A new Pfizer whistleblower has come forward with copies of an email chain involving two high level company executives confirming that cell lines that derive from an aborted fetus have been used in the company’s COVID-19 vaccine testing program.
In an Oct. 6 piece published by Project Veritas, Melissa Strickler, a Quality Auditor who worked in Pfizer’s McPherson, Kansas plant, leaked emails from Vanessa Gelman, Senior Director of Worldwide Research, Development, and Medical Communication and Philip Dormitzer, Vice President and Chief Scientific Officer of Viral Vaccines showing the officers confirming human embryonic kidney cells are used in the company’s testing program.
- Trio of Pfizer Scientists Expose Corporate Culture, Virtues of Natural Immunity
- HHS Whistleblower Alleges COVID Vaccine Side Effects Common, Underreported
- On Hidden Camera, FDA Employee Says Blow Darts Should Be Used to Force Vaccinate Blacks, Low IQ Whites
- Undercover Video Shows J&J Scientist Calling for ‘Second Grade Citizens’ Through Vaccine Passports
Strickler claims to have accidentally discovered the emails in an internal Pfizer database.
Fetal tissue confirmed in laboratory testing
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Check your email to complete sign up
In an email dated February 4, 2021, Gelman was asked by Advait Badkar, who is listed as a “Senior Director” on his LinkedIn profile, “This question came in as an enquiry to our Med Info group…’Did Pfizer make use of a cell line from an aborted foetus when carrying out any confirmatory tests for this vaccine?’”
Badkar added, “This is AFTER we had already confirmed with the customer that no cell lines from an aborted foetus were used in the manufacturing process of the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2.”
Gelman responded, “We have been trying as much as possible not to mention the fetal cell lines,” providing an additional paragraph that was half in red, and half in yellow. The piece in yellow, Gelman said, “We have tried really hard not to share unless it’s strictly necessary and mission critical.”
The red portion was consistent with Badkar’s original email, “Human fetal derived cell lines are not used to produce our investigational vaccine, which consists of synthetic and enzymatically produced components.”
But the yellow portion contained the admission, “One or more cell lines with an origin that can be traced back to human fetal tissue has been used in laboratory tests associated with the vaccine program.”
Later in the email chain, a second Pfizer executive, Philip Dormitzer, Vice President and Chief Scientific Officer of Viral Vaccines, confirmed, “HEK293T [Human Embryonic Kidney] cells, used for the IVE assay, are ultimately derived from an aborted fetus.”
“On the other had, the Vatican doctrinal committee has confirmed that they consider it acceptable for Pro-Life believers to be immunized.”
Dormitzer added, “Pfizer’s official statement couches the answer well and is what should be provided in response to an outside inquiry.”
The next day on Feb. 5, Gelman followed up in the chain, wanting to confirm with Badkar and several other staffers where the request originated in order to insure it was not from a “member of the public,” because Gelman “just want[ed] to make sure we are responding to a legitimate request that may ignite a FB campaign on this that we may ultimately need to manage.”
On Feb. 9, Gelman reiterated to the now-dozen Pfizer employees who have been brought into the email chain that the information on aborted babies being used in vaccine testing was extremely sensitive to Pfizer’s public relations, “From the perspective of corporate affairs, we want to avoid having the information on the fetal cells floating out there.”
“In this heated environment of heightened scrutiny on every detail on our vaccine, we would like to avoid the opportunity of creating an issue – we believe that the risk of communicating this right now outweighs any potential benefit we could see, particularly with members of the general public who may take this information and use it in ways we may not want it out there.”
“We have not received any questions from policy makers or media on this issue in the last few weeks, so we want to avoid raising this, if possible.”
In a second case provided by the whistleblower, she filmed an instance where windows in “manufacturing rooms” and “group lead offices” inside the Kansas plant had been blacked out, allegedly in advance of a visit by the Food and Drug Administration.
“I could not believe that they were blacking out windows down in our manufacturing rooms,” said Strickler.
“They tell us, you know, that you should make sure you can be seen at all times for integrity purposes…and so when I saw they were blacking out windows in group lead offices and unoccupied fill rooms, I thought it was odd.”
Strickler says she raised the issue with a member of Pfizer’s Aseptic Quality department and was told, “Well, the FDA is coming.”
The light of conscience
Project Veritas frontman James O’Keefe asked Strickler why she stepped forward, “I felt it was the right thing to do. I feel like I had no one else to turn to within my own company who would be honest with me.”
“What was troubling to me was they were wanting to keep it under wraps. They didn’t really want the information out there that they were using the HEK [Human Embryonic Kidney] cells to do the study.”
When asked why she thought Pfizer was trying to cover up the use of fetal tissue in experiments, Strickler said she is of the opinion that it was all about not letting religious reasons be used for mandatory vaccination exemptions, “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…And they’re denying our religious exemptions at Pfizer.”
She continued, “It shouldn’t be political, but they’re making it political. The media and the government is 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.”
O’Keefe asked the woman whether she was afraid of retaliation for stepping forward. In response, she said what she was most concerned about was the coming wave of mandatory injections for children, “A little bit. I have faith that I will be protected or whatever the outcome is is what it’s supposed to be. I’m at peace with it. I’m a little anxious on what they’ll do or what they’ll say, but it needs to be seen by the people because they’re trying to get this to kids.”
“And if they’re being this deceptive about it, I don’t feel comfortable being silent while they’re trying to give it to babies who can’t talk.”
In closing, Strickler had a message for her soon-to-be former employer, “You guys are very adamant about integrity and making sure that things are done right and that things are always double checked. But I’m just one person, one face of many of your employees who are willing to fight this and reveal to the world what’s going on.”
“And all we want is for you to be transparent and honest with us and do the right thing.”