Analysis Breaking

Breaking: trials suggest new vaccine 90% effective, WHO calls for caution

A coronavirus vaccine developed by pharmaceutical company Pfizer is being hailed as the key to a return to normality after trials indicated a 90% effectiveness. The BBC featured Sir John Bell of the University of Oxford saying ‘with some confidence’ that it will mean a return to normality by the spring.

These are interim results and the World Health Organisation (WHO) has urged caution, while concerns have been raised over the transportability of the vaccine, which has to be stored at extremely low temperatures of around -70 to -80C, and about the timescales for mass production and the durability of protection.

However, the news is the first glimmer of light after a long year in which Boris Johnson’s mismanagement of the UK’s response to the crisis has been calculated to have led to tens of thousands of needless deaths and one of the worst COVID-driven economic collapses of any major nation.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. Russia already has a working vaccine ‘apparently’, though international media is at pains to dismiss it and even if it turns out to be all they say it is, we will never use it, preferring to pay American multinational anything they ask. The same is true of 3 Chinese developed vaccines.
    It wasn’t so long ago that we cooperated with other countries and published data. This search for a vaccine has been an unedifying race to patent first and make money.

    1. Any advance made by Russia – the new enemy – will be dismissed by “international media”. Medicine made huge strides during the USSR period and that was dismissed too!

  2. Must be a winner if Nandys pal big pharma Smittys advising Pfizer..Doesn’t it make you proud to think Smitty strikes again to save the world as well has helping to save the world from Corbyn.

      1. I don’t . I smell a pump and dump. The biotech company who invented it have already taken the money. Pfizer can’t be trusted. They have a whole trail of l corruption and lawsuits behind them wherever they roam. There will almost certainly be no effective vaccine for coronavirus any more than there will be for rhinovirus. But especially not this year or next. If I’m wrong feel free to call me out 6 months from now.

      2. M – You are of course entitled to your opinion no matter how …….

  3. Steve H your not getting somthing from big pharma as well as the knight are you stevie?….Getting a bit tight at HQ I understand,so the job might be on the line now the membership are bailing out because of the enabler stance you’ve taken…Remember that loyalty means nix to the knight led Labour party.

    1. Joseph – I’m just pleased that thanks to unprecedented international scientific co-operation multiple vaccines from many different worldwide sources are reaching the end of their evaluation and testing phase and many appear to be giving positive results. Why aren’t you pleased by this good news?

  4. Developed by Pfizer scientists? Everything so vague; who will get it? How long does immunity last? Where will it be manufactured & by whom?

    1. Steve – Does it matter who has developed it, multiple other scientists are on the brink of finalising their research on vaccines that use a similar innovative approach.?
      It was reported a few days ago that GPs had been written to so they could prepare for giving vaccines to care home residents, staff and the vulnerable next month. The other priority is obviously NHS staff. The order of priority has apparently been published. (The over 80s get it first)
      How long it will last will obviously be revealed in time.
      I don’t know, does it matter. The UK has pre-purchased its supply.

      1. Of course it matters. This could alter our DNA or cause T cells to over react in some people. You don’t just accept a totally new kind of vaccine like this willy nilly. Also it will cost hundreds of billions for 2 shots each person over 50 plus all the vulnerable. We’ve bought 10 million doses so far that means vaccination for 5 million. I don’t intend being one of them.

      2. lundiel – This vaccine has so far been tested on over 43,000 volunteers across (I think) 6 countries without any adverse effects.
        Although this is not the primary consideration how much is not having a vaccine costing.
        I have every confidence that a vaccine, this or any other, will not be released in the UK before it has passed the relevant safety checks.

      3. lundiel – I haven’t seen any such reports, can you please post a link.

      4. lundiel – Thanks for the link but unfortunately it doesn’t work.

      5. You are so desperate to believe, you write stuff like this: “This vaccine has so far been tested on over 43,000 volunteers across (I think) 6 countries without any adverse effects.”
        You are a dangerous man SteveH.

      6. lundiel – Is it untrue?
        Have you managed to sort out that link yet?

      7. lundiel – I got fed up of waiting, here is the link
        The side effects sound very similar to the flu vaccine I took last week. I do remember that one person had what at first appeared to be an adverse reaction and the trial was instantly halted until it was established that his symptoms weren’t caused by the vaccine.
        Coronavirus vaccine trial participants report day-long exhaustion, fever and headaches — but say it’s worth it

      8. Yes it’s untrue. Also half of the test cases were given a placebos.
        And look it up yourself you lazy git.

      9. lundiel – I’ve posted your link for you, you lazy incompetent git.

      10. And, they’ve no idea how successful it is. The only way to know that is to inject those vaccinated with the virus.

      11. lundiel – Yes they have, they are reporting a 90% success rate.
        I of course accept that it is impossible to know how long the immunity will last yet. Time will tell.
        I also remember seeing on TV a few weeks ago that they had been conducting challenge trials to establish its efficacy. which is what you are describing.

      12. “The side effects sound very similar to the flu vaccine I took last week. I do remember that one person had what at first appeared to be an adverse reaction and the trial was instantly halted until it was established that his symptoms weren’t caused by the vaccine.”
        That was another vaccine, the one currently under development by Oxford. It’s nothing like the flue vaccine you moron.

      13. lubdiel – Before calling people morons perhaps you should learn a bit of basic English comprehension first. I was very clearly referring to the symptoms not the vaccine. You can also add very uncomfortable aching joints to the list of symptoms from the flu jab.

      14. More like a first class honours degree in the bleedin obvious

      15. All medicines can have side effects on some people ranging from minor (common) to severe (uncommon). And the subjects givenb the placebo are obvs not included in the 90% success rate. Maybie lundiel is an anti-vaxxer?

      16. Dear Marty. I’m not an anti vaxer, I have my flu jab every year, much good it does. But I’m not a moronic cabbage either and Pfizer don’t have a great rep so I think I’ll wait a while.

      17. Unless you are in your 70s or 80s or an NHS/Care worker you probably won’t have much choice but to wait a while.

      18. fao SteveH – It matters when a compliant public sit back & just accept what they are told,,,,,asking questions is healthy & a major role of the 4th Estate in a healthy democracy. MSM refuses to ask difficult questions & our children are being taught the same. The most dumb questions are those you don’t ask.

    2. There no more chance of Pfizer giving us an effective vaccine in the next 12 months than there is Serco giving us an effective tracka nd trace system. AstraZenica made similar claims late spiring that they could have a vaccine by September and the press just repeated it verbatim from a PR press release without any scrutiny at all. It never materialised.

      1. M – I think you will find that because of the passage of time the various drug companies are much further on in the testing and certification process so they can be more confident about their progress. As other vaccine companies using the same ‘novel’ methodology are reporting similarly encouraging results I guess there is a minuscule possibility that there is a worldwide conspiracy that involves all the pharma companies, university researchers and regulators.
        Who knows , you may be proved right but I doubt it.

  5. It’s the final part of Melinda the Merciless’s evil plot to implant mind control devices in us so we won’t see Windows 10 for the piece of shit it is.

    1. Dave – My Mum will be one of those who are first in line for this. I’ll ask her to watch out for any subliminal messages from Bill and report back.

      1. How old are you judas H eleven and a half..Keen to get mummy to take smittys cure from the former snake oil salesman ,now on the Pfizer big Pharma vaccine…..I hope you’re not waiting for the inheritance chum,the Caribbean island is but a dream in the wind.for you no matter what the knight and his misfits have promised.

  6. Banter apart
    The rush to get a vaccine out there is dependent on cutting corners and who is bunging the government,
    The most vulnerable also have compromised immune systems which reduces effectiveness, so nowhere near a game changer
    Truth Defence
    £17 billion of Covid19 contracts awarded to private companies since April, £5 billion unreported
    Oh what a tangled web

      1. Yes Good Law Project
        Not Truth Defence
        They are the folk challenging EHRC report
        Back to vaccine, Professor from Newcastle University on BBC News this afternoon was scathing about rushing this vaccine into general population
        Should be small runs in small communities over a long period of time to allow any side effects to come through

      2. Doug – As I understand it all the normal trials have been conducted but because of the urgency some have been done in parallel rather than serially.
        Effectively supply will dictate a relatively slow initial roll out and apart from NHS & Care staff the first in line for a jab are the relatively small (especially since the cull) cohort of over 80s.

      3. hmmm Doug, “Should be small runs in small communities over a long period of time to allow any side effects to come through”

        Not good “monetising” Doug… won’t persuade hedge fund operators who paid £2,000 EACH to listen to “Vaccine Tsar”… who knows that she knows little about vaccines – Tory KATE BINGHAM. Kate Bingham leaked SIGNIFICANT COMMERCIAL VALUE… market sensitive #10 decided information to hedge funds.

        Bingham gave heads up on privileged information to the usual parasites. It would normally be called malfeasance as she is govt appointed. It would also be normally seen as collaboration with insider traders.

        But Bingham is married to a Tory MP … Jessy Norman i think he’s called. Like Dido Harding and her husband. All a tight band of chums.

        Funny how Tories spread OUR many billions THICKLY amongst their 1% clique of cronies, scroungers, snouters, cunning consultants and other daylight bandits.

        Now, who endorsed Johnson and Cummings to govern this country??? Ah
        W. M.D Tony Blair & Co

      4. windchimes – I very much doubt that Blair influenced many. Unfortunately it was the ‘working class’ (C2DE) that endorsed Boris with their votes and put him into office with an 80 seat majority. For the first time ever more of them voted Tory than voted Labour.

  7. SteveH
    The scientists are not splitting hairs here, they are poles apart, if in doubt do nowt, gonna let you take one for the team
    Good Luck

  8. This is a novel vaccine using technology never used before that interferes directly with the cell replication mechanisms so genetic damage is quite possible.
    Science may have advanced a lot but it is still not capable of accurately predicting all the possible adverse affects of new drugs and this is much more complicated and animal studies are not 100% reliable.
    Genetic damage can cause damage to embryos or even cause cancer – some of it affecting the next generation.
    Without adequate long-term safety studies this sort of damage won’t be detected.
    Think I will wait a few years until it is proven safe.

    1. It’s ok, SteveH is willing to be a guinea pig 🐷. I can’t be sure he has human DNA but I am sure he’s a moron.

    2. Iain – That’s one interpretation but another is that they have ‘snipped off’ the bit of the virus that attaches to the host cells. This does not infect the recipient but prompts the immune system to produce an immune cells in response to the RNA. This technology if it proves successful (as seems likely) will facilitate new vaccines for a whole range of viruses that we currently don’t have vaccines for.
      As far as I can see your claims that it will genetically modify the vaccine recipient is complete and utter bollocks. In fact as it is not a live vaccine and doesn’t infect the recipient it appears to be intrinsically safer.

      1. That is not correct. The RNA is transcribed and translated in the cells of the recipient to produce the proteins that make the ‘spike’. Only then does the body induce the immune response (via antigen presenting cells). So there is a risk, I don’t know how much of a risk this, it may well be low, but it is in uncharted territory and in normal times this would likely require much longer trials. Its not that far removed in principle from cas9 gene editing which is outlawed in European countries for testing on humans because its risks are still unknown.

      2. M – Really, I don’t claim to be a geneticist but to my layman’s eyes there doesn’t seem to be much of a relationship between what you describe and the CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing process. Perhaps you could explain for all our benefits the similarities between the two processes.
        I do find it odd that so many extremely eminent scientists don’t seem to share your concerns.

      3. And I find it odd that so many extremely eminent scientists DO and yet are regarded by the MSM as non-credible. Who gets to decide this? It appears to be someone with an ulterior motive rather than anyone who’s taken the Hippocratic oath.

    3. Thalidomide, Celebrex and Bextra come to mind – the latter two were produced by Pfizer. Pfizer was forced to pay out 2.3billion dollars in a lawsuit settlements for covering up evidence in their own trials. Of course 2.3bn is peanuts to them. So I wouldn’t assume they’ve learned any lesson.

      1. M – .. I note you haven’t even made an attempt to defend your your bollocks about it genetically altering the vaccine recipient

      2. M…don’t argue with Judas H,torys always question the science especially when hes using mum as a human Guiana pig.

  9. SteveH vaccine trials usually take 2-3 years MINIMUM. The media are claiming this vaccine could be ready by January, even xmas. There is no shortcut to finding the a yearly seasonal effect of a vaccine on a person in less than a year. And even with parallel trials you aren’t going to shave of 2 years, and that is without explaining why parallel trials don’t happen all the time.

      1. lundiel – Isn’t this just standard procedure for all vaccines. Can you think of a reason why this might be the case.
        I accept you don’t have any confidence in our regulatory institutions but many of us prefer to place our trust in them instead of antivax conspiracy sites like

      2. Every time I make s comment you disagree with you mention global research, a site I never visit. It appears that you are desperate to tar me with the antivax brush. You really are a snidey tosser.

      3. Hahahaha you creepy little fuck. That wasn’t an admission of anything. I know of many sites. Take your head out of your arse.

    1. M – Your are of course entitled to your opinion but unless you happen to be a virologist that’s all it is.

      1. I’m not a virologist but I am a geneticist. Aren’t we all here to contribute opinions?

      2. M – Really, did someone buy you one of those DNA kits for your birthday.

    2. They called for it and got it. Some time ago. (And no I don’t have a link or the time to look for one, but doubters no doubt do!)

  10. SteveH
    Gonna have to stop this fight, much as we could never tire of M punching you out, Queensferry rules and all that

  11. steveH Yes really. For 13 years. What else can I say… you are entitled to your opinions.

    1. M – I would be interested to hear your explanation in laymans of how this vaccine genetically alters the recipients DNA.

      1. Well I have no idea if it will alter the DNA, nor does Pfizer. But thats not really the point so I’ll try explain simply anyway: DNA is transcribed in the cell to produce RNA. There are different kinds of RNA but for our purposes you can just think of mRNA which is a reverse copy of a piece of your DNA that is necessary to produce proteins.
        Almost very part of your entire body – except water and minerals – is made of proteins and all is made from RNA. This vaccine very cleverly uses the cells equipment (ribosomes, enzymes organelles – all also made of proteins) to translate this RNA into new proteins as if it was the cells own RNA. The problem is that there are an almost infinite number of different and complex proteins and RNAs in the body – each with a very specific task (or not). Any slight alterations or error in translation of DNA>RNA>protein can create a protein thats either harmless, deleterious or lethal. We are skipping the DNA part but the problem is that RNA and proteins can and do alter and effect DNA>RNA>protein pathways naturally. The human body is extremely complex, there are 20,000 protein making genes and about the same number that don’t make protein but still have function in translation of those other proteins. And each gene has many variants and functions. BUT (don’t fall asleep yet) it gets even more complex when it comes to immunity – there is a lot more genetic variation with immune related genes between people than any other genes. For good reason – good immune requires maximum variation. . Interfering with the immune response by injecting attenuated viruses really just mimics what our body would do naturally if it came across a virus – the immune response as you described is induced by AP Cells. But many viruses are wise to this in evolutionary terms – and is why there is no vaccine for the common cold or HIV – they have their own immunity. Back to Pfizer: Their vaccine (as I understand it) is using your own cells to produce the proteins found on the surface of the virus. This could have unknowns effects because its hard to know exactly how the protein>RNA interactions will interfere with other ones naturally occurring in the cell. Its the endless quest of geneticisis to understand these complex and often subtle and often undetectable interactions for all genes in the body. Now it could be that nothing harmful happens, but the only way to know that is to test it, and test it and test it again. My opinion is that this should require WAY more testing than using the traditional attenuated virus type vaccine for all the reasons I just explained. In the same way that brain surgery is more risky than fixing a broken leg one requires much more caution. If you are still with me now we can now also get back to the politics: It would be a major breakthrough if it works (and I hope it does) but that’s also the reason to be sceptical for me. My original comment was that it won’t see the light of day for some time. I think this is more liklely than them pushing through a poorly tested vaccine . As with most coronavirus and flu vaccines the efficacy is likely to be much poorer than they claim. so the results of the trial would have to be spectacular and long term to justify any serious risk of distributing it nationwide by the end of the year with such short trials. (but who knows, this is Pfizer and the Tory govnt we are talking about here) . Finally I will leave you with a question: – how do you test a vaccine isn’t going to have long term effects if its only been in your possession for 6 months? You don’t need a virologist or any scientist to answer that.

      2. M – Thanks for your reply, I’ll study it in the morning when my mind is a little fresher.

  12. SH – “I very much doubt that Blair influenced many.”

    My point as you well know is that Blair ENDORSED Johnson instead of Jeremy on the MSM. He was asked the prepared question and he gave the prepared answer.

    Of course since the creature’s IRAQ lies causing the deaths of over a million according to the Oxford Iraq Study Group, Blair is neither believed nor trusted “by many.”

    The widespread distrust of Blair was also intensified after Dr David Kelly’s suspicious death and being found propped up against a tree, with signs the body had been moved, then the IMMEDIATE launch of an inquiry by the creature Blair, guaranteed to kick questions into the long grass. I do not believe Dr Kelly killed himself.

    So yes SH it is clear that Blair’s endorsement of Johnson would not have influenced many. As i’ve posted before, check the election map. The areas which voted “LEAVE” refused to accept “Constructive Ambiguity” to spin Starner’s REMAIN “People’s” Vote campaign to erase their choice.

    Your Starmer’s REMAIN ZEALOTRY cost us the election. Check the map. Jeremy like Dianne was reelected as always with above THIRTY THOUSAND VOTES EACH‼️ They KNOW that Jeremy has never been and is not now or likely ever be an anti-Semite.

    The people in the heartlands know it too. It was the refusal to honour their CLEAR democratic choice and voice, then insult them by calling them racists then insulting them further with the laughable so rightly LAUGHED at ” Constructive Ambiguity”.

    Jeremy’s Labour won in Putney. REMAIN lost us the election nationally FPTP. Starmer dumped public support of REMAIN as soon as he became leader. He know he pushed it so we would lose the heartlands.

    Ask AH Shill hunt post monitor tool, to point out my post about Starmer dropping remain, just after he deceived the membership to grab the leadership.

    It was White Flag Man Allan Howard’s APPEASEMENT in the form of REMAIN, which handed our win to the Tories.

    Neither A/S nor anything else caused that. Brexit was the pivot of the election. Were it A/S, or “too “Left”, then Berger, Soubrey, Ummuna, the Lib Dem PRIME MINISTER … can’t remember her name… the Limp Dims would ALL be triumphant now. They are not. They lost. The electorate REJECTED every single one of them and their LIES‼️

  13. Why am I sceptical about the vaccine? I want to be wrong but it has been endorsed by BoJo & chums in super quick time. Sputnik 5 vaccine is criticised by western media because it was not thoroughly tested…….double standards. I trust Big Pharma nor BoJo will be able to side step their civil responsibilities?

  14. Big Pharma has already got immunity from prosecution I’m afraid and Vaccines Are The Only Answer, apparently. Fate conspires to totally inadvertently enrich the elite once again. They’ll be weeping all the way to their Swiss bank!

    1. timfrom – I suppose it boils down to whether you think vaccines are a good idea.

Leave a Reply