A Covid-19 vaccine at last!

[Doc Holliday]

BTW we are NOT getting into politics.

Apologies Davie, but I was just trying to point out what this recent story is actually about and draw a line under it ... hopefully?

[daviemac]

Apologies Davie, but I was just trying to point out what this recent story is actually about and draw a line under it ... hopefully?

Yeah I know Doc, the troll has made it very clear he is going to try and bang on about this for some time to come. He isn't.

[Marmalade]

BTW we are NOT getting into politics.

Absolutely. No politics. No new threads for the next one. Absolutely verbotten.

Is anyone wearing masks again? I must admit I think of it, however irrationally, if I get on a bus packed with the great unwashed or forget to hold my breath shopping in Lidl.

[daviemac]

Absolutely. No politics. No new threads for the next one. Absolutely verbotten.

Is anyone wearing masks again? I must admit I think of it, however irrationally, if I get on a bus packed with the great unwashed or forget to hold my breath shopping in Lidl.

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit and does not go down well.

My post about no politics was not aimed at Doc, it was aimed at the numpties who would see his post as an excuse to once again push boundaries.

[PepeMAGA]

Absolutely. No politics. No new threads for the next one. Absolutely verbotten.

Is anyone wearing masks again? I must admit I think of it, however irrationally, if I get on a bus packed with the great unwashed or forget to hold my breath shopping in Lidl.

I was in the doctor's the other day, where they all that you wear a mask again. I do out of courtesy really... Funny though there were a few coughers in and no of them had masks on, I found similar during the lockdowns tbh.

[Marmalade]

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit and does not go down well.

My post about no politics was not aimed at Doc, it was aimed at the numpties who would see his post as an excuse to once again push boundaries.

I have to remind myself that you easily misunderstand my posts.

My intention was both to underline your point  and also as I maybe flatter myself that you might remember once you gave me a ban, the only one I’ve ever had I’m pleased to say, for starting a second thread about covid-19. So it was also a reminder to myself not to wander off thread as I’m often apt to do (and without any maliciousness — just forgetfulness when flipping between posts on a phone screen). I realise it has to be taken more seriously for yourself and I had no intention to give you extra work. (But if I keep on you’ll probably think I’m taking the piss, so I’d better at least try to say I’m not. I take the mild insult on the chin seein as you’re a mod n all that.
 Kind regards 

[Strawberry]

This isn't about Covid per se but is about compensation and the woeful inadequacy of the Government scheme put in place to cover the emergency use of a vaccine, which had not been tested on large numbers of people. It was inevitable the vaccine would harm some people.

As I posted somewhere very early on in this thread, UK Government has history with this and it comes as no surprise that we are now at this juncture where court action against the vaccine manufacturer is the only option left to those people who have been harmed as they have been let down again by the politicians.

In medical compensation terms £120K is a joke for severe and permanent life changing injuries.

Can we move on again?

This is the sad thing, many, many people did the right thing, took the vaccine but are now seriously affected plus had their side effects brushed off. I know of some people who cannot risk another booster because each time within a week they have been rushed to hospital with heart problems. There's judgment out there, and in my opinion the people suffering need recognition and support.

[scutty brown]

Here we go again.
Another unknown respiratory disease on the loose in China. Possibly a form of viral pneumonia but no-one knows.......
External Link/Members Only

Chinese mysterious 'newly mutated' disease outbreak sparks major epidemic fears

An unknown respiratory illness has swept across China, and officials are seeking more information as the epidemic is likened to the early days of Covid.

This is the first winter in China where Covid restrictions have been lifted, and now a new illness is threatening public health. As concerns grow, the World Health Organization (WHO) is seeking more answers from China about what exactly is going on. As some health experts look to pin the burgeoning crisis on the common aftermath of lifting isolation restrictions, others are raising a red flag regarding the source of this respiratory illness, which many are calling Pneumonia.

China’s National Health Commission reported an increase in respiratory diseases, on November, 13. Subsequently, the Program for Monitoring Emerging Diseases (ProMED), tasked with flagging outbreaks of infectious diseases, reported swathes of undiagnosed pneumonia in children in the Northern region. ProMED then reported an inundation of cases in the North East, in Beijing, and in the city of Liaoning.

In Beijing, it is children's wards that have been particularly flooded by cases. Al Jazeera reported: “One major hospital in the city has reported that on average every day, they are seeing about 1,200 patients enter their emergency room.” However, exact figures for the cases are not currently available, but Beijing schools are recording surging numbers of children not attending school, for a week or more. Parents are being warned to stay cautious.

[Blackpool Rock]

Here we go again.
Another unknown respiratory disease on the loose in China. Possibly a form of viral pneumonia but no-one knows.......
External Link/Members Only

Well let's wait and see, you would hope that at least we and other countries would be better prepared this time around.

Covid was weird in that it didn't seem to affect the young although I did hear that the later mutations was affecting them more, I always said that if children had been dying then attitudes towards it would have been drastically different, if this is affecting children then perhaps the fuckwits will take it seriously this time around 

[PepeMAGA]

Here we go again.
Another unknown respiratory disease on the loose in China. Possibly a form of viral pneumonia but no-one knows.......
External Link/Members Only

Gawd no

[petermisc]

Here we go again.
Another unknown respiratory disease on the loose in China. Possibly a form of viral pneumonia but no-one knows.......
External Link/Members Only

No mention of deaths in that report, just large numbers of children off school for a week or two.

[PepeMAGA]

No mention of deaths in that report, just large numbers of children off school for a week or two.

Yes after reading it in detail it's a bullshit headline with no mention of anything other than what we saw when people came out of lockdown here.

[scutty brown]

Don't forget it took some weeks before the Chinese admitted to any deaths at the beginning of the COVID outbreak, and even when they did they downplayed the numbers.
Hopefully you're right and there's nothing to it, but it could be another nasty.....

[timsussex]

now an increased association is not cause and effect but

External Link/Members Only

as some of us have noted no treatment is without risk and it is unwise to come to any conclusion until at least 5 years after

[PepeMAGA]

now an increased association is not cause and effect but

External Link/Members Only

as some of us have noted no treatment is without risk and it is unwise to come to any conclusion until at least 5 years after

You can get injured from the vaccine, you can get injured by COVID... The ideal would have been for it never to have existed or reached our shores....neither of these seem to be a concern for the enquiry.

[Marmalade]

You can get injured from the vaccine, you can get injured by COVID... The ideal would have been for it never to have existed or reached our shores....neither of these seem to be a concern for the enquiry.

Same with any medicine. It is most unfortunate that some people were harmed: but it was still a better roll of the dice at the time than not having the vaccine. That's simple statistics. It might be possible in the future, I don't know, to check whether someone has a sensitivity making them unsuitabe for the vaccine, but it wasn't at the start of the pandemic.

There were flaws in some of the research work, but again the benefits were such that vast numbers were helped and lives saved, even if that doesn't make up for it from the individual perspectives of people who sadly suffered badly fom the vaccine.

[timsussex]

The vaccine roll out was rushed - it had to be or even more would have died

[PepeMAGA]

Same with any medicine. It is most unfortunate that some people were harmed: but it was still a better roll of the dice at the time than not having the vaccine. That's simple statistics. It might be possible in the future, I don't know, to check whether someone has a sensitivity making them unsuitabe for the vaccine, but it wasn't at the start of the pandemic.

There were flaws in some of the research work, but again the benefits were such that vast numbers were helped and lives saved, even if that doesn't make up for it from the individual perspectives of people who sadly suffered badly fom the vaccine.

I agree with a couple of caveats:
1) young healthy children shouldn't have been vaccinated, to me this was cultish
2) the strength of the Moderna vaccine should have been dialled down. It was fundamentally the same as the Pfizer, but higher dosed. When the Pfizer was going to be effective, the dose should have been adjusted.

[PepeMAGA]

The vaccine roll out was rushed - it had to be or even more would have died

Except in Wales where it was slowed down.

[PumpDump]

Same with any medicine. It is most unfortunate that some people were harmed: but it was still a better roll of the dice at the time than not having the vaccine. That's simple statistics. It might be possible in the future, I don't know, to check whether someone has a sensitivity making them unsuitabe for the vaccine, but it wasn't at the start of the pandemic.

There were flaws in some of the research work, but again the benefits were such that vast numbers were helped and lives saved, even if that doesn't make up for it from the individual perspectives of people who sadly suffered badly fom the vaccine.

That is all fine and well, we all know all medicines have risks.

You are forgetting that people were in many cases forced to have the vaccine (care home workers, NHS workers). People did not give informed consent, they were not informed of the possible negatives of taking the vaccine, instead they were painted a rosy picture which was far from accurate. They were told it was safe and effective, there was no risk, it would prevent transmission and the efficacy was 95%. In other countries it was impossible to live a normal life, in Ireland for example you could not go anywhere indoors (such as a restaurant or pub) with proof of vaccination. Same or worse with many other countries.

[Marmalade]

That is all fine and well, we all know all medicines have risks.

You are forgetting that people were in many cases forced to have the vaccine (care home workers, NHS workers). People did not give informed consent, they were not informed of the possible negatives of taking the vaccine, instead they were painted a rosy picture which was far from accurate. They were told it was safe and effective, there was no risk, it would prevent transmission and the efficacy was 95%. In other countries it was impossible to live a normal life, in Ireland for example you could not go anywhere indoors (such as a restaurant or pub) with proof of vaccination. Same or worse with many other countries.

You put the opposing case well, and there’s always an opposing case. And individual cases can be taken individually.

My own feeling is that can’t go on blaming forever. I’m only looking at the general situation. The people in charge were taken unawares. There’s a tendency retrospectively to hold them to a higher standard of perfection that few could have achieved. Let’s remember that it was an emergency. Most people were unprepared. Maybe they should have been better prepared but they weren’t.

The basic test in law for negligence asks if another doctor, faced with the same situation at the same could have done the same thing. Not necessarily ideal, just at least one equally qualified doctor who might have acted the same in the same circumstances. If the answer is yes, then the original doctor accused of negligence is judged not negligent. That would be the case if applied strictly here, even if it is only a rough guide. Of course, it wasn’t just about doctors. People do their best. Often it wasn’t very good. In hindsight they might have done better. But the decisions made were mostly human ones I think, however unfortunate for the victims. That’s only the basic test by the way (known as the Bolam test) and many other attempts are being made and External Link/Members Only.

Where the law decided it’s due that becomes the truth and I have nothing against such claims. I am only disagreeing if people are beating on about it and stirring up hatred. It’s only decent that some awards are made in the most serious cases. But at some point we as a nation I think have to put covid behind us.

[timsussex]

I wonder if the COVID inquiry will examine whether we were fully informed and therefore able to give informed consent

The paper I quoted noted that
During the 1976 swine flu vaccination campaign in the USA, there was a small increase in GBS associated with what was a novel flu jab at that time. At the time, the vaccination campaign was halted because the risk of developing GBS was statistically increased from background (normal times), although subsequent statistical analysis found the risk of a link to be lower than initially thought.

The Astra Zeneca vaccine used a similar simian adenovirus vector

The incidence is small and COVID is clearly a million times more dangerous but this risk has been known for 40+ years - can anyone remember being informed before having the jab ?

I would still have had the jab but who decided that for our own good we shouldnt be fully informed ?

[Marmalade]

Informed about what though. They read a list of side effects to me, gave me the leaflet, and I sat down and waited the stated ten minutes.

What’s been decided so far? That they deliberately concealed dangers they could have or did know about?

I guess it requires another epidemiologist to know or have known that. Has it occurred?

[lostandfound]

The vaccine roll out was rushed - it had to be or even more would have died

I prefer expedited to rushed.

And informed consent would just have hindered takeup.

[PepeMAGA]

Informed about what though. They read a list of side effects to me, gave me the leaflet, and I sat down and waited the stated ten minutes.

What’s been decided so far? That they deliberately concealed dangers they could have or did know about?

I guess it requires another epidemiologist to know or have known that. Has it occurred?

I don't think they're has been a reveal that they covered up additional side affects. It seems they did lie about how effective it was at stopping transmission.
They're was maybe some delay with admitting AZ wasn't safe for younger people, can't remember the timeline

[timsussex]

I prefer expedited to rushed.

And informed consent would just have hindered takeup.

Agreed

and it is a purely moral and AFAIK theoretical question
Does a government have the obligation or right  to lie (or at least withhold facts which might be used to erroneously mislead) to the people for their own good ?

[RedKettle]

I don't think they're has been a reveal that they covered up additional side affects. It seems they did lie about how effective it was at stopping transmission.
They're was maybe some delay with admitting AZ wasn't safe for younger people, can't remember the timeline

There is a difference between a lie and basing what you say on the data available at the time.

[PepeMAGA]

There is a difference between a lie and basing what you say on the data available at the time.

From what I can remember they said it prevented transmission, but it has since come out that they had no data to support that.

[RedKettle]

From what I can remember they said it prevented transmission, but it has since come out that they had no data to support that.

They said believe reduces (not stop) transmission as people will have lower viral load but lack of evidence to be certain.

[Blackpool Rock]

They said believe reduces (not stop) transmission as people will have lower viral load but lack of evidence to be certain.

Yes I don't recall being told that it would stop transmission or stop you getting it but then again the conspiracy people will now claim whatever they want just like they spread made up shit back then 

I know back at the height of everything there was evidence that it did indeed reduce transmission slightly and when you have an "R" rate that you are trying to keep down even a small reduction in cases will then multiply up to prevent a much larger number

[timsussex]

There is a difference between a lie and basing what you say on the data available at the time.

Here is some data from the quoted paper
in 1976 a mass vaccination using simian adenovirus vector (like Astra Zeneca) had to be abandoned due to high levels of Guillain-Barré syndrome.  (GBS) is a rare but serious autoimmune condition that attacks the peripheral nervous system, typically resulting in numbness, weakness and pain in the limbs and sometimes resulting in paralysis of breathing.

The levels of GBS were later revised down but the paper quoted now reports GBS in AZ vaccinated patients but not Moderna or Pfizer (which dont uses adenovirus carriers) and as I pointed out the risks are well below the risks from COVID.

So are you suggesting that no-one on the various committee knew of the abandonment of the 1976 mass vaccination ?

Were you told that you might suffer mild to fatal paralysis 24 days after the AZ jab but not the other two ?

If everyone had been told about the abandonment of the 1976 trial then the takeup of the AZ vaccine (which the government praised) would have been lower.

The standard is and was "Fully informed consent"

[timsussex]

Yes I don't recall being told that it would stop transmission or stop you getting it....

In that case why would you get vaccinated ????

[Marmalade]

But tim, I don’t think we can extrapolate from one failed vaccine almost 50 years ago when the delivery method has been studied and refined over a long period can we?
External Link/Members Only


When you get a medicine they don’t tell you about earlier forms of a related medicine made by a similar process which was abandoned. Maybe I’ve missed something? (Could you post or repost a link to the paper you’re quoting from please).

[Marmalade]

External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

[timsussex]

But tim, I don’t think we can extrapolate from one failed vaccine almost 50 years ago when the delivery method has been studied and refined over a long period can we?
External Link/Members Only

When you get a medicine they don’t tell you about earlier forms of a related medicine made by a similar process which was abandoned. Maybe I’ve missed something? (Could you post or repost a link to the paper you’re quoting from please).

The report I quoted points out that GBS can result from a wide range of viral infections - its an autoimmune disease so in some ways its a side effect of the bodies response to a virus. As I said its a pretty low incidence so you need large numbers to detect it but as its a known side effect of lots of viruses and in particular the virus used by AZ then yes I think the failure nearly 50 years ago is still relevant.
It is not known why some people develop GBS or in fact most autoimmune diseases - perhaps the study of the AZ vaccine might provide some clues.

Remember "we" denigrated other European countries that doubted  the AZ vaccine  and wouldnt use it in certain groups eve  or at all - perhaps because "we" knew we couldnt get enough of the other ones.
The simple and undeniable fact is we don't use the AZ vaccine in the UK now - why ?

The System has history - I say system because its not just the NHS
In the UK we dont use the Polio sugar lump vaccine now because of safety issues - in fact for nearly 20 years the only cases of Polio that arose in the UK were traced to that vaccine.
 heres my origional post

now an increased association is not cause and effect but

External Link/Members Only

as some of us have noted no treatment is without risk and it is unwise to come to any conclusion until at least 5 years after

 

[Marmalade]

Thanks. I see it’s listed in the current version of the patients leaflet.

External Link/Members Only

Last revision (scrolling down)  26/01/2022.

Normal frequency 1 per 50,000
Frequency listed as rate side effect of vaccine: 1 in 10,000

Some early cases: External Link/Members Only

So was the patient information leaflet sufficient or are we saying more detailed advance information should have been provided and wasn’t?

It’s a very interesting puzzle and I was looking to see what we have for formal guidance on it.

This perhaps:

"The test of materiality is whether, in the circumstances of the particular case, a reasonable person in the patient's position would be likely to attach significance to the risk, or the doctor is or should reasonably be aware that the particular patient would be likely to attach significance to.

"The assessment of whether a risk is material cannot be reduced to percentages. The significance of a given risk is likely to reflect a variety of factors besides its magnitude"

Which is from:
External Link/Members Only (the box on the right, first page).

Now if we follow that, it would seem to me that a reasonable person would attach rather low significance to the risk given that is exceedingly small and that the risk of covid was exceedingly great. Vaccinations of course were not compulsory.

I think the rule about giving enough info for informed consent would follow similar lines. Without looking the legal case law I suspect comes down similarly to a “reasonable doctor” and “reasonable patient”. I don’t think it can be backdated inasmuch as “if I’d known I was going to be the 1 in 10,000 I wouldn’t have had it”, because nobody would have known that.

[Blackpool Rock]

In that case why would you get vaccinated ????

It lessened the effects of the virus in a great many people and ultimately stopped them from dying

[PumpDump]

You put the opposing case well, and there’s always an opposing case. And individual cases can be taken individually.

My own feeling is that can’t go on blaming forever. I’m only looking at the general situation. The people in charge were taken unawares. There’s a tendency retrospectively to hold them to a higher standard of perfection that few could have achieved. Let’s remember that it was an emergency. Most people were unprepared. Maybe they should have been better prepared but they weren’t.

The basic test in law for negligence asks if another doctor, faced with the same situation at the same could have done the same thing. Not necessarily ideal, just at least one equally qualified doctor who might have acted the same in the same circumstances. If the answer is yes, then the original doctor accused of negligence is judged not negligent. That would be the case if applied strictly here, even if it is only a rough guide. Of course, it wasn’t just about doctors. People do their best. Often it wasn’t very good. In hindsight they might have done better. But the decisions made were mostly human ones I think, however unfortunate for the victims. That’s only the basic test by the way (known as the Bolam test) and many other attempts are being made and External Link/Members Only.

Where the law decided it’s due that becomes the truth and I have nothing against such claims. I am only disagreeing if people are beating on about it and stirring up hatred. It’s only decent that some awards are made in the most serious cases. But at some point we as a nation I think have to put covid behind us.

I think you are being very naïve and trusting of the people in charge. Any doctors who spoke of their concerns were struck off. Their careers were completely destroyed. Absolutely no discussion or questioning of anything the WHO said was allowed. Much of what these doctors warned is turning out to be true and now accepted by the authorities. These are the issues the Covid enquiry should be looking in to, to ensure something like this can never happen again. However I fear it will just be a whitewash and nothing learnt.

[Marmalade]

I think you are being very naïve and trusting of the people in charge. Any doctors who spoke of their concerns were struck off. Their careers were completely destroyed. Absolutely no discussion or questioning of anything the WHO said was allowed. Much of what these doctors warned is turning out to be true and now accepted by the authorities. These are the issues the Covid enquiry should be looking in to, to ensure something like this can never happen again. However I fear it will just be a whitewash and nothing learnt.

I haven’t been following the enquiry meticulously so I’m very open to find out what I don’t know. All I’ve done so far is lay out the basic principles, formal guidelines and some statistics. One has to start somewhere. I’d be very interested if you could provide me with links and details to show where the formal guidelines have been trashed, which is maybe what you suggest.

What was done? What should have been done differently?
How could it have been done differently?

I’m not particularly trusting or distrusting. Just interested in facts (as opposed to emotional laden opinions). In can be quite hard to get them. Court transcripts where victims have been given awards might help.

The main fuck up I know of was Boris’ delay, his reluctance to recognise the onset of the pandemic and failing to heed the warnings from Cummings and others. You mention doctors being hushed up, so that points to a political fuck up. What did those doctors want done instead? Go quicker? Delay? Give more warnings? Was it a strong ‘difference of opinion’ or acting in bad faith.

I think I’ve dealt with the Guille Barr liability at least based on the documentation but if I’m incorrect on that as well please correct me. I suspect there is something more major that you feel I’ve missed? I’m just doing my best, I’m not a ‘believer’. So if you want to call me naive, please point out the factual basis for that so I can update my knowledge. I’m not taking the piss!

I am as keen as you are, maybe more, to get at the truth. I don’t have time to investigate it as much as I would like so I appreciate some factual pointers.

[Marmalade]

It lessened the effects of the virus in a great many people and ultimately stopped them from dying

On a personal level I’m pleased I had the vaccines. Are there people trying to turn the thread into an anti-vax rant or am I missing the point somewhere?

[timsussex]

The UK government was pushing the AZ vaccine - they dont use it now - Why ?
are the others better or safer ?
were the others unavailable?
or too expensive ?

I don't recall ever seeing a detailed reason for the change - just a vague "more effective as a second dose" but it will be interesting to see if the inquiry supports the view that they were not more effective as a first dose and when the data was available

and before you say new data

Remember this ?

External Link/Members Only

but European doubts about AZ at the time were dismissed as typical European moaning

[timsussex]

On a personal level I’m pleased I had the vaccines. Are there people trying to turn the thread into an anti-vax rant or am I missing the point somewhere?

On a personal level I had the AZ followed by the Moderna a third (not sure which) and I'm due a 4th later this week so I'm not an antivaxxer but I do believe that the UK government fell far short of what it could have done given information at the time

[Marmalade]

On a personal level I had the AZ followed by the Moderna a third (not sure which) and I'm due a 4th later this week so I'm not an antivaxxer but I do believe that the UK government fell far short of what it could have done given information at the time

I don’t think we disagree there. 

[Marmalade]

The UK government was pushing the AZ vaccine - they dont use it now - Why ?
are the others better or safer ?
were the others unavailable?
or too expensive ?

I don't recall ever seeing a detailed reason for the change - just a vague "more effective as a second dose" but it will be interesting to see if the inquiry supports the view that they were not more effective as a first dose and when the data was available

and before you say new data

Remember this ?

External Link/Members Only

but European doubts about AZ at the time were dismissed as typical European moaning

Not specifically. I went through tons of data at the time but don’t keep it all my head.

The BBC fact check suggested Macron had twisted the words (or didn’t understand them. It says there were hardly any older people in the clinical trials so it couldn’t say the trials showed it was effective for that age group. That’s not the same as saying it’s ineffective. It’s like saying there’s no proof it works on people who live in the Shetlands (cos it was never tested there).
External Link/Members Only

A few months later or more specific analysis was published:
External Link/Members Only
Result: no clinically significant difference between the effect of each the two vaccines tested.
Conclusion: Macron can be a bit of a wanker.

But let’s not forget that all the countries were jockeying like mad for supplies, and some very awkward questions got asked over who would get what first.

[Xtro]

Yes I don't recall being told that it would stop transmission or stop you getting it but then again the conspiracy people will now claim whatever they want just like they spread made up shit back then 
...............

No conspiracy here;
'We Can Get There!': Stunning Pace Of U.S. Vaccinations Puts Pandemic's End In Sight | Rachel Maddow -
External Link/Members Only

[timsussex]

Not specifically. I went through tons of data at the time but don’t keep it all my head.

The BBC fact check suggested Macron had twisted the words (or didn’t understand them. It says there were hardly any older people in the clinical trials so it couldn’t say the trials showed it was effective for that age group. That’s not the same as saying it’s ineffective. It’s like saying there’s no proof it works on people who live in the Shetlands (cos it was never tested there).
External Link/Members Only

A few months later or more specific analysis was published:
External Link/Members Only
Result: no clinically significant difference between the effect of each the two vaccines tested.
Conclusion: Macron can be a bit of a wanker.

But let’s not forget that all the countries were jockeying like mad for supplies, and some very awkward questions got asked over who would get what first.

It wasnt just Macron External Link/Members Only

While hindsight is always easy the most telling fact is that the AZ vaccine is no longer used by ANY Country !

[Doc Holliday]

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=288440.msg3011288#msg3011288

External Link/Members Only

[Doc Holliday]

Any doctors who spoke of their concerns were struck off. Their careers were completely destroyed.

Can you tell me the total number of UK Doctors who had their registration suspended in relation to this?

[Marmalade]

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=288440.msg3011288#msg3011288

External Link/Members Only

Thanks for that. I think I also quoted something about some payouts to victims. It will most interesting to see the legal analysis (interesting to me anyway). I want to see the fire behind the smoke.

(That they discontinued it doesn’t prove anything — there could be many reasons; but it’s also entirely possible that something was covered up and hopefully the courts can dig up anything that’s more than hearsay.!

[timsussex]

Thanks for that. I think I also quoted something about some payouts to victims. It will most interesting to see the legal analysis (interesting to me anyway). I want to see the fire behind the smoke.

(That they discontinued it doesn’t prove anything — there could be many reasons; but it’s also entirely possible that something was covered up and hopefully the courts can dig up anything that’s more than hearsay.!

well it was a lot cheaper and a lot easier to store so I would assume that EVERY country in the world had pretty compelling reasons not to use it - or at least that would seem a logical assumption/starting point.

I remember Boris claiming it was the best thing since sliced bread then when some doubts arose that it was still  "a vaccine for the world"