic added an unprecedented layer of complexity to the clinical trial. Dr. Balachandran and his team recognized the urgency of adapting swiftly to ensure that patients were not adversely affected.

Under the leadership of Cristina Olcese and with the unwavering support of individuals such as Department of Surgery Chair Jeffrey Drebin and Hepatopancreatobiliary Service Chief William Jarnagin, the team orchestrated the logistics required to maintain the trial's momentum.

Remarkably, what was initially estimated as a two-and-a-half-year trial was completed in a mere 18 months. The tireless efforts of Dr. Drebin, Medical Oncologist Eileen O'Reilly, Physician-Scientist Jedd Wolchok, Biologist Taha Merghoub, Computational Biologist Ben Greenbaum, and the support from Stand Up 2 Cancer/Lustgarten Foundation were instrumental in making this trial a reality amidst the challenges posed by the pandemic.

A Bright Future for mRNA Vaccines in Pancreatic Cancer Treatment

The recent findings from this pioneering research offer a beacon of hope for patients grappling with pancreatic cancer. Dr. Balachandran affirms that "an mRNA vaccine can trigger the production of T cells that recognize pancreatic cancer cells."

The prospect of personalized vaccines enlisting the immune system in the fight against pancreatic cancer—a disease in dire need of improved treatments—holds tremendous promise. Moreover, these developments may extend their impact to other forms of cancer as well.

Looking ahead, Dr. Balachandran and his team are committed to further analyzing the data obtained from the clinical trial. This analysis will provide valuable insights into the factors that facilitate the vaccine's efficacy in patients. Armed with this knowledge, they aim to refine the vaccines to make them more effective and applicable to a broader spectrum of pancreatic cancer patients.

In a testament to the forward-thinking vision of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, this pioneering work exemplifies their commitment to bringing cutting-edge treatments to cancer patients.

Through their partnership with BioNTech and Genentech, and with the support of Stand Up 2 Cancer/Lustgarten Foundation, a larger study is already in the pipeline, aiming to test personalized mRNA vaccines in a more extensive cohort of pancreatic cancer patients.

As Dr. Balachandran notes, they were at the forefront of mRNA vaccines before their popularity surged, leveraging scientific discoveries to make a tangible impact on patients' lives. The future indeed looks brighter for those facing the formidable challenge of pancreatic cancer, thanks to the relentless pursuit of innovation in the field of mRNA vaccines.

Key Takeaways

Some people with pancreatic cancer survive many years after diagnosis.

In these patients, the immune system keeps the cancer from returning.

A messenger RNA vaccine based on this concept is being tested in combination with another type of immunotherapy.

Early results suggest the vaccine is having the desired effect on the immune system.

[trickricksblog08]

5G Planned Marburg Zombie Epidemic?

A lot of y’all been asking me about this, so here’s a rundown & my thoughts.

Military Attorney Todd Callender & his research team & thousands of whistleblowers point to a planned Marburg Epidemic, paid for by tax payer dollars in the Prep Act.

Inside the lipid Nanoparticles from the vaccines are sealed chimeric pathogens — including E. coli, Marburg, Ebola, & different pathogens can be released by different frequencies pulsed through a 5G Network.

When they broadcast an 18 gigahertz signal for one minute, three different times as a pulse, it would cause those lipid nano-particles to swell & release these pathogenic contents.

The #1 side effect of the Pfizer is to delete the 1P36 gene, which will turn people into zombies.

1P36 Gene Deletion is a disease with zombie-like symptoms, that make a person aggressive, with a propensity to bite.

In 2011, the CDC published “Preparedness 101: for a Zombie Apocalypse” The CDC said it used popular cultural reference to zombies to promote preparedness for different emergencies and disasters.

In 2011, “CONPlan8888-11 Counter Zombie Dominance” was published. US Strategic Command.

On October 4, (Back-Up Date October 11) 2:22 ET, FEMA and FCC will are conducting a National Emergency Alert — It is believed this test will be used to send a high frequency signal through devices (smart phones, radios, & TV’s) with the intention to activate Graphene Oxide and other nanoparticles received through the vaccines.

MY THOUGHTS:

I believe Donald Trump averted this catastrophe although I feel it could have been their plan all along & why they want people vaccinated so badly.

I don’t know why, but my first immediate thought was when Trump banned Huawei & ZTE equipment when president, due to National Security Concerns.

Did you know Joe Biden hasn’t lifted a finger to undue this ban? In fact, he’s implemented more restrictions.

God is in control. Do not succumb to the fear.

https://rumble.com/v3jy9vq-5g-activated-marburg-zombie-epidemic.html

[darkmaga-returns]

"Safe and effective." With these three words, President Biden and public health officials launched an unprecedented campaign to vaccinate the American public with a novel mRNA technology. Today, we know those words were demonstrably false.

In a groundbreaking interview on the Radically Genuine Podcast, Amy Kelly, Chief Operations Officer of Daily Cloud and director of the Pfizer Documents Analysis Project, reveals the chilling truth behind the clinical trials. Working with thousands of medical and scientific experts, Kelly's team analyzed over 450,000 pages of Pfizer's own data – documents the FDA initially tried to hide from the public for 75 years.

What they uncovered is nothing short of shocking: more deaths in the vaccinated group than the placebo group. An 80% miscarriage rate among followed pregnancies. A bait-and-switch in the manufacturing process that exposed millions to an essentially untested product. The destruction of control groups that would have revealed the true scope of adverse events.

Perhaps most disturbing is the coordinated deception. While CDC Director Rochelle Walensky assured pregnant women the vaccine was safe, Pfizer's own pregnancy and lactation review documented what Kelly calls "atrocities" - miscarriages, premature births, and serious effects on nursing infants. Officials declared the vaccine would prevent COVID transmission even as Pfizer's data showed COVID was one of the top adverse events in their trial.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

The public paid for "Moderna's" vaccine, and now we're going to pay again (and again and again)

Moderna is quadrupling the cost of covid vaccines, from $26/dose to $110–130. Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel calls the price hike “consistent with the value” of the mRNA vaccines. Moderna’s manufacturing costs are $2.85/dose, for a 4,460% markup on every dose:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/01/moderna-may-match-pfizers-400-price-hike-on-covid-vaccines-report-says/

If you’d like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here’s a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/24/nationalize-moderna/#herd-immunity

Now, obviously the manufacturing costs are only part of the cost of making a vaccine: there’s also all the high-risk capital that goes into doing the basic research. Whenever a pharma company like Moderna hikes its prices, we’re reminded that the rewards are commensurate with these risks.

But the story of the Moderna vaccine isn’t one of a company taking huge gambles with shareholder dollars. It’s the story of the US government giving billions and billions of dollars to a private firm, which will now charge the US government — and the American people — a 4,460% markup on the resulting medicine.

Writing for The American Prospect, Lily Meyersohn reminds us of the Moderna vaccine’s origin story: the NIH spent $1.4B developing the underlying technology and then the US government bought $8b worth of vaccines at $16/dose, giving Moderna a guaranteed 460% margin on each jab:

https://prospect.org/health/2023-01-23-moderna-covid-vaccine-price-hike-bernie-sanders/

Moderna clearly does not feel that the billions it received in public funds came with any obligation to serve the public interest. The company falsified its patent applications, omitting the NIH scientists who co-developed the vaccine, claiming sole ownership:

https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2022/01/06/nih-moderna-mrna-covid-vaccine-patent/

As Meyersohn writes, this omission allows Moderna to block the NIH from licensing the vaccine to foreign manufacturers — including vaccine manufacturers in the global south, home to many powerhouse producers of vaccines:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/08/24/waivers-for-me-not-for-thee/#vaccine-apartheid

Moderna claims to have capitulated to the NIH on the patent question, but it’s a lie — even as they were publicly announcing they would drop their bid to exclude NIH scientists from their patent application, they quietly filed for a continuance that would let them renew their exclusive claim later, when the heat has died down:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/17/us/moderna-patent-nih.html

This maneuver, combined with Astrazeneca reneging on its promise to open its vaccine — a move engineered by Bill Gates — has deprived billions of the world’s poorest people of access to vaccines. Many of these people were previously blocked from accessing AIDS drugs when the Gates Foundation teamed up to block WTO vaccine waivers:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/13/public-interest-pharma/#gates-foundation

These immunucompromised, unvaccinated people are at increased risk of contracting covid, and when they do, they are sick for longer, creating more opportunities for viral mutation and new, more virulent variants.

That was where we stood before Moderna announced its 400% vaccine price-hike. Now, millions of Americans will also be blocked from accessing vaccines, opening the door for rampant, repeated infections, more mutations, and more variants. As Alex Lawson of Social Security Works told Meyersohn, at that price, the US will not be able to achieve herd immunity.

What will Moderna do with the billions it reaps through price-gouging? It won’t be research. To date, the company has spent >20% of its covid windfall profits on stock buybacks and dividends, manipulating its stock price, with more to come:

https://www.levernews.com/how-big-pharma-actually-spends-its-massive-profits/

It’s not an outlier. Big Pharma is a machine for commercializing publicly funded research and then laundering the profits with financial engineering. The largest pharma companies each spend more on stock buybacks than research:

https://www.levernews.com/how-big-pharma-actually-spends-its-massive-profits/

Moderna didn’t have a single successful product for its first decade of operation: it is only a going concern because it got billions in free public research and billions more in public commitments to buy its products at a huge markup.

It wasn’t always this way. Until the 1990s, pharma companies that commercialized public research were bound to license terms that required “reasonable pricing.” NIH inventions were subject to non-exclusive licensing terms, ensuring a competitive market.

The NIH could act to stem Moderna’s profiteering. Moderna’s vaccine (like virtually all mRNA vaccines) uses NIH patent 10,960,070 — though Moderna doesn’t license the ‘070 patent. The NIH could use the threat of a patent infringement suit to force Moderna to put pandemic resilience and access to vaccines over financial engineering and executive bonuses.

When it comes to patent enforcement to protect the public interest, the USG has a long history of channeling King Log, letting companies price-gouge with products built on public research.

https://media.nature.com/original/magazine-assets/d41586-021-03535-x/d41586-021-03535-x.pdf

The states are stepping in where the feds have failed to act, spinning up their own pharma production capacity to create a “public option” for medicine — think of California’s move to produce insulin and other meds:

https://prospect.org/health/its-time-for-public-pharma/

Or Massachusetts’s MassBiologics, the “only non-profit, FDA-licensed manufacturer of vaccines” in the USA, which sells its generic tetanus and diptheria vaccines nationwide:

https://www.umassmed.edu/massbiologics/

The US has a long way to go when it comes to using public production to offer competitive discipline to private pharma. Sweden nationalized its pharma in 1970. Cuba got there in 1960, and is a pharma powerhouse:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/11/28/somos-cuba/#omishambles

Meyersohn closes her excellent article with a warning and a promise: though public covid vaccines are a long way away, new vaccines for RSV and even cancer are in the pipeline, and without “substantial intervention,” Moderna will be a “harbinger…of crises of inequitable access to come.”

[Image ID: Moderna headquarters in Cambridge, Mass. On the left side of the entry, a Jacobin with a guillotine gets ready to decapitate an aristocrat. On the right side of the frame, a cigar-chomping, top-hat wearing ogrish figure makes ready to yank a gilded dollar-sign lever while holding an MRNA molecule disdainfully aloft]

[zot3-flopped]

“Man, I don’t think I’ll ever be as famous as the Rock,” Mr. Kelce said.

His co-managers looked at each other. “We’re like, Yes, you can,” André Eanes said.

This was a year even the Rock might envy. Mr. Kelce, a tight end, won the Super Bowl (his second) in February. In March, he hosted “Saturday Night Live.” He’s starred in seven national television commercials. The podcast he co-hosts with his brother, Jason, is among the most popular on Spotify. He launched a clothing line with his team.

And he’s dating the world’s most famous pop singer. Perhaps you’ve heard.

The Chiefs have spent the last few years as the most unstoppable force in football and, along the way, Mr. Kelce’s other team has grown to include a creative strategist, a community outreach coordinator, a Los Angeles-based publicist, a personal chef and a trainer. He has four football agents, led by Mike Simon at VMG. In the spring, he also became a client of Creative Artists Agency to feed his budding acting itch.

The Eanes brothers coordinate it all, managing the surging flow of incoming traffic for a piece of Kelce Inc. Film scripts have been shared among the team. Game shows are a consideration. Maybe a few less commercials.

“People say to me, ‘Man, it’s been a crazy year,’” Aaron Eanes said. “When I say, ‘Actually, it’s not that crazy,’ people look at me funny. It’s because it’s easy when you have a plan. We’re executing that plan.”

But while Mr. Kelce’s shift into a more mainstream form of celebrity was planned out before he met Ms. Swift, there is no question that the doubling of his prospective audience — from mostly men between the ages of 18 and 49 to a far larger group bolstered heavily by Ms. Swift’s female fans of all ages — has changed the calculus for where the plan goes from here.

“The awareness of Travis is much larger and with an even broader audience,” said Richard Lovett, C.A.A.’s co-chairman. “It’s accelerated that which was probably inevitable in terms of his level of awareness and appeal.”

But nothing was being rushed, Aaron Eanes said. That’s not Mr. Kelce’s style. And Mr. Eanes had already been laying the groundwork for his client’s path to the A-list. Throughout 2022, Mr. Eanes had targeted endorsement deals with companies that were not traditional N.F.L. partners — like promoting vaccines for Pfizer, for instance, or a new debit card from Experian. The purpose was to build out Mr. Kelce’s résumé as a stand-alone pitchman, rather than yet another interchangeable player in a commercial for one of the N.F.L.’s partners, capitalizing on a foundation built by the league.

[justinssportscorner]

Noah Dowe at MMFA:

Right-wing media have amplified conspiracy theories and bigotry from Ultimate Fighting Championship figures including UFC President Dana White and a number of high-profile fighters.  In doing so, these media platforms have mirrored former President Donald Trump's efforts to use the prizefighting league to boost his 2024 campaign. They’ve also provided a megaphone for White and his current and former fighters — some of whom have expressed support for QAnon and claimed the U.S. government orchestrates mass shootings — to espouse racism, anti-LGBTQ bigotry, false claims of election fraud, and a claim that Pfizer-sponsored athletes are “taking handouts from the devil.” 

UFC fighters have delved into right-wing politics and fringe conspiracy theories like QAnon, finding allies in conservative media

An MMA journalist noted that a number of UFC fighters have repeatedly used their public platforms to court conservative fans and endorse extreme right-wing conspiracy theories, including QAnon. MMA journalist Karim Zidan has reported that dozens of MMA figures have embraced fringe beliefs like QAnon, COVID-19 conspiracy theories, mass shooting denialism, and even 9/11 trutherism. He has written: “MMA's embrace of outsider sports fans and right-wing politicians has helped create a wave of athletes activating around extremist causes and conspiracies.” [Bloody Elbow, 9/15/20; Global Sport Matters, 10/20/22]

Former President Donald Trump employed endorsements from UFC fighters in the 2020 election and now sees the organization as a major component of his 2024 campaign, as his team hopes to target “young male audiences with little interest in politics.” During the 2020 election cycle, a number of fighters endorsed Trump and joined campaign events like the Trump Jr.-led “Fighters Against Socialism” bus tour; the former president’s 2024 campaign is now doubling down on this strategy, which Trump aides say “puts him in front of potential voters who may not closely follow politics or engage with traditional news sources.” [Politico, 10/29/20; The Guardian, 8/5/23; The Associated Press, 12/15/23]

Right-wing media have previously defended bigoted commentary from UFC fighters, even backing middleweight Sean Strickland after he described being transgender as “a mental fucking illness” and suggested he would have “failed as a man” if he reared a gay son. A number of right-wing figures, including podcaster Steve Bannon and white nationalist Nick Fuentes, also championed UFC star Conor McGregor after his anti-immigrant commentary came under investigation by Irish authorities last year; Fuentes notably told McGregor to “rise up” because “it’s either going to be the Irish or it’s going to be the blacks. Only one side is going to come out of this alive.” [Media Matters, 11/30/23, 1/31/24; Sports Politika, 11/30/23]  

Outside of direct interviews with these fighters and figures, some right-wing media have attempted to harness what Bannon’s War Room called “one of the last patriotic sports left” for political gain. Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, for example, has advocated for the Republican Party to embrace “the alpha male culture of Joe Rogan, Dana White, and the UFC” in order to “win over millions of other voters,” even suggesting he would contact White in an effort to “get voter registration and ballot chasing at every one of these UFC fights.” [Bloody Elbow, 4/14/21; Real America’s Voice, The Charlie Kirk Show, 7/10/23, 6/3/24]

Dana White

UFC President Dana White is a Trump ally and donor who has repeatedly used the organization to benefit the former president’s political ambitions. Besides directly endorsing Trump at the 2020 Republican National Convention, Karim Zidan reported in September 2020 that “White, along with a select group of UFC fighter[s],” had “spent the last few months advocating for the incumbent president in an attempt to ensure his re-election. From campaign rallies and bus tours, to TV appearances and ad spots, the UFC went to great lengths to campaign for Trump.” [The Guardian, 8/23/20; Bloody Elbow, 11/11/20; The New York Times, 5/12/20]

The UFC continues to be a bastion of right-wing extremism, conspiracy theories, and bigotry. Dana White, Joe Rogan, and co. set the tone for that style.

[covid-safer-hotties]

Also preserved in our archive (Daily updates!)

By Mary Van Beusekom, MS

New findings from two studies have tied use of the antiviral drug nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (Paxlovid) to a reduction in COVID-19 hospitalizations and death, as well as to faster resolution of symptoms and less use of healthcare resources.

Benefit seen only in older patients For the first study, published in Clinical Microbiology and Infection, a Medical University of Vienna–led research team compared the effectiveness of Paxlovid with that of the antiviral drug molnupiravir (Lagevrio)—and with that of not receiving an antiviral—against hospitalization and all-cause death from January 2022 to May 2023. Participants were adults with mild to moderate infections and one or more risk factors for severe illness caused by the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant.

"The oral antivirals nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir are the mainstay treatment for Covid-19 in non-hospitalised adults at increased risk of severe disease," the study authors wrote. "Both oral antivirals were approved at the time of the study period (2022/2023) for the treatment of non-hospitalised patients with mild-to-moderate Covid-19, but the current National Institute of Health guidelines favour nirmatrelvir-ritonavir over molnupiravir."

Of the 113,399 eligible COVID-19 patients in the retrospective cohort study, 10.7% received Paxlovid, 9.5% received molnupiravir, and 80.0% served as untreated controls. Over 96% of participants were previously infected with or vaccinated against COVID-19.

A total of 0.43% of Paxlovid recipients, 1.4% of molnupiravir users, and 1.13% of controls were hospitalized within 28 days (risk difference [RD], -0.7%; Paxlovid vs control RD, 0.26%). No Paxlovid recipients and 0.13% each of molnupiravir users and controls died.

The estimated risk of hospitalization was 0.57% in Paxlovid users and 1.09% in controls (adjusted RD [aRD], -0.53%). The estimated risk of death was 0.0% in the Paxlovid group and 0.13% in controls (aRD, -0.13%).

The number of patients needed to treat to prevent hospitalization and death was 190 in Paxlovid recipients and 792 in controls, respectively. These statistically significant aRDs were seen only among patients 60 years and older.

The estimated risk of hospitalization in the molnupiravir analysis was 1.36% in the molnupiravir group and 1.16% among controls (aRD, 0.2%). The estimated risk of death was 0.12% in molnupiravir recipients and 0.14% in controls (aRD, -0.01%).

"Among outpatients aged ≥60 years with Covid-19 in an Omicron-dominated era, treatment with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was associated with a lower risk of hospitalisation and all-cause death within 28 days, albeit with wide confidence intervals and high numbers needed to treat," the study authors wrote.

"This finding was not observed in molnupiravir users and younger nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users. Future studies are needed to better define target populations that show greater benefit from treatment with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir," they concluded.

Proportion of patients seeking care slashed 73% The second study, a phase 2/3 randomized clinical trial published today in Clinical Infectious Diseases, also found protection against COVID-19 hospitalization and death in adults receiving Paxlovid and demonstrated a faster resolution of symptoms and lower use of healthcare resources compared with a placebo in high-risk patients.

The research was led by researchers from Pfizer, which developed Paxlovid. The drug was given to 977 symptomatic COVID-19 patients, while 989 were given a placebo, at 343 sites in 21 countries from July 2021 through December 2021, a Delta-predominant period.

Paxlovid significantly shortened the time to symptom relief (median, 13 vs 15 days; hazard ratio, 1.27) and resolution (16 vs 19 days; HR, 1.20) through 28 days and cut the number of COVID-related medical visits by 64.3% and the proportion of patients seeking care by 73.2%.

In total, 0.9% of Paxlovid recipients and 6.4% in the placebo group were hospitalized, for a relative risk reduction of 85.5%. Hospitalized Paxlovid recipients had briefer hospital stays, and none required intensive care or mechanical ventilation. Fewer patients in the Paxlovid group needed other COVID-19 treatments, and none died by 6 months, compared with 15 in the placebo group.

"The importance of having effective COVID-19 treatments such as NMV/r [Paxlovid] to reduce burden on healthcare systems, both ambulatory and hospital based, should not be underestimated," the authors wrote.

Study Links: www.clinicalmicrobiologyandinfection.com/article/S1198-743X(24)00508-1/fulltext

academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciae551/7889107

[liam-twatter]

Paul Gallagher, the older brother, had written an article on Zani about Senna. These days celebrating the 30th anniversaries of Ayrton Senna from Brazil (Italian origins) and Oasis first releases. That Brazilian showgirl, girlfriend of Senna, was a jinx. In that scene wishing him all well and kissing him for all the years until 1993 and not 1994... I remember 1989 was the biggest scandal in sports history. Senna said everybody knew Prost always crying and blaming others... that reminds of overrated media darling Lewis "Lewser" Hamilton (9 years for a pole in Monaco, driving fast cars), so more similar to Prost than Senna... "correct" media and influencing (plagiarising) fankids who didn't live his times, say the opposite. Senna was against the system, politics in which Prost was swimming well... That's why it's so weird to see Senna being used by spineless pathetic Vettel of correct politics system... (fake "green" bullshit that Noel Gallagher hates, sick lgbt that Noel said fuck off, etc Vettel had to go to Singapore by bicycle, because of global warming and even retired because of that... sure... but he preferred a jet). Prost didn't show respect, even mocking Senna for believing in God... If you see the famous 1989 scene from the front, it's even more clear that Prost move was deliberate. The president was Balestre, a French, so obviously favouring Prost... Senna was even accused of causing the collision, which is totally absurd (he would've lost the title). Prost was even laughing when saying the rules can be interpreted... and that he didn't collide on purpose... sure... in fact he won the title thanks to that. As if it wasn't enough, Senna won anyway but disqualified because "cutting the chicane"... even more nonsense. He had lost even more time when trying to come back ontrack. According to the absurd rule, he should've reversed with an inversion, so dangerous going against other cars. Obviously nobody ever did that, and many cutting chicanes were never punished (just as Hamilton...). He even had 6 months (then didn't) and 100,000 dollars to pay. It's obvious he had his vengeance in 1990, when (Balestre) made him start on the wrong side of the front row... Prost refused to have Senna as team mate in 1993... sure, because he would've lost against him... he's always been a childish coward, I remember the famous 1984 Monaco GP, he stopped where was the red flag, as trying to hide himself behind his mum's skirt...

Senna today would hate technology, A.I., whatever, the same as Noel. He was winning races as a real man, even in 1993 against that electronic Williams computer...

electric cars of corrupt Eu are a fraud : as if it wasn't enough (not green, and Africa Asia Brazil children being used not only for lithium, price, copper stolen, explosions, etc etc), they are 3 times more dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists. Many times we've seen people suddenly had a silent electric taxi behind their legs and got scared. Who IMPOSED electric (only in the Eu, as a dictatorship, to "save the planet"), is an assassin. Oh they are those of Von der PFIZER Leyen lying (documents destroyed, conflict of interest with her husband etc for dangerous fake vaccines), sending billions for weapons...

[foreverlogical]

A Washington-based married couple's challenge to an obscure provision of the 2017 Republican tax law has the potential to become "the most important tax case in a century," with far-reaching implications for federal revenues, key social programs, and Congress' constitutional authority to impose levies on income.

That's according to a new report released Wednesday by the Roosevelt Institute and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP).

The policy groups estimated that if the conservative-dominated U.S. Supreme Court sides with the plaintiffs in Moore v. United States—which the justices are set to take up in December—nearly 400 multinational corporations could collectively receive more than $270 billion in tax relief, further enriching behemoths such as Apple, Microsoft, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and Google.

The Roosevelt Institute and ITEP also found that Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito own stock in 19 companies that are poised to receive a combined $30 billion in tax breaks if the judges strike down the 2017 law's mandatory repatriation tax, a one-time levy targeting earnings that multinational corporations had piled up overseas.

But the case could have impacts well beyond a repeal of the repatriation tax, which was projected to generate $340 billion in federal revenue over a decade.

Depending on the scope of the justices' decision, the new report argues, the Supreme Court could "suddenly supplant Congress as a major American tax policymaker, putting at legal jeopardy much of the architecture of laws that prevent corporations and individuals from avoiding taxes, and introducing great uncertainty about our democracy's ability to tax large corporations and the most affluent."

"At the best of times, blowing a $340 billion hole in the federal budget would be catastrophic," Matt Gardner, a senior fellow at ITEP and a co-author of the new report, said in a statement. "And if the court invalidates the transition tax in its Moore decision, that's exactly what would happen: possibly the costliest Supreme Court decision of all time. And it would be hard to identify a less deserving set of tax cut beneficiaries than the companies that would reap at least $271 billion from repealing this tax."

"The Roberts Court could decide with the stroke of a pen to simultaneously forgive big business decades of tax dues."

Charles and Kathleen Moore brought their challenge to the repatriation provision after they were hit with a roughly $15,000 tax bill stemming from their stake in an Indian farm equipment company. As the Tax Policy Center recently observed, the Indian firm is a "controlled foreign corporation (CFC), or a foreign corporation whose ownership or voting rights are more than 50% owned by U.S. persons who each own at least 10%."

The Moores' cause has been championed by billionaire-backed organizations and corporate lobbying groups, including the Manhattan Institute–which is chaired by billionaire hedge fund mogul Paul Singer—and the powerful U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

"That such a case involving such modest sums would make it all the way to the high court indicates that there is much more at play than a single family's tax refund," ITEP's Gardner and Spandan Marasini and the Roosevelt Institute's Niko Lusiani note in the new report.

The plaintiffs' legal team argues that because the Moores' shares in the Indian firm were not "realized"—they did not sell or receive a distribution from the company—they should not have been on the hook for the repatriation tax.

"The government, on the other hand, argues that almost a century of tax law precedent has established Congress' broad authority to decide when and how to tax income, even without a specific realization event," the new report explains. "What's more, the income was clearly realized by the corporation, which is sufficient for income taxation of shareholders under various provisions of the existing tax code."

While it's possible that the Supreme Court will rule narrowly on the specifics of the Moores' situation, the report authors cautioned that the justices "could also issue a broad decision that taxing income—of an individual or a corporate shareholder—requires realization, and that income taxation on multiple years of accrued income is unconstitutional."

Such a sweeping ruling could preemptively ban a wealth tax—an outcome that right-wing supporters of the Moores have explicitly advocated.

"This case presents the court with an ideal opportunity to clarify that taxes on unrealized gains, such as wealth taxes, are direct taxes that are unconstitutional if not apportioned among the states," the Manhattan Institute declared in a May amicus brief.

A broad ruling by the high court could also imperil key elements of the existing tax code, according to ITEP and the Roosevelt Institute.

"One of the most established of these pillars is known as Subpart F, which was enacted in 1962 to prevent American corporations from avoiding taxation through offshore entities or controlled foreign corporations," the new report says. "Provisions related to Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (GILTI), the branch profits tax; tax treatment of corporate debt; and others could be uprooted by five justices."

"The Corporate Alternative Minimum Tax—enacted as part of the Inflation Reduction Act to create a basic corporate tax floor—as well as international efforts to curb international tax avoidance could be made constitutionally invalid," the report adds.

The analysis stresses that the consequences of a broad ruling in the upcoming case would be profound, affecting more than just a handful of corporate tax provisions.

"In Moore," the report warns, "the Roberts Court could decide with the stroke of a pen to simultaneously forgive big business decades of tax dues, increase the federal deficit over the long run, jeopardize future public revenue and essential social programs, escalate these multinational companies' already sizeable after-tax profits, and further enrich their shareholders."

[zekedms]

Normally I'd roast any company that turns off comments on an ad... but this time i think i side with the poor pfizer social media team's throwing their hands in the air.