Discover more from The Pulse
New Documents Confirm Pfizer Whistleblower Was Directly Involved in Pfizer's COVID Vaccine Trials
Whistleblower Brook Jackson shared dozens of documents, recordings, pictures and texts with the British Medical Journal (BMJ) that claimed that during Pfizer trials data was falsified, patients were unblinded, and that employees were not adequately trained for vaccine administration.
Jackson spent two weeks in September 2020 as a regional manager overseeing vaccine trials Pfizer contracted Ventavia Research Group to perform. During this time she made her concerns known to her superiors at Ventavia and the FDA, at which point she was fired.
The BMJ published an investigative article featuring Jackson on Nov. 2, 2021.
Soon after the article was published a Ventavia spokesperson, Lauren Foreman, was quoted in MedPage today saying, “no part of her (Jackson) job responsibilities concerned the clinical trials at issue.”
Jackson quickly went public with some partly redacted personal information - her hiring letter that outlines her responsibilities and duties with Ventavia. It clearly states that she was involved in "quality assurance," among other roles during the trial.
She has also released other documents as proof. These include emails, and a copy of a signature sheet and a delegations of duties log from one of the Pfizer trial sites.
With almost 20 years of clinical research experience, Jackson's jobs have been detail oriented and about meticulous collection of information and data. She seems to have utilized these skills to cover her bases in regards to bringing light to the flaws in the Pfizer clinical trials. And even further to prove that Ventavia was out right lying in saying she did not work on the trial.
Jackson has served Ventavia a legal letter demanding a public retraction of the statement Foreman made.
As of Dec. 6, 2021 there has yet to be an official retraction statement made by Ventavia. On the MedPage article they have added a part closer to the end of the article that says they received an email from Jackson.
However this article seems to still downplay the fact that Ventavia lied. If you found out that the source that you were trusting to discredit another person's claims was lying, would you reconsider the trustworthiness of that source?
Consistently Jackson has provided physical evidence to back up her claims with nothing to gain. While Ventavia, who has a lot to lose, is allowed to lie and is still considered the more reliable source.
The BMJ issued a response to the questioning of the validity of original article. It outlines more evidence and brings into question even more issues that may have taken place in the Ventavia Pfizer vaccine trials.
As for Jackson, she has recently shared on twitter that she is working again in the industry she has been for almost two decades. She continues to speak out and share evidence that she accumulated while overseeing Pfizer clinical trials as a regional manager.