Our readers write: September 9, 2021 issue

Thanks for the idea

We were really pleased with Clarence Schmidt’s article, “Figs Are Not What You Think.” (August 26) We learned a lot about fig flowers, fruits, and nuts.

It was informative and entertaining to include history, science / vegetables, common sense and humor. We were so inspired that we bought some figs. Thank you.

Mimi and Arthur Pearl
Rancho Bernardo

The FDA should have had additional resources before the vaccine could be approved

In the August 26 issue of The Watchtower, “Great Time to Pay for the Treatment of Unemployed Taxes,” Thomas Elias points out the ways in which vaccination-loving individuals can be disciplined. I will leave out the obvious moral issues associated with such an American attitude, and also, Mr. Elias has no medical evidence.

Instead, I would like to focus on a recent event that raises questions in the minds of rational individuals, namely, the FDA’s recent approval of the Pfizer vaccine without input from the advisory committee. The FDA has sent a letter of approval to Pfizer stating, “We did not send your application to the Advisory Committee because of our review of the information provided in your BLA. [Biological License Application] He did not raise any concerns or controversies that might benefit from the advisory committee discussion.

In the FDA website itself, “Advisory Committees – Critical to the FDA Product Review Process,” these advisory committee meetings can be a very important source of information for patients, health care providers and other interested people. In the product. ”

So the FDA makes us believe that there is nothing controversial about this vaccine, and despite their own policies, they have not been able to open Pfizer data for external review and discussion. Reasonable people should be concerned when the FDA looks like this.

Joe Fior, MD
Rancho Bernardo

Leave a Comment