By Herman Tiu Laurel
(Part 1: mRNA’s yet Unchartered Waters)
It took me some time to ascribe as “imperialism” the US behavior on its vaccine promotion efforts, but after reviewing the course of events since the start of the Covid-19 crisis I found this as an inescapable fact – the US has tried to impose on the world its new vaccine development, its parameters for defining “efficacy” and its pernicious propaganda efforts at putting down other countries’ vaccine projects.
The US effort at pushing the vaccine into development reeks of the capitalist profit purpose, starting with the billions of Dollars from Trump’s May 2020 “Warp Speed” to US Big Pharma that promptly pushed stocks prices and the Pharma executives went on shares selling sprees continuously since July 2020. US media simultaneously went on a hyped campaign of “95% effectiveness” or efficacy of the US mRNA vaccines which now emerges to be based on debatable data.
US attempt to smear other vaccines
The worse and most revealing part of US vaccine imperialism was its posthaste campaign to discredit other countries’ vaccine development, not only China’s but also Russia’s and Cuba’s. The US let India alone, likely for being its geopolitical ally hence clearly showing the politization of the vaccine crisis.
China, however, is multi-polarizing vaccine development, sharing technology with rising economies that can now be independent from the Western Pharma in vaccine development.
It should be no wonder now that almost every day there is another country announcing its joint ventures with China’s vaccine developers, being welcomed not only to ASEAN countries but all the way to Latin America in Brazil, to Eastern Europe in Serbia, to the Middle East in the UAE and others, in Africa. Presidents and prime minister of countries have volunteered to be the first to take the Chinese “inactivated varus” vaccines due to its safety and the need to convey that message to their peoples.
Global virus and vaccine enlightenment
The Covid-19 crisis and the conflict over the vaccines that have dominated the global media the past few months have forced an accelerated educational course on vaccines on the populations of the world, and this is good for these reasons:
1) Epidemics and pandemics have become an inevitable part of 21st Century life in our Human Community due to the closeness of all countries brought about by globalization of travel and trade;
2) This is one thought that never occurred to until I listened to a discussion between two American doctors in biology, Drs. Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying, who mentioned “biological warfare” as one reason why countries should be prepared with vaccine technology capabilities;
3) The present attempt by the US Big Pharma to hoodwink the world to swallowing its defnitions of “efficacy” while hiding its data manipulation from the understanding of the global public;
4) For the global public to start realizing that simplistic “anti-vax” positioning is no longer a viable absolute position even while we all should push “natural health and immunity” awareness.
US verbal engineering
In this opportunity for virus and vaccine educational efforts we pay special tribute to The British Medical Journal The British Medical Journal .
The BMJ of the British Medical Association and its associate editor Peter Doshi, PhD and associate professor of pharmaceutical health service research at the University of Maryland, who had through the past months pointed out that the mRNA vaccines first dose only had 52% (media never made this clear) while Pfizer and Moderna data were never complete contrary to their claims.
The US media had launched a negative campaign against China’s vaccine development efforts. It raised the issue of a single small bribery case against Sinovac in China, yet upon cursory research one can readily find ten times more bribery cases against Pfizer in China and other Third World countries. US media then harped on the lack of data from China’s vaccine developers when China was actually working with several countries in a more meticulous and complicated process of verifications.
50% efficacy misrepresented
But the chief strategy of US media was to define the parameters of what “efficacy” or “effectiveness” meant in the English media influenced world like the Philippines. The impression the US media and, in the manner reported in the Philippines, is that efficacy means “complete immunity” and thus created the lingering question why WHO and even the US CDC and Philippine health authorities and experts accept 50% efficacy as the threshold for approving a vaccine.
The US FDA and even DR. Anthony Fauci accepts the 50% threshold, and as the US National Public Radio reporting on I.J. Tan, chief strategist of the nonprofit Immunization Action Coalition, explains: “’if you vaccinate 100 people, 5 people will not get disease…. It’s possible that the Covid-19} vaccine will reduce the severity of disease’ in the other 50% who do get sick’”. Quoting another health expert, “It may mean that people are less likely to be hospitalized…”
The above explanations clarify Sinovac’s announcement about its efficacy rate in its Brazil trials, “Sinovac’s COVID-19 vaccine is 100 percent effective in preventing severe and moderate infections, 77.96 percent effective in preventing mild cases, and has an overall efficacy of 50.4 percent in Brazil’s final-stage trials.” And clearly many countries in the world prefer that to the cliam of 95% efficacy but carrying the risk of death for some patients in certain categories and based on uncertain data.
The explanations above clarify the WHO standard for vaccine acceptability, as well as for all health professional I have read or have seen published in the three months course of this debate on efficacy and effectiveness rate. Only a few in the Philippine Senate and certainly a bit more in Philippine mainstream media (like the camera-hugging Senator Panfilo Lacson or the blatantly anti-China Joel Reyes Zobel of DZBB).
The backlash to the US
The recent coronavirus shock news from the untimely deaths of 23 senior citizens inoculated with the Pfizer vaccine in Norway confirmed the alarm of some voices as far back as 2020 – the new mRNA vaccines of which Pfizer is one, along with Moderna, presets serious problems which have not been fully studied and addressed to ensure 100% safety of the vaccines.
We must caution the public not to be unduly freaked out about vaccines in general by this alarming news about the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines that were so loudly and enthusiastically promoted by the Western media at their inception, but the “Warp Speed” project and billions in funding for a “new” and early vaccine prompted a lot of short cuts.
Most vaccines do not suffer from the “short cuts” process that the mRNA vaccines of Pfizer and Moderna was rushed through, hence there are still “known unknowns” about them. While the traditional “inactivated” virus technology has been used for hundreds of years and present relatively little unknowns about them.
Pfizer side effects from the onset
In November 2020 Pfizer was still touting the 94% effectiveness of its vaccine in subjects 65 years old and above, and thus many nursing or care-for-the-aged homes wanted priority for their very senior citizens – which may have proven to be a major mistake. While in Japan this January they have limited the use of Pfizer to those above 16 years old due to limited data on the younger age group.
First mRNA glitches were already reported in US media in December 2020 (https://www.zerohedge.com/political/alaska-health-worker-had-serious-allergic-reaction-pfizer-vaccine-rollout-suffers-hiccups ) when a health worker in Alaska who had no known drug allergies was under hospital observation for an anaphylactic reaction similar to two other health workers in Britain after receiving the Pfizer-BioNTech.
Anaphylactic reactions are sudden, widespread, potentially severe and life-threatening allergic reactions.
On December 21, 2020 US media, including USA Today, reported on a nurse volunteer for the Pfizer vaccine enthusing before a camera “how awesome” it was to take the shot and then collapsing. Later reports say “underlying conditions” caused the reaction had no correlation to the vaccine but the nurse asked “How can you say beyond a reasonable doubt that the vaccine didn’t cause this?”
The HealthSite.com on January 7, 2021 reported: “Nearly 4,400 adverse events were reported after people received the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine in the US, with 21 cases determined to be anaphylaxis, according to CDC. Throughout this time mainstream and social media seemed to downplay the problems – until the Norway rash of seniors’ deaths sounded the 5th degree alarm.
The latest alert was raised in California and reported on January 16, 2021 in several US media when the state’s top epidemiologist called for a halt to the use of a batch of 330,000 doses of Moderna mRNA vaccines after ten serious anaphylactic shock reactions arose from 21,800 shots given out.
The mounting evidence is plain for all to see now, the mRNA vaccine has a major drawback – allergic reactions.
(To be continued)