‘No evidence it won’t work’.

A double-negative positive.

EMA recommends first COVID-19 vaccine for authorisation in the EU (EMA)

24 thoughts on “Protest In Vein

  1. Joe

    Superb news, a mass speeded up vaccination program is required to be rolled out a.s.a.p.
    There is nothing in the scientific data to show this vaccine will have in any way, less efficacy against various mutations of the coronavirus. If you examine the scientific literature it has already been effective against multiple mutations.

    Reply
  2. eoin

    So how come lockdowns have eradicated the yearly flu yet covid 19, with it’s flu like transmission…rages on unabated? Anyone?

    Reply
    1. alickdouglas

      That’s because the blow in armchair epidemiologists who graduated in 2020 would have you believe that the epidemiology of flu is well understood. It’s not at all: the drivers of the apparent winter peak, and the apparent annual march of flu from Australia remain the source of debate among people who actually earn their living studying viruses. One of the most interesting indicators from this year for me as someone who only spent 3 years working on flu, is that the stop to intercontinental travel actually appears to have halted flu transmission.

      My favorite theory is that the flu virus falls to earth from space every autumn, first showing up at the base of the Himalayas and spreading from there (because that’s where the atmosphere is thinnest, innit), and then transiting round the world. The origin of that theory with Fred Hoyle FRS is also a fine demonstration of Dunning Kruger, where someone who is apparently smart in one field thinks they are smart in another.

      Reply
  3. f_lawless

    Over in the US, the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention has set up a smartphone-based health checker called “V-Safe” to offer advice and survey recipients post vaccination.

    According to a CDC report, by Dec 18th, 112,807 of those who have registered with V-Safe had received their first dose of the experimental vaccines.

    Of those 112,807 registrants, 3,150 had reported experiencing “Health Impact Events”.

    The CDC defines a “Health Impact Event” as: “unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to work, required care from doctor or health care professional”

    https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2020-12/slides-12-19/05-COVID-CLARK.pdf

    Reply
    1. bisted

      …really disappointed Bodger that you continue to host this daily dose of misinformation…this commenter espouses dangerous messages that have nothing to do with healthy scepticism…

      Reply
      1. f_lawless

        I’d ask you to point out exactly what the misinformation is in my comment, but clearly, you can’t. Unless you’re taking the angle that quoting the official website of US government body, the CDC, is posting misinformation? That would be an unusual angle, coming from you.

        The onus is on us all to seek out as much information as we can from sources we deem trustworthy so that we can best inform our own decision on whether taking the experimental vaccines is right for us, personally .What’s dangerous is to adopt the mindset that any information which doesn’t fit into the one-sided, pharma industry-sponsored spin about how wonderful the vaccine is, must be deemed automatically taboo. If you’re not able to discuss these serious themes in a reasoned, adult way, then maybe these kinds of posts aren’t for you?

        Reply
        1. bisted

          …in fairness, you have been relatively upfront in showing your position, whether it’s your constant anti-vax stance, as here, or letting the virus run unchecked through the population to achieve some notion of herd immunity through advocacy of quack remedies…I lack the ability to analyse what motivates you the way people like David Robert Grimes can…but I know if I express what I really think then Broadsheet will sanction me whereas you operate with impunity…

          Reply
          1. SOQ

            Bisted- you do not contribute to debate. You switch from sneering bitchiness and trying to get under people’s skins to demanding outright censorship- that is your two default positions.

            Our civil liberties are under attack like never before- governments literally turning on their peoples- for a trumped up virus which especially in it’s latest version, makes no sense whatsoever.

            We will continue to disuses these issues on Broadsheet until the owners decide otherwise.

          2. Brother Barnabas

            “Our civil liberties are under attack like never before”

            being asked to wear a mask when indoors in a public space?

            I like a bit of hyperbole as much as the next chap, soq, but…

    2. ReproBertie

      “Of those 112,807 registrants, 3,150 had reported experiencing Health Impact Events”

      So about 2-3% and that’s with people self reporting HIEs. Not a lot to be concerned about there.

      Reply
        1. SOQ

          Mad isn’t it? It could turn people into vegetables and still there will be some who will say “well it’s still only 2 – 3%”,

          When did having blind faith in profit driven global pharmaceutical companies become a left wing thing?

          Reply
          1. ReproBertie

            It’s self reported. Let’s unclutch the pearls there until we get some proper medical reports.

            Any report that shows the effectiveness of masks and you’re running around demanding peer reviews and citations but some people say they weren’t feeling well and that’s good enough to fuel an anti-vax position.

      1. Zaccone

        So 3% of people experiencing Health Impact Events (to date, this is only likely to grow in time) is nothing to be concerned about, but covid which has a mortality rate of 0.004% for under 35s, 0.06% for 35-45s etc is something worth shutting down society to avoid?

        Reply
  4. Just Sayin

    It will most likely work as well as the regular flu vaccine, which for old or vulnerable people, means it won’t really work at all.

    Conclusions We attribute the decline in influenza-related mortality among people aged 65 to 74 years in the decade after the 1968 pandemic to the acquisition of immunity to the emerging A(H3N2) virus. We could not correlate increasing vaccination coverage after 1980 with declining mortality rates in any age group. Because fewer than 10% of all winter deaths were attributable to influenza in any season, we conclude that observational studies substantially overestimate vaccination benefit.

    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/486407

    Survey studies on influenza vaccinations show that in 10 years we have only succeeded three times in developing a vaccine with an efficiency rate of more than 50%. Vaccinating our elderly appears to be inefficient. Over 75 years of age, the efficacy is almost non-existent.

    Due to the continuous natural mutation of viruses, as we also see every year in the case of the influenza virus, a vaccine is at most a temporary solution, which requires new vaccines each time afterwards. An untested vaccine, which is implemented by emergency procedure and for which the manufacturers have already obtained legal immunity from possible harm, raises serious questions. We do not wish to use our patients as guinea pigs.

    On a global scale, 700 000 cases of damage or death are expected as a result of the vaccine. If 95% of people experience Covid-19 virtually symptom-free, the risk of exposure to an untested vaccine is irresponsible.

    https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/09/19/growing-concern-about-lockdown-from-doctors-in-belgium

    Reply
    1. alickdouglas

      Why would you compare to flu virus or flu vaccine? The coronaviruses don’t mutate in a way anything like flu, and the manner in which antigenic sites are exposed to the immune system is entirely different. The fact that the a large proportion of the hemagluttanin of flu is covered up by other structural proteins is one of the reasons making flu vaccine is so difficult.

      And please enlighten me as to how the testing of this vaccine is different to how one is normally tested? Enligthen me as to how much longer you’d need to run the trial, and how many more subjects you’d have to recruit? Where does your suggested 700 thousand cases of damage or death come from? Is that a rate? Are you aware that the FDA and EMA conduct ‘benefit risk’ analysis and that the main basis of licensure is benefit risk? Done by people, like, who actually study how to do benefit risk?

      Reply
      1. Just Sayin

        There are already 4000 covid19 mutations in the UK

        Re testing, I’d like enough testing so the manufactured would be prepared to accept responsibility for the vaccine, rather than requiring an government indemnity.

        Reply
        1. alickdouglas

          Yes, but the mutations for coronas are not nearly as extensive as those seen in flu they occur at a lower rate, and the mechanism that drives mutation in the coronas is more gradual. The key with flu is that the antigenic sites are massively prone to point mutations, drifts (that are bunches of point mutations) and shifts. The reason we don’t have a universal flu vaccine is that little of the H and N antigenic sites are exposed and the other potential antigenic sites are covered up with glycoproteins and so are ‘invisible’ to the immune system. These complications don’t exist for coronaviruses.

          I do share some concerns about the speed of development, but the fact is that the corona vaccines have been developed within most of the already existing rules for vaccine development. Most (not all!) adverse events occur within 6 weeks, and most trial participants have had 8 weeks of follow up. Traditionally there’s a 12m follow up, but I don’t recall 12m of follow up *ever* revealing a signal in a clinical trial (in roll out, ‘Phase IV’, yes). Developers have gotten round the speed problem by stopping other development programs dead, and reallocating resources so monitoring etc. can be done in parallel, and they have hired literally every freelance vaccine safety physician and statistician that there is to make it happen. I don’t like the indemnity nonsense, but for a company lawyer to agree, you’d need (back of envelope calculation) 300 to 400 thousand subjects in the trials. For a biologically meaningful result you’d need closer to a million to ensure ‘safety’ for rare disorders (Maurice Hilleman I believe said he only believed a vaccine was safe after 1 billion doses).

          One sentence why I understand companies wanting indemnity: when a vaccine is normally rolled out, uptake is quite slow; if shit hits fan, you are likely to only hurt a limited number of people before you can withdraw the product, and your exposure to litigation is low. If however, you are vaccinating many thousands a day (as now) you can potentially be exposed to massive litigation (note, understanding, not agreeing or liking).

          The US vaccine compensation fund exists because in rare casses with vaccines and any medical intervention, unforseable things happen and people get hurt. Developers have insurance and reserves of cash to buffer litigation. But the risk that companies are exposed to by pandemic roll outs is massive. Whether we like it or not, there’s a push pull (or suck and blow) element to vaccine roll out; the company want to make money, but health authorities want their health problems fixed. Rightly or wrongly, companies (lawyers and insurance companies) want the indemnity in place.

          Reply
          1. Just Sayin

            when a vaccine is normally rolled out, uptake is quite slow; if poo hits fan, you are likely to only hurt a limited number of people before you can withdraw the product, and your exposure to litigation is low. If however, you are vaccinating many thousands a day (as now) you can potentially be exposed to massive litigation (note, understanding, not agreeing or liking).

            I could accept the above if there was a valid reason for the rush, but there isn’t.

            For under 70s covid is less harmful than the flu and for over 70s it is only marginally more dangerous.

            The need for an emergency vaccine is driven by pure hype rather than any scientific reality.

            A licence for an emergency vaccine will only be given if there is urgent need and no treatment available.

            The useless mask / lockdown strategies were a smokescreen to promote the urgent need.

            Note how the WHO are rowing back on those now that the objective has been achieved.

            Note how Ivermectin and HCQ were demonised in order to pretend no treatment was available.

            What about the last time they pulled this scam?

            The 2009 fake swine flu pandemic.
            Similar tactics to sell toe panderemix vaccine to a large market (with an indemnity)

            80 cases in the Irish courts for people mostly children damaged by that vaccine.

            Hundreds of healthcare workers who were forcibly vaccinated (or lose their job) have cases in the courts there.

          2. Junkface

            @Just sayin

            People in their 30’s, 40’s 50’s and 60’s have died from covid 19 around the world, not less harmful than the flu. Vaccinations are essential for future plans for every population increasing over time.

            Lay off the facebook anti-vaxx pipe

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!