EU Commission on AstraZeneca's Jabs: 'No Safety Concerns'

How would Eurocrats spell 'limited hangout'? Now we know.

As is known, the EU Commission revoked the market approval for AstraZeneca’s corona ‘vaccine’ effective as of 7 May 2024. This was done ‘at the [manufacturer’s] request’.

Here’s what I asked the EU Commission to comment on:

A few days ago, the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine was, at the manufacturer’ s request, from the EU market (https://ec.europa.eu/health/documents/community-register/2024/20240327162288/dec_162288_en.pdf)

I’m writing you to solicit commentary in writing on behalf of the EU Commission, or direct me to such a comment available online.

The EU Commission’s Answer to my Enquiry

Now, I solicited a written comment from the EU Commission that has it all (emphases mine):

• Astra Zeneca made a request to withdraw the market authorisation of its COVID-19 for commercial reasons [no-one wanted to take them, which indicates massive consumer power].

• As this withdrawal was requested by AstraZeneca, you may wish to contact the company for more information on the reasons of the request.

• It is important to stress a few very important elements in this context:

• First, this withdrawal is not a result of safety or efficacy concerns [grrrr].

• The safety and efficacy of all the vaccines developed and distributed under the EU Vaccines Strategy, including the AstraZeneca vaccines, have been subject to a rigorous scientific assessment by EMA. The safety and efficacy of these vaccines have been well established [speak for yourself].

• Second, it is important to note in this context that the last batch of AZ vaccines that was released on the EU market expired in 2022 and that the AZ vaccine has not been used in the EU for quite some time.

• Third, it is, in general, not uncommon practice for companies to request the withdrawal of market authorisations of medicines or vaccines for commercial reasons. This could, for instance, be the case if the product is no longer in demand in the EU [no shit].

• On average, each year some 20 centrally authorised products  are withdrawn for commercial reasons.    

• Following this request by the company, the marketing authorisation was withdrawn.

• You will find a link to the decision  here: dec_162288_en.pdf (europa.eu).

Here’s a screen shot of my inbox / the EU Commission’s email:

Bottom Lines

The explicit, repeated references to the ‘safety’ or ‘effectiveness’ of the product is revealing, as this is considered ‘a given’. The only problem here is that the AstraZeneca product has not been administered in many countries for almost three years. (Here in Norway, the administration of the AstraZeneca jabs was suspended on 11 March 2021; Iceland and Denmark also did so around that time.)

What is more than an interesting ‘coincidence’ with the legal proceedings against AstraZeneca is that—despite the similarly non-existent demand for the modRNA preparations from BioNTech/Pfizer and Moderna—there is no discussion about revoking their market authorisation.

Due to the large investments in modRNA production facilities, it seems rather unlikely that BioNTech/Pfizer or Moderna, like AstraZeneca, will apply for the end of the market approval on their own initiative.

So now you have to rely on ‘Mr. Market’, and if you look at the current stock market prices of BioNTech/Pfizer and Moderna, the future of the modRNA manufacturers is also up for grabs (I’ll keep my fingers crossed for the untimely demise of all three of these vulture pharmaceutical companies).

The EU Commission’s decision is thus little more than a so-called ‘limited hangout’, rather than an admission to well-known things that can no longer be denied.

This was done ‘not [as] a result of safety or efficacy concerns’; on the contrary, both aspects—‘all vaccines’ are ‘safe and effective’—are emphasised time and again and, above all.

If you needed any more ‘proof’ that these institutions are ‘out to get you’, well, look no further.

Act accordingly.