Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pfizer Responds to Covid Gain of Function Research Claims

pfizer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–79 of 79 posts

Re: Pfizer Responds to Covid Gain of Function Research Claims

#71

Post by gjsman-1000 »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #70
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your inability to understand the difference contributes to why you subscribe to vaccine conspiracy theories. Point me to a link to why you think so. I'm merely pointing out that Pfizer's own letter, here, hardly denied anything their guy said, which cannot be a conspiracy theory. They could just deny that he even worked for them, or claim that he was taken out of context. They haven't. That's pointing out a fact, n…

> Unless they lied on effectiveness to regulators, who according to the video, are also in their pocket. They lied to people who are in their pocket? Your conspiracy theories make less and less sense the more you explain them.

I didn't say it, Pfizer's director did bragging that the regulators are soft on them. If true, that means the regulator's ability to do their job would logically be compromised. It also rings, to me, true because of Pfizer's long record-setting criminal past. Tell me then why Pfizer didn't deny any of it, except one portion in partial capacity, and waited over 48 hours until Friday night (the time you post anything you want to bury from the news cycle). Their silence is confirmation [1].

You can hate Project Veritas all you want - but if Pfizer doesn't deny their claims despite 22M views, or even allege that he was taken out of context, that's all I need to know. In which case, you are too busy shooting the messenger to read the message. If it was so easily false as you portray, Pfizer could have simply tweeted a one-sentence denial within the first hours.

[1] Especially because, for a CEO to allow a video like that to get 22M views and not deny it, if it was false, would be potentially a financial crime of negligence (total disregard of the Fiduciary Duty of Care) he would be personally responsible for (like, could be sued by shareholders and lose his house). Convince me how allowing a story that is false to get 22M views, and not issuing a denial to 90% of the claims after waiting over 48 hours, is compatible with that Fiduciary duty. If the story is actually false, we should be suing Albert Bourla right now for malpractice, for deliberately allowing Pfizer's name to be dragged through the mud and doing nothing to stop it, and worse, releasing a statement that does not deny 90% of the "false" claims and only seems to partially confirm one. You would have to be insane to react this way to a false story.

Re: Pfizer Responds to Covid Gain of Function Research Claims

#72

Post by lern_too_spel »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #71
lern_too_spel wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unless they lied on effectiveness to regulators, who according to the video, are also in their pocket. They lied to people who are in their pocket? Your conspiracy theories make less and less sense the more you explain them.

I didn't say it, Pfizer's director did bragging that the regulators are soft on them. If true, that means the regulator's ability to do their job would logically be compromised. It also rings, to me, true because of Pfizer's long record-setting criminal past. Tell me then why Pfizer didn't deny any of it, except one portion in partial capacity, and waited over 48 hours until Friday night (the time you post anything y…

You contradict yourself again. Why would they post a rebuttal on Friday if they knew that anything they post on Friday would get buried? You'll need to rearrange some of the yarn and pictures on your pegboard to make a more cohesive conspiracy theory.

Maybe the reason it took them so long is that nobody with any sense is watching what Project Veritas (or OAN, The Epoch Times, The Washington Times, etc.) puts out, so it only became an issue when politically powerful conspiracy theorist panderers like Rubio made a deal out of it, and then they only respond to the accusations that Rubio repeated.

Re: Pfizer Responds to Covid Gain of Function Research Claims

#73

Post by daxfohl »

I fully expect this to be a guy spouting stories in the hopes of getting laid.

But, it could all be true. The level of detail is pretty convincing, not something you'd make up on the spot. So I am actually happy some congress people are taking it on and would like to see a more bipartisan effort there.

So, in the case this is real, now what? (I'd also think the next step would be to uncover more before going public and letting the investigated company purge everything, which makes me lean further towards assuming this is nothing but a publicity stunt).

Re: Pfizer Responds to Covid Gain of Function Research Claims

#74

Post by baja_blast »

ethanbond wrote: post #16
machina_ex_deus wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just make sure you have the world media prepared with an appropriate wargame to simulate what would happen if an unrelated coronavirus would start spreading. Give it a boring name like event 201. Since it's all out in the open it's clearly not a conspiracy. Then have the world media present you as the Oracle of Delphi because you had such an accurate prediction.

Doesn’t take a genius to know live animal markets in urban centers are risky and that respiratory viruses can emerge + spread.

> Doesn’t take a genius to know live animal markets in urban centers are risky and that respiratory viruses can emerge + spread.

Yes and when that happens the virus is circulating in an animal population. And this results in multiple independent outbreaks overtime across the entire region the animals live in. For example MERS a few years earlier has independent outbreaks in multiple countries, same with SARS. And it is due to the fact the virus is circulating in an intermediate animal species that for both SARS and MERS they were able to identify the animal that infected patient zero within months.

For SARS2 we have not found any intermediate species with the virus, or has there been other spillovers. You'd think that if it was circulating in something like racoon dogs there would be an outbreak in LAOS or we would find the ancestor virus in racoon dogs in bordering countries of China.

Re: Pfizer Responds to Covid Gain of Function Research Claims

#76

Post by unraveller »

Digory wrote: post #6

This is responding to an undercover video by the activists at Project Veritas. They have released a video that appears to show a Pfizer director saying they are mutating new COVID lines for vaccine purposes.

You got a source that those internal "admissions" are the allegations they are responding to and not any other floating around? Their vagueness on this point alone is far from transparent.

Re: Pfizer Responds to Covid Gain of Function Research Claims

#77

Post by ethanbond »

baja_blast wrote: post #74
ethanbond wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn’t take a genius to know live animal markets in urban centers are risky and that respiratory viruses can emerge + spread.

> Doesn’t take a genius to know live animal markets in urban centers are risky and that respiratory viruses can emerge + spread. Yes and when that happens the virus is circulating in an animal population. And this results in multiple independent outbreaks overtime across the entire region the animals live in. For example MERS a few years earlier has independent outbreaks in multiple countries, same with SARS. And it…

Sure. Doesn’t point at all to a deliberate leak like what GP was alluding to (the existence of a similar war game scenario implying that “they knew” it was going to happen).

Re: Pfizer Responds to Covid Gain of Function Research Claims

#78

Post by def_true_false »

fidgewidge wrote: post #14
Digory wrote: post #6

This is responding to an undercover video by the activists at Project Veritas. They have released a video that appears to show a Pfizer director saying they are mutating new COVID lines for vaccine purposes.

It actually does show that, albeit he says they're considering/planning on doing it, not doing it right now. The clips where he talks about it are long and with plenty of context, the man in question does indeed have the title Veritas claimed for him (although they are now trying to scrub his internet presence), and when he was confronted with the recordings he freaked out and attacked the reporters. On every thread…

You claim that the other side is biased and trying to stop people from seeing the footage, and yet it's your post that contains bullshit like "Pfizer planning to create COVID variants so they can later sell vaccines for them" -- a sentence intentionally crafted to imply Pfizer planning not just to create the variants, but also to spread them. What does "creating a variant" even mean? If you "create a variant" and then the same or similar variant ends up being dominant in the outside world, without the variant you created ever leaving the lab, that sounds like what you actually want the vaccine companies doing? If they can predict which variant vaccines will be needed and make them in advance, I don't really care how they did it, assuming reasonable risk management (no leaks and so on).

But no, you crafted your shitty statement so that the only reasonable reading is the technically incorrect one -- i.e. that Pfizer is planning to create AND SPREAD variants so they can later sell vaccines for them. Not exactly a shining beacon of integrity, are you?

Re: Pfizer Responds to Covid Gain of Function Research Claims

#79

Post by [deleted] »

Erem wrote: post #60
fidgewidge wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It actually does show that, albeit he says they're considering/planning on doing it, not doing it right now. The clips where he talks about it are long and with plenty of context, the man in question does indeed have the title Veritas claimed for him (although they are now trying to scrub his internet presence), and when he was confronted with the recordings he freaked out and attacked the reporters. On every thread…

Readers in the thread should reference a few relevant resources before accepting the "honest, hard-nosed journalism" description of project Veritas proposed by fidgewidge. Consider that they are also a political spying organization, as successfully argued in front of the DC Circuit Court (link at bottom) Taking into account the court's findings and other easily available material like Wikipedia it beggars belief to i…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN