AstraZeneca has been withdrawn from the market. Reason: "there are plenty of other vaccines that might work better." Noble, right? Well: not so noble that they don't hide behind the small print in the leaflet.
In England, the The Guardian (according to some a "reliable source" 😂 ) a nice article about the voluntary withdrawal. What is not mentioned is that they have not been able to get rid of the stuff on the paving stones for a while. The AstraZeneca jabs had already been scrapped in many countries due to the bad reputation. Over time (because no corona vaccine has been thoroughly tested in advance), they turned out to have one side effect: TTS (thrombosis with thrombocytopenia). One.
Despite this, the vaccine is still labelled as safe and effective, according to the Guardian.
This is despite the fact that AstraZeneca recently had to confirm in court that the vaccines can cause blood clots in "extremely rare cases", with an estimated risk of one in 50,000 of developing the potentially fatal complication. This side effect was added to the package leaflet on 7 April 2021. Not a word about the other side effects.
England: Didn't read the fine print? Too bad!
More than 60 relatives have started a lawsuit against AstraZeneca. Twelve of them have had to give up the fight.
Twelve relatives are stopping the legal battle now that it appears that their loved one was jabbed after April 7. That is the date that the pharmaceutical company added the side effect to the package leaflet.
Didn't read the fine print? Too bad!
It's your own fault, you should have paid more attention.
Death.
It seems that AstraZeneca is not to blame for people vaccinated after April 7. Continuing is not an option for the surviving relatives because losing this case would mean that, if they do not win the case, they would have to pay for the legal costs of the pharmaceutical company. They can easily run into the barrels. No one is going to run that risk.
And not a word about the liability of the doctors who administered the jabs. Or about the government, which forced the jabs. Or the institutes, which they have stamped. That's easy to approve and push, without any liability. What did the doctors get per injection?
It is of an unprecedented scoundrel.
English The National Message about it. Below are a few excerpts.
Radio host Lisa Shaw, 44, mother of one, suffered a blood clot and was treated, including cutting away part of her skull to relieve pressure. But it didn't help.
A coroner concluded that she "died from complications from an AstraZeneca Covid vaccine", due to thrombotic thrombocytopenia caused by the vaccine.
Her husband, Mr Eve, told The Telegraph that it was "unjust" that he and other families of relatives who died after the warning was issued were unable to move forward with the trial. He said he felt "totally deprived." He and other families were offered £120,000 (approx. €140,000) in compensation from the government for the loss of their loved ones.
Note: It is not clear to me why AstraZeneca is defending itself in this way at all. It will be because of reputational damage. The National writes that the British taxpayer must pay any damages because of the indemnity clauses.
AstraZeneca is also covered by the WHO: "the vaccine is safe and effective in protecting people from the very serious risks of Covid-19, including death, hospitalisation and severe illness". The WHO acknowledged the "very rare" risk of blood clotting complications, but said the benefit of inoculation with the jab "far outweighs the risks".
In The Telegraph, the pharmaceutical company (paywall): "Our condolences go out to anyone who has lost loved ones or reported health problems. Patient safety is our highest priority, and regulatory agencies have clear and rigorous standards to ensure the safe use of all medicines, including vaccines."
"The evidence from clinical trials and real-world data shows that the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine continues to have an acceptable safety profile. Regulatory agencies around the world consistently state that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of extremely rare potential side effects." (Yes of course, they're going to admit that they've been asleep!)
Rejected vaccines are chemical waste. What a shame!
PGB = Personal budget, intended for people who are insufficiently self-reliant or cannot participate well in society. (Care Guide). Often with reduced legal capacity. There, the Dutch residual stock of AstraZeneca was put away for a while, in 2021.
"When it's gone, it's gone." Yes, we are in good hands! The caring government... People with a personal budget are good for getting rid of chemical waste, that's what it comes down to. How people are treated... Or am I getting old? This has to blow at some point, the disdain becomes unbearable. And they don't even notice it themselves. Actually, it's already clapping, it's just not so noticeable because it's going in slow motion.
Did they also let those incapacitated read the fine print properly? Their supervisor? Their guardian? Their doctor? Yes, those stinging doctors... What role they have played is unimaginable. All fans of Károly Illy and Ab Osterhaus.
Well the other vaccines still
It remains to be seen whether AZ's risk profile was really that much worse than that of the other vaccines, including the popular Pfizer vaccine. Pfizer does not have to worry: the European member states have confirmed with a signature that they were well aware that the long-term effects of the Pfizer vaccines are unknown. They have also confirmed that nothing is yet known about what side effects may occur.
So Pfizer is not to blame, they have even warned about it in black and white. But AstraZeneca apparently had a weaker lobby; the CEO probably didn't have any direct SMS line with Ursula von der Leyen. So with Pfizer still being injected, in some countries in Babies from 6 months.
To refresh your memory, you can also read the history of AstraZeneca in the Netherlands on the basis of the WOB documents, on the Substack van Cees van den Bos.
Or else the following Twitter thread from Cees: "Do you remember..."
Hi Anton, the unabashed scurrilousness is outrageous. We have to keep calling a spade a spade. The psychopaths who had this on their conscience and still
always have not a single glance worthy of judging. And whether the judiciary will ultimately turn out to be independent? …. We'll wait and see
Outrageous, but maybe it's even worse than you think.
The harmful effects of the AZ injections came to light relatively quickly. Soon after the 'clot shot' things went wrong. Or not if you were lucky. That 1 in 50,000 is therefore what the seller himself indicates. The marketing department, so to speak. So in reality, it will be worse. Ogically, there will be a multiple of that number of serious side effects. Most people don't just drop dead, but first get serious complaints from which most people will normally recover. There are also lawsuits about this in England.
The mRNA jabs will show a much more insidious pattern of side effects. If someone dies or becomes ill months after an injection, the bandage is not so quickly made. Astra Zeneca's side effects were 'blindingly obvious', just to stay in the English realm for a moment. Is AA now being used to make the mRNAs look better?
What also played a role at that time (February-March 21) was that people had no choice which vaccine they received. If you were on the roll for AstraZeneca, you got AstraZeneca or you had to wait until everyone was vaccinated, which could mean that it was not your turn until September.
I saw it as a marketing ploy: give people the illusion of choice and they will take more.
At that time, I was still working at the Thrombosis Service and, as a doctor, I received worried phone calls from patients (all of whom have an increased risk of thrombosis) asking if they should take the Astra vaccine. I then said that I thought it would be wise to wait his turn, not to take a vaccine: the corona season (read flu season) was almost over and therefore the chance of 'infection' was small anyway. And by September, it would be clear how reliable/dangerous an mRNA vaccine is for people who are prone to clotting.
I was unable to convince ANY of these worried callers at the time that in dubio abstinae (when in doubt, don't do it) was the best choice for those people. That's how the fear was.
For what it's worth: here is a publication (on which I am a co-author) from which you can conclude that the vaccines (mostly Pfizer) that were given to patients at the time (who had their blood values checked at the Thrombosis Service) were thrombogenic for humans, given that the coagulation value (INR) decreased on average (and the lower the value the greater the chance of clotting). At the same time, on average, more people had an INR that was too high after vaccination (compared to before vaccination), which increases the risk of bleeding.
Nice stuff.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8899332/
'Our' conclusion: flush out, but check. By that time I was already gone...
Unbelievable. And there's just research that states that Pfizer and Moderna injection didn't show increased thrombosis levels. I don't believe any of it. That whole Big Pharma is really a deep black pool of horrible.
Unbelievable. Can you explain to both Jip and Janneke how to increase and decrease INR at the same time? Could that work differently for each patient or would it have been different vaccines?
Interesting contribution, Willem. Given the quotation marks and your comments, the recommendation was not entirely unanimous....This report -as far as I understand it- should set off quite a few alarm bells. And this is only about coagulation risks. Perhaps an idea to send the link to the science editors of NRC? They should wake up too, shouldn't they?
I agree with Anton. A short explanation would be nice.
Diffuse intravascular clotting sounds plausible to me.
What is diffuse intravascular coagulation?
Diffuse intravascular clotting – often abbreviated to 'DID' – is a serious condition in which blood clots form in small to medium-sized blood vessels. These blood clots are called microthrombi. They can get stuck in all kinds of organs. Because parts of those organs no longer receive oxygen-rich blood, they can die. This can cause extensive damage to all kinds of different organs. A situation in which multiple organs no longer work properly is called 'multi-organ failure'.
Diffuse intravascular clotting can lead to many different complaints. Often the condition will lead to bleeding. Because clots form in the blood vessels on a large scale, many clotting factors are used up. This leads to a situation in which the body is no longer able to stop bleeding. This creates a clotting disorder. This is called 'consumption coagulopathy'. That is why people with DID often have a bleeding tendency.
Hi Anton, very interesting, thanks!
What is the source of that photo with "PGB group is still being pricked astra zenica"? Was that in an email?
Geen dank! Ja dat zijn e-mails uit de WOB-documenten. Onderaan het artikel staan hyperlinks naar die documenten, dat heb ik nu duidelijker gemaakt. Ook onder het plaatje zelf nu.
This reminds me of the "injection" of the BA.1 bivalent vaccines in autumn 2022.
For those who miss the context: at the end of 2021, the Omicron twins BA.1 and BA.2 arrived. What many people don't know is that these are genetically extremely different from each other, and just as different from each of them compared to Delta. Because BA.2 was initially missed, a bivalent vaccine based on BA.1 and Wuham was made. But by the fall of 2022, BA.1 was already completely extinct, and so was Wuham's Delta descendant. Either the variants that were circulating were all BA.2 or close BA.2 relatives (BA.4/5 differs only a handful or fewer mutations), for which the 'new' vaccine was no longer targeted.
'Fortunately' there was already a switch and also a bi-valent for BA.4/5 for sale. However, the Netherlands had already bought a million pieces of the BA.1/Wuham shot and was going to prick it up before you got the new BA.4/5.
The GGD website even openly stated "you are not allowed to choose".