The British Medical Journal criticized Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers for ‘reaping vast profits’ without proper independent scrutinyHidden summary:
British Medical Journal (BMJ), a journal of medicine, has called on public health regulators and major pharma companies to immediately make available all raw data from Covid-19 vaccination trials. It argued that independent scrutiny is essential. “complete data transparency”This was the matter of “public interest.”
Branding Big Pharma as “the least trusted industry,”A recent BMJ editor’s op-ed stated that this was “morally indefensible”This information is still not accessible to researchers, doctors and the general public, in spite of the worldwide rollout vaccines and treatment.
In the scathing editorial, the writers – senior BMJ editor Peter Doshi, former editor-in-chief Fiona Godlee and her successor Kamran Abbasi – accuse pharmaceutical companies of “reaping vast profits without adequate independent scrutiny of their scientific claims.”
Three of the companies that make Covid-19 vaccines had to settle criminal or civil cases, which cost them millions of dollars. One of the companies pleaded guilty for fraud. The other companies do not have a pre-Covid record.
The editorial collective slams Moderna, Pfizer and AstraZeneca, pointing out that they do not provide adequate care. “timely access”You can find more information here “anonymized individual participant data”Their clinical trials. Regulators like the US Food and Drug Administration can access this granular information. Last month, a judge ordered the FDA to allow 75 years for the publication of all data related to the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine.
But the BMJ said Pfizer – whose trial was “funded by the company and designed, run, analyzed, and authored by Pfizer employees” – has indicated that it will not entertain data requests until May 2025, a full two years after the primary study is completed.
Access to data can be a problem. “consistent across vaccine manufacturers,”The editors note that this industry is not sustainable. “legally required” to honor requests from independent researchers.
In addition, they note that regulatory agencies like Health Canada and European Medicines Agency are not the only ones who do this. “receive or analyze” trial data, whereas the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency does not “proactively release”Such information.
“The purpose of regulators is not to dance to the tune of rich global corporations and enrich them further; it is to protect the health of their populations,”They came to an agreement.
[ad_2]
