Save Private AstraZeneca

I see that appeals abound in the newspapers these days to still trust AstraZeneca and its vaccine. The reasons for this interest range from "but there is no zero risk", to "there is no evidence", up to "science says".

I am pleased that so many people have the personal phone number of Mrs. (I imagine Doctor) La Scienza. I guess it's nice to talk to all these interesting people asking for guidance.

The trouble is that so far "Science" has said little. First of all, its approval in the UK was more due to Ms "Politics" than to Dr "La Scienza". Secondly, unlike the two mRna vaccines, it is a classical type DNA vaccine, which uses a virus to infect cells with a DNA that produces spike proteins . Technique already used in the past, with due checks and tests.

What does it mean?

It means that the British health authority was not "quicker to check", but approved the vaccine using the "emergency situation" clause.

The Astrazeneca vaccine in the UK was not approved by doing the checks faster. It was approved by SKIPPING the checks.

Let's go to the talk of the second dose. There was something wrong with using the second dose of the vaccine:

In practice, that is, the more the vaccine is used the less effective it is, so it would have been better from the beginning to use half a dose, but for some reason two are recommended. I point out that to date Dr. Saputa La Scienza has not expressed herself. It is not known why this happens. Whoever says "science tells us" is actually listening to "Politics" and not "Science". Of course, selling the fourfold of the active substance can be convenient, if you want to be malicious.

But… should we be malicious towards AstraZeneca?

Well … yes. The company has a troubling history of ethical issues . The first of which concerns the data provided to the authorities.

2007. One of Astrazeneca's flagship products is presented as an improvement on an earlier competitor drug. Unfortunately, this is done using non-comparable prescription data: Here and Here . The problem is raised in an interview with “Stern” magazine by Marcia Angell .

2010. Astrazeneca pays $ 250 million to silence a story of "illicit promotion" of a drug for bipolar disorder. Link Here.

1998: the former CEO of Astrazeneca is convicted of stealing money from the company, which was then spent on prostitutes and other personal expenses. To defend himself, he comes up with conspiracy theories, the KGB, and other fairly recent things, if we think about it. In his spare time he harassed the office workers, it seems.

2004: a comparative research is carried out between three drugs, sponsored by Astrazeneca. These are drugs for psychiatric use. A mentally ill person commits suicide during the trial. At that point during the investigation it turns out that the guardian (the mother) had never authorized participation in the research and the man had been threatened with being locked up in an asylum if he had not participated and kept silent.

2010: Astrazeneca pays £ 505million to the UK tax department to close a tax avoidance position.

Now, in these conditions, yes, I have some reason to doubt the ethics (and wanting to be malicious even the data) of AstraZeneca.

If we add to it the scandalous behavior in this epidemic, I would say that by doubting AstraZeneca you are doing a disservice to Doctor La Scienza. To say it all, it seems that doubting is almost a duty and I am sure that Dr. La Scienza agrees. Especially if the behavior regarding vaccine dosage and efficacy cannot be explained by science itself.

So why does everyone want to save AstraZeneca?

Well, for a reason. As I explained in the past, Italian newspapers are very fond of the taste of American asses and Anglo-Saxon asses in general. And in this case:

• it would be really embarrassing for Johnson if it turns out he has licensed (by skipping tests) a vaccine that is causing trouble.
• it would be really embarrassing for Johnson if it turns out that the British authorities have seen the same problems seen in 10 other countries but have kept quiet.
• AstraZeneca has an office in Italy, with around 700 employees. Having a registered office, it lobbies like all big pharma.

And since, in fact, the Italian press loves the taste of Anglo-Saxon ass, the result is that we must, at all costs, save AstraZeneca's face. Even if it doesn't deliver. Although it is filling a warehouse in Belgium with vaccines that it intends to sell abroad, hoping that the export ban will fall, while it does not respect deliveries to Europe.

Because the Anglo-Saxon ass, it seems, has a beautiful taste: that of money.