Where Does the Misinformation Come From?

December, 8, 2021 | 18 Comments

Comments

  1. A “JUDGEMENT” Call … ‘Doctoring the Evidence’ …

    AntiDepAware@AntiDepAware 1h

    #WilfulBlindness
    #Coroners

    ‘We blame doctors after our daughter killed herself while on acne drug’

    “She was let down in life and she has been let down in death by the authorities’ steadfast refusal to recognise the role Isotretinoin played in her death.

    “But we, the family and friends and the people who knew her know the real truth, and this will not be changed by the opinions of those who never met her – yet had the power to stand in judgment over her.”

    “We know we will never get justice for our child, but we tried our best to get recognition for the role Isotretinoin played in Annabel’s death in the face of wilful ignorance by those who refuse to listen, we could do no more.

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/dangerous-acne-drug-caused-happy-25652833?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar

    they will not hear about the true side effects including sudden suicidal impulses from those who glibly prescribe it.

    Jonathan Leach said the evidence from experts on a potential link between Isotretinoin and self-harm was that there was ‘no settled and agreed view’.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10288549/Schoolgirls-suicide-not-directly-linked-acne-drug-Roaccutane-coroner-rules.html

    Mr Wright had nothing to add to the statement, other than to say that he felt the whole way the case had been handled, including the inquest, had been ‘bizarre’.

    Annabel Wright: Acne drug link to Ripon teen’s suicide ruled out

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-59568882

    and that part of his evidence was outside of his area of expertise.”

    Doctoring the Evidence: GlaxoSmithKline Pushes Depression Drug

    Published by
    Special to Corp Watch
     
    By

    Shelley Jofre

    Monday, July 30, 2007

    https://www.corpwatch.org/article/doctoring-evidence-glaxosmithkline-pushes-depression-drug

    But the outcome of these the trials was not what GSK had been hoping for. Paroxetine proved no better than placebo. In the biggest trial, Study 329, which was conducted across several sites in the U.S., 11 of the 93 children who took paroxetine developed serious side-effects; seven had to be hospitalized. Significantly more had self-harmed or attempted suicide on the drug than on placebo.

    The BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) obtained confidential case reports from Study 329 which detail what happened to them:

    This has been described by British psychiatrist Dr. David Healy as “the biggest medical scandal since thalidomide.” Dr. Healy, rather than the regulatory authorities charged with monitoring the safety of medicines, was instrumental in uncovering the evidence at the heart of the scandal. It was a series of U.S. legal actions that led Dr. Healy, as an expert witness, and the legal team with whom he was working, deep into GSK’s secret archives, where they found a series of damning internal documents.

    ‘This drug was GSK’s golden egg for many years and a lucrative business was built around its promotion. So it is perhaps not surprising the company dismissed my investigation as media scaremongering.

    What is surprising, though, is how many doctors on both sides of the Atlantic who claim to practice evidence-based medicine still refuse to acknowledge the damage the drugs can do – even though the evidence comes from GSK’s own RCTs and the company’s internal correspondence clearly shows how they tried to cover it up. …

  2. ‘But results vary ‘
    We are being treated like a herd of sheep harrassed by the dogs into a vaccine pen. How many of us can plough through this lot for example to make a decision and few will have access to someone to help us make a decision as best we can under the present circumstances And worse if we use the blogs and other research as part of a decision not to take the vaccine we are undermined in the same way reluctance to use SSRIs is undermined In the case of vaccines we can be coerced-sanctioned in the case of psych meds coerced-sectioned.

    First studies suggest Omicron can evade vaccine protection, boosters needed
    Variant spreading rapidly in Europe with case numbers doubling every three days or less.
    INDIA-HEALTH-VIRUS
    The Omicron variant can escape all the vaccines in use in Europe, but a third dose provides some protection
    BY HELEN COLLIS
    December 8, 2021 1:21 pm
    First data from laboratory studies suggests the Omicron coronavirus variant can dodge the protection given by vaccines, although booster shots may help if enough doses can be administered quickly enough.

    ‘In the last 24 hours, study results from South Africa, Sweden and Germany, as well as from vaccine maker BioNTech, all suggest Omicron can “escape” the immunity gained via vaccination. But results vary….’ So .read on in POLITIC0

    Ooops -the files have gone ‘missing’
    ‘European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is under scrutiny over her text messages to the Pfizer CEO | Etienne Ansotte/European Union
    BY LILI BAYER
    September 17, 2021 9:59 am
    European Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly wants to know more about European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s text messages with a pharmaceutical company chief.

    In April, the New York Times reported von der Leyen had exchanged calls and texts with Pfizer Chief Executive Albert Bourla.

    But when a request for access to the messages was submitted, the Commission said it had no record of them. Text messages, the Berlaymont argued, are generally “short-lived” and in principle excluded from its record-keeping. ‘

    I think it is reasonable to have doubts when there was no warning that the vaccines would fizzle out after six months or so but ‘they’ made out that that was a possibility only after they started to wane. Did they know that would happen at the start of vaccine rollouts. Was it a case of nudging rather than a case of informing. Once vaccinated it seems reasonable to have another one just as a precaution. Did they know they might fizzle out without ‘boosters’. Once caught in a vacc trap it’s hard to say no to another one . and another one ..and another one. How much can a body take both biologically and psychologically. The pandemic has created a situation where refusal of vaccinations can lead for many to coercion-incarcerating and to avoid this involuntary consent (as not voluntarily given) to be vaccinated -just as refusal of psych meds can lead to coercion-incarceration-sectioning . Even though in both cases there are grounds to refuse . The for the common good is a powerful argument but the common good is not always to follow what politicians physicians scientists regulators uncle tom cobbly and all tell us. When so many have proven to be corrupted and/or our right to autonomy trashed by being pushed through regulations designed by those who are dehumanising people to a form of robot , they love themselves, love robots but not quirky human beings. There is no such thing as benign abuse but that is what is being claimed in the name of the common good

  3. All4.com Homepage
    A watered doen version on C4
    Vaccine Wars: Truth About Pfizer: Dispatches
    Pfizer’s Covid vaccine has saved millions of lives around the world. But with rising prices and record profits, is the drug firm profiteering from the pandemic?
    No episode available to watch on demand on Channel 4

    but might be able to download on Teleboy
    Vaccine Wars – The Truth About Pfizer: Dispatches – Channel 4 – 10. December 2021, 20:30 – Teleboy Play
    Record

    This program is now only available in Replay.
    Channel 4 Friday, 10. December • 20:30 – 21:00
    Vaccine Wars – The Truth About Pfizer: Dispatches
    Documentary

    Pfizer’s Covid vaccine has saved the lives of millions around the world and the Government has chosen the Pfizer jab over the much cheaper Oxford AstraZeneca for its autumn roll-out of boosters. However, as Pfizer hikes up the price of its vaccine and enjoys record-breaking profits, questions are mounting over the pharmaceutical company’s behaviour. Reporter Antony Barnett considers whether its is unfairly profiteering from the pandemic, whether it has always played by the rules, and whether it is doing enough to stop people in poorer countries dying from Covid-19.

  4. Our Response to Channel 4 Dispatches

    Pfizer is disappointed to hear of the Channel 4 Dispatches documentary episode of 10th December 2021: “Vaccine Wars: Truth About Pfizer”.

    The Dispatches documentary was being advertised before Pfizer itself was sent a list of areas to respond to with a very short window to reply.

    We are concerned that unbalanced reporting will only serve to undermine the UK’s vaccination efforts at a time of much public concern. We have a number of concerns around specific accusations made in the approach to Pfizer, outlined below.

     https://www.pfizer.co.uk/news-and-featured-stories/our-response-to-channel-4-dispatches

    Vaccine Wars: Truth about Vaccines: Dispatches

    https://www.channel4.com/programmes/vaccine-wars-truth-about-pfizer-dispatches/on-demand/73166-001

    Pfizer’s Covid vaccine has saved the lives of millions around the world. But with rising prices and record profits, is the drug firm profiteering from the pandemic?

  5. Home On website Real not Rare
    Real Stories
    Take Action
    Contact
    Videos
    Groups
    Other
    Real Censorship

    #RealNotRare published accounts with videos and presentations at event

    Watch Now ‘What WAS your life like….’

    Latest Videos
    Latest Stories
    Holly Lindberg
    6 hours ago

    Holly Lindberg
    First Dose of Moderna on 03/12/21 Lot # 040A21A Second Dose of Moderna 04/09/21 Lot # 039A21A Blossom, Texas Q: What was your life like…

    Amy Heffner
    a day ago
    3 min
    Amy Heffner
    First Dose of Pfizer on 09/09/21 Second Dose of Pfizer on 09/30/21 Texas Q: What was your life like before you got the vaccine? I was a…

    Anthony Sanchelli
    2 days ago

    Anthony Sanchelli
    First Dose of Pfizer on 04/25/21 Lot #EW0170 Second Dose of Pfizer on 05/16/21 Lot #EW0182 San Francisco, California Q: What was your…

    Erin Van Vleet
    3 days ago

    Erin Van Vleet
    First Dose of Pfizer on 01/18/21 Richmond, VA Q: What was your life like before you got the vaccine? My life before the vaccine was…

    Michelle Johnson
    4 days ago

    Michelle Johnson
    First Dose of Moderna on 01/13/21 Lot #012L20A Pennsylvania Q: What was your life like before you got the vaccine? Prior to vaccination I…

    Mindy Brown
    5 days ago

    First Dose of Pfizer on 08/15/21 Georgia Q: What was your life like before you got the vaccine? I am a stay at home Mom so I basically…

    Taylor Devereaux
    5 days ago

    Taylor Devereaux
    First Dose of Pfizer on 09/10/21 Toronto, Ontario, Canada Q: What was your life like before you got the vaccine? I was a happy, 26 year…

    Kirstie London
    6 days ago

    Kirstie London
    First Dose of Pfizer on 05/19//21 Lot #EW0199 Second Dose of Pfizer on 06/30/21 Lot #FA9091 New Brunswick, Canada Q: What was your life…

    SHARE YOUR STORY
    READ MORE STORIES
    “The FDA wants 55 years to release vaccine data”
    Educate Yourself

    FDA WANTS 55 YEARS:

    https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/wait-what-fda-wants-55-years-process-foia-request-over-vaccine-data-2021-11-18/

    The small amount of current data released, already leads to concerns:
    https://www.react19.org/post/cumulative-analysis-of-early-on-pfizer-vaccine-data-released-by-the-fda-11-17

    Lookup Your Reps
    https://myreps.datamade.us/

    Call Your Reps

    Ask your representative to demand the FDA release the vaccine data in a timely manner.
    The first 2.5 months of data is very concerning, and we have a right to complete disclosure and transparency.

    Email Your Reps
    Download this letter template for more talking points or to send your rep an email:

    DOWNLOAD LETTER
    Get Involved With Additional Actions Items >
    Washington, D.C. , Nov 2nd, Event Presenters
    Robert Kaplan, PhD

    Stanford Robert M. Kaplan, PhD is currently a faculty member at the Stanford School of Medicine Clinical Excellence Research Center…

    Iona Heath, CBE, FRCGP
    Past President of UK Royal College of General Practitioners Inner city general practitioner in Kentish Town in London (1975-2010); now…

    Peter Doshi, PhD
    University of Maryland Peter Doshi, PhD, is an associate professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of…

    Patrick Whelan, MD
    University of California, Los Angeles Patrick Whelan MD Ph.D. is an Associate Clinical Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of…

    Linda Wastila, BSPharm, MSPH, PhD
    University of Maryland Linda Wastila, BSPharm, MSPH, PhD, is Professor and Parke-Davis Chair of Geriatric Pharmacotherapy in the…

    Retsef Levi, PhD
    MIT – Massachusetts Institute of Technology Retsef Levi PhD is the J. Spencer Standish (1945) Professor of Operations Management at the…

    David Healy, MD, FRCPsych
    McMaster University Dr David Healy is a Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at McMaster University in Ontario, having…

    Aditi Bhargava, PhD
    University of California, San Francisco Dr. Aditi Bhargava is a Professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and the Center…

    About Us
    Our Purpose
    Real lives are being affected by “not so rare” consequences.

    Our purpose is to raise awareness of the many vaccine injuries that are happening, to create a community of public support, to give a voice to those who have been silenced, to have our elected officials acknowledge us, to encourage ways to advocate, and to change public perception. This is all in an effort to help the injured receive better healthcare and treatment. Vaccine injured individuals did their part by getting this vaccine, and now they need your help.

    Although many do great with the vaccine, there is a chance for an adverse reaction. We believe where there is risk, there should be choice. Many are losing employment over these mandates, and we can not afford unemployment numbers to keep rising. We need to strengthen our economy; not lose our workforce.

    This is not red vs. blue. This is not us vs. them. This is humanity vs. disease. #teamhumanity.

    Our Demands
    Our elected officials and federal health agencies must start acknowledging our adverse reactions to the vaccines. We have been silenced for nearly a year. Stop the censorship!

    The medical community needs to be informed of these adverse reactions so that we can obtain better medical care.

    Large scale research needs to be funded – to increase understanding of these reactions, find a path to recovery, and to help make the vaccines safer for everyone. There is currently no safety net for those Americans injured.

    Stop the denial of religious and medical exemptions.

    Stop the mandates. Where there is a risk – there should be a choice. We need to strengthen our economy; not lose our workforce.

    We need the covid vaccines to be added under the VICP program, including eligibility for those who were injured under the EUA and clinical trials!

    Getting the covid vaccine is a public service, and we rolled up our sleeves to do our part to stop the pandemic. It took bravery for those who got the vaccine early on or during the clinical trials. They willingly rolled up their sleeves and are now left out cold by the very same government who urged us to get our doses. This must change!

    Who We Are
    We are a completely independent, grass-roots movement comprised of people who have become united through our human suffering. This is not political. Many of us have lost loved ones to covid, and take it seriously. This is not about whether or not to vaccinate or wear a mask. This is about freedom of choice, informed consent, and quality healthcare for the injured.

  6. 1 of 1
    ACTION ALERT! Take Action Against Tyrannical Federal Legislation
    Inbox

    Children’s Health Defense
    Sat, Dec 11, 9:10 PM (8 hours ago)

    Dear Susanne,

    On November 30, H.R. 550, a federal bill passed in the U.S. House of Representatives.

    The bill, “Immunization Infrastructure Modernization Act of 2021,” would expand state and local health department vaccine-tracking systems to monitor the vaccination status of American citizens. States would provide the information to the federal government.

    The bill may be difficult to stop as it already has bipartisan support. It passed the House with the support of 294 U.S. Representatives, including all Democrats and 80 Republicans.

    H.R. 550 is now under consideration by the U.S. Senate where, if passed, it could be implemented in under 12 months.

    H.R. 550 would lead to a monumental invasion of our rights as American citizens. It would set an incredibly dangerous precedent and could lead to more vaccine mandates, and more restrictions of services and healthcare for the unvaccinated.

    The bill also creates a mechanism for federal, state and local governments to enforce vaccine passports and possibly no-fly lists. And it would be costly to taxpayers — it appropriates $400 million dollars to expand vaccine tracking.

    Part of this money would be spent on grants and cooperative agreements to state or local governmental entities that agree to adopt the new data collection guidelines set by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    It’s imperative that we work to educate our Senators on why this legislation poses an unprecedented threat to freedom and liberty, and how it will lead to an unconstitutional invasion of privacy and loss of medical freedom.

    Once freedoms are lost, they’re nearly impossible and extremely costly to regain through legal action. The time to act on this is now!

    Please take a few moments to complete this action alert by simply entering your name and address, and a letter explaining why you oppose this legislation will automatically be sent to your federal representatives.

    And mark your calendar now, to put aside time on Monday, December 13 to call your elected representatives. To make it easier, we’ve included a brief phone script. Calls to voice your concerns for any legislative matters are the most effective way to influence representatives, so please make the time to do this!

    This is an invasion of privacy and freedom that no American citizen should be comfortable with and it’s critical that we all take action now! Thank you for taking the time to help us defend our freedoms and restore democracy.

    Thank you,

    The Children’s Health Defense Team

  7. The Dispatches programme ‘Vaccine Wars’ is now being made available
    free to play on All4. with e mail and password
    Vaccine Wars: Truth About Pfizer: Dispatches

    This intial message (above Dec 10th) has disappeared ie ‘No episode available to watch on demand on Channel 4

  8. Rapid response to:

    Evidence is insufficient to back mandatory NHS staff vaccination, says House of Lords committee
    BMJ 2021; 375 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2957 (Published 03 December 2021)
    Cite this as: BMJ 2021;375:n2957

    Evidence does not justify mandatory vaccines – everyone should have the right to informed choice
    Dear Editor,

    As doctors and health professionals, many of whom work in the NHS, we would like to express our opposition to anti-SarCov2 vaccination being mandated for any group of people, including health and care workers. We agree with the House of Lords committee that the evidence is insufficient to justify this measure, but the government and Parliament do not appear to be listening and mandatory vaccines for NHS staff looks likely to be passed into law this week.

    We do not dispute that covid-19 can be and has been a dangerous infection, and we agree that vaccines are effective in many situations. However, there is considerable uncertainty about the effectiveness of the covid vaccines, some serious short-term complications and a lack of data on long-term harms. In this situation, it is imperative that people are able to make a fully-informed choice about whether to have the vaccine or not.

    It is widely accepted that randomised controlled trials are the only means of providing robust data on the efficacy of medical interventions because observational data is subject to uncontrolled biases. Yet the randomised trials of the covid vaccines lasted for a very short time and were only powered to provide definitive statistical evidence on preventing ‘symptomatic infections’, not on preventing infection per se, hospitalisation or death. The trials also provided no data on whether the vaccines reduce transmission or not—things we have had to learn the hard way, through real world evidence like the rapid spread of the Delta and now Omicron variants.

    Results from the randomised vaccine trials published so far suggested the vaccines were effective in reducing symptomatic infections for a few weeks. The average duration of follow-up for people in the first report from the Pfizer trial, on which licensing was based, was only 46 days, for example. [1] The recent report on data from people who had been in the trial for up to 6 months revealed that the mean total duration of follow-up for the primary outcome of the double-blind trial was 3.6 months for those who received the vaccine and 3.5 months for those allocated to placebo. [2] Moreover, only 7% of participants actually remained in the double blind trial for 6 months. [3] Real-world data are not consistent with the trial results, with high case numbers in doubly vaccinated individuals reported from the UK [4] and Israel [5], for example. This suggests either that effects of vaccines wear off quickly, and/or that some bias crept into original trial procedures, possibly due to unblinding caused by vaccine reactions [6] or other procedural irregularities. [7] The same observational data suggests the vaccines may reduce hospital admission and death due to covid infection, but, in the absence of data from randomised trials it is difficult to be certain, since unknown factors may bias the data in either direction.

    More alarmingly, third and fourth ‘booster’ shots have not been tested in any randomised trials, and other data on the efficacy and safety of administering further doses are scanty.

    In other words, data on the only outcome properly tested in randomised trials, the prevention of cases by two vaccinations, appear unreliable, possibly due to rapidly waning effects or other factors, and other outcomes and procedures have not been investigated in randomised trials, meaning there is no secure evidence either way.

    As far as the safety of the vaccines is concerned, it is clear that rare but serious, and potentially fatal adverse effects occur, such as thrombosis and myocarditis, [8] and that these took months to identify. Long-term harms will be difficult to detect due to the short duration of the randomised trials, and will only become apparent in coming years.

    There are also no data on groups who might be particularly adversely affected by the vaccine, such as those with, or at risk of autoimmune disorders, and there is little data on adverse effects of booster shots, which is significant since there have long been safety concerns about repeated exposure to mRNA technology. [9] Repeated booster vaccines therefore represent cumulative risk for untested benefit.

    For young age groups, in whom covid-related morbidity and mortality is low, and for those who have had covid 19 infection already, and appear to have longstanding immunological memory, [10] the harms of taking a vaccine are almost certain to outweigh the benefits to the individual, and the goal of reducing transmission to other people at higher risk has not been demonstrated securely. [11]

    Respecting people’s autonomy and bodily integrity is at the heart of human rights and medical ethics and the data currently available on the vaccines by no means justify over-riding these important principles. More good quality research and access to existing data from the vaccine trials are required for people to make fully-informed decisions about whether to take these vaccines or not. [12] Coercing people to have a covid vaccine, either through the threat of legal sanctions or, in the case of mandates for occupational groups, by depriving people of their livelihoods and careers, is not justified due to the prevailing uncertainty about the overall benefits of the vaccines, the unfavourable risk-benefit ratio for many groups, and, not least, the lack of data on long-term harms.

    13 December 2021
    Joanna Moncrieff
    Professor of Critical and Social Psychiatry
    Professor Peter C. Gøtzsche, Dr Rufus May, Dr Giovanni Dalla-Valle, Dr Rachel Brown, Dr Lili Dawson, Dr Andrew Docherty, Professor Gabor Keleman, Dr Brian Martindale, Dr John Mason, Dr Gad Meyer, Dr. Livia Hronska, Dr Tomasz Pierscionek, Dr Pino Pini, Dr Jessica Robinson, Dr Clive Sherlock, Dr Marianne Siapera, Dr Federico Soldano, Dr Maria Tsvetkova, Dr Cathy Wield, Dr Sami Timimi, Dr Kasha Siubka-Wood
    UCL

    @joannamoncrieff

  9. There was a video on YouTube with this content but it is no longer available.
    Maybe it would be better to upload it on the blog and and other platforms such as Bitchute that are being used by those who have real content.
    Thank you for your work, as always.

  10. Coronavirus (COVID-19)
    Guidance and support
    HomeHealth and social careMedicines, medical devicesPharmacyRegulatory approval of Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine for COVID-19
    Medicines & Healthcare products
    Regulatory Agency
    Decision
    Information for Healthcare Professionals on COVID-19 Vaccine Pfizer/BioNTech (Regulation 174)
    Updated 14 December 2021

    Contents
    Regulation 174 Information for UK healthcare professionals
    1. Name of the medicinal product
    2. Qualitative and quantitative composition
    3. Pharmaceutical form
    4. Clinical particulars
    5. Pharmacodynamic properties
    6. Pharmaceutical particulars
    7. Marketing authorisation holder
    8. Marketing authorisation number(s)
    9. Date of first authorisation/renewal of the authorisation
    10. Date of revision of the text
    Print this page
    Regulation 174 Information for UK healthcare professionals
    This medicinal product has been given authorisation for temporary supply by the UK Department of Health and Social Care and the Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. It does not have a marketing authorisation, but this temporary authorisation grants permission for the medicine to be used for active immunisation to prevent COVID-19 disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus in individuals aged 12 years of age and over.

    As with any new medicine in the UK, this product will be closely monitored to allow quick identification of new safety information. Healthcare professionals are asked to report any suspected adverse reactions. See section 4.8 for how to report adverse reactions.

    1. Name of the medicinal product
    COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 concentrate for solution for injection

  11. It does not have a marketing authorisation, but this temporary authorisation grants permission for the medicine to be used for active immunisation to prevent COVID-19 disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus in individuals aged 12 years of age and over.

    I might have misunderstood as only caught snipett on news – but haven’t they started or going to start vaccinating children UNDER 12 yrs old…
    There’s a lot of important very detailed in the web site but too much to post as a comment

  12. All of Dr. Breggin’s YouTube videos were taken down after he interviewed me about my book on antidepressants. (The channel is still operating, but it contains only videos by others that he has linked to.)

    The Medical Dictatorship is coming.

    BTW, if anyone is interested in listening to the interview, it still can be found on Dr, Breggin’s website. Click on this link, and then scroll down to Episode # 492:

    https://breggin.com/the-dr-breggin-hour-archives/?fbclid=IwAR0NbRThwjKDjEFrmBmgdTHQUzDM5PpYuwa7Xm-1K41Xd3Cv4D3fN55y-Dc

  13. Right after I posted the above comment, I received a press release from Senator Johnson]s office. The US military is discharging active-duty service members who are refusing the covid shot — even the ones who have recovered from the covid and now have robust, long-lasting natural immunity.

    They have stopped pretending this is about protecting our health.

  14. Intended for healthcare professionals
    News
    Covid-19: “Most complex patient in the world” should have ventilation withdrawn
    BMJ 2021; 374 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2193 (Published 07 September 2021)
    Cite this as: BMJ 2021;374:n2193
    Read our latest coverage of the coronavirus pandemic

    Clare Dyer
    Author affiliations
    A 56 year old woman described by doctors as “the most complex covid patient in the world” should have the ventilation keeping her alive withdrawn by the end of October, a High Court judge has ruled.1

    Mr Justice Hayden, vice president of the Court of Protection, said it would be in her best interests to be moved from the intensive care unit to a quiet and private place where she could end her life surrounded by her close family members.

    He said he had been told authoritatively that she was the most complex covid patient in the world, in terms of the neurological impact and complications of the disease. That conclusion had been arrived at following consideration of national and international case studies, he added.

    The woman, referred to as AH, has been a patient at Addenbrooke’s Hospital in Cambridge since December 2020 and on a ventilator since January. Hayden said her clinical presentation was highly unusual and the impact of the illness had created “an invidious dilemma” both for her family and professionals.

    AH has extensive brain damage and by March her peripheral motor nerves had little to no remaining function. She can communicate with her eyes and has some neck and lips movement, but no limb movement, and frequently exhibits distress.

    She has four children and Hayden said some family members had been highly critical of the hospital. “At times, some of their behaviour has fallen below that which the nursing and medical staff should be expected to tolerate,” he added. He described the staff’s care of AH as “inspirational.”

    Each family member had vacillated as to the right way forward, he said, and none of the available options were devoid of difficulty. Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust had applied to the court for a decision about AH’s best interests.

    “It is an unusual feature of this case that while the way forward has been described as ‘finely balanced’ every single professional involved in AH’s care has reached the same conclusion—that continued ventilation is not in her best interests,” he said. During examinations, on every occasion, she has become distressed, cried, and appeared anguished.

    As well as mechanical ventilation, she has a nasogastric tube, a urinary catheter, and a rectal tube to manage faeces. She requires frequent suctioning of her trachea to control respiratory secretions and is turned often to avoid pressure sores.

    Hayden said the delicacy of the case arose from two important aspects. “AH is able to feel and show some degree of emotion. Predominantly, she now reveals pain and real distress. However, she plainly sustains comfort from the presence of her children who have been the focus of her life.”

    He added, “The evidence, not least that given by the family, has identified a tentative plan which has crystallised, at least to some degree, during the hearing. As I have analysed, it is centred upon respecting AH’s dignity and promoting the best quality of life at this last stage. For it to be most effective it will require cooperation between the family and those caring for AH. This will require respect, each for the other. The time has come to give AH the peace that I consider she both wants and is entitled to.”

    Continued ventilation had become burdensome and medically futile, he said, but it should be continued until all four children, including AH’s daughter in Australia, and other family members could be with her in a quiet place, which must be by the end of October.

    “It provides an important opportunity for this close and loving family to be together at the end. The treating clinicians feel able to work with and perfect this plan and recognise that it is consistent with their own professional conclusions and reflective of the central importance of family in AH’s hierarchy of values and beliefs,” he concluded.

    This article is made freely available for use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.

    https://bmj.com/coronavirus/usage

  15. Rapid response to:
    Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial
    BMJ 2021; 375 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2635 (Published 02 November 2021)
    Cite this as: BMJ 2021;375:n2635

    Open letter from The BMJ to Mark Zuckerberg
    Dear Mark Zuckerberg,

    We are Fiona Godlee and Kamran Abbasi, editors of The BMJ, one of the world’s oldest and most influential general medical journals. We are writing to raise serious concerns about the “fact checking” being undertaken by third party providers on behalf of Facebook/Meta.

    In September, a former employee of Ventavia, a contract research company helping carry out the main Pfizer covid-19 vaccine trial, began providing The BMJ with dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings, and emails. These materials revealed a host of poor clinical trial research practices occurring at Ventavia that could impact data integrity and patient safety. We also discovered that, despite receiving a direct complaint about these problems over a year ago, the FDA did not inspect Ventavia’s trial sites.

    The BMJ commissioned an investigative reporter to write up the story for our journal. The article was published on 2 November, following legal review, external peer review and subject to The BMJ’s usual high level editorial oversight and review.[1]

    But from November 10, readers began reporting a variety of problems when trying to share our article. Some reported being unable to share it. Many others reported having their posts flagged with a warning about “Missing context … Independent fact-checkers say this information could mislead people.” Those trying to post the article were informed by Facebook that people who repeatedly share “false information” might have their posts moved lower in Facebook’s News Feed. Group administrators where the article was shared received messages from Facebook informing them that such posts were “partly false.”

    Readers were directed to a “fact check” performed by a Facebook contractor named Lead Stories.[2]

    We find the “fact check” performed by Lead Stories to be inaccurate, incompetent and irresponsible.

    — It fails to provide any assertions of fact that The BMJ article got wrong

    — It has a nonsensical title: “Fact Check: The British Medical Journal Did NOT Reveal Disqualifying And Ignored Reports Of Flaws In Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Trials”

    — The first paragraph inaccurately labels The BMJ a “news blog”

    — It contains a screenshot of our article with a stamp over it stating “Flaws Reviewed,” despite the Lead Stories article not identifying anything false or untrue in The BMJ article

    — It published the story on its website under a URL that contains the phrase “hoax-alert”

    We have contacted Lead Stories, but they refuse to change anything about their article or actions that have led to Facebook flagging our article.

    We have also contacted Facebook directly, requesting immediate removal of the “fact checking” label and any link to the Lead Stories article, thereby allowing our readers to freely share the article on your platform.

    There is also a wider concern that we wish to raise. We are aware that The BMJ is not the only high quality information provider to have been affected by the incompetence of Meta’s fact checking regime. To give one other example, we would highlight the treatment by Instagram (also owned by Meta) of Cochrane, the international provider of high quality systematic reviews of the medical evidence.[3] Rather than investing a proportion of Meta’s substantial profits to help ensure the accuracy of medical information shared through social media, you have apparently delegated responsibility to people incompetent in carrying out this crucial task. Fact checking has been a staple of good journalism for decades. What has happened in this instance should be of concern to anyone who values and relies on sources such as The BMJ.

    We hope you will act swiftly: specifically to correct the error relating to The BMJ’s article and to review the processes that led to the error; and generally to reconsider your investment in and approach to fact checking overall.

    Best wishes,

    Fiona Godlee, editor in chief
    Kamran Abbasi, incoming editor in chief
    The BMJ

  16. More members of the parliament and retired politicians are speaking out against increasing authoritarianism in UK but not enough -some of the hostility being ramped up in sections of the media against people who are declining vaccines and support for vaccine passports has a lot of public approval in UK

    Wales Online
    In full: Lord Frost’s resignation letter to Boris Johnson
    PA Reporters & Will Maule 55 mins ago

    Lord Frost has resigned as the UK’s chief Brexit negotiator, citing concerns about the Government’s “direction of travel”.

    (Part of) The full text of Lord Frost’s resignation letter to the Prime Minister is below.

    Dear Boris, (Prime Minister)

    I have led our EU exit process for the two and half years since you became Prime Minister.

    In those years we have restored the UK’s freedom and independence as a country and begun the process of building a new relationship with the EU.

    You know my concerns about the current direction of travel. I hope we will move as fast as possible to where we need to get to: a lightly regulated, low-tax, entrepreneurial economy, at the cutting edge of modern science and economic change.

    Three hundred years of history show that countries which take that route grow and prosper, and I am confident we will too.

    We also need to learn to live with Covid and I know that is your instinct too.

    You took a brave decision in July, against considerable opposition, to open up the country again.

    Sadly it did not prove to be irreversible, as I wished, and believe you did too. I hope we can get back on track soon and not be tempted by the kind of coercive measures we have seen elsewhere.

    Together we have put this country onto a new path. I am confident that under your leadership this newly free Britain can succeed and prosper hugely.

    I wish you and the Government every success in that.

    David

Leave a Reply