FOR nearly a decade, Dr Tess Lawrie, MBBCh, DFSRH, PhD, has run the Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy, an independent company concerned with rigorous medical research in healthcare.
She produces reports that can be found in the Cochrane Library, a respected organisation providing unbiased scientific paper analyses.
Dr Lawrie is a frequent member of technical teams developing international guidelines in the healthcare sector, and her peer-reviewed publications have received more than 3,000 citations. In short, Dr Lawrie should not be ignored.
Unless of course you are the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, the deaf-eared UK body regulating the novel, experimental, and under-tested Covid-19 mRNA and traditional vaccines.
With vaccine-associated deaths passing 1,600 in Britain, the MHRA should suspend the vaccination programme, like it did after 47 deaths caused by the Pandemrix swine flu jab.
However, it has no intention of doing so and continues to insist that the vaccine is ‘safe and effective and the best protection against Covid-19’.
Dr Lawrie sent Dr June Raine, the MHRA’s chief executive, a 39-page, fully-referenced paper criticising the agency’s complicated Yellow Card Scheme, a government system designed to collate information about adverse events caused by new drugs, as ‘not fit for purpose.’
She reminded Dr Raine, and copied in 15 of her colleagues, that they had a duty to ‘take any necessary action to minimise risk to individuals, after weighing risks against expected benefits.’ She pointed out that because of omissions in their data collecting, such as age and gender, and the timeframe of reaction post vaccination, the Yellow Card Scheme is non-transparent.
She said: ‘These omissions mean that basic conclusions about safety cannot be drawn. Consequently, the public and trial participants are not fully informed of the potential risks of taking a Covid-19 vaccine and are unable to give fully informed consent.’
Dr Lawrie concluded that the voluntary reporting system needed a complete overhaul, saying the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in the US was doing a much better job giving citizens and healthcare professionals detailed information.
From VAERS’ database, she was able to conclude that more than 90 per cent of deaths occurred afterfirst vaccination and there was a clear link between vaccination and death, something MHRA members frequently say they cannot prove and insist is more than likely ‘coincidental’.
Speaking of VAERS, Dr Lawrie said: ‘From that system it is apparent that sporadic event reporting is high in number, as in the UK, and that there is a tight temporal relationship between Covid-19 vaccination and deaths: 15 per cent of deaths occurring within 24 hours, 22 per cent within 48 hours and in 37 per cent of deaths, the patient became unwell within 48 hours of Covid-19 vaccination with an event that led to their death.
‘The deaths analysed followed an almost equal number of Pfizer and Moderna Covid-19 vaccinations, and 91 per cent of deaths occurred after administration of the first Covid-19 vaccine.’
With the AstraZeneca #clotshot, which has not been approved for use in the US, double the number of people are impacted compared with Pfizer.
Dr Lawrie said that, as well as vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopaenia (VITT), the European Medicines Agency has identified Guillain-Barreì Syndrome as a potential risk from the AstraZeneca vaccine.
It is adding a warning to the product information that ‘vaccinated persons need to seek immediate medical attention if they develop weakness and paralysis in the extremities.’ READ FULL ARTICLE AT CONSERVATIVE WOMAN
