Anti-vaxxer blames COVID-19 vaccines for death of Queen Elizabeth II

queen elizabeth vaccines

Yes, an anti-vax MD, Peter McCullough, in a crass and disgusting Twitter post tried to blame COVID-19 vaccines for the death of Queen Elizabeth. Anti-vaxxers will take any opportunity, without regard to morality and civility, to produce propaganda about vaccines. They have no shame. They have nothing supporting their claims, so they use this type of repulsive post to lie about vaccines.

Dr. Peter McCullough, who has a history of promoting misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines, should not be considered a source of anything related to vaccines. And he has no clue about the cause of Queen Elizabeth’s death.

Because the Royal Family is always tight-lipped with news, we may never know the actual cause of death. But Queen Elizabeth II was 96 years old, which has nothing to COVID-19 vaccines, mandated or otherwise. She lived an incredibly full life, devoted to service to her country.

At 96 years old, her life expectancy is around three years, so there’s nothing mysterious about her death. What does Peter McCullough think? That Queen Elizabeth’s next 50 years were cut short by COVID-19 vaccines? His ridiculous, unfounded, and unsupported statement would be laughable under normal circumstances, but this is a repulsive disrespect for someone who has just died.

Furthermore, there is a huge volume of evidence that COVID-19 vaccines do nothing that he claims. They are demonstrably safe. And there is NO evidence that the vaccines did what he claims they did to anyone on the planet, let alone Queen Elizabeth.

Oncogenesis? No.

Autoimmunity? No.

Senescence? I don’t even know what that means with regard to vaccines.

Subclinical myocarditis? What?

Thrombosis? Extremely rare with the JNJ vaccine, which she probably didn’t receive since it’s not approved in the UK.

I thought I couldn’t get any more disgusted by the anti-vaccine world. But they do things that bring it to the next level. The anti-vaxxers jumped on the death of Queen Elizabeth to pass along lies about vaccines. Just how low can they get?

The misleading claims of anti-vaccine Steve Kirsch — a review

Steve Kirsch

This article about misleading claims from anti-vaccine activist Steve Kirsch was written by Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law (San Francisco, CA), who is a frequent contributor to this and many other blogs, providing in-depth, and intellectually stimulating, articles about vaccines, medical issues, social policy, and the law.

Professor Reiss writes extensively in law journals about vaccination’s social and legal policies. Additionally, Reiss is also a member of the Parent Advisory Board of Voices for Vaccines, a parent-led organization that supports and advocates for on-time vaccination and the reduction of vaccine-preventable diseases. She is also a member of the Vaccines Working Group on Ethics and Policy.

I have not previously discussed posts by Mr. Steve Kirsch, of the new generation of antivaccine activists, because they are not generally related to law or regulation, and they have been well debunked by those that are in the field, such are Dr. Jeffrey Morris, Dr. David Gorski, and others more suited to address his statistical errors. 

But his recent post, “Silenced healthcare workers speak out publicly for the first time,” is sufficiently jarring that I would like to address it. Mr. Kirsch’s claims have been getting increasingly more extreme, and this post is a good example of some of the problems with his views that you do not need an extensive background in statistics to address. (I do not link to anti-vaccine posts, but with the title and author they should be easy to find, should anyone wish to). 

Continue reading “The misleading claims of anti-vaccine Steve Kirsch — a review”

VAERS facts — contradicting anti-vaccine claims and beliefs

VAERS facts

This article about VAERS facts, literally a FAQ, was written by Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law (San Francisco, CA), who is a frequent contributor to this and many other blogs, providing in-depth, and intellectually stimulating, articles about vaccines, medical issues, social policy, and the law.

Professor Reiss writes extensively in law journals about vaccination’s social and legal policies. Additionally, Reiss is also a member of the Parent Advisory Board of Voices for Vaccines, a parent-led organization that supports and advocates for on-time vaccination and the reduction of vaccine-preventable diseases. She is also a member of the Vaccines Working Group on Ethics and Policy.

Some of the new generation of anti-vaccine activists appear to have built their careers on misrepresentation of VAERS. One example is Dr. Jessica Rose, who apparently started her career as a legitimate young scientist, but at some point became a devoted anti-vaccine activist. Dr. Rose’s background is described by Orac thus:

Her background is more in the sort of computational biology that looks at protein structures and bioinformatics related to DNA sequences than it is to the sort of mathematical and statistical skill set necessary to delve into VAERS with any credibility. A perusal of her curriculum vitae, which is included on the profile, confirms my assessment, particularly her publication record, which includes a lot of molecular biology and virology, but nothing in the way of epidemiology.

In 2021, Dr. Rose joined the anti-vaccine organization IPAK as a research fellow, and she has published several papers in IPAK’s own publication, named Science, Public Health Policy, and the Law, whose editorial board is comprised of leading anti-vaccine activists.

Dr. Rose’s specialty appears to be doing bad analyses of VAERS and claiming, based on them, that COVID-19 vaccines are dangerous.

On August 9, 2022, Dr. Rose published a “Question and Answer” “facts” about VAERS, titled “A question and answer document on the subject of VAERS as a pharmacovigilance tool”. It is highly misleading. But it gave me an opportunity to provide information based on actual facts about VAERS.

If you want to see how it’s misleading, jump ahead to question 3 (and I hope you then go back and read the long discussion in questions 1 and 2).

I will repeat each question, answer it, shortly summarize Dr. Rose’s claims, and explain why they are misleading. Note that this discussion is limited to the mRNA vaccines and the J&J vaccine, which are the ones used in the United States and subject to reporting to VAERS – Novavax is newer and is not the subject of most of the misinformation from the anti-vaccine activists misleading people about VAERS. 

Continue reading “VAERS facts — contradicting anti-vaccine claims and beliefs”

Settlement of lawsuit about COVID vaccine religious exemptions

COVID-19 vaccine religious exemption

This article about the settlement of a lawsuit and COVID-19 vaccine religious exemptions was written by Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law (San Francisco, CA), who is a frequent contributor to this and many other blogs, providing in-depth, and intellectually stimulating, articles about vaccines, medical issues, social policy, and the law.

Professor Reiss writes extensively in law journals about vaccination’s social and legal policies. Additionally, Reiss is also a member of the Parent Advisory Board of Voices for Vaccines, a parent-led organization that supports and advocates for on-time vaccination and the reduction of vaccine-preventable diseases. She is also a member of the Vaccines Working Group on Ethics and Policy.

Headlines about a settlement between healthcare workers and their employer related to COVID-19 vaccine religious exemptions led people to ask what is the relevance of that settlement. This post explains this settlement and puts the issue in context.

Three points need to be made:

  • First, this is not the first time an employer settled a claim for denial of religious exemption.
  • Second, sometimes the settlement is the result of an employer making mistakes in handling religious exemptions and having a really bad case, and settling is the right thing.
  • Third, in legal terms, the settlement has no relevance to any other case. In practical terms, though, it can be used to put pressure on other employers, even when those employers are on legally solid ground.
Continue reading “Settlement of lawsuit about COVID vaccine religious exemptions”

COVID vaccination lowers cardiovascular and stroke risk

COVID vaccination

Complete vaccination against COVID-19 was linked to a reduced risk of cardiovascular events such as acute myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke as secondary complications of a COVID-19 infection. These results were published in a peer-reviewed journal recently.

This is another huge benefit of COVID-19 vaccination that should be convincing evidence that the vaccine has both short- and long-term benefits.

As I usually do, I will review the study and results so that you can use this paper as further evidence that COVID-19 vaccination saves lives.

Continue reading “COVID vaccination lowers cardiovascular and stroke risk”

Long COVID symptoms include hair loss and sexual dysfunction

long COVID-19

When many people dismiss COVID-19 as unworthy of needing a vaccine, they almost always ignore the effects of long COVID, the long-term symptoms and sequelae that tend to persist or appear after the typical convalescence period of COVID-19. And new peer-reviewed research shows that long COVID is associated with hair loss and sexual dysfunction — every male that sees this will be running as fast as they can to get the vaccine.

But on a more serious note, long COVID is linked to a lot of serious long-term consequences that are often dismissed by anti-vaccine and COVID-19 deniers.

Let’s take a look at this new paper and review the results of their analysis. The basic result is that long COVID is scary.

Continue reading “Long COVID symptoms include hair loss and sexual dysfunction”

Brook Jackson False Claims lawsuit against Ventavia COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial

pexels-photo-5878514.jpeg

This article about the Brook Jackson lawsuit claiming false payment claims for the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine was written by Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law (San Francisco, CA), who is a frequent contributor to this and many other blogs, providing in-depth, and intellectually stimulating, articles about vaccines, medical issues, social policy, and the law.

Professor Reiss writes extensively in law journals about vaccination’s social and legal policies. Additionally, Reiss is also a member of the Parent Advisory Board of Voices for Vaccines, a parent-led organization that supports and advocates for on-time vaccination and the reduction of vaccine-preventable diseases. She is also a member of the Vaccines Working Group on Ethics and Policy.

Brook Jackson worked as an operator of three of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials sites for 18 days. Based on what she saw, she brought suit against the operator – Ventavia, the company that hired clinical trials site operators, ICON PLC., and Pfizer in the name of the United States under the False Claims Act. Jackson’s lawsuit claims, if true, may show that Ventavia had many issues in running the trial.

But they do not show fraud in relation to claims of payment from the federal government, which is the heart of a False Claims claim, and that alone should probably lead to her lawsuit being dismissed. The False Claims Act is not a catch-all tool for violation of FDA regulations. 

Again, even if true, they do not show a problem with Pfizer’s vaccine, a vaccine for which there is now extensive independent data on safety and effectiveness. 

Continue reading “Brook Jackson False Claims lawsuit against Ventavia COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial”

Brook Jackson False Claims lawsuit against Ventavia COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial

close up view of a vaccine vial

This article about the Brook Jackson lawsuit claiming false payment claims for the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine was written by Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law (San Francisco, CA), who is a frequent contributor to this and many other blogs, providing in-depth, and intellectually stimulating, articles about vaccines, medical issues, social policy, and the law.

Professor Reiss writes extensively in law journals about vaccination’s social and legal policies. Additionally, Reiss is also a member of the Parent Advisory Board of Voices for Vaccines, a parent-led organization that supports and advocates for on-time vaccination and the reduction of vaccine-preventable diseases. She is also a member of the Vaccines Working Group on Ethics and Policy.

Brook Jackson worked as an operator of three of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials sites for 18 days. Based on what she saw, she brought suit against the operator – Ventavia, the company that hired clinical trials site operators, ICON PLC., and Pfizer in the name of the United States under the False Claims Act. Jackson’s lawsuit claims, if true, may show that Ventavia had many issues in running the trial.

But they do not show fraud in relation to claims of payment from the federal government, which is the heart of a False Claims claim, and that alone should probably lead to her lawsuit being dismissed. The False Claims Act is not a catch-all tool for violation of FDA regulations. 

Again, even if true, they do not show a problem with Pfizer’s vaccine, a vaccine for which there is now extensive independent data on safety and effectiveness. 

Continue reading “Brook Jackson False Claims lawsuit against Ventavia COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial”

Second COVID vaccine booster now or wait for the new vaccine?

second COVID-19 vaccine booster

Someone asked me the other day whether she should get the extremely safe second COVID-19 vaccine booster now or wait for the new Omicron-adapted vaccines that are coming in the fall from Pfizer and Moderna. I didn’t know the answer, so I thought I would investigate. Maybe it will help you or someone you know with that decision too.

The actual answer is a bit complicated, but there appear to be some good, solid recommendations coming from people who are experts in containing this pandemic. Let’s take a look.

By the way, this old dinosaur got his first Moderna booster in October 2021 and received his second booster (this time Pfizer) in April 2022. I do practice what I rant about here!

Continue reading “Second COVID vaccine booster now or wait for the new vaccine?”

Combined flu and COVID vaccines associated with mild reactions

COVID-19 flu vaccines

A new study examined the incidence of mild reactions after individuals have received the flu and COVID-19 vaccines at the same time. The researchers did not find anything to be of concern, but I always like to get ahead of a story and discuss it so I (and you) are prepared to deal with the inevitable anti-vaccine meme or trope.

Since COVID-19 cases will probably be increasing this fall (in fact, it’s already increasing), we will probably need another booster this fall. And that’s about the time most of us get our flu shot, so researchers wanted to know if there were any issues when getting both the flu and COVID-19 vaccines. Spoiler alert — not really.

Continue reading “Combined flu and COVID vaccines associated with mild reactions”