UWE-Bristol Vaccination Centre Closes due to Misinformed Anti-vaccine Protest
In today’s Medium article, I will address Mark Sexton going way too far in his attempt to close vaccination centres with pseudoscience. This article will also address the case briefing document which was handed to various people by Mark Sexton (plus followers) and the false information inside. So without further ado, let’s get into the article.
➡️ The Pseudoscience within the Document
- First screenshot of claims made:
The second sentence details that Phase 3 clinical trials are still ongoing and not due to conclude until late 2022/early 2023, this claim is completely false. Pfizer’s [1] and AZ x Uni of Oxford [2] released their clinical trial data in December 2020, this data was also peer-reviewed. Moderna [3] released their clinical trial data in February 2021, which was peer-reviewed too. The falsehood that Phase 3 trials are ongoing has now been refuted. The only reporting taking place now is pharmacovigilance, which happens AFTER approval of vaccines and the conclusion of Phase 3 of trials [5].
A pathologist cannot say for certain without an opinion-based conclusion that the vaccine(s) was the primary cause of death, without first determining causation, which has not happened at all. Causation means either the production of an effect, or else the relation of cause to effect. Causes produce or occasion an effect [5]. This was not determined during autopsies, only the pathologist's opinion was given.
- Second screenshot of claims made
The case document briefs data from MHRA’s Yellow Card Scheme and VAERS self-reporting systems, stating that these reports alone are factual and represented as real but without highlighting the limitation of these systems. I won’t go into too much about Correlation, Causation and why these reporting systems have limitations, so please my Medium article detailing this further [6].
These are quotes directly from the VAERS website:
These are quotes directly from VAERS. “Note that the inclusion of events in VAERS data does not infer causality.” [7]
“The number of reports alone cannot be interpreted or used to reach conclusions about the existence, severity, frequency, or rates of problems associated with vaccines.” [8]
“It is generally not possible to find out from VAERS data if a vaccine caused the adverse event VAERS data cannot be used to determine rates of adverse events” “VAERS accepts reports of adverse events following vaccination without judging the cause or seriousness of the event. VAERS is not designed to determine if a vaccine caused an adverse event” [9]
Conclusion on using VAERS as causal data: You cannot use VAERS to find out if reported events were caused by a vaccine because that’s not how VAERS works. So this evidence can be dismissed easily.
This is a direct quote from MHRA’s Yellow Card Scheme:
“It is important to note that Yellow Card data cannot be used to derive side-effect rates or compare the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines as many factors can influence ADR reporting.” “It is very important to note that a Yellow Card report does not necessarily mean the vaccine caused that reaction or event. We ask for any suspicions to be reported, even if the reporter isn’t sure if it was caused by the vaccine. Reports to the scheme are known as suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs).” [10]
- The next screenshot goes in really bizarre:
The claims now suggests that Graphene is within the vaccines, which is totally nonsense, the vials of each 0.5ml vaccine would have a grey hue is this was the case, a nice link from HealthDesk [11] states there is no Graphene Oxide within the vaccines.
On Twitter, ScienceMatt makes a fantastic Twitter thread [12], completely disproving that Graphene or GO is found within the vaccines, his PhD dissertation was on about graphene in lipids, he studied how you can break down graphite into graphene within a lab, but it would still have a grey hue even after using lab blenders using different liquids.
- They now talk about Manslaughter:
As can seen above, the Case Briefing Document takes a further bizarre twist and stating laws about manslaughter, based on the anecdotal evidence from VAERS & Yellow Card Scheme, as this would not be classed as reliable scientific evidence, or even stand up in a court of law, these anti-vaccine protestors really do a great job of embarrassing themselves and speaking on subjects they don’t understand. I’m not going to go too far into this area, all scientists and most evidence-based laymen’s should know this is total garbage.
- Graphene Toxicity “report”
As there’s sufficient proof to show that Graphene or GO isn’t present inside the vaccines, the Case Document goes over to show a Toxicity report study [13] of Graphene nanoparticles. Now whilst the study maybe reliable itself, it DOESN’T mention anything about mRNA vaccines or vaccines in general, whatsoever. This study from 2016 makes absolutely NO MENTION of vaccines, proof here:
Furthermore if they're trying to state that GO resides in vaccine vials, then why didn't they document a proper peer-reviewed study detailing GO being present in vaccines? Their whole case brief falls apart very quickly when countered with proper scientific evidence.
References: [1] https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577
[2] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32661-1/fulltext
[3] https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2035389
[4] https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory/overview/pharmacovigilance-overview
[5] https://jech.bmj.com/content/55/6/376
[6] https://link.medium.com/8faGs0qWPtb
[7] https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/datasets.html
[8] https://vaers.hhs.gov/data.html
[9] https://vaers.hhs.gov/faq.html
[10] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions/coronavirus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reporting#analysis-of-data
[11] https://health-desk.org/articles/how-do-we-know-graphene-oxide-isn-t-used-in-covid-19-mrna-vaccines
[12] https://twitter.com/matscimatt/status/1414018907900366858?s=12&fbclid=IwAR0hhq5cxD1Q5oIhrDjLej6rscAY27hjTh1_G16odwbFsJ7mDKYiKfxVE_Y
[13] https://particleandfibretoxicology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12989-016-0168-y
➡️ Conclusion
Mark Sexton is completely incorrect, the case briefing document holds zero weight, no proper scientific evidence, unfounded claims without supporting evidence and can easily be refuted with science. He’s another example of why we shouldn't comment on things we don’t understand.
💥 Thanks for reading, Lawrence. Please consider a small contribution, in the form of a beer as all articles are created in my small amount of spare time: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/LawrenceRob