Will you take an approved COVID-19 vaccine?

allaboutt

joseywhales wrote: »

An internet forum poll is not the same as getting the time off work and physically getting jabbed in the arm twice. And confidence is fickle, a large enough minority will grow fast if they can successfully create enough fear.Its a real issue, everyone has fingers crossed that the public will have confidence in the vaccine.

Its growing in the uk the protests against it, most here are still towing the line. But when you talk to die hard lockdown they are getting thin on the ground.. they are mostly follwoing orders but patience is running out.

What is even more alarming in this country is most havent even heard of mRNA and dont even know that is has never being authorised for humans before.
If you are anyway a critical thinker alarms bells should be bellowing from the roof tops. I guess the MSM in this country have done a good job on not highlighting it or people are just too excited about Christmas

John_Rambo

allaboutt wrote: »

That is exactly what will happen, it will come through the backdoor.. you cant do this unless you have it. Its like taxes start with small taxes, so little it means nothing and then gradually increase as time goes by. The same will happen with this vaccine, bit by bit people will get it without even knowing what happens after 5 years of having it (a big if there is long term affects)

There's nothing back door about it. You will avail of the vaccine or you won't. There's no way you'll get the vaccine without knowing it, nobodies going to sneak up behind you and jab you in the neck.

However, you will in time eat you words and begrudgingly get the vaccine because you will have realised it works, you'll mumble about side affects and blame any ailment you have on it.

That's how you roll.

allaboutt

Approved User Assesment wrote: »

Many polls and surveys also point towards 60-75% saying they'd take it, which is sufficient in the larger scheme of things.

The question is really, should the other 25-40% pay a penalty, suffer restrictions, be denied various types of freedoms, denied location access, denied types of travel, risk their jobs, all for their own personal choice to opt out.

It is and most dont even know where to find the relevant reports from Lancet, FDA etc. There is a great level of Trust being put into these companies, the government and MSM instead of going direct to the source of the information.


At the moment it cannot be done as for Pfizer Vaccine does not stand up to scrutiny from a long term point of view to be safe. This is Fact. They stated as much in the report and I stated this earlier... Again it is only a matter of time before this information becomes widespread and people wake up to the fact that this Vaccine has not/could not bedemonstrated to be safe long term.

That point cannot be argued and the FDA has clearly stated this.



It begs the question why did Merck Sell its Equity share in Moderna this week.

https://www.merck.com/news/merck-announces-sale-of-its-direct-equity-investment-in-moderna/

Approved User Assesment

Heard in an interview that Moderna have never taken a large scale product to market ever before (or even managed FDA approval before). Also that Bill Gates owns shares, stocks and investments in many of these Pharma companies.

Will he be even richer than he was before? Even considering he was throwing hundreds of millions of cash at good causes (related to vaccine promotion).

allaboutt

John_Rambo wrote: »

There's nothing back door about it. You will avail of the vaccine or you won't. There's no way you'll get the vaccine without knowing it, nobodies going to sneak up behind you and jab you in the neck.

However, you will in time eat you words and begrudgingly get the vaccine because you will have realised it works, you'll mumble about side affects and blame any ailment you have on it.

That's how you roll.

I am not even going to answer your first statement or insult you John_Rambo.

As I have stated earlier I will get the Vaccine when the Long Term Affects are known. Again where did i say i will grumble about side affects.. I stated facts and referenced the relevant reports Look back what I said about Bells Palsy with current data

"its one to watch but not one to get alarmed about yet." ..that is my opinion i dont think that is someone grumbling even though other posters were trying to be alarmist about it :)Again reading the data from the FDA report

hmmm

Approved User Assesment wrote: »

Heard in an interview that Moderna have never taken a large scale product to market ever before (or even managed FDA approval before). Also that Bill Gates owns shares, stocks and investments in many of these Pharma companies.

Moderna have partnered with Lonza who are an experienced manufacturer.

Bill gates I don't get the obsession with, I presume that's just part of the script. I presume also the next post will be something like "I hope none of these 5G stories are true. I don't believe it myself, but it makes you think?" or "I am pro-vaccine, but I would never take a vaccine that has been rushed."

hmmm

allaboutt wrote: »

What is even more alarming in this country is most havent even heard of mRNA and dont even know that is has never being authorised for humans before.

Seeing as our bodies are made up of mRNA, someone should tell the Creator about this.

Approved User Assesment

hmmm wrote: »

Seeing as our bodies are made up of mRNA, someone should tell the Creator about this.

This is an interesting statement. Should humans be playing 'god'?

Are organic unmodified farm tomatoes on a green grocers shelve often considered more healthy and of higher nutritious value? - than say the GMO (genetically modified version grown to be more red and shinny in some factory).

Perhaps it's a case of trial and error, but mistakes are often a part of such experiments, a 'learning opportunity' if you want to put a positive spin on it.

hmmm

Approved User Assesment wrote: »

This is an interesting statement. Should humans be playing 'god'?

Are organic unmodified farm tomatoes on a green grocers shelve often considered more healthy and of higher nutritious value? - than say the GMO (genetically modified version grown to be more red and shinny in some factory).

Perhaps it's a case of trial and error, but mistakes are often a part of such experiments, a 'learning opportunity' if you want to put a positive spin on it.

Oh wow, I didn't think you were going to start throwing out reference to GMOs, this is a new one for me in vaccine disinformation. This is really educational insight into how you can link two unrelated things and try and get people concerned about the one you are interested in talking down.

I also like the way you threw in the bit about "mistakes are often part of such experiments". Nicely done Just get that bit of uncertainty planted in people's minds.

And as for whether humans should be playing 'god', well then unless we're planning on avoiding any form of medicines at all and instead and just reverting to savagery, I think humans will do what they can to try and prevent death and disease.

But I agree with you on one thing - I wouldn't take the Russian vaccine, not up to EU standards.

Approved User Assesment

hmmm wrote: »

And as for whether humans should be playing 'god', well then unless we're planning on avoiding any form of medicines at all and instead and just reverting to savagery, I think humans will do what they can to try and prevent death and disease.

I still wouldn't take the Russian vaccine however, not up to EU standards.

To be fair you mentioned the 'creator' after typing mRNA.

Genetic medicine is a new science, it's not like the Egyptians were at it 5k yrs ago handing out honey for folks with sore throats (as is done today).
Every time they make a new Dolly the sheep or re-create someone's pet they are always plagued (poor choice of words) with defects or deformities.

Too late on the Russians, aren't they combining forces with Oxford or something.

hmmm

Approved User Assesment wrote: »

Genetic medicine is a new science, it's not like the Egyptians were at it 5k yrs ago handing out honey for folks with sore throats (as is done today).

Again you're just throwing out phrases to make them sound scary. GMOs and "Genetic medicine" and "Dolly the sheep" have feck all to do with these vaccines, but you're trying to link them. You're clearly skilled at it, I admire that.

Too late on the Russians, aren't the combining force with Oxford or something.

Oxford are helping to bail them out apparently.

BryanMartin21

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/10/dr-fauci-says-covid-vaccine-trials-on-pregnant-women-and-young-kids-could-begin-in-january.html

Pregnant women and children to be trialled with the vaccine from January hopefully.

Of course, presumably that will take at least a year to get any decent data on the effects on pregnant women. I suppose that means there isn't going to be a mandatory programme for at least a year, if ever there will be, should women want to get pregnant at some stage in their lives considering the absence of data. Hopefully there will be an opt out available to health care staff too at the initial stages.

schmoo2k

Approved User Assesment wrote: »

Many polls and surveys also point towards 60-75% saying they'd take it, which is sufficient in the larger scheme of things.

The question is really, should the other 25-40% pay a penalty, suffer restrictions, be denied various types of freedoms, denied location access, denied types of travel, risk their jobs, all for their own personal choice to opt out.

No they shouldn't, nor should any given venue be responsible for their covid related well being.

schmoo2k

allaboutt wrote: »

Its growing in the uk the protests against it, most here are still towing the line. But when you talk to die hard lockdown they are getting thin on the ground.. they are mostly follwoing orders but patience is running out.

What is even more alarming in this country is most havent even heard of mRNA and dont even know that is has never being authorised for humans before.
If you are anyway a critical thinker alarms bells should be bellowing from the roof tops. I guess the MSM in this country have done a good job on not highlighting it or people are just too excited about Christmas

Fact Check: mRNA based medicines have been used (and approved by FDA etc.) for over 20 years. Up to this point they have been primarily used to target specific cancers.

What I find alarming is:
1. You believe what you posted, in which case I would ask how you came to this conclusion?
2. You know what you posted is wrong, in which case I would ask why your trying to scare folks?

allaboutt

hmmm wrote: »

Moderna have partnered with Lonza who are an experienced manufacturer.

Bill gates I don't get the obsession with, I presume that's just part of the script. I presume also the next post will be something like "I hope none of these 5G stories are true. I don't believe it myself, but it makes you think?" or "I am pro-vaccine, but I would never take a vaccine that has been rushed."

I dont either.. But I share your opinion absolutly . "I would never take a Vaccine that has been rushed" no matter what the marketing around it. Its important everyone does their own due diligence on the Pfizer Moderna Vaccine as the mRNA Vaccine has never being authorised for humans before and with absolute fact we do not know the long term consequences of this.



From the FDA Report

"Adverse reactions that are very uncommon or that require longer follow-up to be detected Following authorization of the vaccine, use in large numbers of individuals may reveal additional, potentially less frequent and/or more serious adverse events not detected in the trial safety population of nearly 44,000 participants over the period of follow up at this time. Active and passive safe"
and more specifically
"Vaccine-enhanced disease Available data do not indicate a risk of vaccine-enhanced disease, and conversely suggest effectiveness against severe disease within the available follow-up period. However, risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown and needs to be evaluated further in ongoing clinical trials and in observational studies that could be conducted following authorization and/or licensure"
In otherwords do you want to be the guniea pig to determine is there any Vaccine enhanced diseases for the Pfizer / Moderna Vaccine?

My family dont and we will gladly play the long game for 5/6 years and forfit for example our yearly vacation abroad to wait on these results.

allaboutt

schmoo2k wrote: »

Fact Check: mRNA based medicines have been used (and approved by FDA etc.) for over 20 years. Up to this point they have been primarily used to target specific cancers.

What I find alarming is:
1. You believe what you posted, in which case I would ask how you came to this conclusion?
2. You know what you posted is wrong, in which case I would ask why your trying to scare folks?

i like your counter arguement There is a Big Differene in mRNA Based Medicinies and mRNA Vaccines..and it is easy to use the both as if they are the same. but they are very different.

Again I will go to the findings from the FDA Report and what they say about mRNA Vaccines Vs mRNA Medicines. Dont believe me but read the report. Does it talk about mRNA Medicine in the Report> Where does it say mRNA medicine in the published FDA Report. The report is all about mRNA Vaccines. Dont confuse the two.



"Vaccine-enhanced disease Available data do not indicate a risk of vaccine-enhanced disease, and conversely suggest effectiveness against severe disease within the available follow-up period. However, risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown and needs to be evaluated further in ongoing clinical trials and in observational studies that could be conducted following authorization and/or licensure"

allaboutt

hmmm wrote: »

Seeing as our bodies are made up of mRNA, someone should tell the Creator about this.

Touche and while they are at it get them to send out a f/b or whattsapp message as such

allaboutt

allaboutt wrote: »

i like your counter arguement There is a Big Differene in mRNA Based Medicinies and mRNA Vaccines..and it is easy to use the both as if they are the same. but they are very different.

Again I will go to the findings from the FDA Report and what they say about mRNA Vaccines Vs mRNA Medicines. Dont believe me but read the report. Does it talk about mRNA Medicine in the Report> Where does it say mRNA medicine in the published FDA Report. The report is all about mRNA Vaccines. Dont confuse the two.

"Vaccine-enhanced disease Available data do not indicate a risk of vaccine-enhanced disease, and conversely suggest effectiveness against severe disease within the available follow-up period. However, risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown and needs to be evaluated further in ongoing clinical trials and in observational studies that could be conducted following authorization and/or licensure"

And you are right mRNA Based Medicines have being used for a long time. 100% Correct. But i am talking in terms of mRNA Vaccines in terms of the Pfizer / Moderna Vaccine .. and the report with the references i have given from that report backs up my statement about mRNA Vaccines. Brillant Question though!
If you have a FDA Report on the mRNA Vaccine please link it here in the thread. I will gladly review and if necessary update my position.

plodder

allaboutt wrote: »

i like your counter arguement There is a Big Differene in mRNA Based Medicinies and mRNA Vaccines..and it is easy to use the both as if they are the same. but they are very different.

In what way are they different? They are both injected or introduced into the body in some way. Are you saying you'd be happy to take an mRNA medicine, but not a vaccine?

schmoo2k

allaboutt wrote: »

i like your counter arguement There is a Big Differene in mRNA Based Medicinies and mRNA Vaccines..and it is easy to use the both as if they are the same. but they are very different.

Again I will go to the findings from the FDA Report and what they say about mRNA Vaccines Vs mRNA Medicines. Dont believe me but read the report. Does it talk about mRNA Medicine in the Report> Where does it say mRNA medicine in the published FDA Report. The report is all about mRNA Vaccines. Dont confuse the two.

1. All vaccines are medicines
2. The mRNA "medicine" is generic delivery mechanism that delivers information to the immune system about foreign objects, so that when the immune system encounters that foreign object it has already been primed to react to it.
3. To date that has been used to target cancers as they are all very different and having a generic way to target them based on DNA is convenient.
4. It hasn't been used as an approved vaccine previously as there wasn't any financial motivation to do so.
5. Once the Covid virus DNA had been fully decoded (and made publicly available for free), it only takes a matter of days to create a specific mRNA vaccine.
6. Your quoted passage speaks to how long the efficacy of the vaccine will be and this is something they have been very up front about - they are not 100% sure

allaboutt

plodder wrote: »

In what way are they different? They are both injected or introduced into the body in some way. Are you saying you'd be happy to take an mRNA medicine, but not a vaccine?

They are totally different in what you are trying to achieve for starters plodder and the Pfizer Vaccine is a mRNA Vaccine and not a mRNA Based Medicine. The FDA Report is for the Pfizer mRNA Vaccine. So the Topic of mRNA Based medicine doesnt even come into it for me in relation to Pfizer Covid 19 Vaccine as the FDA report does not even mention it

• Medicine is to treat an ailment. Human is ill.

• Vaccines is to prevent the ailment. Human is healthy.

• They follow completly different standards of certification production etc. Specifically we are asked to take an mRNA Vaccine and not mRNA medicine.

• In the case of pfizer specifically the FDA report has stated they do not know the long term affects of the mRNA Vaccine and basic common sense would tell you that there would be long term follow ups. FDA Report says such.

• This has all being rushed and there is no long term data on the Pfizer mRNA Vaccine. So this Pfizer mRNA Vaccine is the first approved mRNA Vaccine and who ever takes it are the first to find out the long term affects of it (if there is long term affects). This is Fact! Again the FDA Report has said this.

• There is a lot of people who do not know this about this Pfizer mRNA Vaccine.

Maybe I will look back at this in a 4-5 years time when we have the data and say it was a storm in a tea cup and it is completly safe but personally our family wont be taking that risk based on the current FDA Report for Pfizer!
When the data changes i will review our position. thank you for keeping it on point!

allaboutt

Approved User Assesment wrote: »

Heard in an interview that Moderna have never taken a large scale product to market ever before (or even managed FDA approval before). Also that Bill Gates owns shares, stocks and investments in many of these Pharma companies.

Will he be even richer than he was before? Even considering he was throwing hundreds of millions of cash at good causes (related to vaccine promotion).

Approved User Assessment please go direct to the source of the Lancet peer reviews, the FDA Website itself and the uk MHRA website and read the findings.. There is factual information in there and plenty to chew on to help you make a right decision on the different Vaccines.

hmmm

allaboutt wrote: »

Approved User Assessment please go direct to the source of the Lancet peer reviews, the FDA Website itself and the uk MHRA website and read the findings.. There is factual information in there and plenty to chew on to help you make a right decision on the different Vaccines.

Leaving aside the punch and judy show between yourself and AUA, unless you're someone who is qualified in this area (and note, just because someone is a "scientist" does not make them qualified) the best thing for people to do is to rely on the decisions of the regulators who are scrutinising the data. Not be told to go off and read the source data for themselves.

Because none of us are experts on this. And we don't know what we're reading most of the time. And we rely on people to interpret the data - and would you agree that many of the people reading the data are deliberately trying to misinterpret that data to spread fear and uncertainty?

cgc5483

allaboutt wrote: »

They are totally different in what you are trying to achieve for starters plodder and the Pfizer Vaccine is a mRNA Vaccine and not a mRNA Based Medicine. The FDA Report is for the Pfizer mRNA Vaccine. So the Topic of mRNA Based medicine doesnt even come into it for me in relation to Pfizer Covid 19 Vaccine as the FDA report does not even mention it

• Medicine is to treat an ailment. Human is ill.

• Vaccines is to prevent the ailment. Human is healthy.

• They follow completly different standards of certification production etc. Specifically we are asked to take an mRNA Vaccine and not mRNA medicine.

• In the case of pfizer specifically the FDA report has stated they do not know the long term affects of the mRNA Vaccine and basic common sense would tell you that there would be long term follow ups. FDA Report says such.

• This has all being rushed and there is no long term data on the Pfizer mRNA Vaccine. So this Pfizer mRNA Vaccine is the first approved mRNA Vaccine and who ever takes it are the first to find out the long term affects of it (if there is long term affects). This is Fact! Again the FDA Report has said this.

• There is a lot of people who do not know this about this Pfizer mRNA Vaccine.

Maybe I will look back at this in a 4-5 years time when we have the data and say it was a storm in a tea cup and it is completly safe but personally our family wont be taking that risk based on the current FDA Report for Pfizer!
When the data changes i will review our position. thank you for keeping it on point!

There are several medicines that are used as prophylaxis and the person taking them does not have an ailment. A vaccine is a medicine.

Yes vaccines have different certification for release than other medicines. Medicines are produced in batches and are released by a qualified person in the manufacturer that certifies it meets the correct specifications. For vaccines this also happens but in addition each batch is tested by an independent control lab before it can be released. That is an added level of control so they are actually more strictly controlled than other medicines. Exactly the same for this mRNA vaccine.

Yes there is no long term safety data. The data was submitted with a median of 2 months follow-up.

As per FDA Summary "Safety data from approximately 38,000 participants ≥16 years of age randomized 1:1 to vaccine or placebo with a median of 2 months of follow up after the second dose suggest a favorable safety profile, with no specific safety concerns identified that would preclude issuance of an EUA"

As many others have said this is by no means a cause for concern. The vaccine is long cleared from the body. The company will continue to follow up the patients as would be the norm.

allaboutt

schmoo2k wrote: »

1. All vaccines are medicines (in terms of Pfizer we are talking about mRNA Vaccines and not mRNA based Medicine at the moment, When the terminology changes in the relevant FDA report/ peer reviews etc and they reference it as a mRNA Medicine then lets call it what it is mRNA Vaccine.
2. The mRNA "medicine" is generic delivery mechanism that delivers information to the immune system about foreign objects, so that when the immune system encounters that foreign object it has already been primed to react to it. The mRNA "Vaccine" Please find me a reference where the term "mRNA medicine" is used in the Pfizer mRNA Vaccine.
3. To date that has been used to target cancers as they are all very different and having a generic way to target them based on DNA is convenient.
4. It hasn't been used as an approved vaccine previously as there wasn't any financial motivation to do so. that and the other reason was the safety problems that other pharma companies ran into and the nasty side affects that were highlighted at the time.
https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/10/moderna-trouble-mrna/
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrd.2017.243
So the question here for me is did they hit the jackpot when they developed this one this year in record time.

5. Once the Covid virus DNA had been fully decoded (and made publicly available for free), it only takes a matter of days to create a specific mRNA vaccine.
6. Your quoted passage speaks to how long the efficacy of the vaccine will be and this is something they have been very up front about - they are not 100% sure

thank you!
FDA Report Quote

"Adverse reactions that are very uncommon or that require longer follow-up to be detected.
Vaccine-enhanced disease Available data do not indicate a risk of vaccine-enhanced disease, and conversely suggest effectiveness against severe disease within the available follow-up period. However, risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown and needs to be evaluated further in ongoing clinical trials and in observational studies that could be conducted following authorization and/or licensure"

And that leads us to the common sense question :
What are the short term consquences of taking this Pfizer mRNA Vaccine multiple times a year.

More importantly what are the long term consquences of taking the mRNA Vaccine multiple times a year over a number of years.
Is this really a Vaccine if we have to take it multiple times a year and every year for an unknown amount of time and which I acknowledge your point number 1 about "medicine" But Again the FDA reports reviews refer to it as mRNA vaccine.


My Conclusion:

We do not know the long term consquences of using this mRNA vaccine multiple times a year that could go on for many years.

Have you any research, studies, published papers etc on the long term affects or side affects of mRNA Vaccines?

hmmm

allaboutt wrote: »

What are the short term consquences of taking this Pfizer mRNA Vaccine multiple times a year.More importantly what are the long term consquences of taking the mRNA Vaccine multiple times a year over a number of years.

More misinformation, there is no evidence that this has to be taken "multiple times a year over a number of years". We don't know how long immunity will last, but we know people who were on the earliest stages of the vaccine trial still have immunity, and this immunity could last for very many years.

plodder

allaboutt wrote: »

They are totally different in what you are trying to achieve for starters plodder and the Pfizer Vaccine is a mRNA Vaccine and not a mRNA Based Medicine. The FDA Report is for the Pfizer mRNA Vaccine. So the Topic of mRNA Based medicine doesnt even come into it for me in relation to Pfizer Covid 19 Vaccine as the FDA report does not even mention it

• Medicine is to treat an ailment. Human is ill.

• Vaccines is to prevent the ailment. Human is healthy.

• They follow completly different standards of certification production etc. Specifically we are asked to take an mRNA Vaccine and not mRNA medicine.

• In the case of pfizer specifically the FDA report has stated they do not know the long term affects of the mRNA Vaccine and basic common sense would tell you that there would be long term follow ups. FDA Report says such.

• This has all being rushed and there is no long term data on the Pfizer mRNA Vaccine. So this Pfizer mRNA Vaccine is the first approved mRNA Vaccine and who ever takes it are the first to find out the long term affects of it (if there is long term affects). This is Fact! Again the FDA Report has said this.

• There is a lot of people who do not know this about this Pfizer mRNA Vaccine.

Maybe I will look back at this in a 4-5 years time when we have the data and say it was a storm in a tea cup and it is completly safe but personally our family wont be taking that risk based on the current FDA Report for Pfizer!
When the data changes i will review our position. thank you for keeping it on point!

Okay, but it looked like your concern was specifically with mRNA. To the lay person, it possibly does look like mRNA is some weird untested innovation. So, to find out (and it was news to me too) it has actually been used in other medicines for several years, I thought that would allay some people's concerns. Which is why I'm asking what is it about vaccines that means this experience is not relevant?

As regards the information published by the FDA, it sounds a bit like the safety leaflet in most medications. They publish everything, as much to cover themselves in case something does go wrong. The side-effects, no matter how unlikely are all listed. And it's true the biggest issue with these vaccines is the short time line since they were developed. There is nothing we can do about that. If you want to wait five or six years, fair enough that is your right, but I'd be fairly sure the pandemic will be ancient history by then and there probably won't be any great need to take a vaccine then as opposed to now, when it is needed.

John_Rambo

allaboutt wrote: »

I am not even going to answer your first statement or insult you John_Rambo.

You can't answer it and any insults from the likes of you will be water off a ducks back!

allaboutt wrote: »

As I have stated earlier I will get the Vaccine when the Long Term Affects are known.

Exactly, you'll sit back to see what happens to the brave, the ones that lead by example, the people that will get the economy back on it's feet, the doctors, nurses, the front line people, the vulnerable. There's no argument here, your intentions are clear.

nutjobb

Personally I won't take it for reasons stated above, long term effects cannot be determined as we have no data.

I'm sure many of the scientists are the best in the world at what they do but ultimately the corporation's were in a race to be first to market. With such a small time frame, everything cannot be done by the book. I have worked in both pharma and med device industries and have seen the pressure applied to get approvals signed off, I can only imagine what it was like in this case.

Each to their own I respect anyone's decision to take it or not to take it.

There is a good documentary on Netflix called the bleeding edge. It is for medical devices not pharma but shows how the FDA can be bypassed and sub standard products get to market and the effects they cause on people.

hmmm

nutjobb wrote: »

With such a small time frame, everything cannot be done by the book. I have worked in both pharma and med device industries and have seen the pressure applied to get approvals signed off, I can only imagine what it was like in this case.

Everything was done by the book, and in public.

Full animal, phase 1, phase 2 and phase 3 trials with 30,000 participants in each. The FDA hearing this week on the Pfizer vaccine was held in public.

Independent safety boards for each vaccine, blind trials, the producers did not know the results of the trials until they were told the outcomes.

So it's very easy to say things weren't done by the book, when clearly they were. What was done much faster than usual was that there were no delays between phases, and getting the manufacturing facilities in place was done in parallel. Usually these both cause delays of several years.