- Jan 23, 2021
- 6,300
- 7,110
- 1,938
It has begun. I really thought we'd lead the charge here. It will be interesting to how this is defended on this board.
France's 'Article Pfizer': A Controversial Shift in Health Policy and Free Speech
Here are some snippets.
In an unprecedented move that has sparked widespread debate across France and beyond, the French parliament has recently passed a law that introduces severe penalties for those opposing mRNA LNP injections or other treatments recommended by the state based on current medical knowledge. As of today, criticism of such therapeutic treatments, when deemed obligatory or recommended by the state, could result in up to three years of imprisonment or a fine of 45,000 euros. This bold legislative step, quickly dubbed 'Article Pfizer' by critics, represents a significant shift in the balance between public health policy and individual freedom of expression.
The Implications of 'Article Pfizer'
Labelled 'Article Pfizer', the law is seen as emblematic of a broader trend towards increasing state control over public health narratives and personal health choices. The nickname itself, referencing one of the major pharmaceutical companies behind the development of mRNA vaccine technology, hints at the perceived alignment between government policy and the interests of big pharma—raising questions about the influence of pharmaceutical companies on health policy.
Furthermore, the timing and urgency of the law's enactment, with warnings of an imminent next pandemic and the positioning of mRNA technology as the sole solution, add layers of complexity to the debate. Supporters argue that in the face of unprecedented global health threats, such measures are necessary to ensure public safety and prevent the spread of misinformation that could undermine vaccination efforts.
This is the important part -
As France steps into uncharted territory with the enactment of this law, the international community watches closely. The implications of such a legal framework extend beyond the borders of France, potentially setting a precedent for how governments around the world might seek to regulate public discourse on health and medical treatments in the future.
Biden be like
France's 'Article Pfizer': A Controversial Shift in Health Policy and Free Speech
Here are some snippets.
In an unprecedented move that has sparked widespread debate across France and beyond, the French parliament has recently passed a law that introduces severe penalties for those opposing mRNA LNP injections or other treatments recommended by the state based on current medical knowledge. As of today, criticism of such therapeutic treatments, when deemed obligatory or recommended by the state, could result in up to three years of imprisonment or a fine of 45,000 euros. This bold legislative step, quickly dubbed 'Article Pfizer' by critics, represents a significant shift in the balance between public health policy and individual freedom of expression.
The Implications of 'Article Pfizer'
Labelled 'Article Pfizer', the law is seen as emblematic of a broader trend towards increasing state control over public health narratives and personal health choices. The nickname itself, referencing one of the major pharmaceutical companies behind the development of mRNA vaccine technology, hints at the perceived alignment between government policy and the interests of big pharma—raising questions about the influence of pharmaceutical companies on health policy.
Furthermore, the timing and urgency of the law's enactment, with warnings of an imminent next pandemic and the positioning of mRNA technology as the sole solution, add layers of complexity to the debate. Supporters argue that in the face of unprecedented global health threats, such measures are necessary to ensure public safety and prevent the spread of misinformation that could undermine vaccination efforts.
This is the important part -
As France steps into uncharted territory with the enactment of this law, the international community watches closely. The implications of such a legal framework extend beyond the borders of France, potentially setting a precedent for how governments around the world might seek to regulate public discourse on health and medical treatments in the future.
Biden be like
Last edited:
