The Oxford-AstraZeneca trial illness: one that only appears to have been caused by the vaccine?
The co-called vaccine for “Covid-19” being developed by Oxford University, the pithily named ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, described hereabouts before as being pointless, and the “ultimate in vaccination for the sake of being vaccinated”, has hit a snag during its trials on human subjects; the reader will no doubt have heard. One of the guinea pigs† had to be hospitalised when she grew seriously ill.
Indeed, all the groupings of the same vaccine trial taking place around the world (UK, Brazil, India, South Africa, and the US) were paused. In the UK (and presumably in the other locations) this occurred on 8th September. The hospitalisation happened on 5th September. An investigation evidently ensued, and it was announced on 12th September that the trial would be resumed – this has apparently now happened in all locations except the US; more about this shortly. The 37 year-old woman was said to be going to be discharged on the 9th September, but a Daily Mail article of 17th September, told of how the discharge date had never been officially confirmed.
When the trial was paused, some news escaped about the nature of the woman’s illness: a condition called transverse myelitis (TM), described in press reports as a neurological disorder. It involves the inflammation of a section of the spinal cord, which can lead to paralysis. It is a condition that people do recover from, although most sufferers acquire permanent impairments. AstraZeneca, which is the pharmaceutical company developing the vaccine in partnership with Oxford, made statements to the effect that they did not know if the illness had indeed been TM. However, the abovementioned Daily Mail article reports how CNN had claimed to have seen a ‘Suspected or Unexpected Serious Adverse Reaction report’ filed on September 10th, and had told of being informed that “fourteen days after receiving her second dose of the vaccine in late August, the woman ‘experienced confirmed transverse myelitis’”.
It has also come out that a previously undisclosed pause had affected the trials in July when another subject had experienced neurological symptoms. Apparently, these caused doctors to diagnose multiple sclerosis. The illness was deemed to be unrelated to the vaccine.
Official denials and excuses aside, the fact is that there is most definitely cause to understand that there is a link between TM and general vaccination. Moreover, a possible cause of TM is an immune system response to a viral infection, and thus, given that the Oxford vaccine is supposed to provoke the same thing, it is entirely plausible that the condition in this case could be directly caused by the vaccine.
In fact, we should be prepared to consider that TM could well be a routine collateral side effect of vaccination, but something that the pharmaceutical industry thinks is rare enough so as not to be considered a serious risk. For evidence, see the 9th September Telegraph article, which stated the following:
Several studies have drawn “limited connections” between the condition and vaccination. A 2018 study analysing three decades of data on adverse vaccine events in the US found 119 cases of transverse myelitis – a tiny figure when compared to the number of people vaccinated, but researchers suggested it could be a “very rare” side effect.
We should also note that TM can indeed be indicative of the onset of multiple sclerosis, so the diagnosis of that disease in the first case of an adverse reaction in the Oxford-AstraZeneca trial may have been a convenient “get out” that turned a vaccine-caused illness into something that the trial doesn’t have to deal with or factor into its conclusions – that is, if any newly diagnosed multiple sclerosis patient, as we might expect the case to be, is always dropped from a vaccine trial.
Illustrating that vaccine damage cannot be ruled out in either of the two cases is an information sheet, by AstraZeneca, for trial volunteers dated September 11th, which The Telegraph quoted in an article of 20th September:
After independent review, these illnesses were either considered unlikely to be associated with the vaccine or there was insufficient evidence to say for certain that the illnesses were or were not related to the vaccine.
Indeed, what this extract actually says is that vaccine damage was only deemed to be as likely as whatever evidence was available, or in fact, whatever evidence was preferred and not omitted. And to do a job of summarisation for AstraZeneca regarding the overall situation, it could be said that is merely coincidental that the illnesses that endangered the trial appeared to be illness that was caused by the vaccine.
However, one has to remember that this information is from a medical industrial complex that tells people that, because some people have died, ergo there must be a new virus. And yet the effect-determining-the-cause mode of thinking and operation clearly gets abandoned when it comes to defending vaccines that have millions of dollars and pounds sterling staked in their survival through safety tests and into production. UK Government has invested £65.5 million in the Oxford development, and that appears to be before paying for the millions of doses that are claimed to be required.
Some Americans – other than Anthony Fauci, who is dead keen – are not happy, and by the end of this article we will perhaps find out why. A Dr Peter Jay Hotez, virologist with Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, is reported in the same Telegraph article (linked to above) as telling The New York Times that AstraZeneca had “failed to supply a clear rationale for resuming their trials”. Hotez was “echoed by other US experts”, said The Telegraph.
One such was Dr Paul Offit, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania and a member of the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) advisory committee on vaccines. He was reported as questioning “how AstraZeneca – or the UK regulators – determined that the second suspected case of transverse myelitis… was not related to the vaccine.”
Then there was Mark Slifka, a vaccine expert at Oregon Health and Science University appearing to comment on the fact that both the cases of illness happened in the 8,000 people strong UK trial, who said:
If there are two cases, then this starts to look like a dangerous pattern. If a third case of neurological disease pops up in the vaccine group, then this vaccine may be done.
Ultimately, the FDA, said The Telegraph, “has not commented but is reported to be requesting further data on the two adverse reactions from AstraZeneca.” Hence, and crucially, the American branch of the trial is stalled, and is facing a degree of scrutiny that might upset the apple cart.
What exactly will happen with the Oxford vaccine remains to be seen, but if it is not stopped in the USA, then it clearly deserves to be rejected en masse if it manages to be deemed “safe” because the clues are all there to tell us that those who are developing this vaccine have a culture in which there is no regard for the levels of public confidence, which somewhat indicates a god-complex, and in which small percentages of carnage caused by the product are considered acceptable before fears about becoming culpable for causing injury and death start to materialise, so that criminal prosecution and civil law suit can be avoided.
The reader is asked to consider the little matter of the coincidence introduced above by way of playing devil’s advocate for AstraZeneca: the coincidence of a person in a vaccine trial being struck down with an unrelated illness that looks like it could have been caused by the vaccine. Now, ask the fundamental question: given that applicants will have been screened, why is it that a person could be in a vaccine trial and be prone to illness that looks like it could be caused by the vaccine? Wouldn’t that circumstance be asking for a crisis to occur during the trial? What is the good of having a test subject who is going to come down with an improbable illness – transverse myelitis, an illness that looks like it could be caused by the vaccine – if the point of the test is to establish the safety of the vaccine?
Well, we know that enquiry of applicants to the trial was certainly made regarding current and potential health, and this we understand from Jack Sommers, who was the trial participant who wrote an account of his experience for The Independent (as mentioned in the abovementioned FBEL article) – although it wasn’t divulged that Jack has been an editor at the Jewish Chronicle and a reporter at the HuffPost UK. Obviously, someone, somewhere decided that the Oxford vaccine trials in the UK required an embedded journalist so that there could be reports as if from the front line in a war for the purposes of propaganda. Suspect a military intelligence mind to be behind it. In any case, Jack wrote:
If you do sign up, prepare for the process to be more mundane than you might expect. A vaccine trial combines a lot of admin, like signing up for a bank account but with the light trepidation of having your holiday jabs. You apply via an online questionnaire and will be asked every conceivable question about your health history and your family. Once approved, you’ll be called to the hospital.
Every conceivable question about your health history and your family, says Jack. But they cannot keep test subjects out of the trial who are about to succumb to an illness that will cause suspicion about the trial?
But as it happens, the Transverse Myelitis Society of the UK says that it is possible for the condition to come on suddenly. Indeed, the Daily Mail (in the same article already referred to) gave an account of how the most recent trial case occurred:
She was given the first dose in June, after which she felt fine, and the second was at the end of August. But she started to suffer difficulty walking, pain and weakness in her arms and a headache, after tripping while running in September.
One might be forgiven for thinking that the writer of the article may be confusing transverse myelitis with a slipped disc, because the Transverse Myelitis Society of the UK says that the condition is incredibly rare, and if it was really caused by people taking a tumble, it perhaps wouldn’t be. The rareness of transverse myelitis is astonishing: there are only about 300 cases a year of TM in the UK. The chances of contracting TM and also being on a vaccine trial must be miniscule; even less than dying in a terrorist attack at the height of the War on Terror. The coincidence under discussion is an impossible one.
So, we might infer that, in fact, the illness that only looks like it was caused by a vaccine is in fact… caused by a vaccine. Moreover, a brief study of the history of transverse myelitis shows that in the 1920s it was firmly associated with vaccination. Furthermore, if one assumes that vaccination does cause transverse myelitis, then using the current rate of cases per subjects in the UK Oxford trial, which to be conservative we will say is 1 (although it could be 2), then 300 cases of transverse myelitis a year would represent 2,400,000 vaccinated people, and we could say that the rate of the occurrence of the illness in the trial of the Oxford vaccine is much higher than we would actually expect it to be.
But things are more sinister than that. On 18th September, Simon Dolan, the fellow who brought the judicial review against lockdown, tweeted what must be called an internet rumour: he reported that “the person who suffered the reaction to the Oxford experimental vaccine is currently in hospital and has lost control of hands and feet”.
Far be it for this site to repeat reports from unnamed sources, but lest we forget, we are dealing with a situation where there hasn’t been official confirmation of the woman’s discharge from hospital, plus the fact that the reported symptoms sound like Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) which also involves inflammation of the spinal cord, and “causes a creeping paralysis on both sides of the body that begins at the ends of the limbs (hands and feet) and moves upward”.
The quote is from acsh.org, or the website of the American Council on Science and Health, and also an article that discusses the possible reason for the pause in the Oxford trial; it was published at the time of the pause.
Now, as it happens, GBS was the condition that affected 450 people (killing 30) in the United States in 1976 after an emergency flu vaccine was administered to 45 million people. That was a rate of one case of the illness in a hundred thousand people.
If we applied the rate of 1 in 8000, which is the proportion of the UK trial group that might, in fact, have been given GBS, to a vaccine-receiving population of 45 million, then the number of cases would be 5625. The UK Government has a deal with Oxford-AstraZeneca for 100 million doses.
Rather serendipitously, dear reader, it was only yesterday that Jon Rappoport was writing that “the US government is anticipating many people will be filing claims for compensation, when their family members are harmed or killed by a new Covid vaccine”.
Rappoport ends his piece in a warning, that as government knows what is coming when a Covid-19 vaccine is approved, so now does the reader. The very same warning is issued here. The UK Government may well talk about people acting as a collective for the good of the many, but it means that it knows that people will die and be injured so that it can steamroller through its political agenda. Arguments for vaccine that rely on a fact of relatively small numbers of those made disabled with it by a side effect are equally sinister, and betray that culture of carnage with gay abandon mentioned above. Moreover, those arguing that you take the vaccine, they won’t be the ones without riches for lifelong medical care and assistance when their lives are ruined.
† Meaning that the woman had received a dose of the vaccine, and was not one of those types of trial subjects who are given a placebo.
