Project Veritas COVID-19 Vaccine Exposed Part 5: Pfizer Whistleblower

Project Veritas COVID-19 Vaccine Exposed Part 5: Pfizer Whistleblower

Project Veritas (PV) released Part 5 of ‘COVID-19 Vaccine Exposed‘ last night, featuring an employee turned whistleblower from COVID-drug manufacturer Pfizer. Melissa Strickler, a Manufacturing Quality Auditor at the company, produced emails of executives discussing the use of fetal cells in testing of Pfizer’s COVID-19 product.



The Use of Aborted Fetuses in Vaccines, Testing, and Development

A significant document provided by whistleblower Strickler is an internal email response from Pfizer Chief Scientific Officer Philip Dormitzer to a question as to whether a cell line from an aborted fetus was used in testing. First, he says, “We have an approved answer to this question… HEK293T [Human Embryonic Kidney] cells, used for the IVE assay, are ultimately derived from an aborted fetus.”

Dormitzer says “ultimately,” because the cells used are not directly from a fetus, but derivative of one aborted long ago. National Review explained this distinction in 2020 with the aid of statements from two pro-life doctors, Dr. Tara Sander Lee, Senior Fellow at the Lozier Institute, and Dr. Joseph Meaney, President of the National Catholic Bioethics Center:

“First, it’s important to identify the provenance of the cells used in testing. In the case of both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, it was HEK 293 kidney cells that were used. These are believed to have originated with an abortion, but note my use of the singular. HEK 293s are not continuously gathered as more abortions are performed. They were originally gleaned from a 1973 procedure in the Netherlands and have since been reproduced in labs for various research purposes.

Dr. Lee explained in an interview with National Review that ‘a fetal cell line is not the same as fetal tissue.’ These cell lines began with a cell taken from fetal tissue, but the actual cells used for research were ‘multiplied into many cells of the same kind.’ So, while ‘the connection with abortion is still there,’ she said, Pfizer and Moderna have not been ‘trafficking in babies’ body parts’ in the same way that Planned Parenthood has been accused of.

Dr. Meaney concurred with this assessment, calling it ‘a very important distinction’ between reproduced fetal cell lines and fetal tissue, though he stipulates that in his opinion it is ‘wrong in every case for scientists to work with this material’.”

Another important distinction to be made is that, although fetus derived cells are thought to be used by Pfizer during the drug testing process, there are no cells from an aborted fetus thought to be inside Pfizer’s retail drug product:

“There are no HEK 293 kidney cells in either the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines. Dr. Lee told National Review that HEK 293s were involved only in the ‘post-production’ process of the ‘final vaccine product’: that is, they are not part of the vaccine but rather were test subjects used to help determine how effective it was.

This is not the case for all the vaccine candidates. Some of the higher-profile products under development—by Janssen Research and Johnson & Johnson, as well as AstraZeneca and Oxford University, for example—are using fetal cells in the production process. In these vaccines, there is a ‘direct line’ between the vaccine and abortion; that line does not exist in the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.”

Catholic Church Officials on Ethics and Morality of Vaccines, The Use of Fetal Cells, and Vaccine Mandates

Further into the leaked email, Pfizer Chief Dormitzer says, “On the other hand, the Vatican doctrinal committee has confirmed that they consider it acceptable for Pro-Life believers to be immunized.”

The reference made by Dormitzer is of an opinion from the Catholic Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that was signed by the Prefect, the Secretary, and a Cardinal, then approved by Pope Francis. Though not obvious in all headlines about the opinion, and not the opinion of all clergy, it appeals for the production, approval, and distribution of “ethically acceptable vaccines that do not create problems of conscience” and states that “vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation… it must be voluntary.”

However, the Congregation’s note does proffer that “use of such vaccines does not constitute formal cooperation with the abortion from which the cells used in production of the vaccines derive.” It also clearly states a conclusion that headlines, and evidently Pfizer, are latching on to: “It is morally acceptable to receive Covid-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and production process.”

Even still, the Congregation note says that it does not “intend to judge the safety and efficacy” of any drug, and specifies the assurance that a drug can be used “in good conscience” applies only to those drugs “recognized as clinically safe and effective.” Further, the opinion rests on an implicit assumption: that using the drug neither legitimizes nor signifies moral approval of the practice of abortion, or the use of fetal cell lines. If that assumption fails, one must logically reject the conclusion.

Pfizer’s Informal Vaccine Messaging Policy

Finally, Pfizer Chief Dormitzer’s email directs, “Pfizer’s official statement couches the answer well and is what should be provided in response to an outside inquiry.” Project Veritas says this amounts to an instruction that “employees should just stick with Pfizer’s polished narrative.”

pfizer

Vanessa Gelman, who is identified as a Senior Director of Worldwide Research at Pfizer, is featured in another email that whistleblower Strickler has given PV, intended to show an informal policy of “secretive” messaging. The email says:

“We have been trying as much as possible to not mention the fetal cell lines. One or more cell lines with an origin that can be traced back to human fetal tissue has been used in laboratory test associated with the vaccine program. From the perspective of corporate affairs, we want to avoid having the information on fetal cells floating out there. The risk of communicating this right now outweighs any potential benefit we could see, particularly with general members of the public who may take this information and use it in ways we may not want out there we want to avoid raising this if possible.”

In another exchange, Gelman reaches out to a Pfizer executive identified as Senior Principal Scientist and Group Leader Sarah Weiser to get clarification. Weiser says she prefers that “we do not use the text in yellow,” referring to the portion explaining that cell lines with fetal origin have indeed been used in testing.

pfizer

The Pfizer Whistleblower

Pfizer Whistleblower Strickler came forward after taking a leave of absence from her job as Auditor of Manufacturing Quality at a plant in McPherson, Kansas. “We handle the product daily. Quality gets to see the process from fill to pack, so we see everything,” she said.

In a sit-down interview that makes up the bulk of the Part 5 video release, Strickler explains what she witnessed, what it meant to her, and her motivations:

“What was troubling to me was they were wanting to keep it under wraps. They didn’t really want the information out there they’re just being really deceptive, and they’re being careful with their words, and it just made me not trust it.”

“It’s almost like they are doing a script. They’re sticking to a script, like, ‘we’ve had this approved, this verbiage is approved, so this is what we need to stick to,’ when rather they should just be making it as clear and easy to understand for the population so that they can make informed decisions on this.”

“They don’t want to stir up a mess. They don’t want to have to deal with people who are upset, because I think people can use religious exemptions for it, and they don’t want that. I think they want nobody to have an excuse to not get it.”

PV founder James O’Keefe asks Strickler:

“What do you say to the people who are pro-vaccine [who say] ‘Stop making it political’?”

Strickler responds:

“The media and the government [are] making it political, but this isn’t about Republican, Democrat, liberal, or conservative. This is informed consent on injecting something inside of you from a company that’s called it an experimental vaccine. This is about when you see something that’s being done that you don’t think is right and exposing it.”

Like other whistleblowers who have come forward to PV, Strickler has created a GiveSendGo campaign.

Previous UncoverDC reporting on the Project Veritas ‘COVID-19 Vaccine Exposed’ series:

Part 1 HHS / VAERS
Part 2 FDA
Part 3 Johnson & Johnson
Part 4 Pfizer 1

SHOP THE UNCOVERDC STORE

This post was originally published on this site

Share

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on pinterest

Other News