Britain issues anaphylaxis warning on Pfizer vaccine after adverse reactions

I'm grateful to the brave people who were the first to be vaccinated. They make it safer for the rest of us.

As more people are vaccinated, we'll have a larger sample size and more accurate data on the frequency and severity of side effects for specific populations. We owe the people who are vaccinated now a debt of gratitude.

Here is a warning of Pfizer's vaccine adverse reactions, there we see announcements of its safe and effective use. Which is correct? Because of who is talking? How not to be confused?

This only an example. We have been in bewilderment all the while, after being bombarded heavily by varied reports from media, experts, scientists, and the-know-all since the pandemic began.. Incredible..

This is not unusual with the introduction of a new drug. No medicine is 100% effective or 100% safe. Nothing in life is, life is one continuous risk assessment.

*"..However, the allergic reactions may have been caused by a component of Pfizer's vaccine called polyethylene glycol, or PEG, which helps stabilize the shot and is not in other types of vaccines..."*

I was surprised to read this.

I used PEG many times in the past when woodworking. When applied to green wood it enhances the drying / curing process and stops splitting and cracking.

I never thought it was a "dangerous" substance, but then I never thought it was an ingredient in medicines.

One learns??????

If it is that stabilizing substance and not the vaccine itself, presumably something can be substituted for it.

The name reminded me of polypropylene glycol, which is antifreeze.

Here is a warning of Pfizer's vaccine adverse reactions, there we see announcements of its safe and effective use. Which is correct? Because of who is talking? How not to be confused?

Paying attention is a good way to avoid confusion. Every health measure you can think of is safe when used properly and under medical vigilance. People that have a propensity to allergies may have a dangerous reaction against anything that is introduced into the body, so they are not the target of vaccination, their protection will come as the people around them are immunized. Allergies are one of the perfectly valid reasons to not be vaccinated.

Antibiotics are really good, but not on people allergic to them, surgeries are life saving, but may not be suitable for people that have bleeding disorders, magnetic resonance helps a lot to identify health problems but may not be used for people with older pacemakers, etc. etc. Vaccines are used after consultation with a doctor because of this.

Many people have anti-PEG antibodies, I'm surprised they chose PEG to stabilize their vaccine.

Anyway, here is interesting article about this from a group that tried to bring attention to this issue a while back:

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/pfizer-covid-vaccine-allergic-reactions/?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=defender&fbclid=IwAR333SDU5un1zIRb3p4PS0p0R7yM57HPxATxzP9irmtXx-HghZVlkZsIp_E

Anyway, here is interesting article about this from a group that tried to bring attention to this issue a while back:

If the best source of information you could find for something is an organization well know for repeatedly lying, and misrepresenting information, that should be a good time to reconsider if what you want to prove is actually wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children's_Health_Defense

"*According to an analysis by NBC News, the group is one of three major sources of false claims on vaccination shared on the internet, the other two being the fake news site Natural News and the website Stop Mandatory Vaccination*"

In this case they continue with their invalid generalizations and misrepresentations of the real situation.

They present rates of antibodies against PEG as if that would be enough to produce adverse reactions, it is not. They want to misrepresent PEG allergy as if it was an argument to consider the molecule as "dangerous" even if food allergies are much more common (which is not enough to label all food as dangerous materials). They misrepresent the criticism that having antibodies against something is not enough to produce adverse reactions (after all the majority of people have the antibodies, but are not allergic to the countless products that contain PEG), and instead they replace the real argument with the false one that people don't produce those antibodies, then go on and on about how everything in the vaccine is supposed to produce adverse effects, but fail at explaining how tens of thousands of people could have been inoculated without presenting those life-threatening problems. etc. etc.

It is difficult to think someone would even consider such a collection of tergiversations and lies as worth of attention, but unfortunately science deniers do not have the evidence on their side, so they have to use deceit and demonstrably false information to sustain their points. I can just imagine what they would say if a press release from a vaccine developer was found to contain as much lies and mistakes as this, but for some reason as long as the lies support their point they are perfectly OK.

People prone to allergies are not the target for vaccines, it is desirable and expected to skip vaccinating them, its the same as with pregnant women or people with other immune related problems. They have a valid medical reason to be excluded, and their protection will depend on the herd immunity, there is no secret or conspiracy to hide this.

The data of the American-German duo Pfizer/BioNTech on the Covid-19 vaccine will be checked by nearly 20 independent American experts in order to recommend or not to authorise an unprecedented experiment in global transparency and whose flip side is that it has prevented the United States from being the first to vaccinate its citizens. China, as he used to apply to developed nations, had misleading vaccine effects. Yet US scientists are working hard to address the questions that are not negatively affected by the vaccine. Yet US scientists are working tirelessly to address the questions that are not negatively affected by the vaccine. It doesn't matter who's vaccine is going to work first on us the only thing for them is the better outcomes.