THE VACCINE FILES DAY 3: SECRET FEARS THAT ADVERSE REACTIONS TO COVID JAB COULD DOUBLE…
A "Great British" Row and No10.
Recap:
On Day 1 of the Vaccine Files, I revealed how Downing St asked the ‘independent’ medicines regulator to ‘knock down’ concerns that the AstraZeneca COVID jab might not be as effective as the government had hoped.
On Day 2, I revealed how Downing St and the Department of Health reacted to growing evidence of a rare but potentially fatal side effect of the British-made COVID jab. As a number of countries began suspending the use of AstraZeneca’s vaccine, the UK government’s attitude was to ‘keep calm and carry on.’ Having staked so much on the vaccination programme, they did not want a panic. Boris Johnson felt they should “project an air of breezy confidence.” It was agreed to keep repeating the mantra that the jab was “safe and effective.” Inside the Department of Health, an operation was underway to ensure two key regulators – the MHRA and the JCVI – did not go ‘off-message.’ Nonetheless, the government was taking clot concerns seriously: Johnson was sufficiently worried to be in personal contact with Pascal Soriot, AZ’s Chief Executive.
For all the public posturing, I have not seen any evidence of a deliberate attempt by anyone in government to deceive the public about the safety of the jab. Throughout this period, the relevant authorities were keeping a very close eye on the situation. The question is whether, having decided to vaccinate the entire adult population (never the original intention) those in charge gave sufficient consideration to the ‘benefit versus risk’ calculus for younger people. They seemed very keen to push on.
In some ways, the WhatsApp messages I have seen are as interesting for what they don’t say as what they do. By this point, doctors and scientists knew a great deal about this virus, and how small a statistical risk it posed to healthy people under the age of around 70. Once they knew that a small number of people were likely to develop potentially fatal blood clots, why didn’t they simply revert to the original plan, and focus on vaccinating the elderly and vulnerable? Why was nobody at the top questioning whether younger people actually needed the jab?
Today, I reveal what was really going on behind the scenes, as UK regulators tried to work out whether it would be necessary to change their advice.