Should NHS Staff in the UK Face Mandatory Vaccination?

[Mark78L]

33 minutes ago, beecee said:

Ummm, no they are not getting worse, and there is no ramping up of restrictions. Borders are now open except for WA, International restrictions are being lifted, hospital cases are falling including ICU patients. Masks are still mandatory, although lifting of that also is on the cards. We have, and are doing better then most other parts of the world.

https://www.health.gov.au/health-alerts/covid-19/government-response

https://www.health.gov.au/health-alerts/covid-19/case-numbers-and-statistics

Case numbers did spike with the omicron variant, but they are also now dropping.

That all depends on whether the removal of freedoms and liberties and introduction of vaccine passports is a step forward. And whether you see the demonising of the unvaccinated as justified. For me there has been very little scientific justification for most of the restrictions and certainly no ethical justification for the draconian, authoritarian response. It is not befitting of a free democratic society to prevent people from earning a living based on a refusal to accept an experimental vaccine - for a disease that is of little threat to them. We've completely done away with informed consent and body autonomy.

I think we're setting a very dangerous precedent when we allow governments dictatorial powers to enforce rules that are largely unjustified and threaten our freedoms and liberties.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/covid-australian-state-darwin-nt-lockdown-unvaccinated-b975266.html

Edited February 15, 2022 by Mark78L

[zapatos]

41 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

That all depends on whether the removal of freedoms and liberties and introduction of vaccine passports is a step forward

No, all of the following statement from beecee are true whether removal of freedoms and liberties is a step forward or not. 

Quote

...no they are not getting worse, and there is no ramping up of restrictions. Borders are now open except for WA, International restrictions are being lifted, hospital cases are falling including ICU patients. Masks are still mandatory, although lifting of that also is on the cards

You are arguing against facts with buzzwords like "freedom" and "liberty". No wonder you are not getting anywhere.

Edited February 15, 2022 by zapatos

[iNow]

32 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

I think we're setting a very dangerous precedent when we allow governments dictatorial powers to enforce rules that are largely unjustified and threaten our freedoms and liberties.

Perhaps you haven’t noticed, but you can’t send your kid to school with chicken pox, or go barefoot in a restaurant, or take a dump on public sidewalks either. Your entire life has been a trade-off between public health and individual freedom and the precedent you seem to fear so much was actually set long ago and has been repeatedly upheld over the decades when challenged in courts.

[StringJunky]

8 minutes ago, iNow said:

Perhaps you haven’t noticed, but you can’t send your kid to school with chicken pox, or go barefoot in a restaurant, or take a dump on public sidewalks either. Your entire life has been a trade-off between public health and individual freedom and the precedent you seem to fear so much was actually set long ago and has been repeatedly upheld over the decades when challenged in courts.

Aye. A lot of people against the jabs are looking at things in a vacuum, just like a lot of people who post their ideas here construct them in a vacuum.

[beecee]

40 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

That all depends on whether the removal of freedoms and liberties and introduction of vaccine passports is a step forward. And whether you see the demonising of the unvaccinated as justified.

The unvaccinated have not nor ever were demonised. That is their choice. Certain industries require full vaccination, that is their right. If you don't comply with that, then you need to rethink your employment. Proof of full vaccinations is required for border re-entry...that is what is stipulated by federal and state governments. If you fail to comply, you don't get in, simple as that. If you chose to drive, you where a seat belt. If you don't like seat belts, don't drive.

48 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

For me there has been very little scientific justification for most of the restrictions and certainly no ethical justification for the draconian, authoritarian response. It is not befitting of a free democratic society to prevent people from earning a living based on a refusal to accept an experimental vaccine - for a disease that is of little threat to them. We've completely done away with informed consent and body autonomy.

 "For me" that is for you, being the operative word. I prefer to take the advice of the WHO and local medical experts, that have shown to be correct, rather then the "Trump" like pseudoscience that poured out of that fool's mouth. We all must everyday of our lives, abide by rules and regulations in any democratic society, rather then the uncouth, criminal and desecrative behaviour of a bunch of conspiracy nuts, as per this photo at the Melbourne War Memorial.  

1 hour ago, Mark78L said:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/covid-australian-state-darwin-nt-lockdown-unvaccinated-b975266.html

Anti-vaxxers living in one Australian state will face a four-day lockdown from today after a surge in Covid infections.

Those living in the Northern Territory who have not had two coronavirus vaccine doses will only be able to leave their homes under strict conditions.

These include for essential shopping, for medical treatment, including vaccination, or to provide care.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

While there maybe a "surge in numbers" Like WA, the numbers period are still relatively low. 

We also have a mandate in NSW, that parents that don't have their toddlers fully vaccinated against known childhood diseases like whooping cough, are not allowed to have their kids attend kindergarten. The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few...or the one.

 

[iNow]

1 hour ago, beecee said:

The unvaccinated have not nor ever were demonised

This isn’t really true, but it is irrelevant to the thread. 

[Mark78L]

50 minutes ago, iNow said:

Perhaps you haven’t noticed, but you can’t send your kid to school with chicken pox, or go barefoot in a restaurant, or take a dump on public sidewalks either. Your entire life has been a trade-off between public health and individual freedom and the precedent you seem to fear so much was actually set long ago and has been repeatedly upheld over the decades when challenged in courts.

Yes but loss of freedoms have to be justified in accordance with the threat. If both do not correlate then we risk causing more harm than good and there's always the risk of increased power being abused to benefit those in privileged positions. 

The looming cancer crisis caused by prioritising covid above all else, and the devastating decision to move elderly patients back to care homes without testing them for covid, resulting in covid being spread and killing the very people we were trying to protect, are examples showing how state control and decision-making can be detrimental.

Couple that with the suppression of open dialogue between scientists and policy makers (the suppression of free speech we have seen), and the detrimental effects towards societal health and freedom become exacerbated.

Another example are the pointless vaccine passports we have seen introduced worldwide. In Scotland and Wales they have provided no discernible benefit compared to England who did not implement them. There is no scientific justification for them while their implementation discriminates. There are only two conclusion to be drawn here, either politicians are misinformed or this crisis is also being used as an opportunity to implement greater control over citizens. Regardless, both are detrimental to health and society, and only stands to highlight that state power should not exceed a certain level. It is naive to assume that the loss of freedoms and increase of state power can only be a good thing.

1 hour ago, beecee said:

The unvaccinated have not nor ever were demonised. That is their choice. Certain industries require full vaccination, that is their right. If you don't comply with that, then you need to rethink your employment. Proof of full vaccinations is required for border re-entry...that is what is stipulated by federal and state governments. If you fail to comply, you don't get in, simple as that. If you chose to drive, you where a seat belt. If you don't like seat belts, don't drive.

 "For me" that is for you, being the operative word. I prefer to take the advice of the WHO and local medical experts, that have shown to be correct, rather then the "Trump" like pseudoscience that poured out of that fool's mouth. We all must everyday of our lives, abide by rules and regulations in any democratic society, rather then the uncouth, criminal and desecrative behaviour of a bunch of conspiracy nuts, as per this photo at the Melbourne War Memorial.  

Anti-vaxxers living in one Australian state will face a four-day lockdown from today after a surge in Covid infections.

Those living in the Northern Territory who have not had two coronavirus vaccine doses will only be able to leave their homes under strict conditions.

These include for essential shopping, for medical treatment, including vaccination, or to provide care.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

While there maybe a "surge in numbers" Like WA, the numbers period are still relatively low. 

We also have a mandate in NSW, that parents that don't have their toddlers fully vaccinated against known childhood diseases like whooping cough, are not allowed to have their kids attend kindergarten. The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few...or the one.

 

With Whooping cough that's reasonable because it's a vaccine that's proven safe and effective. 

The differences are many with the covid vaccine though, one being that the covid vaccines are experimental and their long-term safety has not been proven. Another is that most people do not need the vaccine, partly because the disease is largely mild in healthy individuals and partly because these 'unvaccinated' restriction fails to take into account those who've already been infected and developed natural immunity - thus discriminating against those who actually protect others. Not to mention that vaccination does not stop transmission, we are seeing the same viral load in the vaccinated and unvaccinated (naive to the virus).

This is demonisation of a select group of individuals who refuse to take an experimental vaccine for which the vast majority do not need or want. Informed consent is important. These people are not being given a choice, a choice is which do I choose to drink tea or coffee, take the vaccine or we will remove your freedoms and prevent you from working is not a choice, it's blackmail and coercion.

When the science doesn't support the actions of the state, discrimination abounds and blackmail/coercion are undertaken, then it's time to recognise that the state has overstepped its authority and is causing more harm than good.

[iNow]

30 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

Yes but loss of freedoms have to be justified in accordance with the threat. If both do not correlate then we risk causing more harm than good and there's always the risk of increased power being abused to benefit those in privileged positions. 

Six MILLION people dead, and still counting 

31 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

the disease is largely mild in healthy individuals

Yeah, fuck all those unhealthy people and at risk children. 

32 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

These people are not being given a choice, a choice is which do I choose to drink tea or coffee, take the vaccine or we will remove your freedoms and prevent you from working is not a choice, it's blackmail and coercion.

They’re free to find other work if the requirements of the job they’re in feel too burdensome, and that’s before we even consider the burden they’re placing on vulnerable patients. 

34 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

When the science doesn't support the actions of the state

You need repeating this invalid claim despite repeated correction. Why is that?

[Mark78L]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Six MILLION people dead, and still counting 

Yeah, fuck all those unhealthy people and at risk children. 

That's six million over two years of the total global population. Each year 10 million die of cancer - which is set to dramatically increase due to healthcare around the world prioritising covid over all other diseases. Furthermore, that's people dying WITH covid, not directly OF covid (the figure is an exaggeration). Prior to 2019, if you counted flu deaths within 28 days of a pcr positive test and where flu was mentioned anywhere on the death certificate, as opposed to only those that died OF flu, then the flu death figure would be a lot higher than it is. Not to mention that many at the beginning of the pandemic were classed as covid based purely on symptom diagnosis (flu-like symptoms) meaning that many were likely misdiagnosed. I saw an article not long ago that even in early 2021 approximately 30% of covid deaths were misdiagnosed as covid.

There's also been a huge rise in non-covid excess deaths, heart attack, dementia and suicides etc due to the lockdowns and measures that have prioritised covid over all else. So you have to take this into context. Stating one figure in the manner you have is misleading.

How many have died because the lockdowns have prevented other children in poorer countries from getting vaccines for other diseases such as TB? Or aid for famine ravaged countries? There is a concern that the global covid measures may kill more people than covid itself. It's naive to focus only on covid and take the official figures at face value to justify lockdowns etc... when it's clear there are major anomolies and other consequences of lockdown measures that threaten greater loss of life elsewhere.

Unhealthy people and at risk children have been vaccinated - the point being there's no justification for taking away freedoms of unvaccinated healthy people because many have natural immunity, the vaccine will protect those who've taken it, and a vaccine does not prevent transmission to warrant mandating it at the cost of civil liberties and freedom of choice.

In essence, the threat is lower than you propose - the loss of freedom measures are likely causing more harm than good and are not justified against the healthy and unvaccinated scientifically or ethically. And if the vaccines work, then the vulnerable and at risk children are protected. 

Do you think you're getting carried away with the fear narrative that's been pushed?

Edited February 16, 2022 by Mark78L

[zapatos]

32 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

the loss of freedom measures are likely causing more harm than good

Citation please.

[iNow]

50 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

Each year 10 million die of cancer

My kids and sick parents can’t catch your cancer. 

50 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

Unhealthy people and at risk children have been vaccinated

Children under 5 aren’t even eligible yet, so no. Not vaxxed. 

51 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

Do you think you're getting carried away with the fear narrative that's been pushed?

Pot. Kettle. Black. 

Edited February 16, 2022 by iNow

[CharonY]

16 minutes ago, iNow said:

My kids and sick parents can’t catch your cancer. 

Also folks under cancer treatment are extremely vulnerable to infectious diseases such as COVID-19. In the US COVID-19 alone is only behind heart disease and cancer as the leading disease. The mere fact that there are folks still trying to minimize its impact at this point truly and fully establishes how f---ed we are. Especially when the next disease (or a more deadly variant) comes up.

Also, it is annoying the those pro-virus folks newest (or at least one of the newest) talking point is how somehow the COVID-19 deaths are all overcounted, whereas epidemiologists and other folks who actually calculate these things indicate that they are likely to be vastly undercounted.

To make it perfectly clear, folks dying with rather than of COVID-19 is for the most part a myth, driven seemingly by the rise of Omicron in vaccinated populations where there was a substantial number of incidental COVID-19 hospitalizations.

However, comparing the numbers coded with COVID-19 as cause of death, vs just presence of COVID-19, (e.g. looking the ONS data, freely available and with clear definitions of what they consider "involving COVID-19" vs "due to COVID-19" in the mortality analysis) it still appears that whenever COVID-19 appears, it is still the underlying cause of deaths in over 80% of all cases. 

Looking at the data, one can also see interesting patterns. Early in the pandemic, the highest proportion of deaths in which COVID-19 was involved but also the cause of deaths was very high (ca. 95%) and dropped when the cases were low and vaccinations started to increase. However, whenever a wave hit, the values go up to 80% again. 

I.e. if the disease is wide-spread it will more likely to hit vulnerable (including unvaccinated) folks, exactly as we would expect.

But then, it is abundantly clear that this is not about facts at all, but rather to try to find narratives to justify one's worldview, even if it kills us.

[iNow]

40 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Also folks under cancer treatment are extremely vulnerable to infectious diseases such as COVID-19. In the US COVID-19 alone is only behind heart disease and cancer as the leading disease. The mere fact that there are folks still trying to minimize its impact at this point truly and fully establishes how f---ed we are. Especially when the next disease (or a more deadly variant) comes up.

It’s even worse… the very people there to help and heal those cancer patients are the ones refusing to vaccinate / demanding that their caricature of personal freedom trumps the right of their patients not to get infected by them. 

[beecee]

20 hours ago, Mark78L said:

With Whooping cough that's reasonable because it's a vaccine that's proven safe and effective. 

As is the covid19 vaccines, despite your fears to the contrary. And there are many other childhood vaccinations for the likes of measles, mumps, Diptheria, Polio etc.

I see most of your other unsupported claims have been answered.

[Mark78L]

44 minutes ago, beecee said:

"With Whooping cough that's reasonable because it's a vaccine that's proven safe and effective."

As is the covid19 vaccines, despite your fears to the contrary. And there are many other childhood vaccinations for the likes of measles, mumps, Diptheria, Polio etc.

I see most of your other unsupported claims have been answered.

I have to hand it to you guys and applaud your persistence in ignoring, deflecting, creating strawman arguments, and continuing to make misleading statements in a convincing manner. I take my hat off to you, that is a skill - you'd make very good politicians, I hear Klaus Schwab is looking. 

beecee is a prime example of this, ever keen to keep pushing the false notion that covid19 vaccines are safe and effective despite me pointing out on many occasions that this is incorrect - how can any vaccine or drug be claimed to be effective, with any shred of honesty, when it is still in it's trial phase, and when the vaccine / drug company / medical authority refuses to release all the data? The Pfizer covid19 vaccine's phase III trial doesn't finish until March 2023. I think it's time to stop flogging a dead horse.

I thank you for opening my eyes to the realisation that some people are wedded to a particular narrative, cannot think outside the box, and will stick to that narrative regardless.

With that I will take my leave and wish you all well.

[beecee]

14 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

beecee is a prime example of this, ever keen to keep pushing the false notion that covid19 vaccines are safe and effective despite me pointing out on many occasions that this is incorrect - how can any vaccine or drug be claimed to be effective, with any shred of honesty, when it is still in it's trial phase, and when the vaccine / drug company / medical authority refuses to release all the data? The Pfizer covid19 vaccine's phase III trial doesn't finish until March 2023. I think it's time to stop flogging a dead horse.

https://www.ncirs.org.au/phases-clinical-trials

In the COVID-19 pandemic, the vaccine development pathway was accelerated. First, as SARS-CoV-2 is a coronavirus, it shares similarities with SARS-CoV-1 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, SARS) and MERS-CoV (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, MERS). Prior work on SARS and MERS vaccines reduced time spent on pre-clinical assessment of COVID-19, and the target antigen was identified quickly.

Two months after the SARS-CoV-2 genome was sequenced and shared, the first phase I clinical trials began in March 2020. Phase II clinical trials began before phase I clinical trials ended. For many COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, phase I and phase II clinical trials were combined to help speed up the progress. However, scientific design was not compromised as the dosage, safety and immunogenicity measures were evaluated. Phase III clinical trials also began before phase II clinical trials were complete. There were a few trials where phase II and phase III were combined.

Overlapping and combined phases of clinical trials, the urgency of a need for a safe and effective vaccine, international collaborative efforts, funding and pre-planning in manufacturing have allowed vaccine development time-frame to be compressed to about 10 months. COVID-19 vaccines are being rolled out for emergency use authorisation in several countries. However, as there are limited safety data, full registration of the vaccine will only be given after extended safety monitoring, which will take several years (refer to Figure 2).

Figure 2: COVID-19 vaccine development at pandemic speed

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

 

Edited February 16, 2022 by beecee

[iNow]

He’s suggesting we can’t possibly know it’s safe until latest phase of trials ends in 2023. He’s repeating this despite correction earlier in the thread about how phases work 

[beecee]

https://www.tga.gov.au/covid-19-vaccines-undergoing-evaluation

All COVID-19 vaccine applications are being treated with the greatest priority as part of the Department of Health's response to the pandemic. Under normal circumstances, TGA's assessment (for both provisional and general registration) begins once all information to support registration is available. For COVID-19 vaccines, the TGA has agreed to accept rolling data to enable early evaluation of data as it comes to hand.

Many of the large-scale clinical trials that will provide evidence of safety and effectiveness are still progressing and these results will be provided to the TGA as they become available. The TGA will also evaluate quality data (such as how the vaccines are manufactured).

The TGA will only be in a position to make a provisional registration decision for a vaccine once all required data relating to safety, quality and efficacy has been provided and assessed.

With rolling submissions, collaboration with international regulators, and proactively working with sponsors, it is expected the evaluation of COVID-19 vaccines will be significantly expedited without compromising on our strict standards of safety, quality and efficacy. However, the timeframe for the evaluation of each vaccine will ultimately depend on when the complete data package is provided by sponsors. We have not yet received a full data package from any company.

Further information on the TGA's evaluation process for vaccines is available at: COVID-19 vaccine approval process.

[Mark78L]

3 minutes ago, beecee said:

https://www.ncirs.org.au/phases-clinical-trials

In the COVID-19 pandemic, the vaccine development pathway was accelerated. First, as SARS-CoV-2 is a coronavirus, it shares similarities with SARS-CoV-1 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, SARS) and MERS-CoV (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, MERS). Prior work on SARS and MERS vaccines reduced time spent on pre-clinical assessment of COVID-19, and the target antigen was identified quickly.

Two months after the SARS-CoV-2 genome was sequenced and shared, the first phase I clinical trials began in March 2020. Phase II clinical trials began before phase I clinical trials ended. For many COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, phase I and phase II clinical trials were combined to help speed up the progress. However, scientific design was not compromised as the dosage, safety and immunogenicity measures were evaluated. Phase III clinical trials also began before phase II clinical trials were complete. There were a few trials where phase II and phase III were combined.

Overlapping and combined phases of clinical trials, the urgency of a need for a safe and effective vaccine, international collaborative efforts, funding and pre-planning in manufacturing have allowed vaccine development time-frame to be compressed to about 10 months. COVID-19 vaccines are being rolled out for emergency use authorisation in several countries. However, as there are limited safety data, full registration of the vaccine will only be given after extended safety monitoring, which will take several years (refer to Figure 2).

Figure 2: COVID-19 vaccine development at pandemic speed

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

 

(Forced out of retirement lol) See what I mean?

The key phrase in beecee's response is this very telling admission: 
"However, as there are limited safety data, full registration of the vaccine will only be given after extended safety monitoring."

Limited safety data is referring to the fact there is no long-term safety data (because the phase III trial is ongoing and doesn't finish until March 2023), you are part of the vaccine trial making it an experimental vaccine. As pointed out by beecee, it will be given a "license" (different from emergency approval) only after the data on this live trial on the population is collated and compiled to reveal there are no long-term side effects. Until that point (March 2023) long-term safety is unknown - confirming that it is false to claim that this vaccine has been proven to be safe.

Notice how beecee omitted the main point about the phase III trial not finishing until 2023 - you'd think if you were being honest that would be an important point to include.

I rest my case. 

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, beecee said:

As is the covid19 vaccines, despite your fears to the contrary. And there are many other childhood vaccinations for the likes of measles, mumps, Diptheria, Polio etc.

I see most of your other unsupported claims have been answered.

Also, they failed to provide any evidence that there was more safety data out there before any of those have been approved. If you register a trial you propose a time point when you expect to hit an endpoint which can be used to demonstrate efficacy (PhaseIII). In case of vaccines they can be based on infection events or disease manifestation. Once the endpoints are met, they are submitted to the drug agencies for review, where requests for additional data could be required. Due to a little, barely noticeable global pandemic, these endpoints were reached really fast and no surrogates were required. 

But this this point has been made repeatedly and are ignored or met with willful misunderstanding of the process. So let's ask instead: what endpoints did other approved vaccines met that the COVID-19 vaccines didn't? I would like to see evidence that individuals in any of the previous vaccine trials were monitored for longer than three months for side-effects, before wasting any more time on this. 

1 minute ago, Mark78L said:

Notice how beecee omitted the main point about the phase III trial not finishing until 2023 - you'd think if you were being honest that would be an important point to include.

Notice that you again fail to understand how trial endpoints work. Or that in Phase IV (i.e. after release) effectiveness information is continued to be collected which then allows regular approval (which also happened).

See, if one does not make an effort to understand the process, it is easy to get baffled. But it becomes an issue if instead of reading up and trying to understand the process, one then creates a dangerous narrative that is based on said failure to understand. In most other circumstances it would be easy to dismiss, but in the age of social media, weaponized ignorance is unnecessarily killing folks. 

That, together with a distinct lack of solidarity shows how difficult it is for us to face a common challenge. 

[beecee]

3 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

I rest my case. 

You havn't got a case.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-vaccine-monitoring-idUSKBN2AC2G3

Fact check: It is standard practice for vaccine safety monitoring to continue after approval

Social media users have asked why clinical trials for COVID-19 vaccines are set to continue for several years if the jab is safe.

“COVID-19 vaccine trials are ongoing. What does that mean for those taking the vaccine?”, one post shared on Facebook asks.

The post correctly notes that the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine has been given an “estimated study completion date” of Jan. 31, 2023 (here). For the COVID-19 vaccine created by Moderna, studies are expected to end on Oct. 27, 2022 (here).

However, it is standard practice for safety monitoring to continue after a vaccine has been approved for use.

After clearing final Phase III clinical trials, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was granted approval for emergency use by U.S. regulators in December 2020 (here).

Pfizer reported that it would continue safety monitoring of participants in its Phase III trial. (here).

This means that “all trial participants will continue to be monitored to assess long-term protection and safety for an additional two years after their second dose” (here).

Similarly, Moderna said that it would continue to follow participants from its Phase III trial for the next two years (here).

Additional data collected will include “longer term safety follow-up, duration of protection against COVID-19, and efficacy against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection”.

How vaccinates are tested, licensed and monitored for safety is explained by Oxford University’s Vaccine Knowledge Project (here).

Vaccines are also monitored by government bodies as they are rolled out, with the UK using the Yellow Card scheme (here) and the U.S. government operating VAERS (vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html).

Although the vaccines have completed the necessary steps of each trial, the health and economic impact of COVID-19 has meant the process has been sped up.

There has been a global effort to pool resources in order to accelerate the development and production of vaccines (here).

On top of this, unprecedented financial investments and scientific collaborations have made it possible for some steps in research and development to happen “in parallel” (here).

For example, some clinical trials are evaluating multiple vaccines at the same time, though clinical and safety standards are maintained despite the acceleration.

VERDICT

Missing context. It is standard procedure for safety monitoring to continue after vaccines have been approved for use.

This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our work to fact-check social media posts here .

11 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

I rest my case. 

You havn't got a case.

https://www.pfizer.com/science/coronavirus/vaccine/about-our-landmark-trial

The Phase 3 clinical trial was designed to determine if the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is safe and effective in preventing COVID-19 disease. This trial began July 27, 2020, and completed enrollment of 46,331 participants in January 2021. On November 18, Pfizer and BioNTech announced that, after conducting the primary efficacy analysis, their mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine met all of the study’s primary efficacy endpoints. On December 2, 2020, the Medicines & Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) in the U.K. authorized the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use, marking the first Emergency Use Authorization following a worldwide Phase 3 trial of a vaccine to help fight the pandemic. Shortly after on December 11, 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use.

For more information on the landmark study, please see the clinical trial protocol.

How were you able to move with speed in the landmark Phase 3 trial?

Even though we moved with extraordinary speed, preservation of high quality and safety standards was critically important throughout development. We took all of the regulatory and operational steps that we would normally take for all of our vaccine trials, maintaining the highest standards in our development process. This required enormous mobilization of Pfizer and BioNTech resources upfront at a scale never seen before. We also worked closely with regulatory agencies, providing near real-time data and receiving review and advice more quickly than ever before, to support the development of this potential vaccine as quickly as possible.

[zapatos]

52 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

With that I will take my leave and wish you all well.

Another broken promise...

[beecee]

28 minutes ago, Mark78L said:

Notice how beecee omitted the main point about the phase III trial not finishing until 2023 - you'd think if you were being honest that would be an important point to include.

Perhaps if you weren't so fanatically obsessed in supporting your conspiracy nonsense you would have seen......

19 minutes ago, beecee said:

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-vaccine-monitoring-idUSKBN2AC2G3

The post correctly notes that the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine has been given an “estimated study completion date” of Jan. 31, 2023 (here). For the COVID-19 vaccine created by Moderna, studies are expected to end on Oct. 27, 2022 (here).

also I failed to compare the following from an earlier link..................................

https://www.ncirs.org.au/phases-clinical-trials

and...................

Edited February 16, 2022 by beecee

[Adelbert_Einstein]

I'm all for compulsory vaccination.

[zapatos]

2 hours ago, Adelbert_Einstein said:

I'm all for compulsory vaccination.

People who are allergic to the vaccines might object to you forcing them to take it.