Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Quote of the Day: The Dirty Stuff
Christopher Cole of the FDA, not knowing he’s on camera:
Biden wants to inoculate as many people as possible.
So you’ll have to get an annual shot. I mean–it hasn’t been formally announced yet, ’cause they don’t want to, like, uh, rile everyone up.
The drug companies, the food companies, the vaccine companies–they pay us hundreds of millions of dollars a year to hire and keep the reviewers to approve their products.
If they can get every person required at an annual vaccine, that is a recurring return of money going into their company.
So, they give you more money, yes, that’s great, and it increases the chance of approval.
Well, the dirty stuff is never really publicized. I mean, you see, there’s more pressure. There’s more pressure to approve something.
This is from Project Veritas. Here is the first video of Cole’s remarks, and here is the second.
This isn’t exactly Fox Mulder getting testimony from a man inside The Cabal on how the vaccines are designed to fill our blood with microchips and/or kill people by the millions. This is just ordinary human weakness and venality. This is the corrupting influence of power and money.
This puts some pretty damning criticisms of the FDA right in the center of Ockham’s Razor territory, and it’s bad enough without a cabal or microchips: The FDA’s approval of a Big Pharma product, like Covid vaccines for kids, is influenced by money from Big Pharma.
I think Cole deserves some credit for his awareness of the problem, especially towards the end of the second video and in this remark:
And all these, like, uh, organizations within FDA, they, like, started to see all this cash in their eyes. It’s like, oh, I need to grab some of that. And I think we’ve gone too far on that.
And what’s the solution?
More light of day, for a start. Let’s have some Congressional hearings on these shady processes. Let’s have some more hidden cameras, more whistleblowers, and more journalism–and not just from Project Veritas! But thank Heaven we do at least have Project Veritas! And let’s have a few million more people learn about this, and then another few million, and a few more after that.
And then?
And then–reform.
I don’t know the details myself, but I’m guessing the details will probably be pretty clear if we shine enough light on this mess.
Some of the details are probably clear enough now, but I’ve typed enough already, and many others on Ricochet will probably know what to do better than I would. So now it’s your turn!
Published in General
Lovamanoe! doesn’t necessarily need all that much of an explanation. But it’s plenty bad enough.
The second video, starting at about halfway through, goes over some issues with how the FDA uses one of its sources of money. There’s a promising partial solution somewhere around there.
Where are the journalists in this all? In the old days, there would be someone out there digging into all this and pursuing a Pulitzer, although that too has lost its luster, hasn’t it?
US journalism is bad enough even without them getting paid directly by the government, which seems to be why Canada might be even worse.
Great idea. Anything ever come from Congressional hearings? Because Fauci and Collins lied under oath to Congress and they’re still walking free and causing harm.
“Congressional hearings” is where scandals go to die. Prove me wrong.
The media is controlled (and staffed) by intelligence agencies.
Not kidding.
Well, I never said it was enough. And I did say we need reform after some light of day. And we can get some light of day from a few half-decent Senators.
But I’m not saying you’re wrong.
Sorry, I’ve just seen too many hearings that exposed Democrats’ dirty deeds and nothing has ever come of it. I mean, some Senators and House members got to grandstand and then used those sound bites for fundraising . . . but look where we are.
Yes, I’ve taken the black pill . . .
Only when it was in the proprietor’s interest to rake that particular muck. Now that the media-proprietor class is part of the unified crony-capitalist state complex (floating free of democratic, legal and public accountability) you wouldn’t expect that sort of thing to criticize Big Government – unless there was some sort of anti-freedom angle, like the Facebook ‘whistleblower’.
Does anybody know what he is talking about? Is he referring to graft or bribery payments?
Hard to know the difference.
It may not fit either of those things, technically. He doesn’t use those terms. He does talk about “more pressure” to approve the product of someone who funds the FDA.
I think it’s more like me paying someone to read some books and make an official recommendation as to whether everyone else should read them. I’m honest and he’s honest (as far as everyone else knows). But at the same time I’m paying him a lot, and he ends up recommending my books very enthusiastically.
That is called a bribe, and it’s how things are done. Also, the FDA is made up of Big Pharma reps. They basically approve their own products.
By the dictionary, yes. Maybe not in a technical legal sense. Hence the need for light of day to find any illegalities, punish them, find the legal immoralities, and reform to deal with them.
Yes, the revolving doors are a big problem.
That’s not a bribe. It’s somewhat corrupt, but that doesn’t make it a bribe.
We give you money, you show us favoritism. Yes it’s a bribe. I mean, if you want to argue semantics — and you usually do — then go ahead. I’m not playing.
You guys are talking about money transactions that haven’t even been identified yet. Nobody has pinpointed what payments Christopher Cole was alluding to.
No, that’s not not necessarily a bribe. There doesn’t need to be any agreement or deal for it to be corrupt. And yes, it’s a semantic issue. That’s why it’s important to get it right.
In the video Cole explains that a while ago congress passed a law saying that the FDA could accept payment for evaluating a drug or approval. Cole implies that this was intended to offset the cost of evaluating the drug.
This money stays in the FDA accounts but must be spent. So the FDA seeks ways to spend it. Apparently the pharmaceutical companies pay hundreds of millions of dollars with the expectation that their preferred reviewers will be employed, and I suppose presumably have their salaries and expenses paid with it.
Yes, it’s not technically a bribe. It does speak to a cordial professional relationship, and it might have the effect of getting the FDA to use a company’s preferred researchers. I think Cole said this pretty closely in other words.
Probably nothing that is legally a bribe. No one made a decision in favor of Pfizer and got an extra 50,000 dollars in his account the next day. (That we know of.)
Cole described it clearly enough, I thought. The FDA is funded by pharmaceutical companies. And there is a totally non-formalized pressure to approve the products of the people funding them.
So who is this Christopher Cole? Lots of people hate their employers, view them cynically and assign the worst possible motives to them. Project Veritas does some good work, but it was really sloppy in a previous attempt to report on insider news from Pfizer. So I’d want to know what position of responsibility and knowledge this Christopher Cole has. And a job title doesn’t do it, because I know some people at Pfizer who have titles like “senior scientist.” That title probably doesn’t mean what you think it means.
(I don’t doubt that Pfizer likes policies that will make them a lot of money.)
I know no more than can be gathered from watching the videos.
(That, and I think I saw his LinkedIn page.)
I’m reminded, although I can’t remember the specific instance, of a politician asking a journalist exactly this question WRT some issue or another in the past few years. (Covid? Hunter’s laptop? Russia, Russia, Russia? Can’t remember, and it doesn’t matter.) The “journo’s” response was pretty much that it wasn’t up to them to dig in the dirt and uncover the truth of the matter, it was up to the politicians to look into it and figure it all out so the journalists could “report” on it.
***
This is the Quote of the Day. February’s sign-up sheet is here. Please sign up today!
If you’re new at this game, it’s a easy way to get your feet wet and start a conversation; if you’re an old-timer, you already know the ropes. Either way, please sign up to speak up.
Another ongoing project to encourage new voices is our Group Writing Project. November’s theme is “Love, Hate, and Other Feelings.” If you’d like to weigh in, please sign up for Group Writing too!
Pennsylvania court ruling that the mail-in votes where Biden had a 1.4 million advantage were not legally collected?
Wisconsin court ruling that dropboxes outside of the city clerk’s office were alternate sites subject to the rules of Chapter 6, Section 855 of the laws of Wisconsin and were therefore illegally cast/collected, affecting tens of thousands of votes?
The Wisconsin Elections Commission recommending this as well as several ways of illegal voting?
50,000 votes cast outside of the voter’s jurisdiction in violation of the law in Georgia?
Sociological data from earlier elections indicating that large numbers of non-citizens vote Democrat–likely in numbers twice enough to flip Georgia and Arizona?
Stenstrom’s observations on 50,000 votes with a bad chain of custody in Pennsylvania?
Stenstrom’s observations on 60,000 mysteriously uncounted votes, and the Democrat poll observer who was with him?
And that’s not even getting to the really interesting stuff.
Gamer gate and Depression Quest was like this.
When our men of science assured us, “Take the vaccine you must,”
They were hand-in-glove with Big Pharma, and frittered away our trust.
Covid couldn’t divide us as badly as did their bumbles,
and the gods of the copybook headings said, “Just tell the truth, and be humble.”