“Haematologist Dr Sue Pavord was one of the [AstraZeneca] jab’s biggest supporters, but she knew something was wrong when she saw the side-effects up close,” says the Telegraph.
Pavord was so keen she even persuaded her daughter to take part in the trial:
Looking back, Pavord’s feelings about helping to get the AstraZeneca jab onto the market are somewhat mixed. The jab was heralded as “the vaccine for the world” on the basis that unlike the Pfizer jab, which had to be stored at ultra-low temperatures, it could be kept in fridges, making it easier to transport and roll out in developing countries. Boris Johnson described it as “a triumph for British science”.
But nine weeks after the vaccine finally started being administered to the public in January 2021, Pavord became one of the first doctors in the UK to realise that something may be amiss.
A young man came to see her as an outpatient on March 15th 2021. He had developed deep vein thrombosis – a type of blood clot – around a week after being vaccinated against Covid. He also had low platelets.
We now know that the AstraZeneca vaccine could lead to a condition now known as vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT), which can kill patients or lead to life-changing injuries.
But at the time, VITT had not even been named as a condition, and Pavord – a consultant at Oxford University Hospitals – knew that the combination of blood clots and low platelets was highly unusual.
“We see thrombosis commonly and we see low platelets commonly, but the two together really only have a select number of causes, quite rare and serious conditions,” she recalls.
Before long it turned out that other consultants in the MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) were seeing the same phenomenon, but:
Those cases were more severe, and the colleagues in question had had various tests carried out which established that the patients had developed an antibody called ‘anti-platelet factor four antibody’, which is more commonly associated with a very serious immune reaction to a blood thinner called heparin.
Pavord started contacting other haematologists, and soon discovered that the common denominator was the AstraZeneca jab. Alarmingly, the fatality rate at that stage among those affected was a horrifying 75%. She and colleagues worked on treatments to bring the death rate down, but the work revealed the alarming implications for young adults:
We now know that one in 100,000 over 50s who received the AstraZeneca vaccine were at risk of VITT, with the figure dropping to one in 50,000 for the under 50s. Pavord and her colleagues estimate the risk for those in their 20s is one in 10,000.
The deaths of course have to be contextualised. The risks to those under 50 are twice that of dying under general anaesthetic, for example. Although Pavord supported the Government’s response to Covid, she was lobbying for it not to be given to the under-50s:
“We were seeing cases [amongst people] under 50. And it was when the vaccine rollout had reached the 50s that we started to notice the cases,” she reflects. “I was kind of pushing: we’ve got to stop the vaccine for people under 50. But then there were others going, ‘Well, these people are dying of Covid and we need the vaccine’.”
Needless to say there has been no official acknowledgement of the risks:
Last May, having distributed more than three billion doses of the vaccine, AstraZeneca announced that it was withdrawing its product. The company insisted the decision was a commercial one: the vaccine had been superseded by updated vaccines that tackle new variants. It was “incredibly proud” of the role the jab “played in ending the global pandemic”.
A cynic might argue that reads remarkably like a face-saving cover-up. Pavord restricts herself to saying “I’m relieved”.
Will we ever get the whole truth? Perhaps not in our lifetimes.
Worth reading in full.
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.
I’m so glad she was all over the media nine weeks after the jab was first administered warning Joe Public about the dangers of having this poorly tested, experimental gunk.
That would have been about the time I was “invited” to have “my” jab. Fortunately, I’d done my own research and knew by then that the jabs were positively dangerous so I declined.
I remember when the risk of blood clots emerged and some countries started withdrawing the AZ vaccine from the under 50’s – the British mainstream media went ballistic, accusing these countries of undermining the vaccine effort, fearmongering and endangering the population.
So the media has a lot to answer for: rather than asking questions and uncovering the truth, they flipped into full propaganda mode.
Now of course they would rather forget about the whole thing, so it’s all gone quiet on the Covid front.
”Speak dollars to power”
How relieved Pfizer and Modrna must be that the discontinued AstraZeneca “Immunity Modulating Substance” is taking the rap. What gets modulated one way can also get modulated the opposite way.
Now can we please have equivalent media coverage of the safety-efficacy profile of the Pfizer and Moderna injectables not currently taking the public rap.
FYI for followers of finance in general and Moderna Director share sales in particular: “Listed below are trades carried out by directors and other individuals which are required to be notified to the market…”
https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/m/moderna-inc-usd0.0001/director-deals
…Relatively small beer over the last five months, but scroll down to 16 Feb 2024 for ~$2.3M realised by Moderna CEO Monsieur Bancel.
Last time I looked, tip of a massive dollar-berg accrued from CEO share sales over the last five years. Not for nothing is Monsieur said to be a multibillionaire.
Monsieur first come across over a decade ago, when spotted as named inventor on early Moderna patents, despite career background in finance and some of these patents looking like they pre-dated Monsiuer’s appointment as Moderna CEO.
May not sound a big deal, but to this purist acquainted with the concept of invalidating Intellectual Property rights by dubious inventorship claims, it was very telling from the start.
Ample precedent for vanity and small untruths fostering more profitable untruths over time. Sceptics please draw your own conclusions.
mRNA “vaccines” seem to me an infinitely more dangerous proposition because of the mechanisms used, the lack of a long term safety profile, the tendency to see them as a magic bullet because of the perceived ability to develop new “vaccines” quickly. Nobody will want to look at the long term safety profile because there’s too much money, power and kudos at stake.
The moment the industry started parallelising and short-cutting on established “vaccine” clinical trial timings set the alarm bells ringing.
They rang like an air raid siren, when ever-younger arms started getting morally blackmailed by the mandatpry altruism con, in a free for all to work in the NHS, travel abroad, study, etc, etc.
Derelection of duty of care by MHRA, JVCI and all those Rt DisHonourable Ministers, Privy Councillors, Medical Offizers, Profs, Sirs, Dames, FRSs, Professor Sirs and Lord Sir Sir himself in person.
As Charlie Munger memorably puts it “Folly and evil”.
“parallelising” – yup, you can’t create a baby in 3 months by deploying three mothers instead of 1.
The classic sci-fi story features a disaster facing the world, and our hero scientist coming up with a nick-of-time untried solution that may actually make things worse and destroy the universe. The whole tension in the story is always about whether the hasty solution is salvation or armageddon.
My point is that I am unable to conceive how so many in my erstwile medical profession were not crossing their fingers, toes and everything else whilst praying and fasting when a novel pharmaceutical, rushed through in nine months, was rolled out to the whole population.
Yet instead of having their hands poised over the off switch, they express shock and horror that the lack of adequate safety trials predictably resulted in lack of adequate safety.
The sci-fi story always includes blockheaded generals, politicians (and the scientist’s bureaucratic boss) oblivious to risk… they seem to be with us in force even now.
Cue Professor Richard Feynman’s concluding remark to the US Presidential Commission investigating the 1987 Challenger space shuttle disaster:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/the-challenger-disasters-minority-report/
“For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled.”
Made we wonder about how long it will be before Astra Zeneca renames itself. Perhaps the shareholders will have an influence on that.
From speaking to British people and listening to them I get the impression that they definitely prefer the Astrazeneca. You can listen in on a discussion in a coffee bar among middle class English women and they will chat about Moderna, Pfizer etc and they will settle on the Astra because for one thing it isn’t of dubious Yankee extraction and also its a charity thing for them. Honestly that is the level of the discussion. Maybe two years later the cackling hens all get turbo cancer. That is entirely unrelated of course.
That attitude now may be put down to the government’s quiet shadow-banning of the AZ vaccine without any public discussion of why it was withdrawn. I have some sympathy for ordinary people not inquiring into that which they’ve been carefully led to forget.
How is it possibly that a highly trained haematologist could believe any vaxx could be developed in such a short time. Where were the safety and efficacy data? And to advise one’s daughter to participate in the trials of AZ? Dear Lord, you cannot make up a story like this.
Had she had real courage she would have blown the whistle loud and clear at the earliest opportunity.
I had my second AZ jab in April 2021 after this association was well recognised by her and a few other haematologists. As haematologists they should have had sufficient understanding of the low risk of most people from the virus and the potentially serious, though rare, risk of VITT from the AZ jab. Armed with that information many people, including me, would have refused and avoided other fortunately less serious side effects.
Dr Pavord is clearly adopting Chris Whitty’s line of telling us how she recognised the potential problems of the vaccine but failed to stick her head far enough above the parapet
There must be many scientists and doctors who in my view are guilty of professional cowardice in a similar manner who failed in their first duty of a doctor under the GMC Good Practice Guidelines of making the care of the patient their first concern.
All doctors have a duty to report to the relevant authorities if they believe patient care is at risk.
Professional cowardice is a good term: how many of the military would be allowed to be professional cowards and still keep serving? Actually it is a term that can be applied to a lot of professions these days. Courage is sadly lacking amongst people of today.
Moral and Ethical Fortitude.
Pavord was so keen she even persuaded her daughter to take part in the trial.
Not herself? Clearly a kind and loving mother.
The deaths of course have to be contextualised. The risks to those under 50 are twice that of dying under general anaesthetic, for example. Although Pavord supported the Government’s response to Covid, she was lobbying for it not to be given to the under-50s.
Great if you are under 50.
A Canadian group around Denis Rancourt has analysed mortality data from 125 countries, arriving at the conclusions presented in this 10-minute video: https://www.globalresearch.ca/video-denis-rancourt-there-was-no-pandemic-it-was-the-state-that-killed-granny/5876206.
Quoting from the end of the video:
“This was a mega-campaign, … it was planned by the CIA, the military, it was executed, they were going to do it no matter what, and it killed people by how they treated people, and then the vaccines themselves are toxic.
“So the experiment’s been done globally, we know this now, we know that death [from the ‘vaccines’] increases exponentially with age, many elderly people died, it’s hard to complain because they were elderly but, still, they died.
“So just to give you one quantitative figure to leave you with, in most countries, [for] people over 80, the risk of dying per injection is one death in between 5 and 20 injections, depending on the country. That’s the level of toxicity of the vaccines for elderly people. And this is not to mention all the serious harms that are done to young people and young adults, including myocarditis, heart conditions, you name it.”
Just what is wrong with these doctors who so desperately believe in vaccines? Even I – with zero medical training – am aware that drugs need years of experimentation to confirm they are both safe and actually do what they are supposed to do. Has everyone forgotten Thalidomide?
For anyone interested, a simple question on the internet at the time of the ‘pandemic’ revealed that vaccines need 10 to 15 years of development to ensure their safety. But most of the world’s doctors were happy to inject their patients with completely unknown ‘stuff’ that labs had supposedly created in record time. And all in answer to a supposed ‘pandemic’ where the same doctors must have noticed from the patients they were seeing daily that there was no pandemic whatsoever – or, if at all, a pandemic of fear.