While some media outlets reflexively cheer on the deadly shell game, is our military leadership prematurely mandating a vaccine that their personnel cannot, or should not, legally receive? Could that decision prove to be more detrimental to military readiness than the disease itself, thereby posing a greater threat to U.S. national security?
The letter officially designates Comirnaty as the licensed name for COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA. This EUA explicitly states that Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine "[] has not been approved or licensed by the FDA, but has been authorized by emergency use [EUA] by the FDA []". It goes on to assert that Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine and Comirnaty formulations are the same and thereby can be clinically substitutable.
Recent U.S. military vaccine mandates look to be a direct result of the manufactured confusion.
The newly mandated Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is legally defined as an EUA and therefore cannot be mandated in the military unless informed consent is waived by a presidential waiver and, according to U.S. Code Section 1107a of Title 10 and DoDI 6200.02, only after meeting specific criteria.
As the Department did not receive an informed consent waiver from the President to mandate the Pfizer-BioNTech CV-19 Vaccine, and the FDA licensed Comirnaty is not yet available in the U.S., it remains uncertain how the military can continue to incorrectly mandate COVID-19 vaccination.
The pervasive misperception that Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is FDA licensed, thereby justifying mandatory vaccination policy, is a logical syllogism based on a false premise and invalid.
If the mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policy is truly a military readiness initiative, then the reality is it will cause a far graver impact to our national defense posture than this disease.
https://www.revolver.news/2021/09/big-pharma-shell-game-military-mandatory-vaccinations/
No comments:
Post a Comment