Dernière mise à jour : 17 août 2021
On the subject of vaccination, the public authorities - be they political or media influence - sing the same tune, to the point of tipping over into ideological propaganda. The newspaper Le Temps has not hesitated to take a clear side in its headline, leaving aside its role as an informant and becoming an influencer. The biggest newspaper editors in the country, as well as the national television channel are trying to answer the questions of the skeptics by interviewing the same "experts" since the beginning of the crisis. In the meantime, pharmaceutical companies are inflating the prices of their vaccines and leaks of contracts signed between the different countries and these entities give, once again, support to those who are still labeled as conspiracists.
"Buyer acknowledges that the vaccine and materials relating to the vaccine, and its components and constituent materials, are under rapid development due to the emergency circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and will continue to be studied after the vaccine is provided to Buyer under this Agreement. Buyer further acknowledges that the efficacy and long-term effects of the vaccine are not yet known and that there may be adverse effects of the vaccine that are not currently known."
This is an excerpt from the contract signed between Pfizer and Brazil (the Buyer), which was leaked on the internet. This clause also appears in the documents signed with Albania, as well as with the European Commission, which L'Impertinent has obtained. It reduces Pfizer's legal responsibility in case of side effects or even death, since the buyers acknowledge that they accept to buy a product whose safety is not assured by the seller. In addition, the signatory nations formally commit to take charge of the defense costs of the pharmaceutical company in case of a complaint. After the leak of these documents on Twitter, through a whistleblower specializing in web security named Ehden Biber, the social network suspended its account. These contracts have a confidentiality clause valid for ten years.
The question of the responsibility of Pharma in case of a glitch was raised earlier this year. Le Monde's Décodeurs stated, based on information provided by the European Commission: "It recalls that the contracts are concluded in accordance with EU rules, which "require that the responsibility always lies with the company": if a product is defective, it is the laboratory that is responsible. The french TV channel LCI, among others, had published an article reaching the same conclusion.
However, here is what we read in the contract signed between Pfizer and the EU, under the indemnification clause: "The Commission, on behalf of the participating Member States, declares that the use of the vaccines produced under this JPA will be carried out under epidemic conditions requiring such use and that the administration of the vaccines will therefore be carried out under the sole responsibility of the participating Member States. Accordingly, each Participating Contractor, licensor, and sublicensee, and the managing officers, employees, and other agents and representatives of each of them (collectively, the "Indemnified Persons") shall be indemnified against all liabilities incurred, settlements pursuant to Section I.12.6, and reasonable out-of-pocket direct legal expenses incurred in defending third party claims (including reasonable attorneys' fees and other expenses) relating to injuries, damages, and losses as defined in Section I.12.2."
How much does it cost?
These contracts cannot be broken, even if an effective treatment is discovered. This may explain why countries are not rushing to approve ivermectin, for example. It could also explain why it is difficult for governments to reverse course, given the money paid to pharmaceutical companies.
The European Union paid between 13.50 euros (for 1-100 million doses) and 17.50 euros (for 100-200 million doses) for Pfizer vaccine. Moderna charged 19.05 euros per dose. The EU's bill with Astrazeneca is 870 million euros, of which 336 million paid by the Commission and 534 million paid by the member states, the various contracts state.
Time for debunking
While most of the decisions taken to counteract this pandemic have been made in the name of the precautionary principle, this principle does not seem to apply to vaccination. For our authorities, it seems logical to vaccinate healthy young people with a product whose danger is unknown (according to its manufacturers), in order to save elderly people who have exceeded their life expectancy.
Since the media are now part of the vaccination campaign in Switzerland, official experts are regularly invited to calm the concerns of skeptics. Their arguments, presented to Aurélie Toninato for La Tribune de Genève, were submitted to a Swiss research doctor who has published in the most prestigious scientific journals, in collaboration with the Geneva anthropologist Jean-Dominique Michel, in order to debunk the debunkers.
(The specialist in question had a run-in with his cantonal doctor and did not want his name published for fear of having his license revoked)
1. "Developing a vaccine in such a short period of time: the tests must have been botched."
Alix Miauton, clinical director of tropical medicine, travel and vaccinations at Unisanté (the University Center for General Medicine and Public Health in Lausanne), explains that the process of developing a vaccine is "extremely well defined and regulated. It is true that vaccine development usually takes longer, but the financial and human resources allocated have been enormous and unprecedented." In addition to this scientific process, there is the independent control of each country: in Switzerland it is Swissmedic that decides whether or not to authorize a vaccine. For the time being, Swissmedic has refused to approve Astra Zeneca's serum as a precautionary measure.
Answer: Yes, the vaccine has been developed and put on the market much more quickly than usual and very short studies cannot answer either the efficacy in a few months or the risks of side effects in a few months. The so-called "conditional" approval received is proof of this.
Explanation: The enormous "financial and human resources allocated" cannot replace the time needed to observe the side effects, nor the effectiveness of a vaccine.
Proof of this is that after barely six months, the effectiveness of the Pfizer vaccine has drastically decreased in all countries with high vaccination rates (Israel, Malta, Iceland, England, etc.).
It should also be noted that very old people, pregnant women, children, people with serious diseases, form groups that were ALL excluded from the studies. The published results, as far as we can trust them, only apply to the specific groups studied.
This long list of exclusions can be found HERE. So in the words of the Pfizer Risk Management Plan itself, regarding long-term safety: "there are no known risks with a potentially late onset... active surveillance studies are planned to follow long-term safety in people who received the vaccine for two years after the second dose."
2. "We only have one year of hindsight. How can we say that the vaccine does not have deleterious effects in the long term?"
"The real question is rather: in the field of vaccination, how much hindsight do we need to establish that a vaccine is safe?" answers Alessandro Diana, infectiologist at the Grangettes clinic and expert for the Infovac platform. We don't have years of hindsight, but we do have one year and hundreds of millions of people vaccinated. We have been able to show that the side effects are benign in the vast majority of cases." These most common effects - fever, fatigue, among others - are found with other vaccines, notes Giuseppe Pantaleo, director of the immunology and allergy department at CHUV. "It's a reaction associated with the stimulation of the immune system. With the Covid vaccine, the reaction is stronger because the strength of the stimulation is stronger." What about the risk of developing conditions over the long term? For Alessandro Diana, the most likely risk would be to develop an autoimmune disease, the result of a malfunctioning immune system. "The induced antibodies could interact with other components of our body. This has already been seen in the development of vaccines against meningitis. But these reactions occur within four to six weeks, when the immune system is most activated. The biological plausibility of developing an autoimmune disease over the long term is extremely low."
Answer: Thousands of publications demonstrate that one must be very humble in biology and medicine. The risk of long-term side effects is well described in the literature. No one can take responsibility for guaranteeing their absence, unless they are culpably negligent.
Explanation: Swissmedic has approved some vaccines but mentions in the Moderna approval, for example, reservations whilst not telling the public about autoimmune risks by specifying "long pre-symptomatic phase".
(Source: Swissmedic letter of January 12, 2021, decision on MA approval for Moderna vaccine).
The PFIZER, PUBLIC SUMMARY OF THE RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN COMIRNATY (COVID-19 mRNA VACCINE), mentions risks of aggravated illness.
Extract from Pfizer document of 2.9.2021
Available here: https://compendium.ch/news/22633
Table 3. Potential significant risk: vaccine-associated amplified disease (VAED), including vaccine-associated amplified respiratory disease (VAERD)
VAED is considered a potential risk because it has not been observed in human studies with this or other Covid-19 vaccines under investigation. It has also not been observed in vaccine studies in animal models of SARS-CoV-2.
However, in some vaccine studies in animal models as well as in some laboratory studies in animal cells infected with two other related coronaviruses (SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV), abnormalities in immune responses or cellular responses indicative of VAED have been observed. For this reason, VAED is considered a potential risk. In the past, there have been other examples of particular respiratory viruses where VAED has been observed. For example, some children who received an inactivated vaccine against respiratory syncytial virus (another type of virus) showed signs of more severe illness when they were subsequently infected with respiratory syncytial virus.
VAED is thought to be due to several mechanisms: the immune response is not fully protective and actually causes an inflammatory reaction in the body due to the type of immune response with specific types of T cells, or the body does not produce enough strong antibodies to prevent infection of cells by SARS-CoV-2 or produces weak antibodies that actually bind to the virus and help it enter cells more easily, thus worsening signs of the disease.
Reported side effects:
Switzerland, in 7 months: 2.19x more adverse events for Covid vaccines than for all other vaccines combined from 2011 to 2019.
3. "The vaccine can trigger a severe allergic reaction"
The infectious disease specialist agrees, "Yes, the risk exists, just as it does when you take aspirin. For Covid, the figures show that one case in a million leads to such an anaphylactic shock - I am not aware of any case in Geneva - probably due to the component of the oily drop that encapsulates the vaccine. This component is present elsewhere, in certain contrast products for example. So this risk is not inherent to the Covid vaccine. And when such a shock occurs, we know how to treat it. One case in a million causes a severe allergy, and one Covid patient in 100 from the age of 50 has to be hospitalized, 10 to 20 in 100 from the age of 70. It makes you think." Alix Miauton confirms that the number of severe allergic reactions is "comparable to that of other vaccines, such as tetanus."
Answer: Serious complications and deaths not only from severe allergies but also from other complications exist and are published, but the risks must be well explained in order to obtain informed consent.
Explanation: (COVID-19 Anaphylaxis and Vaccine-Associated Allergic Reactions: Consensus Statements of the KAAACI Task Force on Urticaria, Angioedema, and Anaphylaxis): "Contraindications to the administration of COVID-19 vaccines include a history of severe allergic reactions to the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine or proven hypersensitivity to a component of the vaccine, such as PEG or polysorbate 80.
Moreover, there is by far more than just allergic reactions, which can range from simple local redness to death from anaphylactic shock.
This English website reports on July 31, 2021:
Pfizer vaccinated: 20.4 millions, AstraZeneca: 24.7m, Moderna: 1.3m i.e. 46.4 million vaccinated. This same site reports 331,240 adverse reactions, including 5,040 for Pfizer) + 224,252 for AZ + 10,990 for Moderna) + 958 for others. That is to say 1 person out of 140 will have a health problem worthy of being declared, without counting the long-term problems.
With 1517 deaths. Of which 466 for Pfizer, 1018 for AZ, 8 for Moderna and 25 for others.
While these numbers may seem paltry, especially when compared to the mass of people vaccinated, it is worth remembering that flu vaccination campaigns have been stopped after a few dozen deaths were reported. The mortality caused by a vaccine or a drug poses an ethical problem that excludes comparing the deaths produced and the deaths avoided: each person who died because of a vaccine was killed (he or she would not have died without having taken the product), unlike the victims of diseases or accidents, to which no one consents.
4. "The vaccine may cause infertility"
This fear is far from far-fetched, notes Alessandro Diana. "At the very beginning of vaccination, the question did indeed arise. The Spike protein, present on the envelope of SARS-CoV-2, resembles a protein present on the placenta and it was feared that the antibodies induced by the vaccine would interact with it. But today, we are reassured. Those who had Covid did not become infertile and data on vaccinated women did not show that they had more trouble getting pregnant or had more miscarriages than a non-vaccinated woman." This is also what Claire-Anne Siegrist, head of the Vaccinology Center of the University Hospitals of Geneva (HUG), recently stated in our columns. On the male side, Alix Miauton adds that a study has analyzed sperm before and after vaccination and that there is no sign of a decrease in its quality.
Answer: Nobody knows at this time the impact of these ovarian and testicular localizations of the Spike protein. An inflammatory effect on the gonads with a future decrease in reproductive capacity cannot be excluded.
Explanation: The word contraception is mentioned 36 times in the Pfizer protocol. Such insistence on the total absence of risks is strange.
- spleen 23.4
- ovaries 12.3
- small intestine 1.47
- mesenteric lymph node 1.37
5. "Messenger RNA vaccines will change my genetic code"
The head of the clinic first recalls that the first studies of the so-called mRNA technology date back more than ten years, "so we have some hindsight thanks to patients who have already received them for other treatments." And to detail how it works: mRNA is a kind of "blueprint" that each cell can read to produce proteins. Specific mRNA is encapsulated in a drop of oil. This molecule will penetrate the cytoplasm of the cells and deliver instructions for producing a protein, Spike, the same one found on the surface of SARS-CoV-2. The presence of this protein will cause our immune system to react and make antibodies. "This mRNA molecule degrades two days after the injection. It disappears from the body and cannot multiply." Giuseppe Pantaleo adds that in no case does it penetrate the nucleus of the cell, "it is not DNA and it is impossible that it modifies our genetic code".
Answer: More and more studies are being published showing that RNA can be transcribed into DNA and therefore can theoretically be integrated into our genetic code. It is enough to read the publications.
Explanation: It seems true today that messenger RNA does not modify DNA.
However an enzyme, the reverse transcriptase (RT) is able to transform RNA into DNA. It has been said that only certain viruses have this enzyme (Evolutionary nature of human reverse transcriptase and virus-related DNA synthesized in vitro by human leukemia cells). In recent weeks, and thanks to the fact that the coronavirus affair has "boosted" research, this paradigm has been proven wrong. Researchers, Gurushankar Chandramouly and Richard Pomerantz, published on 11.6.2021 in Science Advances, the discovery in humans of the theta polymerase coded by the POLQ gene, which is in fact a reverse transcriptase, whose role is to translate RNA into DNA to insert it into the genome: a first that shows how far we are still from understanding Nature. (A discovery identifies a highly efficient human reverse transcriptase capable of writing RNA sequences into DNA). (Reverse transcribed SARS-CoV-2 RNA can integrate into the genome of cultured human cells and be expressed in patient-derived tissue).
6. "The vaccine is said to be only 60% effective against the Delta variant"
"This figure was mentioned a few weeks ago in Israel," reports Alix Miauton. But since then, a large British study, shows that with two doses, mRNA vaccines are 88% effective against Delta." Alessandro Diana reminds us that "the purpose of a vaccine is not to avoid infection but to avoid complications of the disease. Vaccines fulfill this mission."
Answer: The decline in efficacy over time is proven, verified in the laboratory and confirmed by Pfizer. Because of the variants and human biology, there is no reason why it should be different after boosters. Severe cases are caused by pre-existing comorbidities/diseases and lack of appropriate early treatment. A real public health policy should take care of both aspects.
Explanation: The map shows the prevalence of the Delta variant in most of the world. The vaccine was not designed specifically for this variant, which did not exist at the time of its creation, which does not mean that it will necessarily be more deadly, as the evolution of a virus can also go in the right direction.
As for whether the vaccine actually prevents complications, this would require statistics on the number of hospitalizations and deaths according to vaccination status, pharmacovigilance accessible to physicians, and systematic autopsies of cases of death that might be related to vaccination.
7. "People aged 20-40 years develop few severe forms. For them, getting inoculated with the vaccine presents more risk than getting Covid."
Alessandro Diana acknowledges that this is a legitimate thought. He responds with an analogy: wearing a seatbelt in a car does not guarantee escape from a fatal accident, but statistically, the belt increases the chances of survival. "Not wearing a seatbelt is not a death sentence, but you are taking a risk. It's exactly the same thing when you don't vaccinate. For a long time, I said that we should vaccinate the older ones and leave the younger ones alone. But today, I have changed my mind.
Because of the long Covid, which affects up to 1 in 3 patients, and because the Delta variant is more contagious, the probability of being infected will increase. Everyone will sooner or later be confronted with the virus. The question is: would you rather be infected by the mutant virus or by vaccination?
Answer: The excess mortality statistics are clear as to the ages at risk: 90+. Treatment remains critical, as it is for all respiratory diseases.
Explanation: The pharmacovigilance study (available at this link) by Vincent Pavan and Emmanuelle Darles, members of the Independent Scientific Council concludes:
Several conclusions can be drawn from this study:
- The number of serious adverse events due to the Pfizer vaccine injection is estimated to be around 930;
- The percentage of risk of developing a serious effect in case of a side effect of the vaccine is 76% for 12-17 year olds. The most frequent serious event is myocarditis;
- the benefit/risk balance of the vaccine injection in people over 65 years of age is favorable in relation to the lethality of Covid19;
- The benefit/risk balance is almost nil for the 18 to 65 age group;
- it is clearly very unfavorable for the age groups below 18 years: the lethality of the vaccine is 200 times greater than that of Covid 19 in 12-17 year olds and more than 230 times greater for children under 12 years old.
Switzerland: the 2020 mortality rate is only higher than the 2015 to 2019 maximums for those aged 90 and over.
In view of the strong demographic growth of the baby boomers who are becoming grandpa boomers, an increase in mortality in these age groups is inevitable.
The weekly report of the FOPH on Covid deaths, shows on average more than three pre-existing diseases per person who died from/with Covid. As for the long Covid, it stands to reason that early treatment should greatly limit them. Treatment protocols have been established for its management.
8. "In Israel, despite the fact that 57% of the population is vaccinated, cases are on the rise again. And more than 40% of new cases are among those who have been vaccinated. So getting vaccinated is useless!"
The head of the clinic recalls that current vaccines are not 100% effective against the virus, and are even less effective against the Delta variant. "Some of those vaccinated can therefore be contaminated. When the number of vaccinated people becomes important, it is logical that the number of infected people also increases. And Antoine Flahault, director of the Institute of Global Health at the University of Geneva and epidemiologist, draws a parallel: "In the United Kingdom, where 99% of people wear seatbelts, 66% of fatal accidents happen to people who are buckled up. And yet all the studies prove the effectiveness of the safety belt. Similarly, it is expected that when vaccination coverage is high, a significant fraction of serious complications and deaths will occur in vaccinated individuals." But these complications and deaths will still be far fewer than if the population were not vaccinated, Alix Miauton points out.
Answer: More and more statistics from the most vaccinated countries show coronavirus infections, hospitalizations and deaths among the vaccinated. The comparison with a seatbelt is inappropriate, because once you arrive at your destination, you can unhook it. With the vaccine, you can't go back. Moreover, the risk/benefit ratio of seat belts is clearly in favor of the latter, which is not the case for vaccines.
9. "Between vaccinated and naturally immunized people, Geneva reaches an immunity rate of more than 60% according to a HUG study. That's good enough, I can wait to be vaccinated.
No, answers Alessandro Diana. "In the two previous waves, the virus infected less than 5% of the population, and that was enough to overload hospitals - and pre-determine the care of Covid patients like the one who had a heart attack - as well as hurt the economy."
Answer: No one knows the real rate of immunity of the population because that would require further analysis with cell cultures; the immune system is capable of recognizing and caring for new coronaviruses based on the immunity generated by past contact with these viruses.
Explanation: The decreasing trend in the number of hospitals from 1998-2019, compared to the population growth, shows that in addition to an ageing population (diagram in point 7) an opposite adapted policy should be implemented instead of blaming the population.
10. "If we would have let people develop antibodies naturally, in contact with the virus, we would have already reached the threshold of collective immunity.
"This is surely true, but at what cost!" exclaims Alessandro Diana. At the cost of countless deaths, an explosion of the health and economic systems. Restrictions have certainly prolonged the time it takes for immunity to be achieved, but vaccination is now giving us a boost and we can hope to reach 80% by mid-2022. For Antoine Flahault, "we must not give up. More than 90% of Swiss are vaccinated against polio and measles, so why not against Covid? Mass vaccination is a real health, social and economic emergency. We can no longer live as we have for the last 18 months."
Answer: The "price" depends greatly on whether we treat patients immediately, as we always did before Covid-19, or let them get worse on Dafalgan at home... Hospitals should then be no more overwhelmed than they were during the flu epidemics, since not all clinical and hospital capacities have been used so far.
Explanation: Treatment has been largely suppressed. To compare, one would have to go back to the period before the advent of antibiotics! Many clinics, instead of being used, have been put out of work (which also costs society). The resulting postponement of interventions and examinations also came at a price and reduced the chances of survival for many people whose conditions had time to worsen during this artificial pause.
Occupation of hospitals and intensive care units
11. "The vaccine increases the risk that more pathogenic variants will appear"
"Yet the opposite has happened so far," counters the epidemiologist. The Alpha (British) variant appeared in the UK in September 2020 before the vaccine was on the market. The Beta (South African), Gamma (Brazilian) and Delta (Indian) variants all emerged when their populations were virtually unvaccinated. Giuseppe Pantaleo reminds us that as the number of infected people increases, so do the number of replications and the likelihood of mutations, and therefore variants, increasing. "In some countries, the vaccination rate is less than 10%, which means that the virus continues to circulate actively because it has many potential hosts. Alix Miauton also indicates that "the vaccinated person, if infected, will generally be able to eliminate the virus more quickly. So on average there will be less virus in the body and it will replicate for less time."
Answer: Viruses change, combine. This vaccine gives a "narrow" immunity targeted to some specific aspects of the virus, whereas the much broader natural immunity is able to recognize more than 1000 aspects. Therefore, a modification of the virus is much more likely to escape the vaccine than the immunity.
Explanation: The British Alpha variant appeared on the British territory, the trials on the Astrazeneca vaccine were taking place at that time according to the protocol detailed on the following link (click here). Regarding the Beta variant, which appeared in South Africa, clinical trials on the vaccine had also taken place in July 2020 already, as explained then in this article of Le Temps and announced again in August 2020. For the Brazilian Gamma variant, the Chinese vaccine trials were suspended after a serious incident in late October. For India, an article published in Science in November 2020 points to the lack of transparency in Covid vaccine trials: In view of this data, the question of the origin of the variants arises in a broader and differentiated way.
12. "Cases are increasing, there is talk of a fourth wave but hospitalizations remain low. Why worry then?"
There are three epidemiological profiles currently, explains Antoine Flahault. Firstly, the profile of the United Kingdom and Israel, with 70% of the population vaccinated (editor's note: one dose), which is seeing a strong wave of contamination among unvaccinated young people, with a slight increase in hospitalizations and deaths, but without being able to totally prevent it. Secondly, there is the profile of Russia, with less than 25% of primary vaccinated, or even worse, that of Tunisia (15%) which cannot stop a monstrous wave linked to the Delta variant. Third, in between, there are countries like France and Switzerland with 50-55% of primary vaccine recipients, where it is not known how much the dikes will hold up in terms of hospitalizations and deaths. It is this uncertainty that is a concern.
Answer: Yes, there will always be seasonal respiratory epidemics! Should life be stopped for that? What is missing is a real independent study of the long term consequences of the measures and fear on the population, in the real context of the % of deaths caused compared to the overall all-cause mortality. The subject of public health is not limited to ONE disease.
Explanation: Without the usual media or FOPH zoom on the elderly, the Covid mortality graph (in dark red) shows a 3rd wave of positive tests which has no impact on Covid mortality, nor on global mortality. Switzerland is in under-mortality since the 5th week 2021 compared to the average 2015-2021!
It is absurd to impose restrictions and to claim a pandemic in a situation of under-mortality that has lasted for months! It is also absurd to focus on Covid-19, which is a minority cause of death in Switzerland.
The sanitary measures have had a deleterious effect on young children in a season when it is normally calm, they have weakened the immune defenses of the youngest.
In Germany, the proportion of virus detected in normally rather quiet seasons, compared to three seasons and in relation to the wearing of masks, is sobering:
13. "There is now talk of a third dose... the pharmas just want to line their pockets!"
"It is not the manufacturers who will decide whether a third dose is needed," replies Alix Miauton, "but the health authorities of each country with all the scientific data. For the moment, an additional injection is not indicated for the general population." And Antoine Flahault reminds us that of the 3.8 billion doses already distributed worldwide, only 1.1% have reached the populations of poor countries. "So to speak of a third dose in this situation borders on indecency. For the safety of all of us, it is especially urgent that the entire planet has access to two doses as soon as possible."
Answer: Given the rapid decline in effectiveness of the vaccine and the attitude of the authorities so far, it is highly likely that the doses will be multiplied. Vaud already advises it for immunocompromised people. As for Third World countries, many African countries, for example, are very little affected. Access to water and food (hunger has increased dramatically) are much more fundamental priorities for reducing mortality.
Explanation: It is therefore high time to look at the differentiated factors that influence mortality as a whole, at treatments and to move away from the single solution: the vaccine. Life is a bit more complex... Risk factors play a predominant role, as understood by MANY researchers whose analyses are unfortunately not taken up by the media or by politicians.
But let's ask ourselves why, for example, the scientific study SARS-Cov-2 and obesity gives 1895 results. This is not to stigmatize anyone, but to find solutions together that do not harm, to help and care for each other.
A variable global problem...
The correlation between lack of death and vaccination is not obvious: Hungary, which has taken the most severe measures and has a high vaccination rate, has a very high rate of 3000 Covid deaths per million inhabitants. India has one of the lowest vaccination rates in this table, and the lowest number of deaths per million inhabitants: 304. This country having by the way massively used ivermectin after the Supreme Court of one state imposed its legalization...