GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), which is not a manufacturer of a Covid vaccine and thus did not benefit from Covid vaccine sales, recently announced second quarter 2022 results that surpassed expectations. This has enabled an upward adjustment in the profit forecast for the full year 2022. The Telegraph reported that GSK shares are up 44% from last spring.
Sales of GSK’s shingles vaccine, Shingrix, was the main driver of growth. Shingrix sales more than doubled in the second quarter, being April to June 2022, pushing up total GSK sales by 13%.
Shingrix is a relatively new shingles vaccine that my doctor tells me is considered an improvement on Zostervax, the traditional shingles vaccine. However, Shingrix is not cheap. A two dose course in Hong Kong costs £600, in the U.K. £440 and in the U.S. around $300. Allowing for distributor and retail margins, I estimate that GSK’s income would be about one third of the retail price. Let’s assume therefore that GSK earns £150 per two dose course on a worldwide average basis.
According to GSK, sales of Shingrix doubled to £731M, an increase of £366M in one fiscal quarter. At £150 per course, this equates to an unexpected increase in sales and thus vaccine recipients in one fiscal quarter of 2.4 million from the expected quarterly run rate.
When asked the reason for this surprising jump in Shingrix sales, GSK’s CEO stated: “It comes after countries started to shift their focus away from Covid towards other jab campaigns.”
Nobody seems to have questioned this statement. In the period in question, April to June 2022, Covid vaccine programmes were still highly active and indeed many programmes across the world were on to their third or fourth booster.
Though extremely painful, shingles is not life threatening and generally affects people over 50. It affects persons who have previously had chickenpox, often in their childhood, and is triggered mainly by overwork, lack of sleep or similar stress-related reasons. Shingles attacks the nervous system, especially nerve endings, and hence is often intensely painful.
Vaccination against shingles is not routinely given to all over-50s in most countries. Despite this, according to GSK, in the middle of a continuing Covid campaign, countries opted to shift their focus to vaccinating against shingles?
Is this likely? If indeed there was a shift to more usual vaccination programmes, would vaccination against shingles have been prioritised? Additionally, given the cost of this vaccine, and weighing up the public benefit, would most countries or patients really switch to Shingrix from the much cheaper Zostervax?
All of this seems unlikely. So what has driven a 50% increase in sales of a very expensive vaccine not part of the usual standard vaccination programme?
Further, taking the USA as an example, the ratio of Shingrix to Zostervax sales is 50-50. In most other countries, Shingrix has less than 50% of the market. If 2.4 million people in one quarter had the Shingrix vaccine, how many more had Zostervax? It is not inconceivable that some 5 million more people than usual were vaccinated against shingles in one quarter.
Can this really be explained by countries restarting their normal vaccination programmes, and for no particular reason adding a shingles vaccines into the standard mix?
I may have the answer. In my 50s I twice had shingles. I can vouch for how painful it is. Since then I have had the traditional shingles vaccine jab every few years and had been shingles free for 15 years. I have also consciously improved how I manage my business travel and lifestyle to reduce travel stress and tiredness, which had been the previous drivers in my case.
In March and April 2021 I had my first and second Pfizer Covid jabs. On the day following the second jab I developed a chickenpox like rash and started to experience nerve pain. As I am something of a shingles veteran, I immediately thought “I am getting shingles!” And this is, indeed, what developed quite badly over the next few days.
I rang my doctor who said, “It can’t be shingles, you are vaccinated.” However, after examining me the next day he agreed I was right. I asked what had brought this on? Could it be the Covid jabs? He replied: “I cannot explain why, but it is not likely to be connected to the Covid jab. Just unfortunate timing.”
My doctor then prescribed the usual medication for shingles and it cleared up in a week or so (for some it can take many weeks). My doctor then suggested I spend £600 having the new and better Shingrix vaccine, “as obviously your body is now immune to the traditional vaccine”. In his defence, this was very early days for assessing vaccine side-effects.
I decided I would not spend £600. Instead, I set about researching on the internet.
Since then it has transpired that shingles is a recognised reaction to the Pfizer vaccine in older people. Shingles is an inflammation of the nerves and nerve endings. The mRNA vaccines are now known to affect the nervous system in a number of different ways. It appears that triggering shingles is one of them (or else it is a result of a temporary depression of the immune system, as some have suggested).
Significantly, my doctor has confirmed he has now had other patients who contracted shingles after Covid vaccination. Most took up his £600 offer of Shingrix. It does not take much to imagine what a multiplier effect such advice and take-up across the world would have on the sales of Shingrix and the profits of GSK.
Something must be happening across the world for sales of an existing single product to double in a quarter by 2.4 million. In the absence of any other new factors, one can conclude that the drive in sales must have been due to one side-effect of the Covid vaccines. Equally one can imagine the booster effect for the makers of Zostervax too.
Whilst not all pharmaceutical companies have produced enormously profitable Covid vaccines, the emerging medical toll, side-effects and general aftermath of these vaccines and lockdowns is only just emerging. I suspect all pharmaceutical companies will now share in a second Covid profits bonanza driven by medications prescribed to deal with the collective aftermath of Covid. GSK has lit the way.
Nicholas Williams is a businessman living in Hong Kong.
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.
Well pursued! It’s only persistent digging that turns up the worms.
Who cares what the BBC says, since when would any level of credibility be given to the BBC… Its like complaining to the flat earthers…
Ok prove to me the earth isn’t flat and is a sphere, without using anyone else’s photographs
And when is being rude been allowed here
When the moon landings are obviously fake
I rarely watch or believe anything the BBC says these days but sadly many older people in particular still turn to the Beeb for a trustworthy version of the truth.
The problem is, a significant proportion of the population look to the BBC’s their ‘trusted’ source, so it really is about fine the Govt clamped down on then and made it very clear that their legal Charter for impartiality is there deliberately and for a purpose. Will they though? I doubt it.
Since when has lying become acceptable?
Since the left went full woke, It’s now their main political lever!
“When it becomes serious, you have to lie.” ― Jean-Claude Juncker
Junker.. ex president of the European Commission.. says it all really..
“We all have to lie sometimes for the greater cause.” (Scientist to Prof Fenton referring to misinformation on climate change programme).
Well if its for the ‘greater cause’ then.. yes.. of course..
The left’s philosophy is ‘the end justifies the means’. If that means they have to lie, cheat and kill to rescue the public from capitalism and liberty, they’re willing to do it.
How far is far right I ask myself.. just up the road from extreme right. It seems you can’t safeguard your own well being today without being labelled.
I’m hovering between being an NVE (non violent extremist) and a DT (domestic terrorist).. and there was me thinking I was just a retired working class bloke who cared about his family, fellow man, and country.. I’m obviously mistaken.. silly me!
Exactly. If I’m “far right”, which the BBC probably thinks I am, then what’s wrong with being “far right”?
But by using these terms all the BBC do is reveal that climate is a political issue not a scientific one. ——Or as someone once pointed out “When you mix politics and science, what you get is —–Politics”.
Science only gets you so far. Ultimately everything is political. That’s why we have politics. In this case the science being used isn’t really science.
The BBC also reveal that they are happy to basically call everyone who doesn’t agree with them a Nazi, without having the balls to actually use that word.
They.. the BBC.. will never call anyone a Bolshevik either.. that would be a call too close to home..
I give you my version of what you just said. ——-Government cannot wait for the science so they use “consensus science” as the excuse for forging ahead with policies. Which by the way are mostly the same Liberal Progressives policies as they would want whether the climate was changing or not. —–In other words, it is and never was about the climate in the first place. ——-And as for the BBC, they are simply the climate crisis megaphone.
Indeed. I guess my point was that even with honest, accurate science there are political decisions to be made because there will always be tradeoffs – science is unlikely to come up with perfect solutions to complex problems. It’s a political decision to choose which competing interests are the most important. Even with covid I actually think it was right that politicians should have made the big decisions – they just made the wrong ones. In Sweden, politicians listened to experts and things turned out reasonably well, in the UK our politicians at least pretended to listen to experts and it was a shitshow.
My actual status would be ‘peak common sense’ which in today’s terms translates to ‘far right.’
Oh well.
We should perhaps take comfort from our enemy’s desperate attempts to smear us – the more desperate they get the more it’s clear they feel threatened
The ‘far right’ are left wing extremists. They have nothing to do with conservatives and libertarians.
Well said George. I’m probably considered “far right” but all that’s happened is we’ve probably stayed politically where we’ve always been and “the establishment” has moved further and further to the left. Just my theory, like my conspiratorial ones, which seem to be coming remarkably true.
BBC reporters said they had seen someone at the demonstration who had made social media postings. How did they know his/hee name and user name and why did they trawl the internet looking for it.
this suggests to me a very active political agenda and deployment of significant resources by the BBC. We’re they promoted by Khan’s staff on this too.
Much indignation expressed on this thread about BBC bias but I wonder how many commentators are still paying their TV propaganda tax? This was a nasty habit I gave up long ago.
I’ve got mixed feelings about this. In general, making the BBC look like the far left political organisation that they are is a good thing. On the other hand, are we being too defensive and/or not questioning the right things.
What do the BBC mean by “far right”? What is wrong with being “far right”? Why do we accept it as a “smear” term?
Believing there are people trying to bring about a New World Order might sound far-fetched (I’m undecided) but why is that belief “far right”?
“Far right” is basically a way to call people Nazis or Fascists (by Fascists I mean Mussolini’s lot) without saying say.
“Believing there are people trying to bring about a New World Order might sound far-fetched (I’m undecided) but why is that belief “far right”?”
Well you do surprise me tof. You will be on my side within twelve months and that’s a certainty.
I don’t doubt there is evil afoot, just unsure of the extent to which it is coordinated
‘Twas ever thus – the new elements that seem most dangerous to me are it’s global nature and the ease with which technology can be used to control people
Never forget that Hitler had at least one islamic batallion (common enemy the jews) – that to me makes Khan Far-Right
Meloni, Orban, LePen, AfD, BBB, VOX, any leader or party, ostensibly with concerns about immigration & supports traditional ideas of ‘family’ is labelled ‘far right’ by the BBC. It’s exactly the attitude demonstrated in the Lady Chatterley’s Lover trial (1960), when the QC asked “would you let your wife or servant read this?” It’s the Left now demonstrating a kind of patronising contempt for the rest of us. “Let them eat cake”, could well be a slogan by either main party at the next election.
Perhaps we should all jump on the Prime Miniters house. That doesn’t seem to bother the Progressive left (like the BBC) very much as they fall for the “global boiling” narrative coming from the one world government people at the UN.—– Yep you can stop traffic and sporting events and glue yourself to the street but to the BBC you are simply “highlighting” a serious “emergency”. But if you don’t want your car taken away and your gas central heating ripped out you are FAR RIGHT.
Or be White of course..
Far right is only far when viewed from the extreme left.
Many conspiracy theorists are now being proved to be so far right.
Excellent work Richard. The BBC reporter clearly holds a worldview whereby anything challenging the confected consensus/elite narrative on climate change is seriously triggering. That’s why she made up stuff about Nazi signs. The fact that authoritarian Mayor Khan uses his ethnicity as does the SNP leader to “other” his opponents is typical of the contemporary left. Unfortunately media are now far from disinterested in issues, as the increasingly histrionic Justin Rowlatt shows, they are activists for a cause. That means they have to find ways to discredit their opponents. The Far Right slur is the standard reply. However it’s wearing thin, and the genuine coalition of concerned Londoners cannot be silenced.
The weasel-wording in the BBC statement is excellent — We sent reporters supposed to do nothing but take images supporting our preexisting far-rightness theory but they couldn’t find any. As we were convinced they must have been there, though, we simply reported our theory as fact without having evidence for it — after all, compared to the number of people watching our programmes, London is village and most of our audience won’t have been there.
The BBC and the rest of the MSM do this all the time, so you can either complain and pursue every single instance, or embrace your position on the political spectrum as they define it. If resisting progressive nonsense makes me “far right”, so be it.
The first step is to ask them what they mean by “far right”.
The BBC need to be shut down permanently they are a toxic rumor in this country, protecting paedophiles, promoting racism and advocating transgenderism
Like all petty dictators Khan doesn’t like it when people see through his lies (children’s health vs more tax for me to waste) and complain. Typical, leftie nut case. Thank heavens I’m not living up there anymore
“I hope that doesn’t make me a “conspiracy theorist”
I love being called a conspiracy theorist. I take it as kudos nowadays and it usually means they’ve lost the argument.
Does anyone take the Beeb seriously these days..? Oh dear sadly yes many still do.
This one excruciatingly long boiling frog!
“In short, Khan appears to be exercising at the very least some form of influence over the BBC’s coverage of anti-Ulez protests.”
Khan is a mendacious snake. A Bare-faced liar and a self-serving villain.
I’ve posted this before, but if you haven’t seen it, just watch London Mayor Sadiq Khan, unable to answer simple questions about his claims, quickly resorting to insults. He is a disgrace and should be thrown out of public office and locked up.
This clip should be seen by everyone of voting age in and around Greater London.
https://www.facebook.com/TogetherDeclaration/videos/9400281276650412/?extid=CL-UNK-UNK-UNK-AN_GK0T-GK1C&mibextid=1YhcI9R