J& J - Poison Powder But a Safe CoVax.
Video Killed The Radio Star Fauci Killed Theatres

Response to the British Government Proposal to Roll Out A COVD-19 Vaccine Before Christmas

image from upload.wikimedia.orgby John Stone

The British government (Prime Minister Boris Johnson pictured) are running a public consultation with a view to cutting every corner and safe-guard in order to roll out a COVID vaccine campaign before Christmas (the British “warp-speed”). presumably with the Oxford/Astra-Zeneca product in mind. For anyone who wants to respond it ends this Friday (18 September). This is how I have responded to the on-line form.

Temporary authorisation of the supply of unlicensed products

The urgency of the situation in which such a decision needs to be taken is heavily in doubt. While the government has taken it upon itself to place restrictions on the public from which it would gladly be alleviated the hospitalisation and fatality rates for the virus have been in continuous decline since the spring - if indeed there is a continuing infection rate this presumably confers more certain immunity than any putative vaccine. None of the initial candidate products purports to offer strong immunity so it is hard to see even if there were any good reasons for the present restrictions that the introduction of these products would offer sufficient grounds for their removal. It is more likely that they would simply contribute to public confusion.

As I understand it the decision to distribute unlicensed vaccines (or licensed ones) will be taken by the JCVI. The JCVI is described as an “independent” body, but of what? The chair of the JCVI, Andrew Pollard, is lead developer of the Oxford/Astra Zeneca COVID-19 vaccine, which has been backed by the government to the tune of at least £100 million. In February 2014 Pollard chaired a meeting of the JCVI which recommended the Bexsero Men B vaccine to the schedule of which he was also lead developer, which became part of Conservative window-dressing at the 2015 election. Even if Pollard recuses himself the “independence” of any decision will be in doubt - apart from anything else at its February 2016 meeting the JCVI enjoyed the hospitality of Pollard’s research institution, the Martin School, and his Oxford College, St Cross. It is not reported that any members protested. Dissent at JCVI meetings had never been reported, indeed no votes ever seem to be recorded.

Should a decision be delayed beyond the end of the year it will come under the remit of the licensing authority, the MHRA. The MHRA is entirely funded by the industry for the licensing of medicines and biologicals, and also advised by Prof Pollard. In 2009 the MHRA - at the time of the swine flu scare - failed to detect an association between the GSK vaccine Pandemrix and the condition of narcolepsy, and remained uncontrite in BMJ correspondence as late as 2018. It is illusory at the present time to suppose the licensure in itself provides grounds for confidence. The government in fact has no existing processes to ensure confidence. The government also assumes that anything “authorised” will subsequently be “licensed” which further calls the independence of the process into question. What if it turned out to be not just “temporary”

Civil liability and immunity

The document maintains that it would be unfair to manufacturers to have to sustain liability, but it is not clear why it would be fair to the public who have already had incredible costs loaded on to them, whether any suit was against the manufacturer (to be reimbursed by the government) or against the government itself, the cost of which would then be passed to the public, if successful. Admittedly, in almost any circumstances the Legal Aid Agency will fail to support such litigation (a dramatic instance would be Vioxx), so it is somewhat theoretical: whatever happens the manufacturer makes a killing and there is little sanction on them to ensure safety, let alone that you will not catch the disease.

Ultimately, the government shelters legally behind the principle of informed consent which leaves the onus on the patient or their guardian, but needs to entail that it is genuinely informed (including all the risks and shortcomings of the product as is provided in the Montgomery ruling). It is further prejudicial if scorn and loathing are heaped on anyone who is not sure whether to comply (for instance the several derogatory comments made the Prime Minister about “anti-vaxxers”, or pronouncements by the WHO about the “vaccine hesitant” being a threat to global health) which is devoid of intellectual merit, quite outside the spirit of freedom of choice or the recommendations of the recent Cumberlege review, which considered instances where injured patients were subjected to bullying tactics. This fails to recognise the rights of the patient. It also undermines the rights of the patient if they are expected to be vaccinated to protect someone other than themselves. It is not only a dubious principle it may well be that it is in the interests of children, for example, to acquire natural immunity, particularly if the virulence of the disease retreats to the level of the common cold (which seems entirely likely).

Successive governments have also undermined their credibility by turning away applications for vaccine damage awards - in 2017 the Department of Works and Pensions was hauled over the coals in the Court of Appeal for using a “Catch 22” like strategy to deny claims over Pandemrix for narcolepsy in the swine flu episode. How does it propose to establish its fairness now? Another question is why after that experience they are so confident they will get it right this time? Or perhaps the principle of hit and run holds this time as well.

Expansion to the workforce of the eligible to administer vaccines

This is a reckless initiative. For instance, the business of the US vaccine court tends to be dominated by claims of shoulder injuries (no doubt because it is relatively easy to prove), and these are not trivial. To injure people in pursuit of the chimera of zero-COVID when 80% of people never have symptoms would be highly unethical.

Vaccine Promotion

Politicians, governments and mainstream media have a scandalous record of magical thinking over vaccines: it is always easy to ignore or gaslight those who have been harmed, and to blame the unvaccinated for the vaccinated catching the disease. If the government makes claims about the safety and effectiveness of products which are not true or have not been established it will be hugely culpable. Propaganda should not have a place in medicine and the government would do well to exercise discretion irrespective of whether products have been licensed or not. The fact is that any COVID-19 vaccine products which hit the market in the next decade, let alone the next few months, will not have been adequately tested.

I repeat my comment under ‘Civil liability and immunity’:

“Ultimately, the government shelters legally behind the principle of informed consent which leaves the onus on the patient or their guardian, but needs to entail that it is genuinely informed (including all the risks and shortcomings of the product as is provided in the Montgomery ruling). It is further prejudicial if scorn and loathing are heaped on anyone who is not sure whether to comply (for instance the several derogatory comments made the Prime Minister about “anti-vaxxers”, or pronouncements by the WHO about the “vaccine hesitant” being a threat to global health) which is devoid of intellectual merit, quite outside the spirit of freedom of choice or the recommendations of the recent Cumberlege review, which considered instances where injured patients were subjected to bullying tactics. This fails to recognise the rights of the patient. It also undermines the rights of the patient if they are expected to be vaccinated to protect someone other than themselves. It is not only a dubious principle it may well be that it is in the interests of children, for example, to acquire natural immunity, particularly if the virulence of the disease retreats to the level of the common cold (which seems entirely likely).”

If the government want to maintain a lower standard of ethics than informing the public of the risks and shortcomings of the products when promoting them in the media this does not reflect well on its intentions. Even asking the question does not reflect well.

Further, if the government wants to suppress criticism of vaccine products in either the mainstream media or social media on a generic basis this does not speak well of its good faith. Of course, it goes without saying that no one should make false claims either in favour or against products, but if you legislate against people criticising them then you most certainly have something to hide.

What we could do better

I am satisfied with the space allocated to comment, but I am dissatisfied with what I have been asked to comment upon and the overall context of a government acting outside normal constraints (and even perhaps outside its extended remit through the Coronavirus Act). It remains to be seen whether the government is capable of listening at this late stage to any well-founded criticism, or whether it will just bludgeon on regardless.

John Stone is UK Editor for Age of Autism.

Comments

Angus Files

Another day another brave lady Dr. Li-Meng Yan-but the MMS dont see,hear or speak of her..

A Deer with rabbits ears...

Chinese Virologist;This virus came from a lab..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFlqXPl_hZQ

Pharma For Prison

MMR RIP

Richard McAdam

Let's look at the facts, the government refuse to release any scientific data they say guides policy, I doubt there is ANY credible science to back up that claim, the government and media refuse to allow open debate on the covid (corona) issue, despite being challenged to do so by professor Dolores Cahill,. The government are censoring relevant comments and videos from eminent scientists, epidemiologists, and virologists, not forgetting the observational studies of various doctors treating successfully covid (corona) patients.
WHAT ARE THEY TRYING TO HIDE!

Ronald N. Kostoff

We have just posted a monograph that addresses some of these potential COVID-19 vaccine safety issues (https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/63710).

Gary Ogden

Will: I second John's comment. If you want to understand how utterly broken medical research is, and how perfectly useless the most lucrative drugs are, read Dr. Malcolm Kendrick's "Doctoring Data." Most medical research and publishing have become as trustworthy as government pronouncements. Doctors, mostly, are good, but medicine is horribly broken.

Angus Files

I sent my tuppence worth the other day.Great article John .The warp speed vaccines should have warp speed liability for manufacturers, warp speed medical care when your injury appears,warp speed injury boards ,warp speed injury compensation payouts,...No COVID here for sure.


Pharma For Prison

MMR RIP

John Stone

Will

Unfortunately, you share the politicians faith in the magical properties of drugs, but I am afraid that unless medicines are tightly controlled bad people will always take advantage - most medical literature is fraud anyway and the main effective drugs are still the ones that are comparatively ancient which are of no commercial use to drug companies. The politicians think that that if you deregulate wonderful things will happen - they think that is being creative - and they will be for the super rich screwing the rest of us. If you make room for people to cheat the people who cheat will alway be ahead of those who want to do an honest job more carefully and slowly.

susan welch

Great response to the survey, John.

I did complete it today. Nowhere near as comprehensive as your response, but I did leave them in no doubt as to what I thought of all 5 questions, (politely!).

Will

I think the opposite of some on this site. The regulatory bureaucracy such as the FDA and the EDA is killing us through how long it takes any medicine to get approved. I think a 2 tier system of clinical trials should be enough to get a medical product approved not a 3 tier system of clinical trials. Let alone a supposed SARS COVID 19 vaccine and the bureaucratic nightmare said vaccines are facing worldwide.

Jane

Brilliant article as usual John. I just filled out the submission form on the Alliance for Natural Health survey at the link you gave. It was very easy and I just cut and pasted the abbreviated reasons under each heading. I hope other people can do the same. It took about 3 minutes. They ask where did you hear about the submission and give you lots of specific choices. I said other. They asked for name of website and I just said Newsletter from parents of vaccine injured children. I did not want to name the website specifically because I know they will try to censor us and other social media platforms that are on to them.

Coram Deo

CHANNEL 4 NEWS EXPOSES SWINE FLU SCANDAL [2010 – DEJA VU]
video – 3 mins 31 secs
Channel 4's John Snow reports on the Council of Europe's investigation into the manufactured swine flu hoax. The former Chair of the Sub-committee on Health of the Parliamentary Assembly Dr Wolfgang Wodarg had accused the World Health Organization (WHO) of lowering the definition of a pandemic in order for the pharmaceutical companies and their share holders to rake in massive at the expense of tax payers in targeted countries.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iV1IZVT_LCE

John Stone

I forgot to comment when filling in their form about their statement COVID being the worst peacetime crisis in country’s history. About the disease they would have to be joking, about government and global wickedness there is no doubt.

Hans Litten

AsrtraCyanide and BJ can both go and Fook themselves.

I believe there has been 3 injuries in the tests so far, (obviously it would never make any difference to me either way - I will be refusing no matter what dirty coercive tricks they try).

Dr Elisa Granata has completely disappeared without trace.
We had a report of a participant with MS in June or July.
And now we have this latest unamed female maimed with Transverse Myelitis.

Vaccination the crime of all centuries

John Stone

I also note the excellent response from Alliance for Natural Health

https://www.anhinternational.org/news/uk-law-changes-for-covid-19-mass-vaccination/

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)