Is time travel possible?
In a Carte Blanche opinion piece of 5 February 2022 published in Le Vif [1], Prof. Jacques Longueville attempts an explanation to play down the side effects of the Covid vaccine.
BAM!-DETOX*
For BAM!-DETOX, this is an opportunity to put an end to a few hackneyed arguments and to sort science from science fiction.
Four deaths linked to the Covid vaccine in Belgium?
“Of the 8,741,197 people who have received at least two doses of the vaccine in Belgium, only 4 deaths are considered as probably related to it.”
There are currently 274 post-vaccination deaths reported in Belgium [2]
Are these 274 deaths the consequences of the vaccine? Not necessarily; we will come back to this later.
Are all vaccine-related side effects reported to pharmacovigilance? No, this is what is called passive pharmacovigilance. This means that it is carried out on a voluntary basis, and therefore a relatively large number of side effects are not reported. Empirically, one can reasonably estimate that 1% to 10% of incidents are reported. As regards the Covid vaccine, in September 2021 Prof. Christophe de Brouwer compared the number of reports with the number of vaccinated people for 5 countries[3]: France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Luxembourg. If we consider the Netherlands as an ideal to be achieved, knowing that there too there is a certain degree of under-reporting, we see that Belgium reports almost eight times less (13%) than the Netherlands.
This means that when Prof. Longueville states that “only 4 deaths are considered as probably related to it”, he is talking about 4 deaths for which the link with vaccination has been established among the reported deaths. Does this mean that among the remaining 270 reported deaths there are none linked to the vaccine? No, it simply means that among the 274 reported, a link could be demonstrated for 4 of them.
To illustrate Prof. Longueville’s argument, let us say it is a bit as if one claimed that the number of burglaries solved was equal to the number of burglaries committed. Not all burglaries are reported, and not all reported burglaries are solved.
A benefit/risk balance in favour of the vaccine?
“By contrast, out of 2,921,427 mostly unvaccinated people, Covid-19 disease confirmed by virology is responsible for 27,163 deaths. The difference in mortality rates according to vaccination status is therefore glaring, with vastly more deaths due to the coronavirus among the unvaccinated than deaths suspected of being the consequence of the vaccine.” This reasoning is fallacious. It implies that the 27,163 deaths correspond to the future Covid risk, which is not correct.
Thanks to Caroline Vandermeeren for the illustration.
If we look at the evolution of an epidemic towards endemicity (which is being confirmed for Covid), we see that the future risk decreases over time. In fact, as time goes on, the number of past deaths increases while the number of future deaths decreases.
Moreover, the vaccine’s efficacy is far from 100%, and it decreases over time, which leads to an accumulation of side effects through the multiplication of doses.
A solution?
We can therefore see that past Covid deaths, like pharmacovigilance, are not a good way of calculating the benefit/risk balance, particularly for deaths.
In fact, as has already been pointed out by, among others, Prof. Patrick Meyer[4], Covidata.be[5], Prof. Doshi[6] and BAM![7], there is a simple way to estimate the past benefit/risk balance: give access to the raw anonymised data on deaths and vaccinations. Access to these data would put an end to sterile debates by relying on facts that everyone can verify, and would give everyone the opportunity to make a more informed choice. But the competent services do not seem to be in a hurry to make public the data that are nevertheless in their possession..
What benefit, for whom?
When Prof. Longueville talks about the benefit, he fails to mention that not everyone faces the same risk from Covid. It is now established that several factors play an important role in the severity of infections (obesity, hypertension, diabetes, age, immunodeficiency, etc.). We know that most of those who died of Covid had at least one comorbidity. As regards age, we see from the Statbel figures[8] that below the age of 65 we did not record any significant excess mortality in 2020.
Are we going to impose a draconian diet on an entire population, including growing children, because some people have weight problems or because the average weight of the population is too high?
And in the long term?
“A limited hindsight to ensure the safety of the product is sometimes invoked to describe the anti-COVID-19 vaccine as an experimental treatment, which makes little sense since 8,470,000,000 doses (all brands combined) have already been administered worldwide. (...) The knowledge acquired during this period of pharmacovigilance is reassuring; no development of long-term side effects has been notified.”
Basically, Prof. Longueville is explaining to us that if side effects were to appear within five years, we could already know about it after one year… To justify this feat worthy of a Jules Verne adventure, he explains that 8,470,000,000 doses of the vaccine over one year make it possible to know what will happen in 2, 5, 10 years or more. This argument is of course not medically correct. We submitted this sentence to the judgement of an epidemiologist, who smiled and gave us this answer: “The late toxicities of drugs or vaccines are due to processes different from acute toxicities. Time accumulates effects that are INVISIBLE in the acute phase. These effects can nevertheless be statistically major and very serious. That is why the official phase 3 trials will only end after 2 years”.
But Prof. Longueville reassures us: “no development of long-term side effects has been notified” in the short term…
It may be useful here to recall the Softenon (Thalidomide) tragedy[9]. Placed on the market in 1956 to relieve nausea in pregnant women, Softenon would claim more than 20,000 victims: disabled children, half of whom would die before reaching the age of 1…
The studies presented for the marketing authorisation of this drug did not reveal any side effects. Yet, in 1960, neurologists detected neuritis, inflammation of the nerves. The pharmaceutical company played it down and organised smear campaigns against the neurologists who dared to speak out, with the result that the number of victims increased.
It would take more than 5 years after it went on sale for Softenon to be withdrawn from the market!
If we want to travel in time, we can surely learn from our past experiences, but we should avoid indulging in science fiction.
By BAM!-DETOX
[1] Les effets secondaires sont-ils l’apanage du vaccin anti-Covid ? - La Libre
[2] Coronavirus : aperçu mensuel des effets indésirables des vaccins contre la COVID-19 du 27 janvier 2022 | AFMPS
[3] https://www.facebook.com/photo/ ?fbid=10220123216812117
[4] Interview de Patrick Meyer, professeur à l’ Uliège - BAM! Belgian Alternative Media (in French)
[5] Covidata.be on Twitter: "1/4 Aujourd’hui, jour 8 de la campagne
[6] Covid-19 vaccines and treatments: we must have raw data, now
[7] Droit de réponse : l’absence de transparence et de débat met en danger la science et la santé publique - BAM! Belgian Alternative Media (in French)
The opinions expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent those of BAM!
* BAM!-DETOX brings together university professors, doctors, people working in the pharmaceutical and medical field and independent journalists. BAM!-DETOX aims to analyse and verify the information circulated in the media and on social networks.
Photo source:
BAM!
