Official NIH policy allows agency officials to pocket up to $150,000 a year in royalties from drugs they approved

If you discovered that the official rules of the National Institutes of Health allowed government officials to pocket up to $150,000 PER YEAR in royalties from vaccines "upon which they worked" (?), do you think that would lead to the best possible outcomes, or would that be likely to result in dangerous or less-effective drugs winning approval?

If you think that rule would likely result in the best outcomes, you're too naive to breathe.  Anyone with an ounce of brains instantly understands that the lure of a possible $150,000 PER YEAR in royalties from a drug-maker whose drug was approved by the gruberment would be a powerful incentive to make all roadblocks to the approval of that drug disappear. 

“Little known NIH regulations let agency scientists collect up to $150,000.00 annually in royalties from vaccines upon which they worked,” CHD reported. “These rules are recipes for regulatory corruption.”

Of course you can't believe a government agency would be naive enough to deliberately allow this, eh?  Cuz any school kid could see the obvious conflict of interest, and the incentive for corrupt decisions.  And yet it's real.

Or how about this: In December of 2019 NIH and Moderna signed a contract stating that mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates would be "developed and jointly owned" by the two parties.  Think that could possibly have influenced early "Emergency Use Authorization" of the Moderna mRNA vax?  Yes, I know the FDA technically signs the EUA, but do ya really think the FDA ignores decrees from the NIH?

Do you really think government officials are more honest than "ordinary" people?

Are you beginning to understand how barely-tested, dangerous "vaccines" could have won a type of carefully-couched "approval" for essentially unlimited use, despite a far higher incidence of death and other devastating effects than all previous vaccines?

Oh wait...you didn't hear this on CNN or MSNBC, so it can't be true, right?

Source.