A threatening phone call

‘a threatening phone call’ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/08/how-astrazeneca-vaccine-was-shelved/ 8th November 2023 In March 2021, The Telegraph was one of the first newspapers to imply a causal link between the jab and blood clots after Norwegian scientists suggested a possible mechanism. On the day we published the story we received a threatening phone call from a senior official at the MHRA warning that The Telegraph would be banned from future briefings and press notices if we did not soften the news. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/medicines-and-healthcare-products-regulatory-agency From FDA to MHRA: are drug regulators for hire? https://www.bmj.com/content/377/bmj.o1538 June 2022 Industry money saturates the globe’s leading regulators. The BMJ found that the majority of regulators’ budget—particularly the portion focused on drugs—is derived from industry fees Another well-known Cambridge academic got in touch to complain about our “disgraceful fear-mongering headline” on the story, claiming that it would discourage vaccine uptake and cost lives. We politely pointed out that hiding the facts from people was not helpful and could also cost lives. The academic did not respond. In February this year, TikTok removed an audio clip in which I discussed whether the benefit of vaccination was worth the risks for young people, claiming it had breached community guidelines. After we showed that the Government’s own website acknowledges the link, the clip was reinstated. All of this shows a troubling paternalism in government, academia and some media outlets who believe that the public is not capable of weighing up the pros and cons of medical interventions and so must be shielded from the truth.