Covid-19 caught the world unprepared; the scramble it prompted for treatments, tests, protective equipment and vaccines favoured the world’s richest nations. To avoid the same thing happening in future pandemics, a group of world leaders has proposed a pandemic treaty, which is being negotiated in a series of international meetings hosted by the World Health Organization (WHO).
The draft treaty is aimed at ensuring equity in distributing all that is needed to handle a future pandemic, instead of the coronavirus free-for-all.
However, reaching an agreement is tricky, with diverging government interests, reservations on the part of pharmaceutical companies and lingering anti-WHO sentiment from those who opposed lockdowns, masks and vaccines during the pandemic.
We’re going to pass over to an unelected, remote, global bureaucracy the right to lockdown societies are we?
This has been circling the internet for a few months. What is news to me though is the WHO Digital Global Health Certificate, where everyone has their vaccination / medical history on record with the WHO, following the EU model used during the plandemic.
The simple answer is ‘No’, but how many of our politicians are ignorant of it or actually support the proposals……
Most of government policy comes from unelected global outfits. Our own idiots claim it for their own, but that is bollocks.
On the pandemic front, plenty of poor nations relied on treatments banned (or shadow-banned) by the WHO to their benefit.
Entirely OT, here’s a post about Krugman, the economics equivalent of Polly as a bell-wether of sense:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/08/09/nyts-paulkrugman-mendacious-an-idiot-or-both
Thinking that Krugman is an idiot is an error. He’s often biased, sure, he’s even often wrong. That second happens to all of us. But an idiot, no.
Covid-19 caught the world unprepared
Did it?
It’s remarkable how quickly Western governments ditched decades of medical advice in order to march in creepy lockstep towards medical authoritarianism, despite it being obvious by the Spring of 2020 that Covid had a vanishingly small mortality rate.
But I’m sure the Open Societies Foundation only means us well.
Regrettably the article doesn’t say how much this will cost us.
I vote No!!!
The World wasn’t unprepared, most Countries had an updated Pandemic Plan sitting on the shelf – updated after the SARS CoV 1 non-pandemic that was billed to destroy the World but just fizzled out – and two centuries of medical experience and knowledge with respect to contagion and respiratory viruses in particular. The UK had the Common Cold Research Unit beavering away for 50 years after the War to figure out a cure/vaccines for Colds & ‘flu, without success but learning a great deal on the way. They published over 1 000 papers and in the 60s discovered the four Human coronaviruses that cause 10% of Colds.
What happened is Governments – except Sweden – just ignored the plans and knowledge and followed policies that had no basis in science or for that matter Human Rights. Like their climate doom policies.
Had they followed the plan, which was basically do nothing, then SARS CoV 2 would also have been a non-event. And SARS CoV 2 was not a ‘novel’ virus – clue in there being a SARS CoV 1.
John B has it spot on. There’s one question that lingers for me. Was any policy suggested by anyone that might have offered a useful degree of protection to the denizens of care homes/nursing homes?
The only one I saw was offered by “ticker guy” who wanted the government – Federal, I assume, but maybe State – to use regulations and financial handouts to reduce the chances of staff carrying infection in. He envisaged staff working long spells – weeks at at time – without going home. They’d be accommodated in on-site RVs. Then they’d get a break. Before return they would, I assume, be tested for infection.
They would agree to this mode of work because they’d be paid handsomely to agree to it. The results would be to suppress the merry-go-round of staff working part time in different homes, gaily transmitting the infection between them. It seemed a little far-fetched to me but on the other hand governments and “experts” made no useful suggestions at all that I saw.
It’s a pity that it wasn’t tried anywhere. There must have been places suited for an experiment. The Isle of Wight, maybe?
Krugman is an idiot in the original dictionary sense. Someone who lives in a world of his own. Or ivory tower in his case. Otherwise he’d know he was wrong when he made those predictions and try to work out why. Which would be his own arrogance and failure to identify with people outside his own bubble. By which measure all bubble-dwellers are idiots irrespective of their IQ. As for repeating the lie of fossil-fuel funding of climate sceptics, that is either lazy or mendacious.
On further thought: one of the sources of trouble was the desire of preening politicians to be seen to be ‘doing something’. Trying out ticker guy’s scheme would have given them something to boast about with essentially no risk that it would be as harmful as all the cretinous things they did try.
Absolutely they all had plans, but as mentioned, chucked them in the bin when Ferguson got his calculator out.
Jesse Norman MP, the only one in the COBR’A’ meeting (Oiky Gove the Chair, not Boris for some reason) where lockdown was decided to ask ‘has anyone done a cost – benefit analysis on this (lockdown)’? Answer = No.
Apparently Sweden followed the UK plan(s) – which we ditched.
UK Pandemic plans:
2006:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/contingency-planning-for-a-possible-flu-pandemic
2011:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/overarching-government-strategy-to-respond-to-a-flu-pandemic-analysis-of-the-scientific-evidence-base
and another from 2011:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/213717/dh_131040.pdf
2017:
https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/framework-for-managing-the-response-to-pandemic-influenza/
Given that it’s their purpose one would have expected the WHO to have been prepared for a pandemic. As it was they were utterly useless and it took them 9 months to provide definitive guidance on how Covid was transmitted between people. By then private industry not under WHO control was rolling into mass production of vaccines making this guidance moot.
Amusingly, I suppose, the countries most opposed to the WHO plan seem to be in Sub-Saharan Africa who have enjoyed the experience of being the testing-ground for the Gates Foundation’s exciting experiments in improving the human condition while making pots of money.
Perhaps people here can help my memory. I recall that Boris was originally opposed to lockdowns, but what finally caused the u-turn was the French saying they’d close Calais unless UK locked down like they had.
I’ve never heard it mentioned since. Did that happen?
“Did that happen?” Dunno. My only opinion on the French during the whole cock-up was that it was feeble not to blame the “Kent variant” on France.
Sweden has already completed its Covid inquiry, ours is subject to the usual can kicking so politicians can avoid scrutiny:
“It is 15 months since Sweden’s Coronavirus Commission presented its final report. The 770-page document analysed how the country handled the pandemic and came up with numerous suggestions for how things might have been done better. The initial response, it concluded, was too slow, but the report vindicated the decision to make social distancing measures voluntary rather than compulsory.”
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/covid-and-the-politics-of-panic/
Also, apparently someone took it in to to their heads that Boris should have his mind changed on masks and David Halpen, head of the Nudge unit, showed Boris a load of pictures of world leaders wearing masks and then one of him not wearing one which changed his mind. No evidence needed when politicians do want to be seen as out of step with the rest of the world.
No wonder we ended up with lockdowns if he’s that spineless.
Cnuts.
“Thinking that Krugman is an idiot is an error. He’s often biased, sure, he’s even often wrong. That second happens to all of us. But an idiot, no.”
In my world people who keep getting things wrong are idiots. Krugman may be very erudite and well read etc, but if he keeps producing garbage from all that input, then he’s an idiot.
You should read the report for the Scottish Covid enquiry. Its conclusions are devastating.
@Clovis: this one?
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/cold-case-homicide-cops-investigating-30506943
The most important thing is that we all agree there is no conspiracy. They are just meeting and discussing ways to enslave us and depopulate the world, that’s all.
This is a very interesting piece on the Malthusians, old and new, and their (proven) use of vaccines to sterilise women without their knowledge.
I bet there was no conspiracy here, either – though the only alternatives are
i) they did it by accident
or
ii) some rogue operator did it off his own bat
but I’m sorry to tell you that they didn’t do it by accident and it wasn’t down to some rogue operator.
Oops sorry
Link:
https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/the-forgotten-history-of-sterilizing?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=748806&post_id=135698443&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
@Clovis: joking apart, you presumably meant this?
https://www.covid19inquiry.scot/hearings/epidemiology-presentation
Meanwhile:
Now a Hong Kong study by Yu and colleagues have found that of young persons who had heart damage confirmed by MRI and who underwent a second scan one year later, 58% had residual abnormalities suggesting a scar could be forming in the heart muscle.
Forty adolescents, mean age of 15, mostly boys were evaluated. It was notable that 73% had no cardiac symptoms, so without an evaluation, the parents would have had no idea their child was suffering heart damage from the COVID-19 vaccine.
https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/growing-concern-vaccine-heart-damage?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1119676&post_id=135793178&isFreemail=false&utm_medium=email
Luckily it’s transient and people just get better.
Ah. Maybe not:
Two teenage boys who suffered heart inflammation following Pfizer’s Covid jabs and then seemed to recover had relapses months later, Italian researchers have reported.
Both teenagers showed evidence of new heart damage from the recurrences, including high levels of proteins from injured cardiac muscle. Scans showed one boy had new lesions in his heart wall, and he needed nearly two weeks of hospitalization.
The researchers could not determine why the boys suffered the relapses, which came 8 to 12 months after the initial myocarditis episodes.
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/urgent-italian-researchers-find-covid
Hulscher et al have published the largest accumulation of autopsy result in deaths after COVID-19 vaccination. From a total of 325 cases, independent review found the COVID-19 vaccine was the cause of death in 73.9%. The vast majority had the cardiovascular system as the single fatal organ system injury to the body.
https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/covid-19-vaccine-is-the-culprit-in
At least the major medical journals – despite being mostly funded by Big Pharma – are all over it.
Ah. Maybe not:
A Lancet review of 325 autopsies after Covid vaccination found that 74% of the deaths were caused by the vaccine – but the study was removed within 24 hours.
The paper, a pre-print that was awaiting peer-review, is written by leading cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, Yale epidemiologist Dr. Harvey Risch and their colleagues at the Wellness Company, as well as top pathologist Dr. Roger Hodkinson and others, and was published online on Wednesday on the pre-print site of the prestigious medical journal.
However, less than 24 hours later, the study was removed and a note appeared stating: “This preprint has been removed by Preprints with the Lancet because the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology.” While the study had not undergone any part of the peer-review process, the note implies it fell foul of “screening criteria”.
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/07/06/lancet-study-on-covid-vaccine-autopsies-finds-74-were-caused-by-vaccine-journal-removes-study-within-24-hours/
Of course, world governments, including our own, seeing 10-20% unexpected and largely unexplained excess deaths for week after week after week, are all over this and planning major enquiries.
Ha! Fooled you!
But they are most definitely NOT CONSPIRING TO DO ANYTHING DODGY, mkay? This is ALL TOTALLY NORMAL!
I love you guys. You are immune to any input from science apart from the odds and ends of random tiny samples that confirm your ideas. I just want to know what happened to Mr Ecks.
Wrong audience for that one Fred. Try a different strategy here 😉
Feel free to link to any actual, verifiable, science and not just “The Science”™.
My 42 year old son and my 39 year old daughter in law, both very fit and healthy, had the jab. He experienced a severe bout of heart racing a couple of days after getting the shot. I am shitting myself and will be doing so till I die, which I pray will be before either of them.
Someone needs to
payswing for this.@dearieme
Yes, that’s the one.
If you scroll down on the page you linked a bit you get the link to Croft’s report which rather shafts Fred Scwed (amongst others).
But what do I know? I’m just a professor of statistics and a Chartered Scientist and a Chartered Statistician (yes, I know, stupid credentialism, but sometimes you have to play the game with these f*ckwits).
Dear Fred,
Come on then, post some links to the population wide studies on post vaccine health effects. You know, the ones that governments world wide have done in the aftermath of their vaccine programs, to show everyone that the jabs are perfectly safe, and that will categorically blow all these little random sample studies out of the water.
What you say? No such studies have been done? Funny that isn’t it?
Tangentially related, but did anyone notice that one of the technologies Biden didn’t say they were going to stop investing in in China was gain of function research? 🙂
Jim @ 8.41 +100.
BenS @ 9.28, of course he didn’t, because they aren’t investing in gain of function research in China*, Tony Faucci said so / sarc.off
* Or anywhere else including definitely not Ukraine. Or Winnipeg. Or Salisbury.
The WHOres are the people who lied to us right from the start about COVID.
With regard to the heart problems which keep getting mentioned, what is usually ignored in the analysis is whether those suffering an adverse outcome would have suffered the same or worse outcome from catching Covid while unvaccinated. It is entirely possible that a vaccination can give you a milder version of the symptoms that the disease causes. This is why we don’t try to assess medical outcomes by mere storytelling – even when that is described in fancy language as “case studies”.
The discussion of Sweden and lockdowns always seems to ignore the fact that what is important is not the lockdown but the public behaviour. Those most vociferously opposed to lockdowns seem to be the one who feel that they shouldn’t have to do anything, thus reinforcing the rationale for a lockdown as the use of force to prevent a small number of irresponsible people from doing what the responsible people would do anyway.
@Addolff
Post hoc ergo propter hoc. If someone was run over in a traffic accident on the way home from vaccination, would you blame the vaccine for that too?
“If someone was run over in a traffic accident on the way home from vaccination, would you blame the vaccine for that too?”
Its entirely possible the reason they got run over was they were feeling woozy and walked into the road oblivious to the traffic. So yes, being run over could well be due to the vaccine.
“With regard to the heart problems which keep getting mentioned, what is usually ignored in the analysis is whether those suffering an adverse outcome would have suffered the same or worse outcome from catching Covid while unvaccinated.”
That is indeed possible. The odd thing is the distinct lack of interest from public health bodies in finding out which is the truth.
All the research that gets posted on here that is anti-vax is just little bits of information that point in a certain direction. On the other side of the argument is a gaping void. Don’t you find that odd? All those little independent researchers working away finding anti-vax data points could be completely wiped out if only the State would utilise its vast powers and resources to providing data based on national databases. I mean the UK is ideally placed to do this, with its centralised NHS healthcare data. It could crush the anti-vaxers with its data to prove vaccines are completely safe. Yet it doesn’t. Why would it do that, if it has the truth sitting right there?
Charles @ 5.23, you mean in the way that ALL those who died who had tested positive for covid up to four weeks previously were classified as having died ‘from / with’ covid?
There is no evidence anywhere which clearly shows that lockdowns, masks, social distancing did anything to slow down a disease which was no worse than a bad seasonal flu. The ‘costs’ of those measures though have been enormous. If you believe the measures worked, good for you, hope you you are still wearing a mask whenever you are out and about and keep your distance, because covid is still out there, just don’t try to force your beliefs on the rest of us.
As Jim points out above, there is one side of the debate asking questions while the other is staying shtum, because they know they will, in all likelihood, not like the answers.
@Adolff
September 2020 – an elderly neighbour died. She had cancer and a serious heart condition. She had not been tested for Covid. Death certificate stated that cause of death was Covid. Family queried this with the attending GP and were told that “all the local medics were doing this as it was the most likely cause of death”.
This was when I first became (professionally) dubious about the stats.
@Addolff
As Jim points out above, there is one side of the debate asking questions while the other is staying shtum, because they know they will, in all likelihood, not like the answers.
Case in point just yesterday – if this data exists, why wouldn’t this woman provide it and prove Kirsch wrong? And – to those who say there’s no evidence of any conspiracy in any of this – how likely is it that she has not been leant on by someone higher up, and why would that leaning have happened?
https://kirschsubstack.com/p/my-conversation-with-consumer-watchdog?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=548354&post_id=135955036&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
@Pharma Charlie
This is why we don’t try to assess medical outcomes by mere storytelling
No, you try to pretend it away, censor it, defame those brave souls who speak out. But they continue to speak out, and more and more people work out what has happened.
Here’s one of those ‘stories’ –
Key points:
Nikki Hanna has been a charge nurse for 32 years.
In her 32 year history, she’s never seen anything like what has happened after the COVID vaccines rolled out.
100 person facility. Avg of 7 deaths per year when the facility is full.
During the pandemic, the facility often ran between 50 and 60 patients.
2020: 2 cases COVID but no deaths
COVID shots rolled out on Jan 15
90% took jab (staff and residents)
Over the next 3 months, 11 patients died, but normal expectation is 1 death over a 3 month period.
So that’s 10 excess deaths and there were around 50 patients resident at the time which is a 20% excess death rate.
None of these people died from COVID.
Nikki said there is no other explanation for the 10X rise in the death rate.
At the time, everyone was so busy that nobody realized that there was a 10X excess death rate.
When the pandemic started 90% of the staff wanted to take the vaccine.
Today, 0% of the nursing staff will take the COVID vaccine. If it is forced, they will quit.
The Medicare records for deaths in her facility do NOT match what she personally observed. Hmmmm….
https://kirschsubstack.com/p/nurse-reveals-that-the-covid-vaccine?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=548354&post_id=135953316&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
Sweden didn’t need to lock down because Swedes are vegetables.
Contrariwise, anyone dying within 14 days of a positive test was deemed a covid death so your motor accident victim in fact died of covid.
@Interested – “if this data exists, why wouldn’t this woman provide it and prove Kirsch wrong?”
Because Steve Kirsch is clearly an anti-vaccine crackpot so providing him with conclusive evidence will do nothing to make him change his position and will probably result in him making even more wild claims based on misinterpretation of the data provided.
Charles, surely you must be aware of how weak that response is. All we need is the facts and raw data. Why are excess deaths still running high? Can one tell a vaccine effect from a covid effect by autopsy? Histology? If not, why not?
Charles, you appear to believe that masks stop the spread of respiratory particles and disease and that reasonable people stayed home, socially distanced themselves, got vaccinated and wore masks.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/epochtv/unvaccinated-should-check-this-out-its-highly-unexpected-facts-matter-5449774?src_src=morningbriefnoe&src_cmp=mb-2023-08-13&est=aWTGO8%2BKbf72MnuSAJTV1GVsSufLzoSMd8bLiVNAiq%2FoB6fux92C5tA4CB4hizAet%2BBk
This evidence shows that the vaccinated pose a health risk to the unvaccinated so should ‘do the right thing to protect others’ and stay home, socially distance themselves and wear masks.
But you wont, will you…….
@Pharma Charlie
Ha ha – is that all you have?
Why waste the truth on people who don’t deserve it?
Lol.
‘You’re a nutter who is peddling misleading information’
‘OK then, show me the data that proves I’m wrong’
‘I won’t do that [despite having it] because you’re a nutter who can’t be convinced’
Seriously? Thats all you’ve got?
@rhoda klapp – “Can one tell a vaccine effect from a covid effect by autopsy?…”
Well, I personaly cannot. And you can’t either. But if someone claims to be able to tell the difference, I’ll check their evidence.
@Addolff – “you appear to believe that masks stop the spread of respiratory particles and disease”
They may under some circumstances. They’re of very little value against Covid – especially when not correctly worn, as it usually the case for members of the public.
“This evidence shows that the vaccinated pose a health risk to the unvaccinated”
That URL seems to lead to a publication intended as entertainment for crackpots – not a serious medical journal (or in any field). And in any case it does not say what you claim it does.
@jim
I didn’t say that you were a nutter (though maybe you are), I said Steve Kirsch is one. That’s because he helped fund research and when the research didn’t produce results to his liking, he rejected it and made wild claims. If he’s not going to accept his own research, it’s obvious he won’t accept anyone else’s.
“I didn’t say that you were a nutter (though maybe you are), I said Steve Kirsch is one. That’s because he helped fund research and when the research didn’t produce results to his liking, he rejected it and made wild claims. If he’s not going to accept his own research, it’s obvious he won’t accept anyone else’s.”
So your argument is that because nutters might not accept the State’s evidence that vaccines are safe, there’s no need to provide any such evidence?
That’s weaker than damp tissue paper.
Stout rebuttals there, Charles, well done. I’m impressed. Gosh. Wow. Did I already say “well done”?
surely the simple way of avoiding another covid is to keep the yanks away from Chinese labs!
@Jim – “So your argument is that because nutters might not accept the State’s evidence that vaccines are safe, there’s no need to provide any such evidence?”
No, of course not. Evidence of safety must be provided. And it has been provided to various regulators, and records of trials are publicly available. But when someone subsequently claims that there is no evidence, and it’s clear that they have already made up their mind and will not be influenced by evidence, it would be a foolish waste of time to bother trying to provide them with evidence since there is no reason to suppose that they will take it seriously.
@Wonko the sane – “surely the simple way of avoiding another covid is to keep the yanks away from Chinese labs!”
Even if the last one was artificial (and that is far from proven), that would not help for two reasons. Firstly, there have been worldwide pandemics for thousands of years, so eventually more will appear entirely naturally. And secondly, if they can’t use Chinese labs, they’ll just move elsewhere.
“No, of course not. Evidence of safety must be provided. And it has been provided to various regulators”
So drug company trials of about 6 months in length, of about 45k people, are sufficient to prove the vaccines are safe for over a billion people to take, multiple times, and for many years? And will have no long term adverse effects? Trials that were produced by the drug companies, who stood to make tens of billions, and that were ended by giving all the placebo arm vaccines, thus meaning no long term safety data could ever be derived from them? Thats all we need to show how ‘safe’ the vaccines are?
Where are the long term trials? The assessments of national healthcare data pre and post vaccines? Trials run by people who don’t stand to make billions from the results?
“records of trials are publicly available.”
Thats an interesting statement. Have you forgotten that the only reason that the drug trial data is publicly available is because vaccine sceptics went to court in the US to force it to be so? The drug companies opposed the release of their data and wanted it kept secret for 75 years. Now you tell me – why would they want that?
“@rhoda klapp – “Can one tell a vaccine effect from a covid effect by autopsy?…”
Well, I personally cannot. And you can’t either. But if someone claims to be able to tell the difference, I’ll check their evidence.”
I’ve seen such claims based on histology. The theory is that infection with the virus produces anti-bodies to the nucleus part as well as possibly the spike protein. Problems with thew vaccine show anti-bodies for the spike alone because it is the spike which the mrna vaccines induce the body to produce. IF concentrations of spike or antibody are found in organs associated with cause of death that’s reasonable cause for suspicion of the vaccine playing a part. But autopsies have not been taking place, and if they do there is no requirement for that histology to be done. Don’t you think it’s worth checking? Not to check would give the appearance of a cover-up.
“No, of course not. Evidence of safety must be provided. And it has been provided to various regulators, and records of trials are publicly available.”
LOL!
“and it’s clear that they have already made up their mind and will not be influenced by evidence”
Splutter…
“it would be a foolish waste of time”
The irony.
@Jim
What do you think should have been done? If we need to see the effects over 10 years, then development takes 10 years, which is rather a problem for the people who need treatment in the meantime. We need to have a suitable compromise whereby we assess the costs agains the benefits. Why should vaccines against covid have such major longer term costs as to make use of them a bad idea when that does not happen for other vaccines? And note that we don’t want to require no cost – merely that the costs are less than the benefits.
“Have you forgotten that the only reason that the drug trial data is publicly available is because vaccine sceptics went to court in the US to force it to be so?”
The USA is not the whole world. Trial data is available for trials outside the USA.
@rhoda klapp – “Don’t you think it’s worth checking?’
Maybe. As a first analysis, assume that the vaccine was the cause in any cases where there was any doubt. Then compare that hypothetical cost with the known benefits. If the benefits would still be greater, then it’s not important to assess the costs any more accurately. Otherwise we should – maybe with random sampling to narrow down the range of possibilities to see if a big, expensive investigation is warranted.
One of the key indicators of someone being a crackpot is that, instead of campaigning to gather the relevant evidence, they campaign to use or stop using a treatment on the grounds of insufficient evidence.
‘they campaign to use or stop using a treatment on the grounds of insufficient evidence.’
You clearly don’t support the precautionary principle, Charles.
“We need to have a suitable compromise whereby we assess the costs against the benefits.”
Indeed. So lets have some analysis of the long term effects, if any. Thats what I’m asking for, and you are saying should not happen, because reasons. Why are there no long term studies being done at a population level as to the any potential health costs of covid vaccines? We literally have no data on vaccine safety, other than a few small 6 month trials from 2020. The reason that various small studies from around the world showing health impacts of vaccines get publicised so much is there is no other data available. States who have the data don’t want to look at it or analyse it. Why not?
“The USA is not the whole world. Trial data is available for trials outside the USA.”
No it wasn’t, not for the 2 main vaccines used, Pfizer and Moderna (incidentally have you ever wondered why the AZ vaccine disappeared in mid 2021? Loads of people were jabbed with it in the UK, then by the time boosters came around it was gone. Have you ever thought about why that was?). If the Pfizer/Moderna trial data had been provided to other drug assessment bodies outside the US and made public by them there would have been no need to sue the CDC in the US to get it released. Until that case was won no-one outside of the drug companies and the CDC knew what was in it.
@Boganboy – “You clearly don’t support the precautionary principle”
That’s because it is a stupid principle. We have no proof that the precautionary principle is a good idea, therefore by the precautionary principle we should not use it. In other words, if we assume it’s true, it proves itself false, while if we assume it is false, there is no contradiction. Hence it is either false or stupid.
@Jim – “So lets have some analysis of the long term effects, if any.”
I have no objection to that at all.
– “Why are there no long term studies being done at a population level as to the any potential health costs of covid vaccines?”
Why single out this vaccine for special study?
– “the 2 main vaccines used”
have a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covid_vaccine#List_of_authorized_vaccines Even counting only those authorised in 10 or more countries, there’s a lot more than two.
– “Have you ever thought about why that was?”
I could see it happen – scaremongering and politics.
‘Hence it is either false or stupid.’
Thank you Charles. I love your argument.