Australian Senators vs modeRNA

IN C19 Prey
  • Updated:6 months ago
  • Reading Time:11Minutes
  • Post Words:2842Words
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Here are my chosen clips from the Senate Hearing vs. Moderna held on Aug 3rd, 2023.

Held on the 3rd of August, 2023, here are the clips I thought people most needed to know (that don’t sit through hours of political chess like I do), but you can watch the Full Session in it’s original format on ParlView:

modeRNA Australia Representatives

Senators grill Moderna Australia Officials

  1. 2min—Senator Rennick to Aussie modeRNA officials
    • “What percentage of profits does Moderna play out back into helping people who are injured by the vaccine?” “Policy matters are for the government to decide; I can’t comment.” ‘What about a moral social conscience of putting some of your profits back into helping victims of the vaccine?” “We take safety of our vaccines very seriously.”
  2. 2min—Senator Antic Grills modeRNA officials
    • “The rates of serious adverse reactions are occurring at a rate of 1 in 800 people vaccinated. Now, according to your own clinical trial data, do you accept that that is the rate and if not, how does your overall rate of serious adverse events compare with routine traditional vaccine products such as flu vaccines and the like?”
      • modeRNA: I’m not aware of that.
      • Antic: Do you think you should be aware of that?
    • You can’t tell me the rates of serious adverse events. You realise you’ve come to a Senate hearing today for the purposes of exactly that question and you can’t tell me the rates of serious adverse reactions to your product, which I find extraordinary.”
  3. 3min—modeRNA 3 Aug 2023 (w/- Senator Canavan)
    • Wow, Moderna thinks they prevented asymptomatic transmission back when no one was getting sick anyway. Fascinating flip the switch or rather … great marketing idea!… the lie we live.. :/
  4. 5min—Senator Hanson grills modeRNA officials
    • There are thousands upon thousands of people—because I’ve got pages and pages of adverse side effects from people having Moderna—and what’s very disturbing is people that have reproductive system and breast disorders.
    • At this point in time we haven’t identified any safety signals in regards to what you’ve asked

Clip 1 Rennick

Senator Rennick to Aussie modeRNA officials

  • Dr Jane Leong, Vice President, Medical Affairs
  • Dr Chris Clarke, Director, Scientific Leadership
  • Dr Rachel Dawson, Executive Director, Medical Affairs – Respiratory Vaccines

Thank you. I’m Jane Leong, head of medical affairs for Asia Pacific and Latin America, I’m a general practitioner by training.

And I am Rachel Dawson. I’m the Global Medical Lead for COVID and a pediatrician by training.

My name is Dr. Chris Clarke and I’m the Director of Scientific Leadership for Moderna in the Asian Pacific region, and I have a pHd in Pathology.

What percentage of profits does Moderna plough back into helping people who are injured by the vaccine?

… Policy matters for government to decide I can’t comment.

So Moderna doesn’t put any of its profits back into helping the victims of injuries from the Moderna vaccine. Is that correct?

Moderna is a company that’s focused on manufacturing vaccines. The matter of indemnity for vaccine supplies is a matter for government.

So you’re not prepared to underwrite the risk of your own vaccine. You’re not prepared to actually put money where your mouth is when it comes to the safety of your vaccines. Is that correct?

We take safety of our vaccines very seriously. We have a very good pharmacology process in place in fact a comprehensive one. However, I would need to reiterate that indemnities are a matter for policy makers.

What about a moral social conscience of putting some of your profits back in the helping victims of the vaccine? (06)

Clip 2 Antic

Senator Antic Grills modeRNA officials

A recent study found that the rates of serious adverse reactions are occurring at a rate of 1 in 800 people vaccinated. Now, according to your own clinical trial data, do you accept that that is the rate and if not, how does your overall rate of serious adverse events compare with routine traditional vaccine products such as flu vaccines and the like? (07) (08) (09) (10)

I’m not aware of that.

Do you think you should be aware of that?

I think if you’re able to provide that report, then…

I mean, this is part of the frustration of this process is if you were here, we could provide you with that. But I mean, this has been widely reported. You are a manufacturer of vaccines. I find it difficult to think that you wouldn’t be aware of this report.

What I can tell you is that the rate of serious adverse events in our very large randomized controlled trials was actually in a similar range to what was observed in the placebo.

You can’t tell me the rates of serious adverse events. You realise you’ve come to a Senate hearing today for the purposes of exactly that question and you can’t tell me the rates of serious adverse reactions to your product, which I find extraordinary.

What I can tell you is that on the TGA website, it reports there are 1.2 reports…

That’s the TGA. I’m not asking about the TGA. I’m asking about Moderna. You must have that information. You are a multinational company. You’re before a Senate inquiry and you cannot tell me the rates of serious adverse… I mean, it’s quite extraordinary what you’re telling me.

Awkward Silence…

Nobody can tell me that?

Mic drop.

So, I can provide that information on notice. Well, I can tell you is that we have observed in our clinical trials, we observed no safety concerns. There were no imbalances of serious adverse events, adverse events of special interests or deaths. (11)

Clip 3 Canavan

modeRNA 3 Aug 2023 (Canavan)

However, I can add that there was a COVE study, which was our large Phase III study, which was used for licensure of SpikeVax early in the pandemic, demonstrated that vaccination with the primary series not only helped to prevent severe infections and mortality, but also prevented milder and even asymptomatic infection. And the importance of that is that prevention of asymptomatic infections can make an important contribution to reducing viral transmission. (12)

When was that study completed?

This was the phase 3 study early on, the very first study that led to the licensure of…

Excuse my ignorance, but what’s early on mean, late 2020, early 2021?

Late 2020.

Have you done any further studies with real world data?

So the real world data, there has been a systematic review and an analysis evaluating the spread of infection to family members, which is called the secondary attack rate by vaccination status, and it was found evidence of reduction in infectiousness from breakthrough cases of fully vaccinated individuals. And actually, our studies have investigated viral load and viral shedding in breakthrough cases. And the exploratory analysis suggested that viral load was around 100-fold lower and a duration of shedding was shorter in vaccinated individuals.

And when was that study completed?

And this was in 2021.

When in 2021?

I would have to get back with you with that answer.

Okay. Have you done, are you doing any ongoing investigations on this matter?

Moderna continues to do ongoing investigation on this topic.

On the transmission?

Yes.

Will that be publicly released? Or can you provide us with the most recent findings that you’ve got on that? I mean, to me, as a layperson, it just doesn’t seem to stack up. I mean, we were told by the experts that we reached 70, 80% vaccination, we would have a significant impact on the spread. We’d stop the spread. Our politicians told us it would stop the spread. Clearly, that hasn’t happened. So do you have a simple explanation for why very high rates of vaccination—higher than anyone expected over 90% in this country has clearly not stopped the spread of coronavirus?

As a reminder, the goal of vaccination is to prevent severe infection.

It’s not my question. It’s not my question. I mean, this is a, I’m sorry, Chair, but the witnesses here today have been extremely underwhelming that they, instead of answering a question, they take it back to a completely irrelevant matter. My question is, how can you explain to the Australian public some of whom were forced to take this vaccine, that despite the claims in your studies, despite the statements of our political leaders, that your vaccine would stop the spread. That’s what they said. They said it would stop the spread. It hasn’t happened. Why hasn’t it happened?

And just as a reminder that the virus has changed over time as well. But again, COVID-19 vaccinations, vaccination programs in general are primarily designed to protect individuals against infections of your disease.

Okay. Thank you, Chair. (13)

Clip 4 Hanson

Senator Hanson grills modeRNA officials

(Skipped a few minutes of modeRNA saying that they had “10 years” of trials to every question… )

What tests were done on people with that specific vaccination before it was released on the public? Regardless of what you’ve started 10 years ago, prior to that, the vaccine that was given to the public, where were your trials conducted and over what period of time?

So the trials were conducted worldwide over the course of the 11 months that I mentioned when over 30,000 individuals having received the vaccine in that time period.

Usually when you bring in a new vaccine onto the market, here in Australia, it is actually between seven to ten years that it must be trialled and tested before it’s actually allowed to be given to the public. Why was yours passed in such a short period of time of 11 months to be released on the public?

And that is because of my first comment of the fact that the mRNA platform was studied for over a decade. So this allowed the vaccine to be made within the 11 month time period and reminding you of the culmination of the years of research, government agencies and researchers who came together to make the vaccines that saved millions of lives.

And there’s thousands upon thousands of people because I’ve got pages and pages of adverse side effects from people having Moderna from you. And what’s very disturbing is people that have reproductive system and breast disorders. What tests were done there?

We have a safety signal detection system, that both we and the TGA do this kind of activity. And when we identify safety signals, we do update them into the product information. And at this point in time we haven’t identified any safety signals in regards to what you’ve asked it.

Senator Rannick asked you, was there any compensation paid from Moderna to the people of Australia who have been affected with adverse side effects and also death. What do you say to those people who have had adverse side effects from you, Moderna, or those that have actually died?

So, so indeed there is uhh, umm, umm, a matter of public record that the Australian government provided indemnities to vaccine suppliers.

I’m not asking about what the Australian government did. I’m asking you, what do you personally say to these people in Australia who have had adverse side effects, miscarriages, they’ve had ongoing health problems for possibly for the rest of their life that I’m pulled up constantly when I’m out in the public of people telling me about the problems they’ve had after being forced to have these injections. Now those people that have lost their loved ones also .. well one 21 year old who died after having a Moderna and a Pfizer vaccination. I will be truthful that she had both them. So, what do you say to those people?

So, firstly in any circumstances of loss of death it’s completely, I convey our condolences to the families. I would only say that in indemnities are a matter of policy for the government and I can’t provide further comment on that.

Would I… Well I ask you then, there are still people in this country are being forced to have the vaccination in order to have work. There are people who are out of work—won’t be employed because they’ve been forced to have the vaccination. Do you believe in today’s day and times when we’re past the pandemic that people should be forced to have this vaccination?

Moderna is a manufacturer of vaccines and we focus on manufacturing vaccines. We do not have a view on decisions taken by public health agencies or governments in relation to vaccine mandates. This is purely a matter for policymakers.

Well then I’ll ask you a question. Do you back your product to the hilt that it should or you know be given to people in order to work? Do you support your product that it will not have any adverse side effects or death on the Australian people?

Our product has been tested extensively and has been reviewed by and all the data reviewed by the therapeutic goods administration (TGA). Again, I iterate that we make vaccines. We focus on making vaccines. You do not have a view on vaccine mandates. (14)

These are the two bills relating to this Senate Hearing: (15)

  • “COVID-19 Vaccination Status (Prevention of Discrimination) Bill 2022 (16)
  • Fair Work Amendment (Prohibiting COVID-19 Vaccine Discrimination) Bill 2023″ (17)

The first hearing was held on the 2nd of May 2023. Download the Hansard transcript. (18)

See posts tagged:

Posts tagged Australian Government

References[+]

Penny (PennyButler.com)
Penny (PennyButler.com)

Truth-seeker, ever-questioning, ever-learning, ever-researching, ever delving further and deeper, ever trying to 'figure it out'. This site is a legacy of sorts, a place to collect thoughts, notes, book summaries, & random points of interests.