"The possible important harms of Covid-19 vaccines". Now please don't get paranoid and conspiratorial and start thinking government is trying to avoid this issue. That can't be true. Obviously.
MHRA are a nest of mendacious sociopaths who shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near a healthcare system. There should be some sort of register they have to appear on for 20 years, forbidding it.
I submitted a leggy FOI to the MHRA at the start of 2021. My previous role at work involved responding to FOIs from the public as well as DPA Subject Access Requests (which we abbreviated to SARS, I kid you not) and PQs (Parliamentary Questions), so I have a reasonable grasp of how to construct an FOI enquiry even when I’m “fishing”.
Really I was just banking answers to trip them up in future if my instincts were right; that the products marketed as covid vaccines might not have our best interests at heart (or alternatively ‘maybe not in the best interests of our hearts’).
I naively thought I’d be able to refer to my FOI during the CONvid inquiry, but it doesn’t even have a reporting date.
No point closing the jabbatoir doors after the horse has bolted, and this one appears to have already dealt many people an almighty mule-kick.
I don't think the MHRA knows the meaning of pharmacovigilance. I've been trying to get the MHRA to investigate a case of mass ADRs and two deaths, one of which was my Mother, resulting from the Moderna booster given to care home residents in May 2022. The care home was in mid COVID outbreak at the time and those residents who had COVID or were recovering from it were not given the booster, effectively acting as a control group. The residents who, like my Mother, tested negative were given the booster. I understand only those who received the booster became ill within 24 hours, mostly with fever and vomiting. Mum, who had Alzheimer's and had lost mental capacity, inhaled vomit and was hospitalised 34 hours after the booster with Aspiration Pneumonia which her hospital doctor told me is more dangerous than COVID. She died suddenly 27 days after the booster. A senior carer at the home told me another lady died from the Moderna side effects.
The MHRA has failed to investigate this case and states it has “not identified any particular safety concerns in the over 75s with any specific COVID-19 vaccine.” Also that “the benefits of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine continue to outweigh the risk of developing severe COVID-19 in these patients”.
This demonstrates that the MHRA is confining itself to the singular risk-benefit balance of COVID vaccine vs COVID infection and is not taking into account the wider risks (such as Aspiration Pneumonia) to the frail elderly posed by the vaccine's side effects.
The MHRA in its latest reply has dismissed my concerns on the basis that when those who receive the vaccines “are very elderly or unwell, it is inevitable that events will occur in close temporality to vaccination” and repeats its mantra that continuous safety monitoring has not identified any new safety concerns. But then how could it when they don't investigate cases such as this one which includes two deaths?
If indeed only those residents who had the booster became ill with ADRs within 24 hours, this would demonstrate a clear link with the Moderna. In turn, the two deaths from those side effects would also be linked to the booster. This is an observational link but cannot be proven technically, one way or the other, unless the MHRA investigates. Moreover, prior COVID infection of my Mother (4.5 months before the booster), and potentially the other residents who suffered ADRs, is pertinent to this case. Both in terms of potential natural immunity and the potential higher risk of ADRs for those with a history of COVID infection. By not investigating this case, the MHRA is displaying either incompetence or deliberate obfuscation. Either way it is negligence.
Meanwhile I know that the Moderna killed my Mother before her time. Other vulnerable elderly are at risk if they and their families do not know (as I did not) about the wider risks of the boosters. I gather that those residents at Mum's care home who did not receive the booster when she and the others did, got to hear about what happened and subsequently refused to have it.
The MHRA, by its own admission, is now an enabler instead of a watchdog.
It’s debatable as to whether it’s ever been a watchdog.
In the same way that multi billionaire investors have a huge influence over football clubs or energy companies, they also hold that influence in medicine too.
Now imagine if you had so much money you could buy huge chunks of big pharma and sovereign regulators under the guise of research grants and investments.
I really cannot understand how anyone with half a brain could believe this situation to be benign. Yet it appears that 650 oxbridge educated Parliamentarians and many academics want us to believe that it is.
"The possible important harms of Covid-19 vaccines". Now please don't get paranoid and conspiratorial and start thinking government is trying to avoid this issue. That can't be true. Obviously.
470k yellow cards. That seems like a lot. A signal of some sort?
Wow. Stunning.
MHRA are a nest of mendacious sociopaths who shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near a healthcare system. There should be some sort of register they have to appear on for 20 years, forbidding it.
I submitted a leggy FOI to the MHRA at the start of 2021. My previous role at work involved responding to FOIs from the public as well as DPA Subject Access Requests (which we abbreviated to SARS, I kid you not) and PQs (Parliamentary Questions), so I have a reasonable grasp of how to construct an FOI enquiry even when I’m “fishing”.
Really I was just banking answers to trip them up in future if my instincts were right; that the products marketed as covid vaccines might not have our best interests at heart (or alternatively ‘maybe not in the best interests of our hearts’).
I naively thought I’d be able to refer to my FOI during the CONvid inquiry, but it doesn’t even have a reporting date.
No point closing the jabbatoir doors after the horse has bolted, and this one appears to have already dealt many people an almighty mule-kick.
I don't think the MHRA knows the meaning of pharmacovigilance. I've been trying to get the MHRA to investigate a case of mass ADRs and two deaths, one of which was my Mother, resulting from the Moderna booster given to care home residents in May 2022. The care home was in mid COVID outbreak at the time and those residents who had COVID or were recovering from it were not given the booster, effectively acting as a control group. The residents who, like my Mother, tested negative were given the booster. I understand only those who received the booster became ill within 24 hours, mostly with fever and vomiting. Mum, who had Alzheimer's and had lost mental capacity, inhaled vomit and was hospitalised 34 hours after the booster with Aspiration Pneumonia which her hospital doctor told me is more dangerous than COVID. She died suddenly 27 days after the booster. A senior carer at the home told me another lady died from the Moderna side effects.
The MHRA has failed to investigate this case and states it has “not identified any particular safety concerns in the over 75s with any specific COVID-19 vaccine.” Also that “the benefits of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine continue to outweigh the risk of developing severe COVID-19 in these patients”.
This demonstrates that the MHRA is confining itself to the singular risk-benefit balance of COVID vaccine vs COVID infection and is not taking into account the wider risks (such as Aspiration Pneumonia) to the frail elderly posed by the vaccine's side effects.
The MHRA in its latest reply has dismissed my concerns on the basis that when those who receive the vaccines “are very elderly or unwell, it is inevitable that events will occur in close temporality to vaccination” and repeats its mantra that continuous safety monitoring has not identified any new safety concerns. But then how could it when they don't investigate cases such as this one which includes two deaths?
If indeed only those residents who had the booster became ill with ADRs within 24 hours, this would demonstrate a clear link with the Moderna. In turn, the two deaths from those side effects would also be linked to the booster. This is an observational link but cannot be proven technically, one way or the other, unless the MHRA investigates. Moreover, prior COVID infection of my Mother (4.5 months before the booster), and potentially the other residents who suffered ADRs, is pertinent to this case. Both in terms of potential natural immunity and the potential higher risk of ADRs for those with a history of COVID infection. By not investigating this case, the MHRA is displaying either incompetence or deliberate obfuscation. Either way it is negligence.
Meanwhile I know that the Moderna killed my Mother before her time. Other vulnerable elderly are at risk if they and their families do not know (as I did not) about the wider risks of the boosters. I gather that those residents at Mum's care home who did not receive the booster when she and the others did, got to hear about what happened and subsequently refused to have it.
The MHRA, by its own admission, is now an enabler instead of a watchdog.
It’s debatable as to whether it’s ever been a watchdog.
In the same way that multi billionaire investors have a huge influence over football clubs or energy companies, they also hold that influence in medicine too.
Now imagine if you had so much money you could buy huge chunks of big pharma and sovereign regulators under the guise of research grants and investments.
I really cannot understand how anyone with half a brain could believe this situation to be benign. Yet it appears that 650 oxbridge educated Parliamentarians and many academics want us to believe that it is.
The government gave the job of protecting the public to MRHA so you can’t blame them fortunately