Astra Zenaka banned in Australia

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

"European Countries Suspend Use of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 Vaccine

AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine may cause unusual blood clots with low blood platelets and should be listed as a rare side effect, the European Medicines Agency said."

From your own source. "Unusual" and a "rare" side effect".

That is not "Unqualified interpretations of journalists and newspapers."

It's from your own quoted source, the European Medicines Agency.

But, I will leave you to it.

The source is used to expose the narrative of what journalists were pushing if you haven't realised it so far. Most newspapers were delivering the sad news using the same lines of argumentation. We have discussed this before several times.

The British press tried to argue that the death of Jack Hurn from the AZ vaccine was due to the outdated advise given at that time when in fact he died due to the...vaccine and not the advise. Links given in the thread.

The facts speak for themselves:

Deaths due to the vaccine
Debilitating conditions due to the vaccine
Severe adverse reactions due to the vaccine
Withdrawal of the vaccine from most countries

This reality exposes all those journalists, the pharmaceuticals and their cronies in the press and the Government who were arguing s*** and played russian roulette with lives of millions of people.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

The withdrawal of the vaccine, but too late to make a lot of difference to the outcome.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: anonentity

I remember when they pulled Astra Zeneca here in the U.S. for a few months back in June 2021 stating that it was causing people signs of neurological diseases and disorders. I'm surprised it ever found its way back on the shelf.

Not in the US (close but, one of its sovereign-less puppet states) but I can vouch for the neurological effects.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0
If "anti vaxxer" means someone who doesn't accept a forced bioweapon, then that's a compliment.

It can mean anything. In fact the term now seems to have lost all meaning (or coherence).

It's worth looking at what happened to Eric Clapton. He took the vaccine but was still pilloried quite ruthlessly as an "anti vaxxer" after he mentioned having an adverse reaction.

So the term "anti vaxxer" seems to have no bearing on whether someone is willing to take a vaccine. It's now a denigrating adjective for someone who is seen as not conforming completely with the official narrative.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

This reality exposes all those journalists, the pharmaceuticals and their cronies in the press and the Government who were arguing s*** and played russian roulette with lives of millions of people.

I'm not disagreeing with the obvious fact that these "vaccines" and the pseudo "vaccines" have an unprecedented (and hopefully never repeated) level of harm.

Though I really doubt this has anything much to do with this particular one being withdrawn. As much as having no real need for them anymore. PH authorities and bureaucrats have consistently shown a complete and utter disregard for the effects of these drugs, I doubt they suddenly stopped being sociopaths.

originally posted by: Quintilian

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

This reality exposes all those journalists, the pharmaceuticals and their cronies in the press and the Government who were arguing s*** and played russian roulette with lives of millions of people.

I'm not disagreeing with the obvious fact that these "vaccines" and the pseudo "vaccines" have an unprecedented (and hopefully never repeated) level of harm.

Though I really doubt this has anything much to do with this particular one being withdrawn. As much as having no real need for them anymore. PH authorities and bureaucrats have consistently shown a complete and utter disregard for the effects of these drugs, I doubt they suddenly stopped being sociopaths.

If you read the literature it seems the AZ was causing a large number of issues including deaths and debilitating conditions. The same is true for the mRNA products however there is much more support from the establishment and especially from the US and other countries to continue to promote them although they have become unavailable in a good number of countries for the under 50s.

The vaccine apologists and denialists of reality on this site support the idea the AZ vaccine was withdrawn due to other vaccines being more safe and effective. Which is ludicrous argument given that the other 'vaccines' are the mRNA products that are well known for the huge number of severe adverse reactions they could cause.

In reality, and given the magnitude of the severe adverse reactions and deaths caused by these products, under normal circumstances they would have been withdrawn from the market long time ago.

a reply to: Quintilian

The reality is if they were any good they would have worked .

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: Quintilian

The reality is if they were any good they would have worked .

Didn't work other than millions of lives and trillions of dollars saved?

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: Quintilian

The reality is if they were any good they would have worked .

I think it's obvious not only that the vaccines in general didn't work as promised, but they were also associated with unprecedented levels of harm. You certainly don't have to convince me personally about the AZ vaccine. I had 0 bouts of covid pre "vaccination" (for about 16 months or so), and then had covid twice in the 6 months following "vaccination". As well as all sorts of neurological problems from the vaccine itself.

That certainly doesn't sound like a success. As I look after someone who is in their 90's (am all they have really),
and have nothing against the idea of vaccination in general, this is what swayed me to get vaccinated. Wouldn't have dealt very well with the fact I hadn't done all I could, should they end up with covid. In hindsight that was a mistake but you live and learn.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
If you read the literature it seems the AZ was causing a large number of issues including deaths and debilitating conditions. The same is true for the mRNA products however there is much more support from the establishment and especially from the US and other countries to continue to promote them although they have become unavailable in a good number of countries for the under 50s.

That somewhat goes to my point. It was revealed through FOI documents recently (think John Campbell even ran a segment on it) that not only did the Aus authorities know of the obvious potential for harms of certain vaccines pre roll out, but they also actually covered up the harms being caused during the roll out itself.

So they knew of the harm all along yet did absolutely nothing (apart from cover it up) because they didn't care. Whatever their motive now for withdrawing any particular vaccine, I doubt it's because they suddenly decided to care about harm. There will be other reasons.

I had a bit of everything... 3 jabs, starting with Astra... All good here... Have yet to test positive.... Which one was supposed to kill me? I can't remember...?? You lot had me scared for a while there... But common sense prevailed.

originally posted by: homerJ
I had a bit of everything... 3 jabs, starting with Astra... All good here... Have yet to test positive.... Which one was supposed to kill me? I can't remember...?? You lot had me scared for a while there... But common sense prevailed.

No need for vaccine propaganda and denialism of reality.

originally posted by: homerJ
I had a bit of everything... 3 jabs, starting with Astra... All good here... Have yet to test positive.... Which one was supposed to kill me? I can't remember...?? You lot had me scared for a while there... But common sense prevailed.

That just means you weren't one of the 0.125% (1 in 800) that had a serious adverse reaction to "vaccination." Although that's on limited data (drug companies don't like sharing that), the complete data would probably be worse than that.

The same way I had covid twice, but neither time was in the 0.063% IFR for my age group (1 in 1,588). The risk/benefit ratio was never on the side of "vaccines", especially when you realise they didn't live up to promises to begin with and any minimal protection they might have provided didn't last very long at all.

At lower ages the risk from covid becomes insignificant, but "vaccine" risks don't. For certain reactions they seem to increase.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

ps. The "all cause mortality" data doesn't look like the vaccines had a positive effect either. From the (Pfizer) RCT data itself there was an increase in mortality in the "vaccinated". It looks like many of the fatalities in the early rollout contained a lot of vaccine deaths, being counted as "unvaccinated" for various reasons. There is some interesting work from the UK on this. No reason to think it would be much different elsewhere.