Big Pharma chose to use mRNA technology for COVID-19 vaccines because their patents were nearing expiration.

The Expose News - com

<p>The claim that Big Pharma chose to use mRNA technology for COVID-19 vaccines because their patents were nearing expiration has been circulating in various articles and discussions. This claim suggests that the pharmaceutical industry opted for a new and relatively untested technology to secure future profits rather than using established methods with known safety profiles.</p>
<p>To evaluate this claim, it's important to consider the context and the available evidence. The COVID-19 pandemic presented an urgent need for effective vaccines, and mRNA technology offered several advantages. mRNA vaccines can be developed and manufactured more quickly than traditional vaccines, which was crucial in the race against the pandemic. Additionally, mRNA technology allows for rapid adaptation to new variants of the virus.</p>
<p>The article by Jonathan Engler on The Exposé suggests that the choice of mRNA technology was driven by financial motives, specifically the need to replace blockbuster products with pending patent expirations. While it is true that the pharmaceutical industry faces challenges with patent expirations, this alone does not provide sufficient evidence to conclude that it was the primary reason for choosing mRNA technology.</p>
<p>Scientific advancements and the potential of mRNA technology also played a significant role. mRNA vaccines have been in development for decades, and the COVID-19 pandemic provided an opportunity to test and validate this technology on a large scale. The success of mRNA vaccines in clinical trials and their subsequent authorization by regulatory bodies indicate that the choice was based on scientific merit as well as practical considerations.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the claim that mRNA technology has 'zero safety profile' is misleading. While it is true that mRNA vaccines were new to the market, extensive clinical trials and ongoing monitoring have provided substantial data on their safety and efficacy. For example, a study published in <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577">The New England Journal of Medicine</a> demonstrated the safety and efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine.</p>
<p>In conclusion, the claim that Big Pharma chose mRNA technology for COVID-19 vaccines due to expiring patents is speculative and lacks concrete evidence. The decision was likely influenced by multiple factors, including scientific advancements, the need for rapid vaccine development, and the potential of mRNA technology. The safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccines have been demonstrated through extensive clinical trials and ongoing monitoring.</p>

Claim Review: Did Big Pharma Choose mRNA Technology Due to Expiring Patents?

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>A recent article from The People's Voice claims that Big Pharma is against Vitamin D because it 'threatens the disease model' and suggests that increased vitamin D levels could have kept COVID-19 in check. This claim was made during an interview with Dr. Pierre Kory on Tucker Carlson's show. This article aims to review this claim and provide a thorough analysis based on scientific evidence.</p>
<h2>The Role of Vitamin D in Immune Function</h2>
<p>Vitamin D is known to play a crucial role in immune function. Studies have shown that vitamin D deficiency is associated with an increased risk of respiratory infections. A meta-analysis published in the British Medical Journal found that vitamin D supplementation reduced the risk of acute respiratory infections (<a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/356/bmj.i6583">BMJ, 2017</a>).</p>
<h2>Vitamin D and COVID-19</h2>
<p>Several studies have explored the relationship between vitamin D levels and COVID-19 outcomes. A study published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology &amp; Metabolism found that vitamin D deficiency was associated with a higher risk of severe COVID-19 (<a href="https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/108/10/e1106/7116659">JCEM, 2020</a> ). However, the evidence is not conclusive, and more research is needed to establish a causal relationship.</p>
<h2>The Economic Incentives of Big Pharma</h2>
<p>The claim that Big Pharma is against Vitamin D because it threatens their business model is speculative and lacks concrete evidence. Pharmaceutical companies have a financial interest in developing and marketing drugs, but this does not necessarily mean they are opposed to vitamin supplements. Many pharmaceutical companies also produce and sell vitamin supplements.</p>
<h2>The Complexity of COVID-19 Management</h2>
<p>The assertion that increased vitamin D levels could have kept COVID-19 in check oversimplifies the complexities of the pandemic. While vitamin D may play a role in immune function, it is just one of many factors that influence COVID-19 outcomes. Other factors include age, underlying health conditions, vaccination status, and public health measures such as social distancing and mask-wearing.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that Big Pharma is against Vitamin D because it threatens their business model and that increased vitamin D levels could have controlled COVID-19 is largely unfounded. While vitamin D plays a role in immune function, the evidence regarding its impact on COVID-19 is not conclusive. The management of COVID-19 is complex and multifaceted, and vitamin D is just one piece of the puzzle. More research is needed to fully understand the role of vitamin D in COVID-19.</p>

Claim Review: Big Pharma's Stance on Vitamin D and COVID-19

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>A recent article published by The People's Voice claims that former Pfizer vice president Dr. Mike Yeadon warned that COVID jabs were designed to intentionally sterilize 99.9% of male recipients. This claim has sparked concern and skepticism among the public. This article aims to fact-check this assertion by examining the available scientific evidence and expert opinions.</p>
<h2>The Claim</h2>
<p>Dr. Mike Yeadon, a former Pfizer executive, allegedly stated during a presentation at the Impfopfer Resistance Conference in Vienna, Austria, on 9 November 2024, that COVID vaccines were created by Big Pharma to reduce the world's population by billions. He further claimed that the vaccines contain toxic ingredients designed to cause sterilization in men.</p>
<h2>Scientific Evidence</h2>
<p>To evaluate the validity of Dr. Yeadon's claims, it is essential to review the scientific literature and expert opinions on the safety and efficacy of COVID vaccines.</p>
<p>A study published in the <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2104983">New England Journal of Medicine</a> found no evidence of adverse effects on male fertility following COVID-19 vaccination. The study concluded that there were no significant changes in sperm parameters among vaccinated men compared to unvaccinated controls.</p>
<p>Additionally, a comprehensive review by the <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/myocarditis.html">Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)</a> found no evidence to support the claim that COVID vaccines cause sterilization or reduce fertility in men. The CDC emphasizes that the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the potential risks.</p>
<h2>Expert Opinions</h2>
<p>Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), has repeatedly stated that COVID vaccines are safe and effective. In an interview with <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/06/health/covid-vaccine-menstrual-cycle/index.html">CNN</a> , Dr. Fauci addressed concerns about vaccine-related fertility issues, stating that there is no scientific evidence to support such claims.</p>
<p>Similarly, the World Health Organization (WHO) has affirmed that COVID vaccines do not affect fertility. The WHO's <a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-vaccines">Q&amp;A on COVID-19 vaccines</a> states that there is no evidence to suggest that the vaccines have any impact on male or female fertility.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that COVID jabs were designed to sterilize 99.9% of men is unfounded and lacks credible scientific evidence. Numerous studies and expert opinions have confirmed the safety and efficacy of COVID vaccines, with no evidence of adverse effects on male fertility. It is crucial to rely on reliable scientific sources and expert opinions when evaluating such claims to avoid the spread of misinformation.</p>

Fact Check: Were COVID Jabs Designed to Sterilize 99.9% of Men?

<p>An official report by a Slovak government commission investigating the COVID-19 pandemic recommended mRNA vaccines be banned after determining they are ‘dangerous.’ This claim has gained attention, especially as it was followed by a similar call from the town council of Port Hedland in Western Australia. However, a thorough examination of the available scientific evidence does not support this claim.</p>
<h3>Understanding mRNA Vaccines</h3>
<p>mRNA vaccines, such as those developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, work by instructing cells to produce a harmless piece of the ‘spike protein’ found on the surface of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This triggers an immune response, preparing the body to fight the virus if exposed in the future. This technology has been studied for decades and has shown promising results in various applications, including cancer treatments and other infectious diseases.</p>
<h3>Safety and Efficacy of mRNA Vaccines</h3>
<p>The safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccines have been extensively studied and confirmed by numerous peer-reviewed studies and health organizations. For example, a study published in <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577">The New England Journal of Medicine</a> found that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 95% effective in preventing COVID-19. Similarly, a study published in <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2035389">The New England Journal of Medicine</a> found that the Moderna vaccine was 94.1% effective.</p>
<p>Regarding safety, a study published in <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7002e3.htm">Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR)</a> by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that serious adverse events after mRNA vaccination were rare. The most common side effects were mild to moderate and included pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, and muscle pain.</p>
<h3>Addressing Concerns</h3>
<p>The Slovak government commission's report raises concerns about the safety of mRNA vaccines, but these concerns are not supported by the broader scientific community. The World Health Organization (WHO), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have all reviewed the data on mRNA vaccines and concluded that they are safe and effective.</p>
<p>It is important to note that any medical intervention, including vaccines, can have side effects. However, the benefits of mRNA vaccines in preventing severe COVID-19, hospitalization, and death far outweigh the risks. The rare cases of serious adverse events, such as myocarditis and anaphylaxis, have been closely monitored and studied, and the overall risk remains very low.</p>
<h3>Conclusion</h3>
<p>The claim that mRNA vaccines are dangerous and should be banned is not supported by scientific evidence. The safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccines have been extensively studied and confirmed by numerous peer-reviewed studies and health organizations. While it is important to continue monitoring the safety of these vaccines, the available data strongly support their use in preventing COVID-19.</p>
<p>For high school students and the general public, it is crucial to rely on credible sources of information and to critically evaluate claims made in the media. Misinformation can spread quickly and have serious consequences for public health. Always seek information from reliable scientific sources and consult with healthcare professionals for medical advice.</p>

Claim Review: Slovak Government Report Calls for Ban of ‘Dangerous’ mRNA Vaccines

If you want to replace an existing title on a portal and you want the replaced title to be visible to you and your followers.

Move the mouse over the title and make a right click.

Select Remedia -> Alternate Title from the menu

In the pop-up window, enter a new title that you like.

The blue icon copies the existing title into the input field, so you don't have to type everything...

By pressing Submit, the title will be replaced, which will be visible to you and others who visit the pages.

(There is a possibility that you will have to reload the page for the changes to be visible)

You can contact one of the fact-checking organizations.

Claim rated as -> Choose from false to true

Add claimer -> Opens a pop-up window that allows you to search for existing people already registered in the system or to create a new profile of that person.

Claimed At -> Enter the link to the page where the claim was found. You can add more places and link more claim authors

Short description -> short content that is seen when sharing articles on social networks

Field for entering the content of the article.

After the article is published, it will be visible on the Remedia social network and to everyone who has the Remedia Chrome extension installed

And you can engage in debunking yourself.

CAUTION! Abusing the platform is not allowed, entering unverified, misleading or untrue content will result in the deletion of the entire account with all content

Canonical -> If you enter content that already exists somewhere (your property), you can enter a link and Remedia will try to enter the content in the provided fields.

Featured image -> Image that is displayed when you share an article on other social networks.

Write your title -> Enter the title of the article

The claim being reviewed -> Enter the claim here, but BEWARE! An assertion is not the entire statement someone has made, but something concise and unambiguous. Check the claim entry multiple times as each change will create a new claim in the system.

Claim made on -> date when someone published the claim.

After installing the Chrome extension, you can log in and use advanced functionalities. One of them is 'Dislike'.

By right-clicking on an article, the options provided by the Remedia extension are opened, by selecting Dislike, the article will become more transparent and less visible.

Your action will be visible to you and all people who follow you!

Alternate Title

1. Log in to the Remedia social network with a Google or Facebook account (link above right).

2. Install the Chrome extension (if you didn't)

4. Enter the email you used to open your Google or Facebook account. Submit.

5. After the input field appears, rewrite the code. Accept.

That's it! Now you can use the advanced functions of the Remedia Chrome extension.

Alternate Titles

Remedia's work so far:

Remedia, the best thing that happened to media!

On the Feed page, you can enter Status, Opinion and Claim Review

It is enough to enter the title, short description and content.

Below the fields for entering content, you will find fields for entering links. By entering page links in these fields, you 'show' the Chrome extension on which pages to display your content

Press Publish to publish your opinion. (It may be necessary to wait a moment while all links are generated)

Claim: "Big Pharma chose to use mRNA technology for COVID-19 vaccines because their patents were nearing expiration." is Mostly False

Has beed claimed by:

Articles reviewing this claim:

Content you might like: