Husband of BBC presenter killed by the Covid vaccine is suing Astrazeneca

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Having spent over 30 years representing Claimant victims of clinical negligence and fighting for justice for them against the medical establishment and big pharma ( including mass actions against said big pharma) I think that I have accomplished rather more good for such victims than you will ever achieve by randomly posting your opinions on an internet forum.

"Defending the pharmaceuticals", indeed.

I have spent quite a lot of my professional life doing the exact opposite, so you can stick that in your pipe, and smoke it, sunshine.

So you are boasting here that you have helped people because of your great empathy for things they have suffered from, but I can't ever recall seeing you show anyone any empathy for anything EVER here.

So you lead a double life then?

I think this is a common observation and I do not recall anything remotely close to empathy for those who have been injured by vaccines or any other drugs. What I see on a constant basis is vaccine apologetics, denialism of reality, or even trying to downplay the deaths and injuries as non significant events.

AstraZeneca was banned here in Denmark pretty fast.

However, it doesn't mean that my country is perfect or anything because they still allowed other useless vaccines!

I think it is time for humanity to spend less time online, and instead, fight for the truth in real life!

Just saying...

originally posted by: SkyAngel
AstraZeneca was banned here in Denmark pretty fast.

However, it doesn't mean that my country is perfect or anything because they still allowed other useless vaccines!

I think it is time for humanity to spend less time online, and instead, fight for the truth in real life!

Just saying...

Yes! Actually the first country to ban the Astrazeneca vaccine given the serious adverse reactions it could cause and deaths. Then everyone else followed and started withdrawing the vaccine.

It seems there are still those who argue the vaccine wasn't withdrawn but it was replaced for more effective and safe vaccines such as the mRNA products.

The AZ vaccine is benign in comparison to the mRNA products.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Did you sign a consent form that pointed out side effects when you had your covid vaccine in England?

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: SkyAngel
AstraZeneca was banned here in Denmark pretty fast.

However, it doesn't mean that my country is perfect or anything because they still allowed other useless vaccines!

I think it is time for humanity to spend less time online, and instead, fight for the truth in real life!

Just saying...

Yes! Actually the first country to ban the Astrazeneca vaccine given the serious adverse reactions it could cause and deaths. Then everyone else followed and started withdrawing the vaccine.

It seems there are still those who argue the vaccine wasn't withdrawn but it was replaced for more effective and safe vaccines such as the mRNA products.

The AZ vaccine is benign in comparison to the mRNA products.

So your logic is they withdrew the Astrazeneca vaccine on safety grounds.

But kept using MRNA vaccines that are less safe.

That makes sense to you?

a reply to: ScepticScot

I would be interested in knowing whether you had to sign a consent form when you received your vaccine in Scotland?

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot

Did you sign a consent form when you received your vaccine in Scotland?

I actually can't remember. Was given information sheet but can't recall if I had to sign or just a verbal agreement.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: SkyAngel
AstraZeneca was banned here in Denmark pretty fast.

However, it doesn't mean that my country is perfect or anything because they still allowed other useless vaccines!

I think it is time for humanity to spend less time online, and instead, fight for the truth in real life!

Just saying...

Yes! Actually the first country to ban the Astrazeneca vaccine given the serious adverse reactions it could cause and deaths. Then everyone else followed and started withdrawing the vaccine.

It seems there are still those who argue the vaccine wasn't withdrawn but it was replaced for more effective and safe vaccines such as the mRNA products.

The AZ vaccine is benign in comparison to the mRNA products.

So your logic is they withdrew the Astrazeneca vaccine on safety grounds.

But kept using MRNA vaccines that are less safe.

That makes sense to you?

Who said they have been reasonable?! This is the most absurd scientific and medical campaign ever. At least they have withdrawn the AZ vaccine and in your country the UK they stopped offering all Covid vaccines to those under the age of 50. Probably by now they are not offering any type of vaccines to those under the age of 75 unless they are in a high risk group.

So yes. The AZ has been withdrawn in the UK. Then they have 'stopped offering' the mRNA products to most people who are healthy from all age groups.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Thanks for replying.
I asked because a poster wrote this earlier in the thread:

Do you realise that before anyone is given the vaccine, they have to sign a consent. It points out that there could be possible side efects.

No one has a gun pointed at their head to make them sign.

Lets get some reality here.

Did the information sheet point out all the possible side effects?

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot

Did you sign a consent form when you received your vaccine in Scotland?

I actually can't remember. Was given information sheet but can't recall if I had to sign or just a verbal agreement.

So you gave your informed consent. You were informed? That's what you are trying to say??!!

a reply to: ScepticScot

And yes the AZ vaccine was withdrawn in the basis of health and safety reasons in most countries that have used it.

And who said the mRNA products are safe?? They have caused more damage than all other vaccines put together in the last 30 years or so.

The conclusion is that this is a paranoic campaign and the this is the greatest medical scandal in history.

a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality and stop defending the Pharmaceuticals.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot

Thanks for replying.
I asked because a poster wrote this earlier in the thread:

Do you realise that before anyone is given the vaccine, they have to sign a consent. It points out that there could be possible side efects.

No one has a gun pointed at their head to make them sign.

Lets get some reality here.

Did the information sheet point out all the possible side effects?

I don't think so.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: SkyAngel
AstraZeneca was banned here in Denmark pretty fast.

However, it doesn't mean that my country is perfect or anything because they still allowed other useless vaccines!

I think it is time for humanity to spend less time online, and instead, fight for the truth in real life!

Just saying...

Yes! Actually the first country to ban the Astrazeneca vaccine given the serious adverse reactions it could cause and deaths. Then everyone else followed and started withdrawing the vaccine.

It seems there are still those who argue the vaccine wasn't withdrawn but it was replaced for more effective and safe vaccines such as the mRNA products.

The AZ vaccine is benign in comparison to the mRNA products.

So your logic is they withdrew the Astrazeneca vaccine on safety grounds.

But kept using MRNA vaccines that are less safe.

That makes sense to you?

Who said they have been reasonable?! This is the most absurd scientific and medical campaign ever. At least they have withdrawn the AZ vaccine and in your country the UK they stopped offering all Covid vaccines to those under the age of 50. Probably by now they are not offering any type of vaccines to those under the age of 75 unless they are in a high risk group.

So yes. The AZ has been withdrawn in the UK. Then they have 'stopped offering' the mRNA products to most people who are healthy from all age groups.

Vaccine recomendations change as situation change. That isn't a bad thing.

Sorry but I don't see how you position make sense. Your claim is that they withdrew one vaccine on safety grounds but also that they kept using others that are worse

If they are behaving unreasonably as you claim then withdrawl of one isnt evidence of poor safety. You can't really have it both ways.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality and stop defending the Pharmaceuticals.

Do we need a mod to remind you how this site works again?

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: SkyAngel
AstraZeneca was banned here in Denmark pretty fast.

However, it doesn't mean that my country is perfect or anything because they still allowed other useless vaccines!

I think it is time for humanity to spend less time online, and instead, fight for the truth in real life!

Just saying...

Yes! Actually the first country to ban the Astrazeneca vaccine given the serious adverse reactions it could cause and deaths. Then everyone else followed and started withdrawing the vaccine.

It seems there are still those who argue the vaccine wasn't withdrawn but it was replaced for more effective and safe vaccines such as the mRNA products.

The AZ vaccine is benign in comparison to the mRNA products.

So your logic is they withdrew the Astrazeneca vaccine on safety grounds.

But kept using MRNA vaccines that are less safe.

That makes sense to you?

Who said they have been reasonable?! This is the most absurd scientific and medical campaign ever. At least they have withdrawn the AZ vaccine and in your country the UK they stopped offering all Covid vaccines to those under the age of 50. Probably by now they are not offering any type of vaccines to those under the age of 75 unless they are in a high risk group.

So yes. The AZ has been withdrawn in the UK. Then they have 'stopped offering' the mRNA products to most people who are healthy from all age groups.

Vaccine recomendations change as situation change. That isn't a bad thing.

Sorry but I don't see how you position make sense. Your claim is that they withdrew one vaccine on safety grounds but also that they kept using others that are worse

If they are behaving unreasonably as you claim then withdrawl of one isnt evidence of poor safety. You can't really have it booth ways.

Vaccine recommendations change but vaccine apologetics don't.

Precisely they withdrew a vaccine which has failed at all levels and kept an even worse one that has caused many more damages then all vaccines put together in the last 30 years.

Given that this is a paranoic campaign there is nothing unreasonable about it.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot

Thanks for replying.
I asked because a poster wrote this earlier in the thread:

Do you realise that before anyone is given the vaccine, they have to sign a consent. It points out that there could be possible side efects.

No one has a gun pointed at their head to make them sign.

Lets get some reality here.

Did the information sheet point out all the possible side effects?

Again going from memory but it pointed out known side effects There was also a bunch of questions to check suitability, history of allergic reactions etc.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Do you still have that information sheet?

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: SkyAngel
AstraZeneca was banned here in Denmark pretty fast.

However, it doesn't mean that my country is perfect or anything because they still allowed other useless vaccines!

I think it is time for humanity to spend less time online, and instead, fight for the truth in real life!

Just saying...

Yes! Actually the first country to ban the Astrazeneca vaccine given the serious adverse reactions it could cause and deaths. Then everyone else followed and started withdrawing the vaccine.

It seems there are still those who argue the vaccine wasn't withdrawn but it was replaced for more effective and safe vaccines such as the mRNA products.

The AZ vaccine is benign in comparison to the mRNA products.

So your logic is they withdrew the Astrazeneca vaccine on safety grounds.

But kept using MRNA vaccines that are less safe.

That makes sense to you?

Who said they have been reasonable?! This is the most absurd scientific and medical campaign ever. At least they have withdrawn the AZ vaccine and in your country the UK they stopped offering all Covid vaccines to those under the age of 50. Probably by now they are not offering any type of vaccines to those under the age of 75 unless they are in a high risk group.

So yes. The AZ has been withdrawn in the UK. Then they have 'stopped offering' the mRNA products to most people who are healthy from all age groups.

Vaccine recomendations change as situation change. That isn't a bad thing.

Sorry but I don't see how you position make sense. Your claim is that they withdrew one vaccine on safety grounds but also that they kept using others that are worse

If they are behaving unreasonably as you claim then withdrawl of one isnt evidence of poor safety. You can't really have it booth ways.

Vaccine recommendations change but vaccine apologetics don't.

Precisely they withdrew a vaccine which has failed at all levels and kept an even worse one that has caused many more damages then all vaccines put together in the last 30 years.

Given that this is a paranoic campaign there is nothing unreasonable about it.

Sorry but that makes zero sense.

You are trying to say they withdrew one based on safety concerns but kept worse ones.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: SkyAngel
AstraZeneca was banned here in Denmark pretty fast.

However, it doesn't mean that my country is perfect or anything because they still allowed other useless vaccines!

I think it is time for humanity to spend less time online, and instead, fight for the truth in real life!

Just saying...

Yes! Actually the first country to ban the Astrazeneca vaccine given the serious adverse reactions it could cause and deaths. Then everyone else followed and started withdrawing the vaccine.

It seems there are still those who argue the vaccine wasn't withdrawn but it was replaced for more effective and safe vaccines such as the mRNA products.

The AZ vaccine is benign in comparison to the mRNA products.

So your logic is they withdrew the Astrazeneca vaccine on safety grounds.

But kept using MRNA vaccines that are less safe.

That makes sense to you?

Who said they have been reasonable?! This is the most absurd scientific and medical campaign ever. At least they have withdrawn the AZ vaccine and in your country the UK they stopped offering all Covid vaccines to those under the age of 50. Probably by now they are not offering any type of vaccines to those under the age of 75 unless they are in a high risk group.

So yes. The AZ has been withdrawn in the UK. Then they have 'stopped offering' the mRNA products to most people who are healthy from all age groups.

Vaccine recomendations change as situation change. That isn't a bad thing.

Sorry but I don't see how you position make sense. Your claim is that they withdrew one vaccine on safety grounds but also that they kept using others that are worse

If they are behaving unreasonably as you claim then withdrawl of one isnt evidence of poor safety. You can't really have it both ways.

They should have never released them in the general public in the first place as they have had no evidence that these products were safe and effective. The rest is vaccine apologetics.