European Medicines Agency

From Wikispooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Group.png European Medicines Agency  
(RegulatorTwitter WebsiteRdf-entity.pngRdf-icon.png
European Medicines Agency.svg
Parent organizationEuropean Union
HeadquartersAmsterdam, The Netherlands
Issued guidance that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine were only to be used in clinical trials or emergency use programs.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is an agency of the European Union in charge of the evaluation and supervision of medicinal products. It is the European Union’s equivalent to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States.

Prior to 2004, it was known as the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products or European Medicines Evaluation Agency.


On 1 April 2020, the EMA issued guidance that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are only to be used in clinical trials or emergency use programs.[1] On 29 May 2020, the EMA stated that patients already taking chloroquine for unrelated conditions, should continue to do so, always under the supervision of their doctor.[2]

On 9 December 2020, the EMA was hit with a cyberattack that resulted in the capturing of "[m]ore than 40 megabytes of classified information from the agency’s review" of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.[3][4] These materials were subsequently published to the dark web and sent directly to a number of journalists and academics.


Related Quotation

Renate Holzeisen“[...] the so-called COVID-19 vaccines, according to official approval documents of the EMA and European Commission (see, among others, on the website of medicinal human register), were not developed and approved for the prevention of infection with the virus SARS-COV-2, but are intended to act solely as prevention of a more severe course of the disease COVID-19 and were also conditionally approved solely for this purpose. It is therefore clear from the official approval documents that these substances cannot break the chain of infection, because the persons treated with them can become infected and thus infectious. Furthermore, practice proves that already fully "vaccinated" persons become infected with the virus and even have an equally high viral load as "unvaccinated" persons (see most recently CDC, among others). Thus it is clear that any COVID-19 "vaccination compulsion" - apart from the fundamental right and unconstitutionality - also factually lacks any justification. All pressure, even moral pressure (alleged act of solidarity with the next person) proves to be relevant in terms of criminal and liability law, if only on the basis of the official admission documents! Especially as a lawyer advising on corporate law, I strongly recommend every employer to refrain from a COVID-19 vaccination pressure/vaccination compulsion, because most of them are obviously not even aware of the far-reaching legal consequences associated with it.”Renate HolzeisenAugust 2021


57px-Notepad icon.png This is a page stub. Please add to it.