The MHRA Papers - Part 6

Shut up; we are managing you.

SUMMARY: The stuff goes everywhere in rats, but does it in humans? The EWG sets out to manage some statements against the main narrative made by scientists.

 We continue our review of the minutes of the meetings of the MHRA’s ​​Commission On Human Medicines (CHM) COVID-19 Vaccines Benefit Risk Expert Working Group.

 On 7 December 2020, the EWG considered the comments by a former Pfizer scientist and vice president without naming him, and this could only be Dr Mike Yeadon. 

Dr Yeadon rose to prominence and was duly demonised as he was a co-signatory of a petition to the EMA to halt the vaccine trials because of the risk of infertility. While the DHSC promptly called the claims “false, dangerous and deeply irresponsible”, the EWG apparently devoted most if not all of its 7 December meeting to “managing” Dr Yeadon’s multiple comments. They seemed concerned that anyone of its secret squirrel population should break the secrecy.

Along the way, they also remarked that the Oxford Astra Zeneca vaccine trials population was much younger than the target population.

TTE explored the pharmacokinetics of Comirnaty in the relevant series of posts starting from post number 9

In the series, we reported the comments made by Dr Bridle, a Canadian viral immunologist, which appeared similar to Dr Yeadon’s. As we shall narrate in a later post, Dr Bridle paid a hefty personal price for these comments.

Dr Bridle was surprised that the biodistribution of Comirnaty in rats was widespread. The vaccine went all over the rats' organs instead of mainly staying in one place (the injection site) like all other vaccines.

This brings us back to the 10 December EWG meeting in Any Other Business. The EWG  discussed the biodistribution of the Comirnaty vaccine, which did precisely what Dr Bridle said: it went everywhere in rats. The EWG received - the all too familiar - reassurance from the manufacturer that everything was OK.

So there you are. Oh, and it’s all secret. Are the two old geezers the only ones to perceive a hint of worry in managing the message (read censorship) by the EWG?

One last thing. What was a [name redacted] consultant from Accenture doing at the meeting as an observer? In contrast, the minutes allow the identification of Dr Mike Yeadon - you might call that double standards. What was discussed was not only secret but also off the record, suggesting they were worried about what he was saying. 

This post was written by two old geezers who don’t like to be managed, probably because they are unmanageable, even by Accenture.