Hancock and Whitty knew about the anaphylaxis issue on 9 December 2020. 3 cases out of 400 shots on day one of the roll-out. That’s 0.75% which is close to the SAR rate in the AZ trial.
From the Pandemic Diaries of Matt Hancock as serialised in the Daily Mail
“Much later, I was on my way to bed when my phone rang. Nobody rings at 11.43pm unless it's bad news, least of all the Prof, whose number was flashing ominously. In that calm, professorial voice of his, he explained that three people had suffered a serious adverse reaction to the vaccine. One had nearly died.
We tried to calculate the statistical risk. If three out of 400 vaccinated today had a massive reaction, then that's 38,000 out of the whole population. And 38,000 is an awful lot of people.
'Jesus Christ,' I thought, feeling physically sick. We may well have to halt the entire vaccination rollout. 'Perhaps all three have a history of anaphylaxis?' I asked hopefully. Still feeling nauseous, I slumped into bed, knowing I wouldn't get a wink of sleep.
Wednesday, December 9
At 5.30am my phone went. 'All three had a clinical history of anaphylaxis,' said Natasha [head of Hancock's private office].
'[Prof Whitty] recommends that anyone with a history shouldn't take this vaccine, that we introduce a 15-minute wait after vaccination to monitor people, restrict the rollout to hospitals for the next couple of days and get on with it,' she said.
I can't remember ever being so relieved in my life.”
Submitted a mis-information complaint to BBC Today prog https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0026v4r @ 1hr 17 mins Prof Andrew Pollard claimed the vaccines had saved 12-20 million lives - I am claiming mis-information on the basis that you can't measure a life saved. Of course, he will claim a model shows this, but we should be using evidence not wishful thinking.
UK Covid Inquiry starts Vaccines module today, suggest get ready to counter it may even get a hearing in the press.
When you read this over the longer term all gathered together by these wonderful old geezers - it really freshly horrifies & focuses the mind.
I worked on the periphery of a clinical trials unit near Hull, UK over 10 years ago. Gold standard random placebo controlled trials. The data obtained was poor (to very) poor but it wasn’t life changing or life threatening. The Prof in charge got his papers published, the generous founders were happy, life went on.
This is much much worse. It always was. It’s appalling. It’s criminal. Babies, people old & young, many millions of us all (not me) were given (& continue to be given) doses of untried, hastily prepared shots of genetically modified molecules that no-one can honestly say “this will do no harm”.
As the distance of time gets bigger between those dreadful years & people who made those decisions & visited upon us all an untried medical intervention “because they could”, we all need to be really volcanically angry.
Sadly - it’s gone, moved on, not forgotten exactly but it is a curious phenomenon that most don’t talk about it or appear bothered that it really did happen & we all allowed it to happen on our watch.
Resisting any power that tries to stitch us up again is now fundamentally important.
" The data obtained was poor (to very) poor but it wasn’t life changing or life threatening. The Prof in charge got his papers published, the generous founders were happy, life went on."
phew; we suspect that for so much; but if academics get their papers published .. ain't that great?
Odd how the secrecy regarding data which all government departments indulge in has in this case provided an ominous example. If one has no data (and never mind that this will affect the health of millions of people) one can now keep this lack a secret as well. Clever!
Moreover, as recent reports on other (migration) data have shown, this has become the norm: keep everything secret and thus nobody knows that you're either ignorant or that things are worse than you say - and then accuse those who demand data and bring evidence can nicely accused of promoting 'fake news'.
Regarding possible anaphylaxis: I recall an 'official' DHSC remark that, unless you actually die, this isn't so bad ... there's reassuring!
the problem comes if folks INSIST these poor people must receive further jabs; friends in NZ told us that jabs were forced on people; if they wished to work; anyone having a serious adverse effect was told by someone called Bloomfield; who seemingly oversaw it all; that they must have a further jab; and that this would be done in an Emergency Dept seemingly; with a resuscitation trolley and staff on standby; such was the single-minded zealotry of that era.
Carl and Tom - your writings arw fantastic and shine a light on why facts, evidence and proper objective analysis beat fear all day long. Wishing you well with what comes next - "May the evidence be with you....."
To make matters worse, I'm not sure what the reporting system was like in the UK or USA, but here in Canada I'm certain that most serious vaccine side effects were never reported to the official database. I'm a physician myself and I have many physician friends. Several of them tried to report serious side effects (like blood clots) and had their reports rejected. Others were true believers in the "safe and effective" mantra and refused to believe that adverse events might be related to the vaccine the person had just received. Some just felt that the process was too onerous and time-consuming or that it might get them in trouble with provincial licensing authorities. I developed a serious arrythmia in the immediate aftermath of Pfizer dose 2. I tried to report it myself, repeatedly, but the website wasn't working. I personally know of several people who developed blood clots, ITP, heart attacks, arrythmias and other serious adverse events in the immediate aftermath of the vaccines. These events may or may not have been be related to the vaccines, but the point is they should have been reported so that they could be compared to baseline levels. We will probably never know what destruction these products have wrought--other than, I suppose, by looking at crude population measures like excess mortality and disability rates.
They are *still* promoting these jabs to pregnant women. UKHSA tweeted a video in Nov which describes all vaccines offered in pregnancy, including the Covid vaccine, as not just safe but “very safe”. The use of the word 'safe' when advertising a medicine is, of course, deemed "unacceptable" by the MHRA's own Blue Guide to advertising medicines. It's unbelievable.
Viki Male via a very vociferous X/ twitter account immunology dept at Imperial continues to advocate and defend the use of these vaccines in pregnancy. This is despite not being recommended next autumn, by JCVI, apparently due to cost benefits. She consistently shouted down any contradictory views or calls for caution.
Recently, read that LNPs (Lipid nanoparticles) had a history of neurological events prior to covid. Sadly, cant find it now, if anyone see's it perhaps they could post.
Hi Alan, I am swept away by a river of crocodile tears, help!!!!!
An old geezer
Hancock and Whitty knew about the anaphylaxis issue on 9 December 2020. 3 cases out of 400 shots on day one of the roll-out. That’s 0.75% which is close to the SAR rate in the AZ trial.
From the Pandemic Diaries of Matt Hancock as serialised in the Daily Mail
“Much later, I was on my way to bed when my phone rang. Nobody rings at 11.43pm unless it's bad news, least of all the Prof, whose number was flashing ominously. In that calm, professorial voice of his, he explained that three people had suffered a serious adverse reaction to the vaccine. One had nearly died.
We tried to calculate the statistical risk. If three out of 400 vaccinated today had a massive reaction, then that's 38,000 out of the whole population. And 38,000 is an awful lot of people.
'Jesus Christ,' I thought, feeling physically sick. We may well have to halt the entire vaccination rollout. 'Perhaps all three have a history of anaphylaxis?' I asked hopefully. Still feeling nauseous, I slumped into bed, knowing I wouldn't get a wink of sleep.
Wednesday, December 9
At 5.30am my phone went. 'All three had a clinical history of anaphylaxis,' said Natasha [head of Hancock's private office].
'[Prof Whitty] recommends that anyone with a history shouldn't take this vaccine, that we introduce a 15-minute wait after vaccination to monitor people, restrict the rollout to hospitals for the next couple of days and get on with it,' she said.
I can't remember ever being so relieved in my life.”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11502003/Matt-Hancock-reveals-moment-vaccine-approved.html
Submitted a mis-information complaint to BBC Today prog https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0026v4r @ 1hr 17 mins Prof Andrew Pollard claimed the vaccines had saved 12-20 million lives - I am claiming mis-information on the basis that you can't measure a life saved. Of course, he will claim a model shows this, but we should be using evidence not wishful thinking.
UK Covid Inquiry starts Vaccines module today, suggest get ready to counter it may even get a hearing in the press.
When you read this over the longer term all gathered together by these wonderful old geezers - it really freshly horrifies & focuses the mind.
I worked on the periphery of a clinical trials unit near Hull, UK over 10 years ago. Gold standard random placebo controlled trials. The data obtained was poor (to very) poor but it wasn’t life changing or life threatening. The Prof in charge got his papers published, the generous founders were happy, life went on.
This is much much worse. It always was. It’s appalling. It’s criminal. Babies, people old & young, many millions of us all (not me) were given (& continue to be given) doses of untried, hastily prepared shots of genetically modified molecules that no-one can honestly say “this will do no harm”.
As the distance of time gets bigger between those dreadful years & people who made those decisions & visited upon us all an untried medical intervention “because they could”, we all need to be really volcanically angry.
Sadly - it’s gone, moved on, not forgotten exactly but it is a curious phenomenon that most don’t talk about it or appear bothered that it really did happen & we all allowed it to happen on our watch.
Resisting any power that tries to stitch us up again is now fundamentally important.
" The data obtained was poor (to very) poor but it wasn’t life changing or life threatening. The Prof in charge got his papers published, the generous founders were happy, life went on."
phew; we suspect that for so much; but if academics get their papers published .. ain't that great?
Odd how the secrecy regarding data which all government departments indulge in has in this case provided an ominous example. If one has no data (and never mind that this will affect the health of millions of people) one can now keep this lack a secret as well. Clever!
Moreover, as recent reports on other (migration) data have shown, this has become the norm: keep everything secret and thus nobody knows that you're either ignorant or that things are worse than you say - and then accuse those who demand data and bring evidence can nicely accused of promoting 'fake news'.
Regarding possible anaphylaxis: I recall an 'official' DHSC remark that, unless you actually die, this isn't so bad ... there's reassuring!
the problem comes if folks INSIST these poor people must receive further jabs; friends in NZ told us that jabs were forced on people; if they wished to work; anyone having a serious adverse effect was told by someone called Bloomfield; who seemingly oversaw it all; that they must have a further jab; and that this would be done in an Emergency Dept seemingly; with a resuscitation trolley and staff on standby; such was the single-minded zealotry of that era.
Carl and Tom - your writings arw fantastic and shine a light on why facts, evidence and proper objective analysis beat fear all day long. Wishing you well with what comes next - "May the evidence be with you....."
To make matters worse, I'm not sure what the reporting system was like in the UK or USA, but here in Canada I'm certain that most serious vaccine side effects were never reported to the official database. I'm a physician myself and I have many physician friends. Several of them tried to report serious side effects (like blood clots) and had their reports rejected. Others were true believers in the "safe and effective" mantra and refused to believe that adverse events might be related to the vaccine the person had just received. Some just felt that the process was too onerous and time-consuming or that it might get them in trouble with provincial licensing authorities. I developed a serious arrythmia in the immediate aftermath of Pfizer dose 2. I tried to report it myself, repeatedly, but the website wasn't working. I personally know of several people who developed blood clots, ITP, heart attacks, arrythmias and other serious adverse events in the immediate aftermath of the vaccines. These events may or may not have been be related to the vaccines, but the point is they should have been reported so that they could be compared to baseline levels. We will probably never know what destruction these products have wrought--other than, I suppose, by looking at crude population measures like excess mortality and disability rates.
They are *still* promoting these jabs to pregnant women. UKHSA tweeted a video in Nov which describes all vaccines offered in pregnancy, including the Covid vaccine, as not just safe but “very safe”. The use of the word 'safe' when advertising a medicine is, of course, deemed "unacceptable" by the MHRA's own Blue Guide to advertising medicines. It's unbelievable.
If you can bear to watch it, it's here: https://x.com/UKHSA/status/1861320781315158316
Viki Male via a very vociferous X/ twitter account immunology dept at Imperial continues to advocate and defend the use of these vaccines in pregnancy. This is despite not being recommended next autumn, by JCVI, apparently due to cost benefits. She consistently shouted down any contradictory views or calls for caution.
reassurance was a very important word, it seems; to them; used 5 times
"provides reassurance"
"This provides reassurance"
"noted that the degree of reassurance "
" heard the company recently provided reassurance"
"Other forms of reassurance "
I remain reassured
Recently, read that LNPs (Lipid nanoparticles) had a history of neurological events prior to covid. Sadly, cant find it now, if anyone see's it perhaps they could post.