The MHRA is not fit for purpose
Discover more from Where are the numbers? by Norman Fenton and Martin Neil
The MHRA is not fit for purpose
We’ve reported before on how the MHRA (which is the UK Regulatory Agency charged with ensuring the safety of new medicines including all vaccines) has failed the British public over its handling of the covid vaccines. This includes its failure to stop organisations like the BBC advertising the covid vaccine and its has failure to properly manage the yellow card reports. A damning report cataloguing other MHRA failings was published last week by Perseus.
Recently, I was alerted to a video of a lecture given in Nov 2022 June Raine (CEO of MHRA) in Wales about the MHRA approach to safety.
I found the lecture quite shocking in its attempt to play down the implications of the avalanche of yellow card and safety signals reported about the covid vaccines. So I decided to make a video highlighting some of many alarming things that June Raine said:
Unless the ‘purpose’ of the MHRA is to bolster the profits of pharma companies by making it quicker and easier to get safety approval for their products, it’s now clear that the MHRA is not fit for purpose.
Links: I mentioned the report about the Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR) which June Raine said was their standard method for looking at safety signals (she seems to be unaware that the CDC’s own PRR analysis found hundreds of safety signals which should have closed down the covid vaccine programme before its mass roll-out). Here is the video about the PRR analysis:
And here is even more nonsense from June Raine in a earlier (March 2022) speech in lecture (form 30 minutes):
On 26 April I did a brief live interview on UK Column TV discussing the video I made about June Raine’s speech:
The MHRA is not fit for purpose
Thank you for this Norman, will give it a watch now.
May I also alert you (if you're not already aware) to this talk by both Kate Bingham and June Raine, which is one of the most alarming things I've watched in the past year — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUQfzTqPUm4 [Raine starts at approx 30mins, and her presentation is unironically titled "From Watchdog to Enabler - Regulation in Covid and after"]
There is so much that is alarming in that talk, such as gems (horrors?) like: "We tore up the rulebook...". Excellent. Well, I mean it's not like we have the rule book for a reason or anything. It's not like we developed a bl**dy rule book because without one you can accidentally kill a lot of people FFS.
She notes that they knew that they could really only see risk and benefit once it's been rolled out, and that they were expecting a vast influx of reports of side effects. Well I would put to June that another way to get a grasp of the risk and benefit *before* roll out might be to conduct quality trials of a decent length, but perhaps I'm just a rube who doesn't properly understand how all this is supposed to work.
Next she shows the table of "parallel working" (ie not doing things in proper order) and she says "that can never be turned back now"... yes, because they want to use this accelerated pathway for all approvals going forward... great news.
Speaking about all the phases happening concurrently, she says "By the time we were able to look at the interim analysis, that was so exciting, we actually knew we were very close to an approval."
... Erm, lady, what? — How could you be almost at the point of approval WITHOUT even seeing the interim analysis? ...what if it was awful?
These people are dangerous muppets, and the self-congratulatory smugness with which she regales us of these horrors only makes it worse. She was given a Damehood for throwing all the safety guardrails into the nearest bin! No wonder she's smug.
Disgusting that these people are not acting in the public interest.
Even if their funding came from the public they would still be loyal to their former pharma masters.
Truly how can this have been allowed to have happened?