Tag: Pfizer

Experimental vaccines

Health and wellbeing

Are you going to have the #Pfizer #vaccine when offered?

The head Dormouse here is in an “at risk” group in relation to #Covid19. He’s not going to take the vaccine and here’s why.

First and foremost, The Dormouse is not “anti-vaccine”, #Smallpox, #Polio, #Measles, #Mumps #Rubella and many more besides have been successfully eradicated in the wild or at the very least significantly controlled through the proper use of well developed vaccines. In the normal course of events The Dormouse takes the view that specific medical conditions of the person to be vaccinated aside one would have to be a moron to refuse appropriate vaccines. And ladies and gents if you’re still concerned about the #MMR vaccine for your children, you shouldn’t be. It’s been around long enough for anything to go wrong to go wrong and it turns out to be as safe as any other vaccine, if not more so.

The Dormouse has concerns about the Covid19 vaccines currently being offered though. These are those concerns:

  • Result data from any trial data from any company has NOT been published for any Covid19 vaccine.
  • No Covid19 vaccine trial data has of today been peer reviewed.
  • No compatibility trials (ie how does this vaccine interact with other medicines) have been conducted
  • Phase I, II and III trials are said to have been successfully concluded and indeed a vaccine could not be approved for use if they hadn’t, however no long term trials have taken place, nor could they have been done in the time available.
  • Governments, including the UK government have indemnified Pfizer and other drugs companies in the event of legal claims being made against them in respect of their vaccines.

The first two items are fundamental to the scientific method. If data is not validated by an independent, knowledgeable third party (publish and peer review) it is impossible to judge the accuracy of any claims made. This is basic, if there’s no peer review there’s no validation and from a scientific point of view any claims made by the discoverer have to be viewed with more than a pinch of salt.

The trials results rely only on manufacturers claims to the regulator. The reported results could be entirely accurate, there might be manageable minor errors, there might be major errors that place the whole program in doubt, there could even be catastrophic errors that lead to a public health emergency, this follows from the paragraph above. More than that is that to date we only have short term results available (no matter how correct), will the vaccine provide protection in a year’s time, what side effects will only come to light next year or the year after? We have no way of knowing.

Lack of compatibility trials means that these vaccines may be rendered useless or even worse have catastrophic effects on patients if they react with other drugs a person may be using.

Effectively the vaccines are still experimental. Their development and trials are not yet concluded and The Dormouse is not a lab rat. Having said that there are those much closer to death than him. An ethical way forward would be to offer the vaccine (after explaining its experimental nature) to those at the very pinnacle of risk from #Covid. That is, those with nothing to lose and where the risk of Covid far outweighs possible side effects. This additional test data could then be used to better inform the general population.

So for the general population do the potential risks associated with Covid outweigh the potential risks posed by the experimental vaccines? At this stage the best we can say is that the question is not yet answered. To which The Dormouse also asks, why if companies such as Pfizer have confidence in their product did they demand an indemnity before allowing their vaccines to be be deployed? To The Dormouse, that’s a big red flag.

Note
  • No one associated with this website is a doctor or has relevant scientific qualifications
  • This article was written on the 3/12/20, information is changing constantly and some objections listed above may not be relevant when you read this page
  • Generally The Dormouse advocates vaccines and only demurs from that general principle in this special case
  • If your best friend walks over a cliff, you don’t have to follow him. The Dormouse has explained what he will do and what his views are, you must make up your own mind.

Meanwhile even mainstream news services are raising concerns, for instance here’s what Forbes (a well known politically independent US service) has to say.

It appears that these trials are intended to pass the lowest possible barrier of success. As this is being written, the FDA is poised to announce tougher standards for a Covid-19 vaccine in the near future. It is my hope that these new standards for an EUA will at a minimum include requirements for protections from infection itself, protections from severe virus-related disease leading to hospitalization, and a significant improvement in Covid-19 related mortality.

Forbes

Mike Yeadon speaks

So who’s Mike #Yeadon and why should you care? He’s a top rank #virologist, he’s also a previous vice-president of #Pfizer, holds a first class honours degree and relevant doctorate. Pfizer is one of the companies producing a #Covd19 vaccine. What he’s not is some lone wolf, conspiracy theory fruitloop living in his parent’s attic.

Dr Yeadon like a great many scientists is critical of the SAGE advice to the UK government and also believes that the the UK government is significantly mishandling its response to the Covid19 virus

There’s nothing unusual about this. For instance we can turn to the #Great_Barrington_Declaration signed by thousands of real scientists, many of whom are world leaders in their fields and who have been saying fundamentally the same thing from the international perspective for some time now. Many of you dear readers though won’t have heard of these people, this is because there is a process by which some social media companies are actively removing content.

Here’s what a rather alarmed but well known journalist had to say on #Twitter.

We say that it’s not the role of Social Media companies to edit what we as adults (and rather good looking rodents) can and cannot read. It’s bad enough when the subject of the censorship is the aforementioned roof dwelling conspiracy fruitloop but when social media companies decide what is and what is not good science the outcome for us all takes a turn for the worse.

Dr Yeadon’s censored video can now be seen here … https://www.bitchute.com/video/J0JWur5LNePt/

Dr Yeadon spouting wrongthink … you decide, it’s OK, unlike YouTube and HMG we trust you.

Today in the UK we are living under unprecedented restrictions. As a society we’re currently accepting these restrictions because we’re told by our government that the restrictions will prevent more deaths than they will cause. They base this advice on the advice of SAGE and SAGE alone. A group of advisors that we now know went to #wikipedia for information – yes, really! We know that the current government imposed restrictions on the people of the UK are causing deaths, causing poverty and are causing long term social and economic harm. Some political groups and organisations such as the UK #Labour Party and the #SNP are calling for even tighter restrictions despite the harm these will cause.

If these restrictions are genuinely saving more lives than they’re costing then so be it. The UK’s survived much worse. But what if these restrictions are doing the opposite and killing more than they’re saving? This is the question we and government need to answer and before doing so we need the very best advice, from the very best people whether than advice plays to our preconceptions or challenges them.

This means that we have to listen to real scientists on both sides of the debate, if we don’t then it’s axiomatic any policy decisions made are going to be flawed. For this reason we have to say no to #YouTube and the other Social Media companies censoring what we say and read and view. Social media companies are our clients, that make money out of their users and as such they they are our servants, not our masters.

Dr Mike Yeadon's letter to the UK  health secretary debunking government claims about the safety of the new Covid viruses being known and concluding that he does not trust the Health Secretary Mr Hancock.