Sadly the article does not communicate some important facts: - Did they discover the contamination within the defined time whereupon they may request exchange or refund? - Are the, "customers," allowed to determine contamination statistically, or can they only receive manufacturer support for those vials directly observed to be contaminated? - Was the customer able to elect to receive a refund, or was their redress limited to exchange by agreement? - What is the timetable for replacement of contaminated doses by the manufacturer?
I suspect that we don't know this because it makes Pfizer/Moderna/Janssen look like thieves and makes the governments look like fools.
Sadly the article does not communicate some important facts:
- Did they discover the contamination within the defined time whereupon they may request exchange or refund?
- Are the, "customers," allowed to determine contamination statistically, or can they only receive manufacturer support for those vials directly observed to be contaminated?
- Was the customer able to elect to receive a refund, or was their redress limited to exchange by agreement?
- What is the timetable for replacement of contaminated doses by the manufacturer?
I suspect that we don't know this because it makes Pfizer/Moderna/Janssen look like thieves and makes the governments look like fools.
(post is archived)