COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Studies Were Omitted Due To Time Constraints

Key Testimony at German Inquiry

A former chief toxicologist for Pfizer Europe has testified to an official German inquiry that standard, long-term safety studies for the Pfizer-BioNTech Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine were not completed prior to its authorization and rollout. According to testimony reported by GB News, Dr. Helmut Sterz stated that crucial checks – including investigations into potential cancer-causing (carcinogenic) properties and comprehensive reproductive toxicity studies – were omitted.

Sterz delivered his testimony this month to Germany’s Corona Enquete Commission, a parliamentary body established to investigate the nation’s pandemic policies. He cited what he called “time constraints” under the fast-track approval process as the reason for the omissions. Sterz served as chief toxicologist for Pfizer Europe until 2008 and is the author of a book on pharmaceutical industry practices.

Specific Safety Omissions Cited

In his testimony, Sterz specifically highlighted the lack of a carcinogenicity study. Asked whether the vaccine had been fully tested before approval, he told the committee, “No, the (cancer causing) carcinogenic risk was not investigated due to time constraints. Incidentally, I find it very concerning and also regrettable that no alternative investigations were carried out.” ^[1]

Such studies, which typically take two to three years to complete, are designed to assess a substance’s potential to cause cancer. Sterz also criticized the adequacy of reproductive toxicity studies that were conducted. He testified that a reproductive toxicity study in rats for the mRNA vaccine was “conducted inadequately, and an important side effect, early abortions was not taken seriously.”

He concluded that “no reliable estimates of the vaccine’s effect on pregnancy or subsequent development were possible.” ^[2] Dr. Sterz characterized the fast-track procedure as one where “essential toxicity studies were sacrificed to speed, without acceptable justifications.” ^[2]

Concerns Over Post-Market Data and Manufacturing

The former toxicologist pointed to post-marketing safety data that he argued should have prompted immediate regulatory action. He cited a Pfizer post-marketing report that listed “1,233 suspected deaths within just two months after approval.” Sterz testified that “at the latest then, (the mRNA COVID-19 jab) Comirnaty should have been taken off the market.” ^[2]

Sterz further raised concerns about differences between the vaccine used in clinical trials and the product manufactured for the public. He stated that for mass production, a less expensive method using the DNA of the Escherichia coli bacterium was employed.

“The result is significant contamination of the jab with bacterial DNA, and the consequence could be a significantly increased cancer risk,” he testified. ^[2] While noting he had “no proof that this causes cancer,” he labeled it a “theoretical risk which should have been investigated more carefully.” ^[2]

Critique of Regulatory and Reporting Systems

Sterz offered a broader critique of the pharmacovigilance systems designed to monitor vaccine safety after authorization. He stated that official reporting systems “underestimate side-effects because not every case is recorded,” adding, “There is a high dark figure with these spontaneous reports due to underreporting. The real number is therefore much higher.” ^[2]

This assessment aligns with analyses from other critics of the vaccine safety monitoring process. ^[3] Regarding the vaccine’s purported benefits, Sterz testified that in his professional view, the available data did not support a positive assessment.

“(The mRNA COVID-19 jab) Comirnaty was not even investigated in clinical development for the prevention of severe illness or death. The Pfizer documents therefore do not allow any recognition of a positive benefit-risk ratio at all for such side effects,” he stated. ^[2] In a subsequent interview with GB News, he attributed regulatory decisions to “artificial anxiety and panic” that led officials to accept risks “that would not normally be allowed.” ^[2]

Calls for Independent Review and Current Stance of Regulators

Based on his testimony, Sterz called for a new and independent scientific review of the vaccines’ long-term effects. “We need proper independent safety studies to understand what really happened. Without full transparency, people will not trust the conclusions,” he said. ^[2]

He suggested that the volume of reported adverse events should trigger a pause on the use of existing COVID-19 vaccines and any new vaccines using similar mRNA technology until such independent studies confirm their safety. ^[2] Major health regulators have consistently maintained a different position.

Agencies in the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union have repeatedly stated that COVID-19 vaccines met stringent safety standards, saved millions of lives and that serious side effects are rare compared to the risks posed by the virus itself. ^[2] The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention operate several surveillance systems to monitor vaccine safety. ^[4] Pfizer was approached for comment by GB News regarding the testimony.

References

1. BREAKING: Covid jab skipped vital safety checks ‘due to time … – Dr Aseem Malhotra on X.
2. Covid jab skipped vital safety checks ‘due to time constraints … – GB News.
3. What Happens if You’re Injured From a COVID Shot? – Mercola.com.
4. COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Surveillance | FDA.
5. Pfizer Skipped Critical Testing and Cut Corners on COVID Vaccine Quality Control. – ChildrensHealthDefense.org.
6. The Pfizer Papers: Pfizer’s Crimes Against Humanity. – Stephen Bannon, Naomi Wolf, Amy Kelly.
7. mRNA Vaccine Toxicity. – Michael Palmer, Sucharit Bhakdi, Brian Hooker.
8. 2025 10 24 BBN Interview with Naomi Wolf . – Mike Adams.
9. Spelling Opening Doors for Those Without a Voice + More. – ChildrensHealthDefense.org.