Upset
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

WHAT IN THE NAME OF THUNDER?

[b] What is this? What utter nonsense is this? (Daily Mail, today.)

You don't just "find" a cancer-causing element in a "safe and effective" drug made by a leading pharmaceutical company! one to which millions of people have entrusted their health over the last two years??

They made the drug! They know exactly what's in it!

Be warned! This company does not merit one iota of your trust! You are being played![/b]

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
I normally would be the last person to appear to defend Big Pharma because I think what they do with pricing, markets, and lobbying is absolutely sinful even if they are able to dance around the criminal statutes. But I also abhor the jumping to conclusions and piling on without the use of some critical thinking:

Nitrosamine is safe at low levels and found everywhere, including process foods;
High levels of nitorsamine, however, are linked to cancer after long periods of time;
The high level can occur from unintentional compounding of chemicals in the manufacturing and processing of goods.

So when Pfizer discovers that somewhere along the line in the manufacturing and processing of these blood pressure drugs there has been the unintentional compounding of nitrosamine from low, safe levels, to high, cancer risk levels -- which must not have shown up in clinical trials or the FDA would not have approved them -- and voluntarily recalls the drugs from the market rather than waiting for the FDA to take action it some how proves they are the Devil Incarnate?
WalterF · 70-79, M
@dancingtongue My profession involves teaching foreign pharmaceutical employees the English necessary for specific activities. Among those activities is that of auditing, or being audited by subcontractors, suppliers, etc., or inspected by regulatory authorities, FDA or from other countries, or local.

In a three-day course, we follow the whole cycle of production, in depth. The requirements are extremely strict, at every level and in every imaginable aspect.

It is inconceivable and unacceptable that such a "discovery" should suddenly be made. What does that say about their testing procedures, implemented at every stage of the manufacturing process? This is frankly unbelievable.

Given the substances and objects discovered in their covid products by researchers who have been analysing these for two years now, this new problem merits strong action by the regulators. But this is, of course, unlikely. Too many vested interests.
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
@WalterF But it sounds to me like the earlier acknowledged problems with the one of the vaccines -- where they added or changed a subcontracting manufacturing plant, and something about the plant or what the subcontractor did resulted in an unusable product and that whole batch had to be thrown out and that production line closed down. Not necessarily an inherent problem with the original formula, but something discovered later on.
WalterF · 70-79, M
@dancingtongue Adding a new supplier is rigorously tested. In theory - and I think it would be considered by regulatory authorities as realisable in practice too - the analyses should be so exhaustive as to exclude any such possibility.