WHEN it comes to error correction, the USA’s 50 sovereign states offer more opportunity for an authoritative challenge to the misuse of power than we enjoy in the UK. Dr Joseph Ladapo, the Florida Surgeon General, has made public a letter excoriating federal health officials over their promotion of the mRNA Covid vaccines. The government, he said, ‘has relentlessly forced a premature vaccine into the arms of the American people with little or no concern for the adverse ramifications’.
The letter was to Drs Robert Califf, head of the Food and Drug Administration, and Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Lapado wrote: ‘Your ongoing decision to ignore many of the risks associated with mRNA Covid-19 vaccines, alongside your efforts to manipulate the public into thinking they are harmless, have resulted in deep distrust in the American health care system.’
As reported here earlier this year, senior American scientists have called for a ‘bipartisan, scientifically minded Covid-19 commission so the public health disaster of the past three years is not repeated’. They face an uphill struggle in achieving that aim, but Ladapo’s no-holds-barred letter means that at least some of Florida’s 22.6million citizens have a chance of knowing the jabs are not ‘safe and effective’, as the British public are constantly being told.
Ladapo would surely have been less forthright if Ron DeSantis, Florida’s Republican governor and a possible future US president, were not also on the warpath over the Biden administration’s handling of the pandemic. The Florida Supreme Court has approved DeSantis’s request to convene a grand jury to investigate ‘wrongdoings’ associated with the vaccines.
But DeSantis is not alone. The Texas Attorney General has launched an investigation into whether Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson, the companies producing the jabs, misrepresented their safety and efficacy and manipulated trial data. The investigation could open the door to lawsuits by people injured by the mRNA products.
Meanwhile, what hope of redress do Britons have, not just for vaccine damage but for the lives shattered by cruel and unprecedented lockdowns?
The public inquiry led by Baroness Hallett looks likely to be worse than useless, as Laura Dodsworth, author of the best-selling A State of Fear: How the UK Government Weaponised Fear During the Covid-19 Pandemic, has described.
It is in ‘the wise and noble tradition of the great British public inquiry’, Rod Liddle commented in the Sunday Times last weekend. That is, keep the public away from it for as long as possible, and say nothing useful or meaningful unless ‘at least 20 years after whatever it is that they are inquiring about, at which point most of the relevant people are stiff as a stoat’.
The headline on Liddle’s article declared: ‘The data is clear: lockdowns are useless. But you won’t hear that from the inquiry.’
Sadly, neither the Sunday Times nor its daily stablemate, nor just about any of the mainstream media in the UK, have yet ventured into questioning the ‘safe and effective’ narrative about the vaccines. So let’s look at what Ladapo, who as state surgeon general can hardly be dismissed as a conspiracy theorist, has told the American public.
‘Data are unequivocal,’ Ladapo wrote. ‘After the Covid-19 vaccine rollout, the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) reporting increased by 1,700 per cent, including a 4,400 per cent increase in life-threatening conditions.
‘Dismissing this pronounced increase as being solely due to reporting trends is a callous denial of corroborating scientific evidence also pointing to increased risk and a poor safety profile. It also fails to explain the disproportionate increase in life-threatening adverse events for the mRNA vaccines compared to all adverse events.
‘Based on the CDC’s own data, rates of incapacitation after mRNA vaccination far surpass other vaccines.’
Ladapo cited a recent study which found an excess risk of serious adverse events ‘of special interest’ for 1 in 550 people after mRNA vaccination. He wrote: ‘As you are aware, this is extraordinarily high for a vaccine. In comparison, the risk of serious adverse events after influenza vaccination is much lower. For you to claim that serious adverse events such as these are “rare” when Pfizer and Moderna’s clinical trial data indicate they are not, is a startling exercise in disinformation.
‘I want to re-emphasise that these questions could have been answered if you had required vaccine manufacturers to perform and report adequate clinical trials . . . I anticipate with regret that you will repeat past mistakes and prematurely promote new therapies to Americans without accurately and truthfully weighing data on risks and benefits.’
Ladapo then asked Califf and Walensky to answer 12 questions relating to the safety data, and concluded: ‘Your organisations are the main entities promoting vaccine hesitancy – Florida promotes the truth. It is our duty to provide all information within our power to individuals so they can make their own informed health care decisions. A lack of transparency only harms Americans’ faith in science.’
At present, however, the FDA and CDC, like the NHS, continue to ignore such reports, asserting that ‘the known and potential benefits of these vaccines clearly outweigh their known and potential risks, and that ‘being up to date on vaccinations saves lives compared with individuals who did not get vaccinated’.