AstraZeneca has been withdrawn from the market.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.
Dit ondanks het feit dat AstraZeneca onlangs voor de rechter heeft moeten bevestigen dat de vaccins in “extreem zeldzame gevallen” bloedstolsels kunnen veroorzaken, met een geschat risico van één op 50.000 op het ontwikkelen van de mogelijk dodelijke complicatie. Deze bijwerking werd op 7 April 2021 toegevoegd in de bijsluiter. Over de overige bijwerkingen geen woord.
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, including the text of this article, also as a Dutch version.
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, including the text of this article, also as a Dutch version.
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?
Interessante bijdrage, Willem. Gezien de aanhalingstekens en jouw commentaar was de aanbeveling niet geheel unaniem….Dit rapport -voor zover ik het begrijp- zou nogal wat alarmbellen moeten doen afgaan. En dit gaat dan nog alleen maar over stollings risico’s. Misschien een idee om de link naar de wetenschaps redactie van NRC te sturen? Die moeten toch ook eens wakker worden?
Sluit me aan bij Anton. Een korte toelichting zou wel prettig zijn.
Diffuus intravasale stolling klinkt aannemelijk voor mij.
Wat is diffuse intravasale stolling?
Diffuse intravasale stolling – vaak afgekort tot ‘DIS’ – is een ernstige aandoening waarbij bloedstolseltjes ontstaan in kleine tot middelgrote bloedvaten. Deze bloedstolseltjes worden microtrombi genoemd. Ze kunnen vastlopen in allerlei organen. Doordat delen van die organen dan geen zuurstofrijk bloed meer krijgen kunnen ze afsterven. Zo kan uitgebreide schade aan allerlei verschillende organen ontstaan. Een situatie waarbij meerdere organen niet meer goed werken wordt ‘multi-orgaan falen’ genoemd.
Diffuse intravasale stolling kan tot veel verschillende klachten leiden. Vaak zal de aandoening leiden tot bloedingen. Doordat op grote schaal stolseltjes in de bloedvaten ontstaan worden veel stollingsfactoren opgebruikt. Dit leidt tot een situatie waarbij het lichaam niet meer goed in staat is om bloedingen te stelpen. Er ontstaat zo een stollingsstoornis. Dit wordt ‘verbruikscoagulopathie’ genoemd. Daarom hebben mensen met DIS vaak een bloedingsneiging.
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.
Dit doet mij denken aan het “opprikken” van de BA.1 bivalente vaccins in najaar 2022.
Voor diegene die de context missen: eind 2021 kwamen de Omicron tweelingen BA.1 en BA.2. Watveel mensen niet weten, is dat deze genetisch onderling extreem verschillend zijn, en onderling net zo verschillend als elk van hen tov Delta. Omdat BA.2 in eerste instantie gemist was, werd er een bivalent vaccin op basis van BA.1 en Wuham gemaakt. Maar in het najaar van 2022 was BA.1 al geheel uitgestorven, en Wuham,’s Delta nazaat ook. Ofwel de varianten die rondgingen waren allemaal BA.2 of nauwe BA.2 verwanten (BA.4/5 verschilt slechts een handvol of minder mutaties), waarvoor het ‘nieuwe’ vaccin al niet meer gericht was.
‘Gelukkig’ was er meteen al omgeschakeld en ook een bi-valent voor BA.4/5 te koop. Nederland had echter al een miljoen stuks van het BA.1/Wuham prikje gekocht en ging eerst deze opprikken alvorens je de nieuwe BA.4/5 kreeg.
Op de GGD website stond zelfs openlijk “je mag niet kiezen”.