Kansas AG sues Pfizer for Misleading Kansans on COVID Vaccine
The Kansas Attorney General's lawsuit against Pfizer alleges that the company misled the public about the safety and effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine.
The claims in the lawsuit focus on several key points:
Concealing Risks: The lawsuit accuses Pfizer of not disclosing known risks, such as potential links between its COVID-19 vaccine and myocarditis, pericarditis, and pregnancy complications like miscarriage.
The lawsuit highlights a study conducted on 44 pregnant rats by Pfizer and BioNTech from June to October 2020. The study revealed alarming results, including:
Severe soft tissue and skeletal malformations in multiple fetuses.
Higher rates of failed embryo implantation compared to controls — 9.77% rate of failed embryo implantation, compared to 4.09% in the control group.
“Significant” weight loss and decreased food consumption among the vaccinated rats.
These findings were deliberately not released to the public, and only became public after a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in November 2022, raising concerns about transparency and lack of informed consent.
Misleading Efficacy Claims: The lawsuit accuses Pfizer of overstating the vaccine’s effectiveness against COVID-19 variants, knowing that its protection diminished over time. It also alleges that Pfizer falsely implied the vaccine could prevent transmission, despite not having studied this aspect. (Pfizer exec confirms this in UK parliament on video).
Furthermore, the lawsuit emphasizes that Pfizer promoted the vaccine as highly effective without disclosing that its efficacy against newer variants and over time was significantly reduced. These claims suggest a broader pattern of misleading statements concerning the vaccine's overall performance.
Censorship Allegations: The lawsuit also claims Pfizer coordinated with social media platforms to suppress criticism of the vaccine. Read More
We now know that Pfizer also colluded with the US government, allowing the company to decide what constituted as misinformation and what should be censored, though that’s not mentioned in this lawsuit.
The result of this was that doctors, researchers and medical professionals were censored and often deplatformed for presenting research that Pfizer did not want publicized. Several deplatformed researchers, such as Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Peter McCullough, and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, raised concerns later supported by data. These included mRNA vaccine risks (e.g., myocarditis) and the limited effectiveness of lockdowns, validating some of their earlier views despite initial censorship.
Avoiding Oversight: Pfizer allegedly chose not to participate in the federal Operation Warp Speed program, which would have subjected the company to more government oversight.
“Regulatory documents show that only 9 out of 153 Pfizer trial sites were subject to FDA inspection before licensing the mRNA vaccine. Similarly, only 10 out of 99 Moderna trial sites and 5 of 73 remdesivir trial sites were inspected.” — The BMJ
Kansas seeks damages and civil penalties under the state's Consumer Protection Act for these alleged misleading statements. Pfizer has denied these allegations and maintains that its claims about the vaccine have been accurate and science-based.
You can read the full lawsuit filed by the Kansas Attorney General here:
