This is the third of the weekly round-ups of Covid vaccine safety reports and news compiled by a group of medical doctors who are monitoring developments but prefer to remain anonymous in the current climate (find the second one here). By no means is this part of an effort to generate alarm about the vaccines or dissuade anyone from getting inoculated. It should be read in conjunction with Lockdown Sceptics‘ other posts on vaccines, which include both encouraging and not so encouraging developments. At Lockdown Sceptics we report all news about the vaccines whether positive or negative and give no one advice about whether they should or should not take them. Unlike with lockdowns, we are neither pro-vaccine nor anti-vaccine; we see our job as to report the facts, not advocate for or against a particular policy. The vaccine technology is novel and the vaccines have not yet fully completed their trials, which is why they’re in use under temporary and not full market authorisation. This has been done on account of the emergency situation and the trial data was largely encouraging on both efficacy and safety. For a summary of that data, see this preamble to the Government’s page on the Yellow Card reporting system. We publish information and opinion to inform public debate and help readers reach their own conclusions about what is best for them, based on the available data.
- The U.S. CDC is investigating reports of heart problems following vaccination with the mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna), particularly in young adults aged between 18 and 30, according to the Mail. It is estimated that around 1 in 100,000 vaccine recipients suffer myocarditis – an inflammation of the heart muscle – as an adverse event. The Israeli Health Ministry has announced further investigation into the issue while the Pentagon is reportedly monitoring it in the U.S. after 14 cases were reported following military vaccination. A study in the Lancet suggests a possible mechanism by which the virus itself could trigger such a condition.
- The European Medicines Agency has approved the Pfizer vaccine for children of 12 years and above, the Metro reports. In Israel, 93 Doctors have signed an open letter calling for vaccines not to be offered to children on account of the low risks to them of the disease and the unknown risks of the vaccines. America’s Frontline Doctors have filed for a temporary restraining order against the use of COVID-19 vaccines in children in the Northern District of Alabama. In the U.K., the JCVI has not made a recommendation on the vaccination of children, and it will reportedly be left to Prime Minister Boris Johnson to make a decision in the coming weeks. If true, this seems a very unsatisfactory state of affairs – in the absence of a clear medical and scientific recommendation to authorise the use of a medicine on children, the default position should surely be not to authorise it?
- A comment piece in the Lancet has raised the issue of the missing consideration of Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) in the vaccine trials and studies. The authors, including Professor Piero Olliaro of the Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health at the University of Oxford, calculate an ARR of 1.3% for AstraZeneca, 1.2% for Moderna, 1.2% for Janssen and 0.84% for Pfizer.
- A letter in the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry (BMJ) (also reported by the Mail and ITV) highlights the risk of stroke following receipt of the AstraZeneca vaccination, linking it to the newly identified condition of Vaccine-induced Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia (VITT) (blood clots).
- The U.K. Government has released two reports on the hospitalisation rates of vaccinated people with COVID-19 over the winter and spring. One, from PHE, suggests 57% of patients admitted with Covid over the period had received at least one vaccine dose. The other, from the ISARIC4C consortium, suggested just 7.3% of Covid hospital admissions over the period had received at least one vaccine dose. This large discrepancy has not been acknowledged or explained.
- The Johnson & Johnson vaccine has received conditional marketing authorisation in the UK.
- EudraVigilance – the equivalent of the Yellow Card reporting system in the EU – has logged reports claiming 12,184 people have died and 1,196,190 have suffered injuries following receipt of the Covid vaccines in the EU.
- Suspected adverse events in the U.K. as reported in the media: Stephanie Dubois (39); Lisa Shaw (44); Kirsty Hext (25).
Summary of Adverse Events UK
According to an updated report published on May 27th (covering the period up to May 19th), the MHRA Yellow Card reporting system has recorded a total of 859,481 events, based on 246,970 reports. The total number of fatalities reported is 1,213.
- Pfizer (12.7 million first doses, 10.5 million second doses) now has one Yellow Card in 380 doses, 2.9 adverse reactions (i.e., symptoms) per card, one fatal reaction in 61,000 doses.
- AstraZeneca (24.2 million first doses, 10.7 million second doses) has one Yellow Card in 190 doses, 3.7 adverse reactions per card, one fatal reaction in 43,000 doses.
- Moderna (0.3 million first doses) has one Yellow Card in 152 doses, 2.8 adverse reactions per card, one fatal reaction in 75,000 doses.
Note that these rates have dropped slightly from last week.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Perhaps it should be called vaccine unsafety update!
Is there a reason that the increasingly suspicious omission of ivermectin as an effective treatment for Covid 19 is a potential game changer as well as a potential source of legal issues when noted against the requirement for no treatments in order to grant emergency use authorisation?
The simple reason is that if there was an effective drug therapy already available for treating Covid then vaccines could not have been granted their emergency authorisation. Drug companies and other vested interests have derided and blocked reports of the success of ivermectin – there is no money in it after all.
”Boris Johnson to decide this policy in the coming weeks”….
Another executive decision without debate or scrutiny, then?
I’m not sure why the regulators went through the nicety of a ‘temporary emergency use authorisation’ for the vaccines since they clearly grabbed them with both hands, and from then on these things would be jabbed into people no matter what.
What’s temporary about it?
No matter that people die; a Covid death is a tragedy it seems, but a vaccine death is only to be expected when you are rolling out millions of the the things – stands to reason, don’t ask stupid questions, etc….
“… the trial data was largely encouraging on both efficacy and safety…”
Except to the thousands who died or are permanently harmed from them.
Some of the trial data was notable by its absence…
Will, do you write parody?
Wow! And so many do not even question! Amazing to see that this products are available . I participated in the rally in London on Saturday and I encourage people here to bring friends and family for next one June 26. The rally was peaceful, stunning group of people from all over society abd see so many children was indeed special.
I have attended all but two the protest marches and must agree that the people on the marches are generally a fantastic lot. Let’s hope that the next one is even bigger and impossible to ignore for all the right reasons.
Every single person who receives any of these experimental vaccines is a labrat.
Long term side effects are unknown.
US
As of 5/30/21, 4561 people have died after taking at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccination. 2183 from the Moderna jab, 2005 from Pfizer, and 351 from Janssen (Johnson & Johnson). 2468 men and 1986 women have died after receiving at least one dose of vaccination.
307 persons have died shortly after the vaccine under the age of 50.
These are enormous figures for a new vaccine.Any other vaccine than Covid vaccine would have been reassessed at this stage
Exactly, and not to mention the vast under reporting of adverse events and vaccine injury, which people now assume is just par for the course with these jabs. One friend still can’t fully lift her arm weeks after getting jabbed, but thinks that’s normal. Most people know friends or family who have had terrible reactions to these vaccines. I still hear folk comparing their reactions after being jabbed as if that’s wholly normal, it’s not, it’s completely nuts.
Is this part of the reason why the vaccines haven’t been pulled yet? People have been desensitised to the amount, and awful nature, of adverse reactions, and so Pharma companies and Government’s aren’t being pressured to pull the jabs. In fact people are literally queuing up for them.
They’ve been reassured that these adverse reactions “show that the vaccine is working.”
A bit like breaking out in boils means your immune system is working rather than you’re run down and your immune system is struggling, otherwise you wouldn’t be covered in boils.
Did your friend log her reactions on the Yellow Card site? I have spoken to so many people who have been wiped out for several days after the vaccination and because they think this is normal they don’t report it. I do wonder what the true figures of under reported side effects really are. And – worryingly – this is just the short term data
Typically what is reported is 1-10% of the likely actual number of adverse reactions.
Surprising what fear will do. If we equalled this out and said; If you take the jab you are going to die, or, if you don’t take the jab you are going to die. Do you think that will be the incentive for people to think for themselves ? It really does depend on who controls the media
I wonder if anyone has compared deaths “with covid” of those under 60 and deaths following “vaccination” for the same age group.
In April, 2 MPs asked Hancock in the commons very searching questions about lack of data on how many people had died after being injected. Hancock spluttered and stuttered and asked them to put their requests in writing so he could be specific in his response!
I’m not aware there has been an update on their requests.
https://www.chrischope.com/news/hancock-panics-when-mps-ask-how-many-die-after-vaccination
166 million people in the USA have received at least one dose. So about 140,000 of these will die anyway every month. Until someone can show that the 4651 reported deaths were because of the vaccine the figure is meaningless.
Depends on whether they were health before the jab and if there’s a direct causation, i.e. it’s not random and due to age, illness, accident, etc. That’s why it should be properly evaluated and not dismissed as being the normal death rate.
Funny how 1000+ people dying from CV19 in India against a normal daily death rate of 27,000 is considered cause for panic, but the deaths and adverse reactions in the U.S. is just part of the normal death rate that occurs, nothing to see, just a coincidence.
There was a somewhat similar claim made in the FDA Pfizer briefing https://web.archive.org/web/20201216060923/https:/www.fda.gov/media/144245/download about the cases of Bell’s Palsy seen in the treatment arm, that they were at the background rate for the population. As far as I can tell they were comparing the annual background rate for the condition against the observed incidence rate shortly after treatment, which would have been a large multiple of the background rate if annualised.
The VAERS system is the same as earlier years.The reported deaths for the same amount of 160 million flu vaccines is about 80-100. Just comparing this with flu vaccine,with the same criteria used for registration of deaths show that this vaccine is much more dangerous than flu vaccines. There are more than 300 deaths within a month for those under 50. The figure is not meaningless as shown that in 1976 50 deaths led to the the withdrawl of the swineflu vaccine 1976. The defence of mass vaccination of heathy young people is outrageous. This vaccine was meant for risk groups but is now used in mass vaccination of healthy yhoung people.
No, this vaccination is for everyone regardless. Please watch a link mentioned earlier of Dr Peter McCullough Md where he blows the lid off Vaccine Dangers.
It is a must watch video.
Flu vaccines are introduced with hardly any publicity. Covid vaccines have dominated the headlines for months. You really can’t deduce anything from the fact that more Covid vaccine incidents are reported than Flu vaccine incidents.
50 deaths in Swine Flu – out of how many vaccinations? Were they investigated? Or did someone just say “that’s too many – stop”?
And because no one is tracking the vaccinated, observing and documenting reactions in the short, medium or long term, which normally would be done in trials, and because the reporting system is voluntary, persons like you will continue to make such smug statements.
“This vaccine is nearly safe”
“This car is nearly safe”
“This airliner is nearly safe”
one of these things is not like the others
no one is tracking the vaccinated, observing and documenting reactions in the short, medium or long term,
What makes you think that? Clearly the long and medium terms have not happened yet so we don’t know for sure if anyone will track the effects – but with 70% of the population vaccinated it won’t be hard to do! In the short term I see masses of reports on vaccination efficacy and safety. An obvious example is the Zoe app.
If you watch UK Column News (which you most definitely should) it’s the fact that these deaths and adverse reactions aren’t being investigated that’s troubling. Why aren’t they? Like there have been NO post-mortems carried out on “Covid” deaths to find out whether they are “from”, “with” or indeed if “Covid” is involved at all. Point is the whole thing STINKS, which ever way you look at it.
it’s the fact that these deaths and adverse reactions aren’t being investigated that’s troubling
Can you give me a link? I would be quite surprised if VAERS reported deaths are not being investigated at all. At the very least I would have thought the CDC/FDA (?) would have done a statistical analysis.
“…the figure is meaningless”
A bit like the figures for COVID deaths then?
It isn’t a vaccine.
US Dr Peter McCullough gives a frank breakdown of why he cannot recommend the vaxs any more which he actually refers to as a BIO WEAPON!
He cites the Swine Flu vax rollout of 1976 which was pulled afer 26 deaths. The rollout is quite clearly an evil agenda coming from the very top. This is a great clip with some very raw truths, from the horse’s mounth. McCullough is top grade and highly respected.
Dr. Peter McCullough MD Blows lid of Vaccine Dangers (A Must Watch)
https://rumble.com/vht8r7-dr-peter-mccullough-md-blows-lid-of-vaccine-dangers-a-must-watch.html
Dr Peter McCullogh is another fearless spokesman of the truth
I have just watched this video of Dr Peter McCullough. I can recommend it 100 per cent as it answers everything in a very clear way.
Any other pharmaceutical would have been halted and pulled, long before now!
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/our-vaccine-rebuttal-competition-the-winner/
Vaccines were a ‘way out of this’ now according to the communi$t member, Susan Mitchie, they are now ‘giving a sense of false security’
I loathe that evil woman
I’ve previously been a bit scathing about over-optimistic reporting on vaccines – so congratulations, Will, on this balancing article.
The point is that people such as myself aren’t ‘anti-vaxxers’ (a propaganda term). The fact that the phrase is used without correction shows that the government is acting essentially as a PR agency for Big Pharma, rather than an honest broker for public health – as well as being engaged in an arse-covering exercise for it expensive misjudgments.
We are simply rationalists, following the best evidence.
The MHRA has comprehensively undermined itself by being a government poodle; it should have turned down the emergency use request simply on the basis that there was plainly no emergency, and that the opening sentence of the government document requiring it was misinformation. But … government appointed bears in the woods …
Good to see the non-mention of ARR figures being picked up – always a litmus test of good faith.
The most worrying sentence? –
“… it will reportedly be left to Prime Minister Boris Johnson to make a decision in the coming weeks.”
F.! A bit like leaving it to Jack the Ripper to rule on women’s rights.
I talked to a supermarket worker at the till who told me she thought the kids should be jabbed straight away to stop the Covid deaths.
She has kids.
Many people are so trusting of the NHS and BBC that they will not begin to change their views unless children obviously die from the jabs,
They have no idea that there could be long term effects.
It’s awful.
Meanwhile, Is Carrie pregnant again? Is that the reason for the quick wedding? Is she helping Boris in his commendable one man mission to further climate change? What are her views and instincts on this issue? They could now be very important. I’m. not hopeful though.
I’m not convinced they’d change their minds even if children die from these vaccines. It will either not be reported or dismissed as natural causes or the price to pay for keeping the very elderly “safe”.
Hang on – the other coronavirus injections in use in the U.K. have temporary authorisation under Regulation 174, not marketing authorisation. This enables them to be used in an ‘emergency’ situation.
Why has the J&J shite in a syringe got CMA – conditional marketing authorisation?
I seem to recall reading something months ago that medicinal products used under temporary authorisation cannot be made mandatory but products with marketing authorisation can – ie for the greater good in a pandemic situation!
Very tricky. Worth making a note of for future reference.
As it’s a ‘single dose’, it could be a candidate for the forced ‘hesitant’ to be subjected to if the benevolent government goes down that route – in the best interests of the public, of course.
Is it appropriate to calculate the risk with reference ti the dose, rather than the complete 2 dose vaccination process?
Calculating by dose understates the individual risk because of the two dose requirement, each individual is put at risk two times.
For example, by dose, Pfizer come in as 1 death per 60,733 doses.
However, with 12.7 million 1st dose and 10.7 2nd, that is 10.7 million completed vaxxes, 2.2 million incomplete. Weight incomplete as 50%, we get 11.6 million equivalent completed vaxxinations.
Dividing this value by 382 deaths, the result becomes 1 death per 30,366 completed vaxxinations.
The comparable value for AZ is 21,650
Younger healthy people very rarely die of Covid.
Based on Irish data, I estimate the annual risk of contracting and dying of covid for all healthy persons under 45 is about 1 in 368,000 (7 deaths out of 2,575,000). The risk to persons under 25 is much less.
Even if the (so far merely reported but confirmed) vaccine related deaths are reduced by a factor of 10, Pfizer at 1 in 304,000 would still be a 21% greater risk than not getting vaxxed.
The risk/benefit of vaccines remains positive for the elderly and those with co-morbidities. But, the vaccines have been proven to have a level of adverse effects that would be unacceptable in less frenzied times. At some point, the risk /benefit ration turns negative. For healthy person without co-morbidities, I suggest this point is in the 45-54 year bracket.
Given this estimate, I believe there is no scientific, ethical or moral justification for requiring or compelling younger people to get vaccinated.
Based on Irish data, I estimate the annual risk of contracting and dying of covid for all healthy persons under 45 is about 1 in 368,000 (7 deaths out of 2,575,000). The risk to persons under 25 is much less.
What level of prevalence were you assuming? One of the aims of a vaccine is to keep the prevalence low on the assumption that it would otherwise rise. Also why just one year? The risk from the vaccine is a one-off. The risk from Covid continues and depends on how long you take into account. So probably fair to compare it to as long as the vaccine provides protection which we don’t currently know.
Made no assumption on prevalence.
Very simply, Under 45 years of age, estimate 7 deaths in the twelve months to 06 March. There are about 2,575,000 under 45 without health issues. So, their annual actual risk of contracting Covid over the 12 months through all phases pf the epidemic in that period was 2575000 divided by 7 which is 1 in 368,000.
On this basis, the risk of vaccination to younger people is greater than the risk of contracting and dying from covid.
Fair enough – you are implicitly assuming the average prevalence in the 12 months to 6th March – which is as good as any assumption. How did you estimate the 7 deaths – does Ireland provide a breakdown by age? But it doesn’t matter much, I did the calculation for deaths of any age in England with current prevalence and it came out somewhat similar.
However, I totally dispute the vaccines death figures which seem to assume that dying shortly after being vaccinated means you died because of the vaccine.
Ireland provides age breakdown for covid deaths. and the overall proportion with underlying conditions, 87%. 48 under 45 times (1-87% with underlying conditions) = 7. Best estimate I can do with the available info.
Vaccine death figures.
Agreed, they are not yet confirmed and investigation will likely reduce them, but we do not know by how much. To account for this, in my estimate above, I assumed a reduction after validation by a factor of 10, this still makes vaccination more risky for the young.
I believe a reduction by a factor of at least 20 is required to ensure vaccines are less risky for the young. At that point, the debate should be about what margin of risk between vaccination or not is considered acceptable. We are not there yet.
How do you justify a factor of 10 (or 20)? These are reported as deaths that might possibly be linked to vaccine. It is the job of the MHRA to then investigate yellow card reports and as far as I know they have only found the minute risk of a blood clot.
10 or 20 are of course choices, made in the absence of sufficient data to make a more accurate estimate. The absence of hard, accurate data does not prohibit making assumptions in order to make estimates, it merely demands openness about the assumptions. I initially chose 10 as a prudent factor for the initial estimate number because this would allow for considerable over-reporting in the safety reports. With this factor, vaccination is still potentially more risky for younger people than not being vaccinated, and it is the risk to the individual, not the community, that determines whether an individual should be vaccinated. According to my estimate, the Pfizer vaccine wotl fe about 20% more risky and the AZ about 70% more risky. Therefore to provide a minimal margin over AZ, the actual proportion of real vaccine related deaths woould need to be 20 times less than reported. A further consideration must be that the Phase III clinical trials are not completet. We know thevaccines have short term effects, but even counting from the start of the firsyt trials, barely a year ago, it is far too soon to know anything about medium or long term effects. It is also a… Read more »
As you say 10 or 20 are choices. I choose 1,000. Where do we go from here?
One-off vaccine? They are already talking about booster shots. No one is promising long lasting immunity due to vaccination.
No ones denying it either – we just don’t know.
Exactly. We don’t know.
And in the absence of confirmed durability of vaccine immunity and the reported prospect that booster shots will be required, a direct comparison between the annual risk of contracting and dying from covod and the risks of vaccination without any adjustment for longer durations is appropriate.
The “vaccines” do NOT provide ANY immunity only a lessening of symptoms if you catch C1984.
It is basically a sort of untested, glorified aspirin but not as useful and definitely more dangerous.
Just ran the numbers on the Oxford QCovid Risk calculator for a person of BMI 25 and no health problems for each year 20 to 44 years old.
Then I calculated the comulative probability of contracting and dying from Covid over the 25 years:
The annual risk reduces from 1 in a million at age 20 to 1 in 34,483 at age 44.
The cumulative risk over the period is 0.0026%, or 1 in 4,951.
This compares to a cumulative risk of death from all causes over the same 25 year period of 2.1%, or 1 in 48
To summarise, a 20 year has a 1 in 48 chance of dying before 45, but if he does die, it is over 100 times more likely to be anything but Covid.
Covid is an exceptionally low life risk for young healthy people.
As I understand it the QCovid calculator is very successful at predicting who is at risk (i.e. relative risk between people) but less successful at predicting absolute risk as that clearly varies with prevalence. But I may be wrong about this – I only just looked into it.
In any case, I don’t dispute that the risk of dying from Covid for healthy 20 year olds is extremely small. I just think the risk from the vaccines is also extremely small. The real point is that young people can act as a continuing sink of infection which can then flare up into episodes which will affect more vulnerable people. Vaccines offer a lot of protection to the vulnerable but they are not perfect and while there is a sink of infection there is always the risk of new mutations which can escape the vaccine.
Agreed. The risk sums seem to conquer with those done via https://qcovid.org/Calculation which I’m used to. A while back, I did not accept the ‘offer’ and tried to explain why. So far, as the evidence emerges, I’m glad I made a wise choice.
Yes. That Covid risk calculator calculates my 22 year old son’s risk of catching and dying of Covid as 1 in 1,000,000. I think that is their lower bound limit, their proceess will not return a lower rosk.
At that level of risk, mandatory vaccinations, with their much higher known level of risk, for young people are a crime against humanity and will kill thousands.
It’s not a ‘vaccine’ though is it. It’s an experimental gene therapy, being forced upon a terrified population and which the ‘experiment’ will carry on until 2023.
But of course no harm has been done…
Why have you chosen to exclude the easy to read and copy format for the vaccine harms? Why have you kept the impossible to fathom list which is totally confusing?
In the beginning the pro covid vaccine lobby stated that the vaccine just ended up in the muscles and lymphnodes. This was obviously not the truth, Just see the below EMA document about Pfizer vaccine. In mouse experiments also concentrated in the ovaries. Does it have relevance? Perhaps not but you need long term studies to exclude risks.
Do ordinary persons understand that it was just a 6 mth’s trial i.e. not even long enough for an ordinary pregnancy? Do we know the risks for pregnancy? Do we know the risk for fertility of men? Of course we don’t know as we had not the appropriate time to exclude those risks.
At the moment nobody can say that the vaccine is safe enough for young healthy persons therefore finding the majority of healthy 30 year old wanting to take the vaccine is incredible for a disease with such a low morbidity in that age group without a co-morbidity.
Stop the vaccines now. This is crazy, I can hardly believe what I’m reading.
Please can anyone tell me why we are still giving our fellow human beings this dangerous experimental stuff for what is fast becoming a non event?
“Uncoordinated phase 3 trials do not satisfy public health requirements”
This from the Lancet piece.
… which means that none of these concoctions is properly tested. It’s as simple as that.
Any body trying to pretend that the testing regime has been sufficient is lying.
Vaccine Safety Update: They’re not f**king safe!!!!!