Friday, March 19, 2021

Does the European Medicine Agency Really Give Astra Zeneca’s Vaccine The All Clear?

Following up on this report:

 Not an all clear. Not even close.  They've acknowledged a higher then usual rate of  "unusual" blood clots/bleeding. And they are changing their directions to patients, doctors and the information that accompanies the vaccine to recognize this issue. They have in fact, through all the doublespeak acknowledged there is a deadly problem.

Their preliminary review, and Yes, it's acknowledged to only be a preliminary report comes of as an exercise in misdirection.

Preliminary: an action or event preceding or preparing for something fuller or more important.

 I’m suggesting that they are obscuring the truth to keep the jabs going.

Considering the vaccine doesn’t stop transmission, though most people mistakenly believe they do. What would be the claimed benefit ? Less severe symptoms, allegedly. Can’t see how one could quantify that claim? When most people, in fact the vast majority, who contract Covid-19 are asymptomatic or very mildly ill. Yes, I am  personally aware of a few people who have tested positive. They are all perfectly fine. Either completely unaware of having the virus or feeling unwell for a day or two.  Considering the reality, how would or could one credibly claim a reduction in “severe symptoms” It doesn’t seem possible. Realistic. Or provable. In face that claim of reduced illness sounds sort of spin like.

Benefits Still Outweigh the Risks. Do they?

European Medicins Agency

EMA’s safety committee, PRAC, concluded its preliminary review of a signal of blood clots in people vaccinated with COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca at its extraordinary meeting of 18 March 2021. The Committee confirmed that:

    * the benefits of the vaccine in combating the still widespread threat of COVID-19 (which itself results in clotting problems and may be fatal) continue to outweigh the risk of side effects;
    * the vaccine is not associated with an increase in the overall risk of blood clots (thromboembolic events) in those who receive it;
    *there is no evidence of a problem related to specific batches of the vaccine or to particular manufacturing sites;
    *however, the vaccine may be associated with very rare cases of blood clots associated with thrombocytopenia, i.e. low levels of blood platelets (elements in the blood that help it to clot) with or without bleeding, including rare cases of clots in the vessels draining blood from the brain (CVST).

“The benefits outweigh the risks” There is no demonstrable science to verify that. 

As you continue to read through their proclamation you will spot a number of contradictions.

"The vaccine is not associated with an overall risk of blood clots", BUT...
the vaccine may be associated with very rare cases of blood clots associated with thrombocytopenia, i.e. low levels of blood platelets (elements in the blood that help it to clot) with or without bleeding, including rare cases of clots in the vessels draining blood from the brain (CVST).
          
So the vaccine is not associated with an overall risk of blood clots but may be associated with an increase in very rare cases of blood clots? If the vaccine can be associated with very rare blood clots, including rare cases of clots in the vessels draining blood from the brain- How can it credibly be claimed it’s not associated with an increased risk of blood clots?  Including extremely rare ones?
"*there is no evidence of a problem related to specific batches of the vaccine or to particular manufacturing sites;"

Therefore the problem is with the vaccine itself. That's obvious.

These are rare cases – around 20 million people in the UK and EEA had received the vaccine as of March 16 and EMA had reviewed only 7 cases of blood clots in multiple blood vessels (disseminated intravascular coagulation, DIC) and 18 cases of CVST. A causal link with the vaccine is not proven, but is possible and deserves further analysis.
The EMA  preliminarily reviewed only 7 cases of one type of blood clot and 18 cases of another. They reviewed. They reviewed. Does that tell us about the number of cases that actually occurred?  No this only informs us of the number of cases reviewed.
“However, in younger patients there remain some concerns, related in particular to these rare cases.”
       
“The Committee’s experts looked in extreme detail at records of DIC and CVST reported from Member States, 9 of which resulted in death. Most of these occurred in people under 55 and the majority were women”
9 Dead. All under 55. Not a group that has any real chance of falling prey to this virus. But clearly the vaccine is a problem for this age group.   
The Committee was of the opinion that the vaccine’s proven efficacy in preventing hospitalisation and death from COVID-19 outweighs the extremely small likelihood of developing DIC or CVST. However, in the light of its findings, patients should be aware of the remote possibility of such syndromes, and if symptoms suggestive of clotting problems occur patients should seek immediate medical attention and inform healthcare professionals of their recent vaccination. Steps are already being taken to update the product information for the vaccine to include more information on these risks.

Benefit outweighs the risk? - Unless you are one of the dead or maimed from the vaccine? Or by benefit are they meaning the profit benefit outweighs the risk to a few expendable humans- What is the context?
Proven Efficacy?-We already know that’s big pharma spin

Let's keep reading this release- Stick with it.

Information for patients

  • COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca is not associated with an increased overall risk of blood clotting disorders.
  • There  have been very rare cases of unusual blood clots accompanied by low levels of blood platelets (components that help blood to clot) after vaccination. The reported cases were almost all in women under 55.
  • Because COVID-19 can be so serious and is so widespread, the benefits of the vaccine in preventing it outweigh the risks of side effects.
  • However, if you get any of the following after receiving the COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca:
    • breathlessness,
    • pain in the chest or stomach,
    • swelling or coldness in an arm or leg,
    • severe or worsening headache or blurred vision after vaccination,
    • persistent bleeding,
    • multiple small bruises, reddish or purplish spots, or blood blisters under the skin,

please seek prompt medical assistance and mention your recent vaccination.

Information for healthcare professionals

  • Cases of thrombosis and thrombocytopenia, some presenting as mesenteric vein or cerebral vein/cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, have been reported in persons who had recently received COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca, mostly occurring within 14 days after vaccination. The majority of reports involved women under 55, although some of this may reflect greater exposure of such individuals due to targeting of particular populations for vaccine campaigns in different Member States.
  • The number of reported events exceeds those expected, and causality although not confirmed, cannot therefore be excluded. However, given the rarity of the events, and the difficulty of establishing baseline incidence since COVID-19 itself is resulting in hospitalisations with thromboembolic complications, the strength of any association is uncertain.
  • EMA considers that the benefit-risk balance of the medicine remains positive, and there is no association with thromboembolic disorders overall. However, steps will be taken to update the SmPC and package leaflet with information on cases of DIC and CVST that have occurred.
  • Healthcare professionals are urged to be alert for possible cases of thromboembolism, DIC or CVST occurring in vaccinated individuals.
  • Recipients should be warned to seek immediate medical attention for symptoms of thromboembolism, and especially signs of thrombocytopenia and cerebral blood clots such as easy bruising or bleeding, and persistent or severe headache, particularly beyond 3 days after vaccination.

A direct healthcare professional communication (DHPC) will be sent to healthcare professionals prescribing, dispensing or administering the medicine. The DHPC will also be published on a dedicated page on the EMA website.

That's not a pass. It's an admission there is a problem with this vaccine. The claim that benefits outweigh the risk cannot be substantiated in any meaningful way.  You've been warned. The clotting/platelets issue can appear more then two weeks after vaccination. The vaccine will kill more people who had nothing to fear from the virus.

Stay tuned for an upcoming report on the massive pharma profiteering. Including the involvement of one specific global investment fund that has figured large in the pandemic/global warming plan to extort wealth from the masses..

3 comments:

  1. Yet another excellent report/analysis Penny. Will incorporate this link into my post of today. Thanks.

    gc

    ReplyDelete
  2. I too will probably incorporate this information in an article at my site as well, Penny, with absolute full credit to yourself...

    You have done a most splendid job here in showing the truth about AstraZeneca and I am like Greencrow in hoping that we can still reach Canuckleheads into not taking these Kill shots!!

    ReplyDelete

TROLLS &SPAM WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT HESITATION
KEEP IT RELEVANT. NO PERSONAL ATTACKS