Disturbing Revelations from the Pfizer Video: When Profit Trumps Ethics
As a passionate gamer, I‘ve slain my share of fantastical beasts and villains. But recently, a real-world adversary has emerged more terrifying than fiction: pharmaceutical juggernaut Pfizer. Project Veritas’ undercover exposé reveals a profit-hungry behemoth, recklessly “playing god” – manipulating viruses and human lives for financial gain.
These are not ethical dilemmas confined to biopunk games or dystopian novels. Pfizer aims to “direct” viral evolution itself, intentionally engineering dangers poised to escape like the runaway train in Snowpiercer. Millions perished to COVID while Pfizer profited; now it brews viral sequels, heedless of further catastrophe. I analyzed the whistleblower footage extensively as a scientist and gamer. In this guide, I’ll break down the ethical transgressions, the implications for public health policy and the insufficient guardrails enabling such pharmaceutical overreach.
Playing with Viral Fire: Utilitarianism Gone Wild
Jordon Trishton Walker, Pfizer’s Director of Research and Development Strategic Operations and mRNA Scientific Planner, brazenly documents the company “directing” evolution of viruses, intentionally increasing infectiousness and mortality. This preemptive vaccine development tactic violates medicine’s cardinal rule – first, do no harm.
Gain-of-function (GOF) experiments can seem reasonable under academic utilitarian ideals. If engineered pathogens remain properly contained, knowledge gained about overcoming antiviral immunity may eventually reduce net human suffering. But recent history illustrates how readily such research can unleash unintended misery instead.
COVID-19 most likely emerged from GoF undertaken at the Wuhan Institute of Virology – China’s CDC equivalent. Driven by utilitarian logic regarding pandemic preparedness, these GoF experiments recklessly toyed with the extreme danger of enhancing transmission in coronaviruses. The ethical case for such research collapsed instantly in January 2020 as lab-designed Nature’s fury erupted globally.
Disregarding this tragedy, Pfizer now charges forth with viral GoF in mad pursuit of profits. Its “directed evolution” ignores utilitarian logic, since natural random mutation supplies countless vaccine targets absent manufactured menace. And utterly without the informed consent of those placed at risk.
With COVID vaccine revenues alone projected to reach $56+ billion by 2025, do viral profits justify the ethical gambles? Who consents to undisclosed genetic gods throwing more viral dice against humanity? Perhaps citizens might debate the merits openly if not for censorship and propaganda concealing these new facts on the Wuhan ground zero sequel set.
Ignoring Ethical Fire Alarms: Past Pfizer Controversies
This utilitarian justification for prioritizing knowledge over safety crumbles further upon reviewing Pfizer’s history of ethical breaches. Even past contamination calamities haven’t deterred modern manic phases.
In the early 00s, an unapproved Genetically Modified virus ended up tainting one of Pfizer’s top biotech drug factories. Their European plant saw medicine production crippled for months due to surprise GMO viral DNA. Sound familiar?
Yet safety oversights continue plaguing the company, like persistent product contamination issues in Pakistan this year triggering a recall. Quality control failures even put Pfizer at risk of exclusion from UN vaccine programs.
This checkered track record underscores a company culture viewing safety protocols as ICARUS style hindrances. For demonstrations of ethical restraint or accountability in past research fiascos, we find a barren cupboard. So for a corporation now forging ahead with gain of function “directed evolution”, what new horrors might escape this Pandora’s jar unseen by unweary eyes?
Callous Disregard for Human Costs
Jordon Walker speaks of Pfizer intentionally engineering more lethal and transmissible viruses with terrifying nonchalance in Veritas confessions…
“If [a virus] takes out everybody in the building, that‘s one thing. But if it spreads out into the world…"
He justifies such Armageddon-risking bravado by noting most people harmed would perish from natural causes anyway in coming decades. This math works better for beings like the Q in Star Trek than flesh and blood souls. Behind Walker’s detached percentages lie millions of precious, irreplaceable lives – not disposable polygons.
Such clinical callousness gives me The Walking Dead’s Eugenics “for the greater good” villain vibes. But real lives hang in the viral balance while Pfizer’s research gods play with mathematical human morality.
What oversight curtails this supply-driven derangement where apocalyptic threats germinate incubation pools unsupervised?
Shattered Guardrails: Blind, Broken or Bought Regulation
Despite Walker stating “no one is watching and no one cares” regarding Pfizer‘s viral moonshots, various oversight mechanisms theoretically constrain pharmaceutical activities. But the broken state of current healthcare guardrails emerges nakedly under investigation.
The industryhas acquired so much wealth and influence that regulation now provides mere theater or able assistance. Like the Securities and Exchange Commission blessing Bernie Madoff’s decades of fraud.
Through a revolving door exchange of favors, pharmaceutical executives even get to monitor themselves. Former CDC head Julie Gerberding led Merck initiatives for years before returning as CDC chief. This self-regulation farce lets pharma repeatedly endanger public health while captured agencies Senators defend the industry trough.
Pfizer spent over $13 million lobbying just in 2022 while leaving bushels for federal campaigns. Is it any wonder Congressional "oversight" offers such soft landings for wayward drug makers?
Supposed impartial arbiters like the FDA also sport glaring conflicts of interest in close ties to those they appraise. Nearly 75% of FDA oversight personnel shuffled straight from Big Pharma or jumped back post "public service" in past decades per Science journal findings.
With regulation diluted, compromised and commercially captured, Pfizer‘s proclaimed "no one is watching" proves no hollow corporate boast.
Pathogen Profiteering Over Public Interest
Pfizer‘s SEC mandated obligation remains increasing shareholder returns, not safeguarding public welfare. So blurring ethical lines presents no obstacle if sufficient profitheckling proxies can be maintained.
With insider allies seeded across oversight authorities and legislative branches, capitalists need not fear the sheriff catching such get rich quick schemes. Cut enough crony checks to captured representatives, et voila – no one is watching comrade.
The Project Veritas footage makes transparent how far major corporations will go to satiate analysts estimates when external controls falter. With compromised regulation greasing skids, the core oversight duty shifts back to "we the people".
Our deafening public health policy silence enables such pharmaceutical overreach threatening local game worlds and meat space alike. But public activism has moved mountains before – perhaps monumental enough to close Pandora’s box on this viral folly before hope itself flees.
More Viral Dangers On Multiple Fronts
Beyond Pfizer’s described “directed evolution”, the COVID-19 pandemic’s roots and ensuing policy responses surface further bioethical issues warranting public debate.
Growing evidence suggests COVID escaped via an accidental lab leak tied to GoF experiments at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Given mainstream media’s past derision of this theory despite compelling circumstantial evidence, their current silence on Pfizer’s described research proves unsurprising.
Relatedly, scientists raise red flags regarding COVID vaccine efficacy claims and the lack of transparency in trial data. Reports indicate compromised regulatory oversight pervaded COVID vaccine approval processes across geographic regions.
In another concerning development implicating monetary influences, the WHO changed definitions around herd immunity and vaccine status, sparking outcry. The potential motives behind such controversial changes deserve airing via public discourse rather than censorship.
Conclusion: Let Public Debate Commence
Like chaotic videogame worlds where developers test abilities before live launch, Pfizer plays with viral god mode cheats absent ethical constraints. Their intentions barely matter relative to the civilizational risks unleashed. With captured regulation asleep and media conscripted, public health policy quietly veers off rails toward undisclosed outcomes.
Exposing these breaches sparks knee-jerk cover-ups, smear campaigns and censorship rather than collective responsibility. Such reactions demonstrate again how truth becomes collateral damage when outsized financial interests feel threatened with transparency.
Via grassroots activism, legislative reforms and ground up debate, citizens can still achieve oversight guardrails sufficient for the task. Pfizer plays deaf to past disaster‘s ethical sirens, lured by potential scoreboard gains into brewing the next unlockable pandemic. But engaged public voices can still restrain such value blindness steaming toward second viral impacts.
Through sustained education and consciousness raising regarding these urgent bioethical issues, positive change remains achievable. But public health prerogatives desperately require rebalancing atop pedestals too long ceded to pharmaceutical shareholders.
The exposed disregard for human welfare and safety makes clear that medical profits require oversight as desperately as medicine itself. Now public debate must commence in earnest on what form of constraint proves necessary and sufficient.