Time for Pfizer to Die?

The chart looks like it could priming for a breakdown. A catalyst could be a fraud suit brewing in federal court. It is claimed the Pfizer trials were fraudulent. If this is true, then a private citizen has standing to sue on behalf of the government and collect a portion of damages.

The Comirnaty Ad

A national emergency birthed The False Claims Act, known as the “Lincoln Law,” after contractors used the exigent circumstances of the Civil War to defraud the people, at the expense of the suffering and death of American soldiers because defense contractors sold the Army lame horses and mules, faulty rifles and ammunition, and rancid rations and provisions. Once again, we face a national emergency, where our military entrusted another defense contractor, to the tune of billions of dollars and millions of American lives. The Defense Department incorporated Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) rules and regulations into its contract by conditioning the contract on FDA compliance and authorization. Respondents ignore this critical fact when trying to claim they contracted away the False Claims Act. Don’t the American people deserve to know if Pfizer lied?

Respondents seek dismissal without discovery, amendment, or trial. Their fundamental premise: even if honestly reported data showed their product caused more illness than it cured, inflicted more injury than it prevented, and took more lives than it saved, America’s military would still have given them billions of dollars and mandated it be injected into America’s military. Respondents claim fraudulent certifications, false statements, doctored data, contaminated clinical trials, and firing of whistleblowers can be ignored based on the theory that they contracted their way around the fraud. This ignores two legal aspects: first, fraud in the inducement is a well-recognized basis for False Claims Act qui tam actions; and second, the military wisely incorporated the FDA regulations into the contract as a precondition of any payment under the contract by conditioning payment upon FDA authorization of the product, an authorization itself dependent upon complete compliance with FDA rules and regulations governing such authorizations and approvals. In the end, the law does not belie common sense: a drug company cannot induce the taxpayers to pay billions of dollars for a product that honest data would show poses more risks than benefits to most Americans and that ignores the actual contract and the law itself. Put differently, the alleged fraud goes “to the very essence of the bargain.” United Health Serv., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar, 136 S. Ct. 1989, 2003 n. 5. The law compels denial of Respondents’ motions to dismiss.

I am skeptical of restatements in legal cases. The claimants say Pfizer has admitted to fraud and that Pfizer claims they're not liable because they were partnered with the government. I haven't dug into this yet. Objectively, we know they pushed a medicine that was worse than the disease. Legally, I don't know.