Covid-19 vaccine manufacturer Pfizer brought “discredit upon” and “reduced confidence” in the pharmaceutical industry, the UK’s pharmaceutical watchdog has ruled.
The ruling was the outcome of a case which concerned a complaint received in February 2023 about a tweet posted to X by a US employee of Pfizer, and retweeted by senior Pfizer employees.
The social media post in question was posted to X, formerly Twitter, by the medical director of Pfizer UK, Dr Berkerly Phillps, who shared a post from a US employee of Pfizer.
The tweet in question claimed: “Our vaccine candidate is 95 per cent effective in preventing Covid-19, and 94 per cent effective in people over 65 years old.”
It added: “We will file all of our data with health authorities within days. Thank you to every volunteer in our trial, and to all who are tirelessly fighting this pandemic.”
The same message was posted by four other employees of Pfizer, including one colleague described as “senior.”
The recent ruling from UK watchdog and self-regulatory body, the Prescription Medicines Code Of Practice Authority (PMCPA), explains that a complainant raised a concern about the pharmaceutical company’s “misuse of social media to misleadingly and illegally promote their Covid vaccine.”
It was also claimed that “misbehaviour” on social media was “even more widespread” than had been thought, and “extended right to the top of [Pfizer’s] UK operation.”
The watchdog found that Pfizer breached the 2019 regulatory code a total of five times. In its ruling, it accused Pfizer of “bringing discredit upon, and reducing confidence in, the pharmaceutical industry.”
A code of practice panel, convened by the PMCPA, found that Pfizer had promoted an “unlicensed medicine,” and was also guilty of “making a misleading claim.” In addition, the panel ruled that Pfizer had made claims that “did not reflect the available evidence regarding possible adverse reactions” and failing to maintain high standards.
The recent ruling from the PMCPA said the message posted to X contained “limited” information about the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine’s efficacy, and no safety information or reference to adverse events.
It ruled that the social media post at the centre of the case led to an “unlicensed medicine being proactively disseminated on Twitter to health professions and members of the public in the UK”.
A spokesperson for Pfizer UK said that the company was “deeply sorry” and said it “fully recognises and accepts the issues highlighted by this PMCPA ruling.”
The statement read: “Pfizer UK has a comprehensive policy on personal use of social media in relation to Pfizer’s business which prohibits colleagues from interacting with any social media related to Pfizer’s medicines and vaccines – backed by staff briefings and training.
“The personal use of social media by UK pharmaceutical industry employees in relation to company business is a challenging area for pharmaceutical companies, in which we continue to take all of the appropriate steps that are reasonably expected of a pharmaceutical company.”
In remarks reported by The UK’s Daily Telegraph newspaper, the UK country medical director for Pfizer said that the social media post was “accidental and unintentional” adding: “That said, we immediately accepted the case ruling and do everything we can to ensure that our employees adhere to our strict social media policy and the industry Code of Practice when using their personal social media.”
Pfizer has previously found itself embroiled in trouble for promoting its Covid vaccine. In 2022, Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla was warned by the same UK regulator for making “misleading” statements about children’s vaccines.
Bourla, during a BBC interview, had asserted that “there is no doubt in my mind that the benefits, completely, are in favour” of vaccinating children aged five to 11 against Covid-19. Shortly after the comments were publicised, the PMCPA received a complaint from parent campaign group UsForThem, who claimed that the comments from the Pfizer CEO were “extremely promotional in nature” and “disgracefully misleading.”
The PMCPA found that Pfizer had breached the code in a number of ways, including making unsubstantiated claims, misleading the public, and failing to present information in a balanced and factual way.
Pfizer went on to appeal the ruling, and while some claims were upheld, including that Pfizer had misled the public, some serious findings were overturned – including the serious claim that Pfizer had brought discredit on the pharmaceutical industry.
Pfizer, which announced a $1.26bn expansion in Ireland in 2022 – its largest Irish investment on record – was forced to cut 100 jobs at its plant in Newbridge, Co Kildare, last November, in what was described as part of its response to a collapse in sales of its Paclovid Covid antiviral medicine and Covid vaccine.
The announcement came less than a year after the pharmaceutical company announced an investment of €1 billion into its 90-acre manufacturing site located in Clondalkin, Dublin.
Leader of Pfizer’s Grange Castle Site in Dublin, Marius McNicholas, wrote on LinkedIn at the time, that the news marked “an historic day in Pfizer Grange Castle” as “Pfizer’s biggest expansion to date in Ireland” as reported by BioProcess international at the time.
It was reported that the expansion would double the capacity of the site, as well as create up to 500 roles – bringing the number of Pfizer staff in Ireland to over 5,000.
Pfizer is facing multiple lawsuits globally over its Covid-19 vaccine, including in Texas, where the State’s Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the company in November for “unlawfully misrepresenting the effectiveness” of its Covid-19 vaccine and “attempting to censor public discussion of the product.”
Paxton claimed that Pfizer engaged in “false, deceptive, and misleading acts and practices by making unsupported claims regarding the company’s COVID-19 vaccine in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.”
The lawsuit alleges that Pfizer “fostered a misleading impression that vaccine protection was durable and withheld from the public information that undermined its claims about the duration of protection.”
It also claims: “And, despite the fact that its clinical trial failed to measure whether the vaccine protects against transmission, Pfizer embarked on a campaign to intimidate the public into getting the vaccine as a necessary measure to protect their loved ones.”
Meanwhile, in Germany, BioNTech is facing its first German lawsuit in relation to alleged side effects of its Covid-19 vaccine, developed in partnership with Pfizer and authorised for emergency use in 158 countries. The lawsuit was filed against the company, which specialises in mRNA-based vaccines, last June.