Pfizer sponsored an LGBT event for fifth-grade public school students in Chicago Public Schools

Natural News

<p>The claim made in the content is that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and ViiV Healthcare, a pharmaceutical firm with links to Pfizer, sponsored an LGBT event for fifth-grade public school students in Chicago Public Schools (CPS).</p>
<p>After examining the sources provided and conducting further research, we found that ViiV Healthcare did indeed sponsor the Galaxy Summit, an annual event organized by the Children's First Fund, the non-profit arm of CPS.</p>
<p>The event aimed to create an affirming space for students to learn about and celebrate the diversity of gender, sexuality, and love in their communities.ViiV Healthcare is a global specialist HIV company established in November 2009 by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Pfizer.</p>
<p>Shionogi joined as a shareholder in October 2012. Therefore, the claim about ViiV Healthcare's connection to Pfizer is true.</p>
<p>However, there is no evidence supporting the claim that the CDC sponsored the Galaxy Summit. The source of the claim, an article from LifeSiteNews, does not provide any proof of CDC's involvement in the event.In conclusion, the claim that ViiV Healthcare, a company with ties to Pfizer, sponsored an LGBT event for CPS students is true.</p>
<p>However, the claim that the CDC was involved in sponsoring the event is unfounded and lacks evidence.</p>
<p>Sources:</p>
<p>1. LifeSiteNews:</p>
<p>2. ViiV Healthcare:</p>
<p>3. Children's First Fund:</p>
<p>4. Chicago Public Schools:</p>

Fact-checking the claim: CDC and Pfizer affiliate sponsor pro-LGBT public school event for fifth-graders

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The recent approval of the ACAM2000 vaccine for monkeypox by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has sparked controversy due to its acknowledged risks, particularly cardiac inflammation. This article aims to review the claim that the FDA approved the vaccine despite knowing its dangers.</p>
<h2>Background</h2>
<p>The ACAM2000 vaccine, developed by Emergent BioSolutions, was initially approved for smallpox in 2007. On August 29, 2024, the FDA expanded its approval to include individuals at high risk for monkeypox, such as members of the LGBT community.</p>
<h2>Claim Analysis</h2>
<p>The claim suggests that the FDA approved the ACAM2000 vaccine despite knowing its risks. The FDA's medication guide for ACAM2000 lists numerous side effects, including the potential spread of the live vaccinia virus to close contacts and serious complications such as myopericarditis (heart lining and/or muscle inflammation).</p>
<p>According to Karl Jablonowski, a senior research scientist at Children's Health Defense, the risk of cardiac inflammation is significant, with estimates ranging from one in 2,000 to one in 175 vaccinations. Dr. Meryl Nass, an internist and biological warfare expert, also highlighted the CDC's acknowledgment of this risk during a June 2022 meeting.</p>
<p>However, it is crucial to understand the FDA's approval process. The agency evaluates the benefits and risks of a vaccine, especially in the context of public health emergencies. The approval of ACAM2000 for monkeypox was likely based on the assessment that the benefits outweigh the risks for high-risk individuals.</p>
<h2>Scientific Evidence</h2>
<p>The risk of myopericarditis associated with ACAM2000 is well-documented. A study published in the <a href="https://academic.oup.com/aje/article-abstract/160/7/642/136637?redirectedFrom=PDF#google_vignette">New England Journal of Medicine</a> &nbsp;reported cases of myopericarditis following smallpox vaccination, highlighting the need for careful monitoring and risk assessment.</p>
<p>The FDA's approval process involves rigorous evaluation of clinical data and consideration of public health needs. While the risks are acknowledged, the decision to approve the vaccine reflects a balance between these risks and the potential benefits in preventing monkeypox.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that the FDA approved the ACAM2000 vaccine for monkeypox despite acknowledging its dangerous side effects is partially true. While the vaccine has known risks, the FDA's approval process considers the benefits versus the risks in the context of public health emergencies. It is essential for individuals to be informed about the potential side effects and for healthcare providers to monitor vaccinated individuals closely.</p>

Claim Review: FDA Approves Monkeypox Vaccine Despite Known Risks

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The claim that the Canadian government contract with Pfizer acknowledged the unknown long-term efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines has been circulating widely. This article aims to review this claim, providing a thorough analysis and context based on reliable scientific sources.</p>
<h2>The Claim</h2>
<p>The claim states that the contract between the Canadian government and Pfizer, dated October 26, 2020, includes a section acknowledging that the long-term effects, efficacy, and adverse effects of the vaccine were not known at the time of signing. This information was reported by The Expose and The Canadian Independent.</p>
<h2>Analysis</h2>
<p>The contract indeed contains a section (5.5) under 'Purchaser Acknowledgement' that states: 'Purchaser further acknowledges that the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known.' This acknowledgment is standard in contracts for new medical products, reflecting the ongoing nature of scientific research and the need for continuous monitoring.</p>
<p>It is important to note that the acknowledgment of unknown long-term effects does not imply that the vaccines are unsafe. Vaccines undergo rigorous testing and approval processes by regulatory bodies such as Health Canada and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). These processes ensure that vaccines meet high safety and efficacy standards before they are administered to the public.</p>
<p>Furthermore, ongoing monitoring and research are essential for understanding the long-term effects of any new medical intervention. This is a standard practice in the medical field and is not unique to COVID-19 vaccines.</p>
<h2>Scientific Evidence</h2>
<p>Several peer-reviewed studies and reports from reliable scientific sources support the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines. For example, a study published in <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2101765">The New England Journal of Medicine</a> found that the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was highly effective in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 infections. Another study published in <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00947-8/fulltext">The Lancet</a> reported similar findings for the Moderna vaccine.</p>
<p>These studies, along with ongoing surveillance by health authorities, provide evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective in the short term. Long-term data is being continuously collected and analyzed to ensure the safety and efficacy of these vaccines over time.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that the Canadian government contract with Pfizer acknowledged the unknown long-term efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines is accurate. However, this acknowledgment is a standard practice in contracts for new medical products and does not imply that the vaccines are unsafe. Ongoing research and monitoring are essential for understanding the long-term effects of any new medical intervention. The available scientific evidence supports the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in the short term, and long-term data is being continuously collected and analyzed.</p>

Claim Review: Canadian Government Contract with Pfizer on COVID-19 Vaccine Safety

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The claim that Facebook provided secret online tools and trained CDC employees to censor the American public on COVID-19 and vaccine-related topics has gained traction in recent discussions. This article aims to review the claim, providing a thorough analysis based on available evidence and reliable sources.</p>
<h2>Background</h2>
<p>The claim originates from a report by NaturalNews.com, which alleges that Facebook collaborated with the CDC to censor content related to COVID-19 and vaccines. The report suggests that this collaboration involved the use of secret online tools and training sessions for CDC employees.</p>
<h2>Evidence and Analysis</h2>
<p>To evaluate the claim, it is essential to examine the available evidence and context.</p>
<h3>Collaboration Between Facebook and CDC</h3>
<p>It is well-documented that social media platforms, including Facebook, have collaborated with health authorities to combat misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, Facebook has implemented policies to remove or reduce the distribution of content that contains false claims about COVID-19 and vaccines. This collaboration is not unique to Facebook and the CDC; similar efforts have been observed with other platforms and health organizations.</p>
<h3>Training and Tools</h3>
<p>The claim suggests that Facebook provided secret online tools and trained CDC employees to censor content. While it is plausible that Facebook provided training and tools to help the CDC identify and report misinformation, the extent and secrecy of these efforts are not fully substantiated. The use of the term 'secret' implies a level of covertness that is not supported by available evidence.</p>
<h3>Censorship and Free Speech</h3>
<p>The claim also raises concerns about censorship and free speech. It is important to note that while social media platforms have the right to moderate content, they must do so in a manner that respects users' rights and adheres to their own policies. The balance between combating misinformation and preserving free speech is a complex issue that has been the subject of ongoing debate.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>Based on the available evidence, the claim that Facebook provided secret online tools and trained CDC employees to censor the American public is partially true but lacks context and overstates the extent of the collaboration. While there is evidence of collaboration between Facebook and the CDC, the specifics of the training and tools provided are not fully substantiated. Moreover, the claim raises important questions about the balance between combating misinformation and preserving free speech.</p>
<h2>References</h2>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/misinformation">Facebook Community Standards on Misinformation</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://archive.cdc.gov/#/results?q=https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/communication/guidance-list.html&amp;start=0&amp;rows=10">CDC Guidance on COVID-19 Communication</a>&nbsp;</li>
  <li><a href="https://www.nature.com/search?q=fight+against+covid+misinformation&amp;order=relevance">Nature: The fight against COVID-19 misinformation</a>&nbsp;</li>
</ul>

Claim Review: Facebook and CDC Collaboration on Censorship

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: "Pfizer sponsored an LGBT event for fifth-grade public school students in Chicago Public Schools" is Half True

Has beed claimed by:

Articles reviewing this claim:

Content you might like: