Dr. Martin Kulldorff, until recently Professor at Harvard Medical School and member of the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee, has now concluded, based on new studies, that the safety profile of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 is concerning. Dr. Kulldorff has until now been supportive of the vaccines for older people; as an example, as a member of the CDC vaccine safety committee he went against the CDC in April 2021, arguing that the Johnson & Johnson vaccine should not be withheld from older Americans despite concerns regarding side-effects in younger people. He has always said those with previous infection and children did not need to be vaccinated, however.
In a new article published by the Brownstone Institute, Dr. Kulldorff refers to two recent studies. First, a new study by Fraiman et al., based on trial data from Moderna and Pfizer, which shows one serious side effect per for 800 vaccinated persons. This, in Kulldorff’s words, “is very high for a vaccine. No other vaccine on the market comes close”.
Dr. Kulldorff also refers to a recent study by Christine Benn et al. that shows the mRNA vaccines do not lead to any reduction in all-cause mortality, based on the same data as the Fraiman study.
While Dr. Kulldorff says the mRNA vaccines may be of benefit to people over 70, when it comes to others, this is his conclusion: “It is unclear from the clinical trial data whether the benefits outweigh the risks for working-age adults who have not been vaccinated and who have not already had Covid. This is true both historically, for the original Covid variants, and currently for the newer ones.”
Thorsteinn Siglaugsson is an economist who lives in Iceland. Find him on his Substack page.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Shorter hours, less stock, higher prices, perhaps. Some might say that it’s good for the environment; guess who will be on the list.
When I was finishing school, supermarkets closed at 5pm on Saturdays and were closed all day on Sundays. I think they did late night Friday. Should cut the staff costs. People who can’t get out to shop during the reduced hours will have to rely on online shopping. Mind you with Ranting Raynor’s 4 day week everyone should have a day for shopping.
Just remind me who can sack this “great thinker”.
Why would Labour ever sack such a good and long time servant. Incompetent I grant you, but he has served leftist interested in the successive jobs where he has failed.
Although it is good to see the BoE commenting on economic affairs for a change (usually it is political or social affairs) I do not recall the BoE objectives include general economic issues.
Their role is to keep inflation within stated limits. They have repeatedly failed.
It’s his fault. He ducked the blame of his incompetence with the LDI overheating and blamed the entirely innocent Lizz at Russ who had just delivered a genuine growth budget. The media scum that have Brexiteers joined in and sold the UK sheep yet another lie.
Many retailers and hospitality businesses, particularly small independent ones, won’t be able to survive the triple whammy:
(3) alone will make most part-time jobs in these sectors non-viable.
The morons are carrying out the coup de grace to our struggling High Streets.
If the High Street closes down, it can be converted into housing for the new Britons arriving on the South Coast.
Oh what a surprise. As I expected inflation is up but not only that it is up to 2.3% from 1.7%. An increase of 35% – great if your income increase is pegged to the September 1.7%. And expect it rise again in January as electricity rises again – 10% last month. Food was the other main increase. The Thieves Job Tax doesn’t come until April but will retailers prepare by increasing prices now?
I assume workers in the public sector are the only ones for whom a pay rise that keeps pace with inflation is a possibility? For private sector employees, below-inflation rises or wage freezes will be the price for holding onto their jobs as companies juggle finances to balance the books. Did Reeves really think she could just take this money from companies without it having a knock-on effect for their employees or customers? I suspect not, but she simply doesn’t care enough about the average Briton to worry about it.