fourth world: Declassified document proves Pfizer vaccine production began in May 2019

Le Point Critique
July 28, 2023

Internal documents relating to the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines show that their production began before the date claimed by the laboratories. The cross-referencing of two documents, from two different legal requests, allows us to more precisely date the start of the Pfizer vaccine development program. It must have actually started on May 27, 2019.

The declassification of data submitted by Pfizer to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval of the BNT162b2 vaccine for ages 16 and up was ordered on February 2, 2022 by Judge Mark P. Pittman (Texas), after an interminable legal battle initiated by a group of scientists and medical researchers (Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency — PHMTP), represented by attorney Aron Siri.

Declassification of Pfizer vaccine approval data: review of an extraordinary case

The FDA and Pfizer's joint request for a stay was therefore rejected by the judge after three months of proceedings during which all stops were pulled out in an effort to prevent citizens and their families from knowing the basis for the "safe and effective" vaccine declaration. While the agency initially demanded a period of 75 years (20,000 days) to deliver the more than 390,000 pages of data that it had nevertheless complied in 108 days, i.e. the period between the request for approval sent by Pfizer to the regulator (May 7, 2021) and the date of authorisation granted in return by the FDA.

Judge Mark T. Pittman (Dallas, Texas Court of Appeals) has just done it again on May 9, 2023, by requiring the delivery of all data concerning the Pfizer pediatric vaccine and the Moderna adult vaccine, including 4.8 million pages, within 2 years vs. the 23.5 requested by the FDA. The laboratories have until June 31, 2025 to comply.

The publication of this data was also punctuated by a series of reports concerning the origin of the virus, which scientists have become convinced comes from gain-of-function research clandestinely funded by Dr. Anthony Fauci. [FW comment: so-called "gain-of-function" research serves as a red herring to uphold the concept of a virus ] Fauci, of course, is the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and former White House medical advisor during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is also now known that vaccine manufacturing began before the official date communicated to the public, with Moderna’s CEO acknowledging in an interview that his company had already produced 100,000 doses of Covid-19 vaccine in 2019.

A confidentiality agreement shows potential coronavirus vaccine candidates were transferred from Moderna to the University of North Carolina in 2019, nineteen days prior to the emergence of the alleged Covid-19 causing virus in Wuhan, China. (The Expose).

According to BioNTech CEO, Pfizer vaccine development began no later than January 2020

Regarding the vaccine marketed by Pfizer, two articles from the Brownstone Institute published on January 18 and 30, 2023, had already demonstrated that the production schedule of the BNT162b2 vaccine is not the one reported by BioNTech founders Ugur Sahin and Özlem Türeci in their book The Vaccine. The January 18, 2023 article cites two documents obtained as part of the Pfizer data declassification: the BioNTech R&D Study Report No. R-20-0072 and the nonclinical study, which was submitted to the FDA for approval, and which cites this document, with reference FDA-CBER-2021-5683-0013936, on page 8.

This study concerns preclinical tests carried out on animals prior to the evaluation of the vaccine on human guinea pigs, and which the founders of BioNTech claim began on January 27, 2020.

As the Brownstone Institute article explains, the purpose of study R-20-0072, summarised on pg. 6 of the document, aimed to test the performance of BioNTech's modified mRNA encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles produced by the Canadian firm Acuitas ahead of preclinical trials. Page 8 of the report shows that this study actually began on January 14, 2020, two weeks before the date publicly claimed by BioNTech, that is to say, the day after the publication of the complete genome of the virus and barely two weeks after the reporting of case zero in Wuhan.

However, this point is not problematic in itself since the BioNTech teams declared to the FDA that they had tested the vaccine with a so-called "proxy" antigen (in this case luciferase) while waiting to be able to do so with the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

However, the founders of BioNTech date the first tests of the luciferase-based vaccine platform in their book to February 3, 2020. The author of the January 18, 2023 article (“FOIA doc shows BioNTech founders postdated start of C19 vaccine project”), journalist Robert Kogon (pseudonym), questions the reasons for this lie, which he attributes to the shocking nature of disclosing the date the vaccine project actually began:

“Why did Sahin and Türeci postdate the launch of their Covid-19 vaccine project in their book? Well, undoubtedly because the actual start date – and we do not know when exactly the actual start date was – would have seemed far too soon. Based on the above considerations, it must have been at the latest just days after the first December 31, 2019 report of Covid-19 cases in Wuhan.”

Kogon R. FOIA doc shows BioNTech founders postdated start of C19 vax project. Brownstone Institute. 18/01/2023

In the second part of this investigation (“It started before the outbreak: A BioNTech-“Pfizer” vax project Timeline”), Robert Kogon rewinds the thread from the technical information provided in the book The Vaccine and comes to the conclusion that the mRNA vaccine was probably ready by January 2, 2020, only two days after the first report of COVID-19 cases in Wuhan on December 31, 2019, which raises the following question: was the epidemic aimed at spreading a pre-existing vaccine or did it start before the first case was announced, and if so, with what risks to the health of the populations? [FW comment: The work of Denis Rancourt & many others has put the lie to the notion there was ever a pandemic]

“But before it could be manufactured, needless to say, the formulation to be tested had first to be conceived and designed; and contact had to be made with Polymun and Acuitas to obtain the required permissions and arrange for the required collaboration. All of this takes time.
There is no avoiding the conclusion that BioNTech’s Covid-19 vaccine project must in fact have started before any Covid-19 cases had even been reported! The obvious question is: How is this possible?”

Kogon R. It started before the outbreak: A BioNTech-“Pfizer” vax project Timeline. Brownstone Institute. 01/30/2023

A new document shows that production of the Pfizer vaccine actually began in… May 2019

A whistleblower is now pointing to new information, contained in another document, also declassified following a FOIA request, which helps answer this question, at least technically. The document in question is the non-clinical evaluation report produced by the Australian regulator (Therapeutic Goods Administration — TGA). Page 40 of the report shows that the company Acuitas formulated the mRNA coding for luciferase transmitted by BioNTech and referenced (ARN-EH190611-01c) in report R-20-0072, into three types of nanoparticles: LNP12 (DODMA:DOPE formulation), LNP5 and LNP8.

TGA. Nonclinical Evaluation Report BNT162b2 [mRNA] COVID-19 vaccine (COMIRNATYTM). Jan 2021. p. 40

However, page 29 of the BioNTech report shows that the formulation of the nanoparticles intended for the vaccine (LNP8, as mentioned on page 12 of the same report) was carried out on December 9, 2019, three weeks before the disclosure of case zero in Wuhan. Since the formulation indications are strictly identical between the two documents, this concordance leaves no doubt that the certificate of analysis contained in the BioNTech report concerns the nanoparticles used in the Australian study:

Product reference: RNA-EH190611-01c;
Batch number: FM-1074-D;
Encapsulation rate: 90%;
RNA concentration: 1.0 mg/ml;
Diameter: 71 nm;
Yield: 90%;
Polydispersity: 0.053:
Storage temperature: – 80 °C.

BioNTech R&D Study Report No. R-20-0072 declassified, p. 29
BioNTech. R&D Study Report No. R-20-0072. 27 Nov 2020, p. 29

But page 31 of the report states that the order was placed not in December, but in… May 2019. May 27, 2019 at the latest. Who had heard of COVID by that date?
BioNTech R&D Study Report No. R-20-0072 Declassified, p. 31
BioNTech. R&D Study Report No. R-20-0072. Nov 27, 2020, p. 31

BioNTech. R&D study report no. R-20-0072. 27 Nov 2020, p. 29

But page 31 of the report states that the order was placed not in December, but in… May 2019. May 27, 2019 at the latest. Who had heard of COVID at that date?