Japan plans to buy AstraZeneca's experimental COVID-19 vaccine

Another “experimental vaccine” that won’t be optional...

Last week, also on Japan Today, there was this article:

Pfizer, BioNTech to supply 120 mil doses of experimental coronavirus vaccine to Japan

https://japantoday.com/category/business/update-1-pfizer-biontech-to-supply-120-mln-doses-of-coronavirus-vaccine-to-japan

And since its two doses per person, that means Japan is planning to give half the population the Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine and the other half of the population a different vaccine by AstraZeneca?? Not to mention the (at least) two vaccines mentioned in the article being developed in Japan?

What, are they hedging their bets (with billions of taxpayer yen) that one of these "experimental" vaccines they are buying won't work?

Great news, lets hope it works as a vaccine is the only way life will return to how it was before. I am happy for the government to gamble our tax money on this rather than wasting it on promoting domestic travel and making the spread of covid worse.

Instead of being happy that probably a vaccine is coming, people complain again about their taxmoney in Japan.

In your home country, you dont pay taxmoney?

If the taxmoney management in your home country is so good, then why dont you go back?

In your home country, you dont pay taxmoney?

If the taxmoney management in your home country is so good, then why dont you go back?

Though Japan is now my "home", back in the country where I was born, the taxes pay for the bloated orange commander-in-chief to go play golf multiple times a week.

@divinda

that means Japan is planning to give half the population the Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine and the other half of the population a different vaccine by AstraZeneca??

The Oxford vaccine isn't as effect as BioNTech vaccine in producing neutralized antibodies, hence the US passed on the first dip and Japan can get this sooner than more effective BioNTech or Moderna vaccines on which the US has the first dip.

Japan has to have some kind of herd immunity by April or the Tokyo Olympics in July is cancelled, hence desperate Japan is trying to inject its vulnerable population with any kind of available vaccine starting in January.

The Oxford vaccine isn't as effect as BioNTech vaccine in producing neutralized antibodies, hence the US passed on the first dip and Japan can get this sooner than more effective BioNTech or Moderna vaccines on which the US has the first dip.

Hmm... isn't as effective.. What do you mean ? I think i read somewhere AZD1222 returned good responses in antibodies and T-cells in 100% (yes all of them) of the participants after the boost shot. Can you share a link ?

@Devinda

Then I think Japan is better for you!

Same for me!

Considering covid is relatively harmless for the healthy, why not just vaccinate the vulnerable.

I would rather catch covid than get the vaccine...

"I understand one or two doses are effective per person," Health Minister Katsunobu Kato told reporters. "If each person receives two injections, this would cover 60 million people."

Hope foreigners here can also get the vaccine just like Japanese and not a repeat of the re-entry ban for foreigners that we witnessed.

Secondly, hope the vaccine is free and if it is not, government will rein on cost and not allow rip-off by pharma and clinics like with the present private pcr test that cost from 33,000 -40,000yen. Well, that is just wishfull thinking.

And since its two doses per person, that means Japan is planning to give half the population the Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine and the other half of the population a different vaccine by AstraZeneca??

Unless the vaccines are harmful, which they aren't as proven in the early clinical trials, this is fine.

I think everyone is doing this. UK too is buying the Pfizer vaccine. Russia is buying Astra Zeneca whilst using their own. I think it will look like that in the beginning. Whatever helps get us back to normal life.

Considering covid is relatively harmless for the healthy, why not just vaccinate the vulnerable.

Yeah, it's not like it ravages peoples lungs leaving permanent scarring or any other long-term effects.

If the taxmoney management in your home country is so good...

There is no such country on this planet. If anything this is money well spent.

What, are they hedging their bets (with billions of taxpayer yen) that one of these "experimental" vaccines they are buying won't work?

No, it is not what you think ! This is more like production volume related . Pfizer will cover half AZ half.

The price for the 2 shots will I thnk be around the 5000JPY mark ( 1/6 the PCR test) of our money.

@Raw Beer

You definitely have a point.

I would argue that increasing vitamin C would obviate the need for a vaccine.

In my experience,I have had success suppressing my own body’s viral activity with it.

@n1k1

Hmm... isn't as effective.. What do you mean?

BioNTech and Moderna vaccines produce four times as many neutralizing antibodies as Oxford vaccine does after 2 shots.

This is the reason why the US passed on the Oxford vaccine, and why the Oxford vaccine is available to Japan at an earlier date than something like BioNTech, which won't be available to Japan until April 2021, which would be too late for Japan as far as the Tokyo Olympic's concerned.

The Oxford vaccine isn't as good as BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, but at least it's better than nothing at this time.

the Money being thrown at this is astronomical at ¥4000 per shot that’s a lot of lolly!

@Samit Basu

Japan has to have some kind of herd immunity by April or the Tokyo Olympics in July is cancelled, hence desperate Japan is trying to inject its vulnerable population with any kind of available vaccine starting in January.

So you think Japan intends to double-dose vaccinate at least half of the country before July 2021? You realize that is probably logistically impossible. Besides, what about the other half? Are they suppose to quarantine themselves till the Olympics are done?

Additionally, how about all the players, coaches, foreign media, int'l staff and sponsors, not to mention the mass of visiting foreign audiance who already bought tickets? Will they be given a vaccine shot on arrival too?

I would argue that increasing vitamin C would obviate the need for a vaccine.

I agree that vitamin C helps, but the evidence is much more convincing that vitamin D is important to fight this thing. Whenever I go a few days without direct sun exposure, I take a vitamin D supplement.

@divinda

So you think Japan intends to double-dose vaccinate at least half of the country before July 2021?

Oxford vaccine is all Japan can find before April 2021. The BioNTech vaccine won't be delivered to Japan until April 2021 because of the US having the first dip in December 2020.

If Japan is really desperate then japan can try the Cansino vaccine that Canada bet its farm on, but that one is hardly producing any neutralizing antibody according to published results, basically it will train T-cell to lesson the effect of an infection but not prevent the infection.

So Japan has no good options because the US is basically buying up all the good vaccines.

@Kobe Whitebar Owner

the Money being thrown at this is astronomical at ¥4000 per shot that’s a lot of lolly!

The Oxford vaccine is being contracted for 3 euro per dose in Europe, meaning it's 6 Euro per person in terms of raw vaccine, plus distribution and injection service.

The BioNTech vaccine is going for $30 per dose, or $60 per person. The reason the US and Moderna hasn't closed the deal maybe that Moderna is asking for upto $50 per dose and this maybe too rich even for the US, considering how the US government is offering to inject the vaccine to Americans for free.

Only an idiot would take a vaccine created in 6 months with no long term clinical trials with admitted side effects.

its a waste of our tax money. Smells of brown envelopes.

The price for the 2 shots will I thnk be around the 5000JPY mark ( 1/6 the PCR test) of our money.

Good you said, you think.

The yearly 2 shot flu vaccine for my brothers elementary school kid cost 5,000yen. Regarding, the cost, not holding my breath knowing who the bureaucrats have sworn allegiance to.

I would argue that increasing vitamin C would obviate the need for a vaccine.

I agree that vitamin C helps, but the evidence is much more convincing that vitamin D is important to fight this thing. Whenever I go a few days without direct sun exposure, I take a vitamin D supplement.

None of them have any demonstrable effect on covid-19, its use just faith based, hoping that data of thousands of patients being examined has been wrong.

Only an idiot would take a vaccine created in 6 months with no long term clinical trials with admitted side effects.

Most vaccines and drugs are put on the market without "long term clinical trials". If you have visited a hospital or have been in treatment for any disease the chances are you have been one of the people using them.

There are ways to see the response of the body that would allow to predict with very high confidence if any long term effect is or not to be expected, both in the preclinical and clinical studies. This at least puts a vaccine candidate much more steps ahead than the infection, which obviously has not been studied for long term effects either. The probability of serious health problems in people infected, even if asymptomatic right now is much higher than for a vaccine.

Like the one in the UK that caused severe brain damage in over 1000 children.

In my experience,I have had success suppressing my own body’s viral activity with it.

well your experience isn't backed by scientific facts, yes vitamins are good for your body in measured doses, but to say its some type of vaccine for viruses is just an opinion. you can always go to visit infected persons and see if your theory is true... good luck

AstraZeneca, how many lawsuits settle for wrongful drugs? and you will trust those who are just looking for profit! sorry I cannot!

Don't be so keen on getting a vaccine for the coronavirus / COVID-19:

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/04/side-effects-of-fast-tracked-vaccine.aspx

https://www.rt.com/russia/497360-russia-first-covid19-vaccine/

@ mothy

If the taxmoney management in your home country is so good, then why dont you go back?

What a wonderfully pragmatic suggestion!!! Those of us living in Japan have not heard that before!!! /s

By this time one would have hoped you’d realized that travel both to and from Japan is not easy restricted.

Someone living in Japan would know that well.

However, someone outside Japan would not know that so well.

Vaccine is good to allow people to build immunity to the virus, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine.

But, don't forget about treatment for people who already have the virus . . . and keep up with Avigan, which many countries have adopted, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favipiravir

And don't forget about disinfectants which can kill the virus externally, thus helping people from getting infected, The US Environmental Protection Agency reported the following products effective against the coronavirus, COVID-19,

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/lysol-disinfectant-approved-for-use-against-covid-19-heres-what-else-can-work

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysol

AstraZeneca, how many lawsuits settle for wrongful drugs? and you will trust those who are just looking for profit! sorry I cannot!

A pharmaceutical company profits much more from people getting sick than vaccinated, if a company is only looking for profit it will simply not make any vaccine.

Don't be so keen on getting a vaccine for the coronavirus / COVID-19:

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/04/side-effects-of-fast-tracked-vaccine.aspx

The vaccine for coronavirus do not need to be fast tracked for it to be ready next year. This is just a misrepresentation done by a known fraud hoping to profit from people getting sick instead of vaccinated as it always done.

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/natural-health-and-the-antivaccine-movement-the-case-of-dr-joseph-mercola/

A pharmaceutical company profits much more from people getting sick than vaccinated, if a company is only looking for profit it will simply not make any vaccine.

Exactly what you mean but the pharmaceutical company (which may or may not be producing the vaccine) profits even more from producing products specific to counteracting the negative side effects that arise from FILL IN THE BLANK.

sciencebasedmedicine.org is there to discredit anyone that does not fall in line with Big Pharma's narrative.

"Science Based Medicine, founded by Yale neuroscientist Steven Novella, was launched to advocate for a reductionist scientific rationality, founded upon Skepticism’s principles and strategies. In 2009, the Society launched its Institute for Science in Medicine, a non-profit organization with a mission to influence public health policies and establish standards based upon its medical determinism at the exclusion of other medical options that the Institute criticizes. High on both the Society’s and Institute’s priority list is the condemnation of Complementary-Alternative Medicine (CAM), which is today offered in most university medical schools. It also accuses naturopathy, homeopathy, massage, chiropractic medicine, nutritional medicine including supplements, and all faith-based and Mind-Body healing modalities of quackery.[8]  Practitioners of these non-drug based therapies are categorically labeled as irrational, charlatans, conspiracy theorists or quacks. Followers of SBM operate solely in the state of its absolute authority, hyper-diligence and ultra-orthodoxy. Medical research favoring conventional medicine is framed as unwavering facts, which leave no room for open discussion and debate."

monty

i'm usually pro vaccine type with a few exception: rotavirus, influenza and whatever says "experimental". not interested at all.

None of them have any demonstrable effect on covid-19, its use just faith based, hoping that data of thousands of patients being examined has been wrong.

Evidence for an association between vitamin D level and respiratory tract infections is quite solid. And there is even some evidence specifically with covid19.

A pharmaceutical company profits much more from people getting sick than vaccinated, if a company is only looking for profit it will simply not make any vaccine.

Yeah, they will make billions selling the vaccines, and then hundreds of billions selling treatments for the chronic illnesses caused by the vaccines.

But yeah, people will continue to get the vaccines because they somehow still have faith...

Evidence for an association between vitamin D level and respiratory tract infections is quite solid. And there is even some evidence specifically with covid19.

So solid that it can never be found? no, not really.

The reality is that a normal person have adequate levels of vitamin D and supplementation produces no real benefit.

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-rise-and-inevitable-fall-of-vitamin-d/

Yeah, they will make billions selling the vaccines, and then hundreds of billions selling treatments for the chronic illnesses caused by the vaccines.

That is irrational, for every single cheap vaccine they will stop making literally thousands and thousands of dollars for treatment. Both things are not just unrelated ways to make money, making money in the first means not making money on the other.

But yeah, people will continue to get the vaccines because they somehow still have faith...

That is rational and easy to explain, on one side people have the evidence that vaccines are one of the most effective and safe health interventions invented by science.

On the other side they have irrational zealots that believe that all doctors, nurses and researchers of the world willingly poison and kill themselves, their families and friends just so a very small number of rich people can gain a lot of money.

Only one of these things have evidence to support it, and is at least rational and believable. Nobody can blame people for not falling for the world conspiracy scam.

Exactly what you mean but the pharmaceutical company (which may or may not be producing the vaccine) profits even more from producing products specific to counteracting the negative side effects that arise from FILL IN THE BLANK.

Which have only been observed in the imagination of the conspiracionist and science denialists. Even if half the vaccinated people would need treatment that still would mean losing money from the lack of treatment of the infections, it is still irrational.

sciencebasedmedicine.org is there to discredit anyone that does not fall in line with Big Pharma's narrative.

Not really, only discredit those people that can be proved they lie, profit from the disease of people and dedicate their lives to promote self contradicting and irrational conspiracy theories without any evidence.

You know, like it should be done. There is nothing wrong with discrediting scammers.

The most important part is that the scammers never have the evidence to support what they say and believe, but expect everybody to just follow them (and buy their products like Mercola) even against clear evidence that nothing actually works. A very easy way to distinguish these people is that when confronted with evidence of the scams they can never defend themselves using valid evidence, so they instead play the victim.

sciencebasedmedicine.org is there to discredit anyone that does not fall in line with Big Pharma's narrative.

Yeah, it certainly does look that way. I get very skeptical when someone has such a carefully crafted name.

@virusrex

So solid that it can never be found? no, not really.

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-rise-and-inevitable-fall-of-vitamin-d/

That is a 2016 report, and all they do is criticize how even older research was carried out. If you really want to know the truth, if you really are interested in science, you should make an effort to look at the newest information.

Such as the following, which was published a few weeks ago:

Immunologic Effects of Vitamin D on Human Health and Disease (2020) **Nutrients, 12(7), 2097.**

The reality is that a normal person have adequate levels of vitamin D and supplementation produces no real benefit.

That was perhaps the "reality" years ago, when the recommended vitamin D level was lower than today, perhaps just enough to prevent rickets. Today vitamin D deficiency is a serious and well documented problem.

And there is also this study from a few years ago:

Vitamin D supplementation to prevent acute respiratory tract infections: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data. BMJ 2017; 356

doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6583

Conclusion: "Vitamin D supplementation was safe and it protected against acute respiratory tract infection overall. Patients who were very vitamin D deficient and those not receiving bolus doses experienced the most benefit."

BTW, BMJ is British Medical Journal, it's a respected journal.

Yeah, it certainly does look that way. I get very skeptical when someone has such a carefully crafted name.

You mean describing the purpose on the name without pretending to be anything else? that is a huge difference with, for example, antivaxxer sites, that always name themselves for something completely different than their purpose.

That is a 2016 report, and all they do is criticize how even older research was carried out. If you really want to know the truth, if you really are interested in science, you should make an effort to look at the newest information.

Meta-analysis are the pinnacle of evidence based science, they require a lot of work to classify and analyze properly the information, that is why they are so hated by people that are against science, because when they try to oppose them with badly made studies with tiny samples and mediocre conclusions it is very easy to see how the evidence points exactly to the contrary to what they wanted. So no, it is not a single study but an organized analysis of many different studies, providing a much clearer view of the situation than any single study can.

That was perhaps the "reality" years ago, when the recommended vitamin D level was lower than today, perhaps just enough to prevent rickets. Today vitamin D deficiency is a serious and well documented problem.

Did you even read your own reference? they specifically say that normal levels of vitamin D are nowhere near difficult to get (and they specifically include the fact that even isolated tribes have perfectly healthy levels), their recommendation is that that supplementation is only useful for the very few people that are at risk of deficiency.

Everything else in the article you present is just an explanation on the perfectly well described effects of vitamin D, not even one line presents data on any benefits of supplementing vitamin D for normal people, much less for covid19.

It is an excellent reference to prove there is no need or benefit from vitamin D supplements.

@n1k1

Unless the vaccines are harmful, which they aren't as proven in the early clinical trials, this is fine.

No vaccine is 100% safe and some are downright dangerous.

All vaccines are designed to be somewhat harmful, aren’t they?

@virusrex

It is an excellent reference to prove there is no need or benefit from vitamin D supplements.

Keep reading and believing secondhand information all you want.

I have been suppressing viral activity within my own body for several years now using nothing more than vitamin C.

I don’t need a know all telling me without firsthand evidence that A or B doesn’t work.

No vaccine is 100% safe and some are downright dangerous.

All vaccines are designed to be somewhat harmful, aren’t they?

Nothing in the world is 100% safe, every single thing have risks, the main purpose of testing is that people have less risk from the vaccination than from the infection.

Testing a vaccine candidate means seeing if it can give protection and at the same time do not have any specific risks above what people have just by their daily lives. In very specific cases, for diseases that are frequently lethal and can be contracted easily it may still be better to use vaccines even if they have some risks for the health (because the risks they prevent are so much higher than having some risk still means less) but for covid19 this is not the case.

Generally speaking any vaccine produced for this disease should have no important risks identified on the clinical trials in order to be approved. Scientifically speaking it is still possible some hidden risks may still exist, but of course that also applies to getting the infection, and it is much more likely this would happen with an uncontrolled infection.

Keep reading and believing secondhand information all you want.

I have been suppressing viral activity within my own body for several years now using nothing more than vitamin C.

I don’t need a know all telling me without firsthand evidence that A or B doesn’t work.

That is not evidence and definetely that is not firsthand, that is just a personal belief not supported by data. How can you compare dose/response? what are your immunoglobuline levels for all the pathogens you are supposed to be exposed, what are the confidence intervals for you conclusions? etc. etc. That would be evidence.

If a person say they have lived for 50 years free of cancer because they always hold a pebble they found on the road when he was a small children. Is that "first hand evidence"? of course not, that is just confirmation bias reinforcing a belief that can be proved false with science.

Conclusion: "Vitamin D supplementation was safe and it protected against acute respiratory tract infection overall. Patients who were very vitamin D deficient and those not receiving bolus doses experienced the most benefit."

That is the whole point, the vast majority of the people are not in vitamin D deficiency (according to your first reference even very isolated tribes, without any supplementation nor balanced diets have perfectly healthy levels) it is not any surprise that people that actually are deficient benefit from correcting this condition, something that does not apply for the vast mayority.

A clearer view on the conclussions:

The authors of the current BMJ article stratified their data to show that the greatest benefit was observed for subjects who were vitamin D-deficient prior to vitamin D supplementation. Thus trials where supplemented subjects are vitamin D sufficient at the start are much less likely to show positive effects. This may explain some of the negative data published in the previous BMJ article.

So the effect of vitamins appear (even if moderated) when supplemented to people that are deficient, but disappear on people with easily achieved normal levels. Studies about people without deficiencies give negative results because of this.

That is nothing special about vitamin D, everything that is considered necessary on the diet affect the health, and very frequently also immunity, but if you have normal levels taking more supplements have no effect.

That is the whole point, the vast majority of the people are not in vitamin D deficiency

Vast majority? If I recall, about 40% worldwide are deficient.

In the US, vitamin D deficiency is also a problem, especially among blacks (dark skin makes less vitamin D). It has been mention on MSM that in the US, blacks are disproportionately affected by covid19. Someone should tell them about vitamin D, rather than telling them to wait for the "safe and effective" vaccine.

No vaccine is 100% safe and some are downright dangerous.

Indeed, there have been serious problems (death, paralysis,...) associated with vaccines that are not discussed openly. Most people don't know anything about it, they think that they are all "safe and effective". Some vaccines increase the spread of the disease they are design to protect against, and some vaccines will wreck your health or kill you. Until we have open discussion of vaccines, I will avoid them like the plague. Especially when we're dealing with a new experimental vaccine.

Vast majority? If I recall, about 40% worldwide are deficient.

Your own source say this is not true, why present something if you are going to contradict it on the next response? does that means your references are false and even yourself think they should not be trusted? then you should have not presented them in the first place.

Indeed, there have been serious problems (death, paralysis,...) associated with vaccines that are not discussed openly.

That is the most important part, "associated", again nothing is free from risk on this world, but if doing something means having less risk, and not doing it means having more risk, the only rational thing to do is very clear.

Most people don't know anything about it, they think that they are all "safe and effective".

Because they are, having the possibility of risk do not contradict the fact they are safe and effective. If your definition of "safe" means not having any chance of risk, then nothing in the world would be safe, and obviously avoiding vaccination wouldn't either, because that brings more risk than vaccinating.

Some vaccines increase the spread of the disease they are design to protect against,

Not a single vaccine in current use in the world does that, that is a mistaken factoid that antivaxxers like to repeat but become mute when told to prove it.

and some vaccines will wreck your health or kill you.

The important part is that this risk is astronomically lower than a natural infection, which will wreck the health or kill a perfectly healthy person much more often.

Until we have open discussion of vaccines, I will avoid them like the plague. Especially when we're dealing with a new experimental vaccine.

Open discussion is being done every day between professionals, the problem is that they do not use lies and mistaken information to do it, so for the people that depend on those lies to protect their beliefs those perfectly rational discussions are terrifying, so they ignore them and say they don't exist.

Seems we're reading a different paper. The paper I linked to says:

"It is well documented that worldwide on average approximately 40% of children and adults have circulating levels of 25(OH)D less than 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L) and approximately 60% less than 30 ng/mL (75 nmol/L). Thus, patients presenting to the hospital with COVID-19 are likely to have vitamin D deficiency or insuciency. It is therefore reasonable to institute as a standard of care to give at least one single dose of 50,000 of vitamin D to all COVID-19 patients as soon as possible after being hospitalized."

"Most of the evidence, to date, suggests that maintenance of a healthy vitamin D status is important for modulating the body’s immune function. Low serum levels of 25(OH)D are associated with multiple immune-related diseases including autoimmune disorders and infectious diseases."

Until we have open discussion of vaccines, I will avoid them like the plague.

You want to avoid the plague by avoiding the thing that is proven to stop plagues?

What kind of scientist are you excatly?

You want to avoid the plague by avoiding the thing that is proven to stop plagues?

How have vaccines been proven to stop plagues?

In fact, some are saying that the "Spanish" flu was started by a US military vaccination. I am not sure that is true, but it seemed convincing enough.

But one thing that is true is that sun exposure was a recommended treatment at the time. Why are the US medical experts not saying anything about that, about sun exposure and vitamin D, especially regarding the black population.

Seems we're reading a different paper.

The fact that isolated tribes have adequate levels of vitamin D comes from that paper as well, I have already accepted that patients with any deficiency benefit from correcting that deficiency for immunity. But for people that take any kind of minimum care of not going into deficiency there is no point in having supplementation above the normal levels.

But one thing that is true is that sun exposure was a recommended treatment at the time. Why are the US medical experts not saying anything about that, about sun exposure and vitamin D, especially regarding the black population.

Recommendations are being updated constantly, everything that is found to have any utility is incorporated to them, and things found to be useless are deleted or even warned about. Preexisting conditions have been included as factors of risk openly since months ago. That include dietary deficiencies in the same category with hypertension, diabetes (even controlled) etc.

In fact, some are saying that the "Spanish" flu was started by a US military vaccination. I am not sure that is true, but it seemed convincing enough.

That is called confirmation bias, where extraordinary or plainly false things are easily believed when they support a preconceived belief, and perfectly rational well supported information is on the contrary denied just because it contradicts what you want to believe is true. Fundamentally a form of denial of reality.

In fact, some are saying that the "Spanish" flu was started by a US military vaccination.

Who is saying it? Scientists? Men in the pub? Some pop group?

I am not sure that is true, but it seemed convincing enough.

If you seem to find it convincing, why are you not sure that it is true? What do you find convincing (though not convincing enough)? Illogical statement from a person who claims to be a scientist.

In fact, some are saying that the "Spanish" flu was started by a US military vaccination.

You have got to post a link for this one

That there is a distinct possibility that Spanish flu originated in the states is common knowledge. Sometimes it was referred to as the "Kansas Flu".

Tons of info available. 5 second search gives us -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu

wipeout - thanks. Yes I certainly would say there is a difference.

I was merely pointing out a widely held view on the origin of and not the cause of.

I believe some people think the Spanish Flu came from Spain.

And for some people with the strange notion of a US military vaccine program causing flu, probably indicates -

a) they are confusing the immunization ( typhoid, smallpox, diphtheria etc ) programs of the day with flu vaccinations. ( There has been a squirrely view held by some that the unsanitary nature of some innoculation procedures of soldiers in Kansas who unknowingly had the flu, may have spread the disease by bodily fluids exchange......???)

b) they don't know much at all.

"AstraZeneca to be exempt from coronavirus-vaccine liability calims in most countries" - Reuters July 30th 2020

https://www.bitchute.com/video/LFUPDavxA67o/

"You can't have a 3 month safety trial and know what the long term effects are"

But vaccine companies already are free of liability from any negative short term or long term effects of vaccine injury within the USA:

National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Childhood_Vaccine_Injury_Act

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986 (42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to 300aa-34) was signed into law by United States President Ronald Reagan as part of a larger health bill on November 14, 1986. NCVIA's purpose was to eliminate the potential financial liability of vaccine manufacturers due to vaccine injury claims in order to ensure a stable market supply of vaccines,...

What happened to the AnGes/Osaka University home-grown vaccine, have those trials been scrapped ?