Colossal Wrongdoings by Big Pharma – Pfizer and COVID-19 Vaccine – Asrar Qureshi’s Blog Post #1095

Colossal Wrongdoings by Big Pharma – Pfizer and COVID-19 Vaccine – Asrar Qureshi’s Blog Post #1095

Dear Colleagues! This is Asrar Qureshi’s Blog Post #1095 for Pharma Veterans. Pharma Veterans Blogs are published by Asrar Qureshi on its dedicated site https://pharmaveterans.com. Please email to pharmaveterans2017@gmail.com  for publishing your contributions here.

Credit: Charlotte May

Credit: Ketut Subiyanto

Credit: Shvets Production

Preamble

This is the last post this series about Big Pharma Wrongdoings. Not that these are the only cases, but these may be considered major in impact. Big Pharma keep doing less than desirable things and mostly get away with it also. Same thing is true in Pakistan where relations are also important along with the size to get away with wrongdoings. As I said in the beginning, the business is business and commercial considerations shall always take precedence over all other things.

The Race for a Vaccine: Pfizer’s Global Sprint

As the world grappled with the chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic, pharmaceutical companies emerged as saviors, developing life-saving vaccines at record speed. Pfizer, in partnership with BioNTech, was at the forefront, delivering one of the earliest and most effective mRNA vaccines. While this scientific breakthrough earned well-deserved praise, it also raised pressing ethical, legal, and economic questions—many of which remain unanswered. In particular, Pfizer’s aggressive approach to vaccine contracts with sovereign nations has triggered global scrutiny, exposing the darker side of pandemic profiteering.

Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine, BNT162b2, was authorized for emergency use in December 2020. It marked a watershed moment in global health, offering hope against a virus that had already claimed millions of lives. With demand soaring and supply scarce, governments scrambled to secure doses. Pfizer capitalized on this desperation by engaging in secretive, tightly controlled negotiations with countries, often enforcing terms that sparked controversy.

While some may argue that aggressive contract enforcement is simply the cost of doing business in an emergency, critics contend that Pfizer leveraged the crisis to prioritize profits, limit liability, and assert extraordinary control over sovereign decisions.

Opaque Negotiations and Confidentiality Clauses

One of the earliest red flags came from the lack of transparency in Pfizer’s vaccine agreements. Unlike typical public health contracts—often subject to public or parliamentary oversight—Pfizer insisted on strict confidentiality. Most countries were not allowed to disclose pricing, terms, delivery schedules, or liability clauses. Where leaks occurred, the revelations were alarming.

In a report by Public Citizen, the nonprofit watchdog organization detailed Pfizer’s boilerplate contracts with multiple countries, highlighting common patterns:

• Prohibition of public disclosure of terms without Pfizer’s consent.

• Indemnification clauses shielding Pfizer from liability for adverse effects.

• Arbitration in foreign courts, not domestic legal systems.

• Use of sovereign assets, like military bases or embassies, as collateral in some cases.

Such conditions, typically unprecedented in vaccine contracts, indicated a stark power imbalance—fueled by the urgent need for vaccines and the limited number of viable suppliers in the early months of 2021.

Allegations in Latin America: “Held to Ransom”?

Argentina and Brazil became focal points in 2021 when media reports and government officials accused Pfizer of pushing “abusive” terms during negotiations.

In Argentina, after months of back-and-forth, Pfizer reportedly demanded indemnity not only for its own negligence but also for its subcontractors and suppliers. When the country pushed back, negotiations stalled. Argentine officials claimed Pfizer even demanded changes to national legislation to accommodate the contract—a move perceived as an affront to national sovereignty.

In Brazil, similar claims surfaced. A leaked contract suggested Pfizer sought immunity from civil claims related to its vaccine and demanded that disputes be resolved in international arbitration forums. Brazil’s health ministry initially rejected the terms as “unreasonable” and “abusive.”

Though both countries eventually struck deals, these early confrontations spotlighted the extreme bargaining power Pfizer wielded during the height of the pandemic.

The European Parliament vs. Pfizer CEO

Perhaps the most high-profile post-crisis controversy involves Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla and the European Union. In April 2021, the EU signed a massive vaccine contract for up to 1.8 billion additional doses. This deal followed a series of personal text messages exchanged between Bourla and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen—communications that were never made public.

The lack of transparency raised eyebrows. The European Parliament requested access to the texts, but the Commission claimed it could not locate them. This triggered a formal investigation by the EU Ombudsman, who concluded that the Commission failed to properly archive the exchanges and thus breached transparency obligations.

In October 2022, Bourla was invited to testify before the European Parliament’s COVID-19 Committee. He declined. His absence only deepened suspicions and fueled criticism over Pfizer’s dealings with the EU’s highest officials.

Profit Margins and Global Equity

While Pfizer's vaccine brought in over $37 billion in revenue in 2021 alone, questions lingered over global equity. Rich countries hoarded supplies, locking in doses for years, while many low- and middle-income nations struggled to vaccinate even frontline workers. Despite efforts like COVAX (a global initiative for equitable vaccine access), Pfizer prioritized high-paying clients, shipping relatively fewer doses to the Global South in the early critical months.

The optics were damning: a pharmaceutical titan amassing record profits while billions of people remained vulnerable.

Defenders of Pfizer: The Business Argument

To be fair, Pfizer did shoulder significant risks in developing the vaccine. Unlike Moderna and AstraZeneca, Pfizer opted not to take federal funding through Operation Warp Speed, asserting that this allowed them to work more independently. The company also bore the costs of clinical trials and scaled up manufacturing capacity at great speed.

Supporters argue that Pfizer’s contractual demands were reasonable given the high liability risks of a novel vaccine rolled out at unprecedented speed. Vaccine-induced adverse events, while rare, could invite billion-dollar lawsuits—a burden few companies would assume without protections.

Furthermore, in a pandemic context, speed and efficiency often require bypassing bureaucratic red tape. Pfizer’s aggressive contract tactics, some say, were necessary to meet the urgency of the crisis.

The Accountability Gap

Still, such arguments do little to assuage concerns about ethics and accountability. A pandemic—by definition—calls for collective action, shared risk, and compassion. When private profit overshadows public interest, the consequences are severe: trust erodes, inequalities deepen, and global cooperation fractures.

Pfizer’s vaccine, a scientific triumph, was arguably tainted by the company’s behind-the-scenes maneuvers. By insisting on sweeping indemnity, limiting public scrutiny, and enforcing asymmetric contract terms, Pfizer sent a troubling message: in times of crisis, commercial interests still come first.

Lessons for the Future

The COVID-19 crisis has underscored the need for reform in global pharmaceutical governance. Some possible recommendations include:

• Standardized vaccine contract templates for use in emergencies.

• International oversight bodies to review and approve contract terms.

• Public transparency obligations for pandemic-related negotiations.

• Greater support for regional vaccine manufacturing in low-income countries.

The goal should be to ensure that life-saving medicines remain a public good—accessible, affordable, and fairly governed—even when developed by private companies.

Sum Up

The Pfizer vaccine will go down in history as a key weapon in the fight against COVID-19. But the way it was commercialized—and the power plays behind its global distribution—also offers a cautionary tale. When the next health emergency arises, the world must do better to balance urgency with ethics, innovation with accountability, and science with stewardship.

Concluded.

Disclaimers: Pictures in these blogs are taken from free resources at Pexels, Pixabay, Unsplash, and Google. Credit is given where available. If a copyright claim is lodged, we shall remove the picture with appropriate regrets.

For most blogs, I research from several sources which are open to public. Their links are mentioned under references. There is no intent to infringe upon anyone’s copyrights. If, however, it happens unintentionally, I offer my sincere regrets.