REMDESIVIR STILL AN "AUTHORIZED TREATMENT" AGAINST "COVID" ACCORDING TO EMA
After Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine success, CEO targeted for revenue slump
After Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine success, CEO targeted for revenue slump
A big shareholder, Starboard Value, has alleged Pfizer interfered in its efforts to drive change by working with two former executives.
The threat to Bourla’s tenure has been launched by Starboard Value, a hedge fund that has taken a $1 billion stake in Pfizer, The Wall Street Journal first reported, seeking unspecified changes. Pfizer’s stock has lost about half of its value since peaking in 2021.
On Thursday, Starboard managing member Jeff Smith released a letter accusing Pfizer of threatening to retaliate against former top Pfizer executives who Starboard said had offered to assist the hedge fund “unless they publicly release a statement supporting the current Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Albert Bourla.” Starboard typically acquires a stake in struggling companies and advocates for changes to boost the value of its shares.
A path to quickly reviving Pfizer’s fortunes isn’t straightforward, some analysts say. “We do not see low-hanging fruit to boost shareholder value,” David Risinger, a Leerink Partners analyst, wrote in a note to clients. The company is facing the loss of patent protection for key drugs in the coming years and has already cut costs significantly, he said.
Starboard didn’t respond to a request for comment. Pfizer declined to comment.
Barely three years ago, Pfizer was the toast of the pharmaceutical world and Bourla, who was elevated to the top job in 2019, wrote a book about the race to develop the coronavirus vaccine.
Pfizer won the gratitude of governments and patients alike with the vaccine and its antiviral treatment, Paxlovid. CNN named Bourla CEO of the year in 2021, beating out Alphabet’s Sundar Pichai and billionaire Elon Musk. The next year, Pfizer brought in $100 billion in revenue, more than doubling its haul from just two years before.
Flush with cash from its coronavirus success, Pfizer went on a buying spree, shelling out more than $60 billion to expand into therapies for immune diseases, migraines, sickle cell disease and respiratory syncytial virus. The centerpiece purchase was the $43 billion acquisition of Seagen, a cancer company with a precision-missile-like approach to targeting tumors.
But then the world moved on from coronavirus faster than Pfizer had anticipated, company executives have said, with fewer people opting to get its vaccine. The company’s revenue went into free fall, sinking to $58.5 billion in 2023, and its share price followed suit. Bourla didn’t receive a cash bonus that year, and his compensation, valued at $21.6 million, was a 35 percent pay cut from the previous year.
Bourla acknowledged in a May interview with The Washington Post that “we missed big-time our internal projections” for coronavirus.
Meanwhile, Wall Street has a new fixation: diabetes and weight-loss drugs pioneered by Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk. Pfizer has yet to distinguish itself in the increasingly competitive race for weight-loss primacy, and is continuing to work on a weight-loss pill.
Bourla said in the May interview that the company “will be a significant player in obesity going forward.” Still, he said in the interview he believes that the market for cancer drugs is far bigger and will be one of Pfizer’s main engines of growth.
Bourla has often invoked his life story in articulating his vision and drive. He grew up part of Greece’s Jewish minority, “so that taught me how to be able to fight, for nothing is given,” he said at a 2022 Goldman Sachs conference, according to a transcript compiled by S&P Global Market Intelligence. Trained as a veterinarian, Bourla spent much of his career at Pfizer’s animal health division, where he learned “how to act without the resources” of the larger company.
As Bourla has navigated through leaner times, he has taken a knife to the company’s operations. Pfizer announced a plan last October to cut $3.5 billion in costs. Then in May, it unveiled an effort to save another $1.5 billion by the end of 2027. The frugal measures have yet to win over Wall Street, and its share price is roughly unchanged so far this year.
There have been some setbacks. In September, Pfizer said it was voluntarily withdrawing Oxbryta, a treatment for sickle cell disease approved in 2019 by the Food and Drug Administration that it acquired in its $5.4 billion purchase of Global Blood Therapeutics, citing patient deaths.
“It’s hard to find a headline that’s truly jarring” in the world of pharmaceuticals, wrote Jefferies analyst Akash Tewari, but withdrawing Oxbryta and discontinuing active trials of the drug “fits the bill.”
Starboard hasn’t publicly disclosed what changes it is seeking but said it plans to present its views to Bourla and the board on Wednesday.
Starboard on Thursday alleged that Pfizer or its representatives tried to intimidate two former executives who had reportedly offered to help Starboard’s efforts, saying they were threatened with litigation and having their pay clawed back unless they publicly supported Bourla.
The allegations came a day after the two men — former CEO Ian Read and former finance chief Frank D’Amelio — said in a statement released by an investment firm that they “decided not to be involved” in Starboard’s efforts and are “fully supportive” of Bourla, his executive team and Pfizer’s board.
Starboard asked Pfizer’s board to probe the matter, calling it “highly inappropriate, flagrantly unethical, and a significant breach of fiduciary obligations.”
Daniel
Gilbert joined The Washington Post in 2022 and writes about the
business of medicine. He previously spent seven years as an
investigative reporter for the Seattle Times, and before that covered
business for the Wall Street Journal. For sensitive tips, he can be
reached on the Signal app: (773) 350-6933.
Von der Leyen loses court case in blow to her 2nd-term bid: EPPUR LA RIELEGGONO, QUESTA STREGA ...
Von der Leyen loses court case in blow to her 2nd-term bid
European Commission president criticized in vaccine transparency judgment a day before she faces crucial vote on her future.
Ursula von der Leyen’s bid for a second term as European Commission chief has been dealt a major blow after a top EU court ruled she was not transparent enough with the public about Covid-19 vaccine contracts.
The General Court of the European Union ruled against the Commission’s decision to redact large parts of the contracts before making them available.
The ruling came just over 24 hours before von der Leyen’s political future will be decided by members of the European Parliament. She needs 361 of the 720 EU lawmakers to back her in a secret vote that is expected to be close.
“She needs to make concessions on this for our vote,” one delegate within Renew Europe, granted anonymity to speak candidly, told POLITICO, adding: “It is important that von der Leyen shows that she can herself gauge the seriousness and the appropriate remedy.”
One of the groups that von der Leyen has been seeking support from is the Greens, members of which brought this vaccine court case.
They filed requests to access the vaccine contracts and certain related documents to understand the agreement between the Commission and Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers in 2021.
The Commission only agreed to give partial access to certain contracts, arguing that some sections had been redacted to protect commercial interests or for privacy matters. The Green MEPs then took the Commission to court over the refusal.
The General Court on Wednesday partially upheld the MEPs’ lawsuit and annulled the Commission’s decision to redact parts of the contracts.
It pushed against the Commission’s decision to conceal provisions on indemnification, arguing that the Commission failed to prove how those clauses would undermine the commercial interests of the pharmaceutical companies.
The Commission had also refused to disclose personal details of the officials who negotiated the purchase of the vaccines over privacy concerns. But the court found that the MEPs demonstrated the “public interest” in identifying that team, in order to ascertain if they had any conflicts of interest.
Tilly Metz, one of the Green MEPs who filed the lawsuit, said the ruling is “significant for the future” as the Commission is expected to perform more joint procurements — in health, but potentially also in defense.
“It is important that the court has confirmed the importance of proper justifications for protecting commercial interests,” she said in a statement.
“The new European Commission must now adapt their handling of access to documents requests to be in line with today’s ruling,” she added.
Peter Liese, an MEP from the European People’s Party (the same political group as von der Leyen), played down the court ruling. He considers it “justifiable” that the Commission agreed to some of the pharmaceutical companies’ demands — including redacting certain clauses — to ensure quick access to vaccines for Europe.
“It is good that the Commission’s lawyers now analyze the judgment in detail and draw conclusions from it, but the conclusion that the Commission got everything wrong can already be disproved at first glance at the judgment,” he added.
The Commission pointed out how the court agreed that certain clauses of the contracts were covered by protection of commercial interest, thus only partially upholding the claims in the lawsuit.
“In these cases, the Commission needed to strike a difficult balance between the right of the public, including MEPs, to information, and the legal requirements emanating from the COVID-19 contracts themselves, which could result in claims for damages at the cost of taxpayers’ money,” the Commission said in a statement.
The executive continued that it will “carefully study the Court’s judgments and their implications” and that it “reserves its legal options.”
The Commission can appeal the ruling within two months and 10 days of the decision.
Other cases regarding the Pfizer contracts and communication between von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla are also pending in different EU jurisdictions.
Max Griera Andreu contributed to this developing story.
Netherlands court orders Bill Gates and Albert Bourla to stand trial over Covid vaccines causing injuries and death
Netherlands court orders Bill Gates and Albert Bourla to stand trial over Covid vaccines causing injuries and death
From the Defender, Childrens Health Defence
COVID Certificate of Vaccination ID
October 22, 2024 A Netherlands court last week ruled that Bill Gates can stand trial in the Netherlands, in a case involving seven people injured by COVID-19 vaccines.
According to Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf, the seven “corona skeptics” sued Gates last year, along with former Dutch prime minister and newly appointed NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, and “several members” of the Dutch government’s COVID-19 “Outbreak Management Team.”
Other defendants include Albert Bourla, Ph.D., CEO of Pfizer (pictured at a WEF conference above), and the Dutch state.
“Because Bill Gates’ foundation was involved in combating the corona pandemic, he has also been summoned,” De Telegraaf reported.
According to Dutch independent news outlet Zebra Inspiratie, the plaintiffs allege that Gates, through his representatives, deliberately misled them about the safety of the COVID-19 shots, despite knowing “that these injections were not safe and effective.”
Dutch independent journalist Erica Krikke told The Defender that the seven plaintiffs — whose names are redacted in the lawsuit’s publicly available documents — “are ordinary Dutch people, and they have been jabbed and after the jabs they got sick.”
Krikke said that of the seven original plaintiffs, one has since died, leaving the other six plaintiffs to continue the lawsuit.
The lawsuit was filed in the District Court of Leeuwarden. According to De Telegraaf, “Gates had objected because, according to him, the judges did not have jurisdiction.” Accordingly, the court first “had to rule in the so-called incident procedure,” De Andere Krant reported.
Zebra Inspiratie reported that the hearing in this “incident procedure” took place on Sept. 18 and that Gates’ representatives disputed jurisdiction, but not the claim.
According to De Andere Krant, Gates was represented by the Pels Rijcken law firm, based in The Hague, described as “the largest and the premier litigation law firm in the Netherlands.” Gates did not appear at the Sept. 18 hearing, but attorneys for Gates argued that the court “had no jurisdiction over him because he lives in the United States.”
However, in its Oct. 16 ruling, the Leeuwarden court ruled it does have jurisdiction over Gates. De Andere Krant reported that the court found “sufficient evidence” that the claims against Gates and the other defendants are “connected” and based on the same “complex of facts.”
Other defendants who reside outside of the Netherlands, including Bourla, did not challenge the court’s jurisdiction.
The court ruled Gates must pay attorneys’ fees and additional legal costs totaling 1,406 euros (approximately $1,520). A hearing is scheduled for Nov. 27.
‘Even if … your name is Bill Gates, you still have to go to court’
In remarks shared with De Andere Krant, Arno van Kessel, one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys, welcomed the ruling. “In its verdict, the court has clearly recorded the basis of our conclusions of claim,” van Kessel said.
Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst told The Defender it is “quite interesting” that the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit in Leeuwarden instead of The Hague, where normally, all cases against the government related to COVID-19 are filed.
“In general, COVID-19 court cases have been very unsuccessful in the Netherlands,” Terhorst said. “There is a slim chance it will be successful.”
She added:
“I think most judges support the COVID-19 vaccination agenda and will find it hard to believe the vaccinations have caused injuries. So, we have a long way to go, regardless of the case.”
Krikke shared a more optimistic outlook, saying that the court sent a message that “even if you are rich and your name is Bill Gates, you still have to go to court.”
New Zealand-based independent journalist Penny Marie, who has closely followed the proceedings in this case, told The Defender she hopes the Oct. 16 ruling “will hopefully set a precedent and help plaintiffs in similar cases around the world regarding jurisdiction,” in cases “where the defendant does not reside in the country of the plaintiff.”
“For parties who make claims against those involved in the implementation of the Great Reset and other international actions, such as the COVID-19 emergency response initiated by the WEF [World Economic Forum] and imposed on all U.N. member nations, I hope that this ruling provides an opportunity for others to follow suit,” Marie added.
Father of vaccine-injured plaintiff made ‘emotional plea’ to the court
At the Sept. 18 hearing, plaintiffs also delivered statements. According to Zebra Inspiratie, “One of the victims, who is very ill, was also given the opportunity to make a plea. She was no longer able to speak and was represented by her father. It was an emotional plea.”
Krikke said the plaintiff’s father told the court that his daughter, who was previously healthy, fell ill after getting the COVID-19 vaccine and could no longer speak, telling the judge that he “would really like to speak to Bill Gates directly” to ask him what happened to his daughter.
“After that, the judge was really quiet,” Krikke said.
The Oct. 18 ruling also addressed the plaintiffs’ claims about Gates’ role in the WEF’s “Great Reset” project.
“The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is also affiliated with the World Economic Forum … an international organization whose statutory objective is to unite ‘leaders from business, governments, academia and society at large into a global community committed to improving the state of the world,’” the ruling states, adding:
“This is a project aimed at the total reorganization of societies in all countries that are members of the United Nations … as described by [WEF founder and executive chairman Klaus Schwab] in his book Covid-19: The Great Reset. …
“Characteristic of this political ideology is that this forced and planned change is presented as justified by pretending that the world is suffering from major crises that can only be solved by centralized, hard global intervention. One of these pretended major crises concerns the Covid-19 pandemic.”
The ruling also states, “The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is affiliated with ‘Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance‘ … an international partnership in the field of vaccinations between various public and private entities.”
World Health Organisation
Vaccine behemoth Pfizer has admitted in its Covid mRNA documents that shingles is caused by their vaccine and is the same as Monkey Pox which WHO declared a public medical emergency “of international concern” on August 14, 2024.
BREAKING NEWS: Bill Gates loses lawsuit and will appear in Dutch court
Shared with permission. Source - Zebra Inspiratie, by Erica Krikke, Netherlands.
Bill Gates, philanthropist and founder of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, recently filed “an incident” against the seven Dutch plaintiffs who want to take him to court because they accuse him of a “tortious act” as a participant in the project “The Great Reset”. The hearing was on September 18, 2024 in the District Court of Leeuwarden in Friesland (Netherlands) and the verdict was on October 16 2024.
Gates, who did not appear before the Leeuwarden District Court on September 18, but was represented by a lawyer from PelsRijcken, stated that he believes that a Dutch judge is not competent to judge him because Gates is an American citizen.
Iscriviti a:
Post (Atom)
Lettera aperta al signor Luigi di Maio, deputato del Popolo Italiano
ZZZ, 04.07.2020 C.A. deputato Luigi di Maio sia nella sua funzione di deputato sia nella sua funzione di ministro degli esteri ...
-
Ex-president of Poland Lech Walesa proposed to “dismember” Russia by admi...
-
World Economic Forum Deletes Sri Lankan PM Article Boasting Of Plan to Make Country ‘Rich by 2025’ Comes after Sri Lankan people ove...
-
Usury From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search Of Usury, from Brant's Stultifera Navis ( Ship of Fo...