Claims of a covid vaccine controversy have resurfaced following a report by The Telegraph, which cited a journal article questioning aspects of how deaths were reported during the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial conducted in 2020.
The paper referenced by the Telegraph was published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons and is not a clinical study or new scientific analysis. It does not present new mortality data, nor does it identify previously unknown adverse effects linked to the vaccine. Instead, it offers a critique of regulatory process during the emergency authorisation phase of the vaccine rollout.
Authored by Jeyanthi Kunadhasan and Corinne A. Michels, the paper focuses on how and when certain deaths among trial participants were recorded and summarised for regulators ahead of the US Food and Drug Administration’s Emergency Use Authorisation decision in December 2020. The authors argue that some deaths were logged weeks after they occurred and therefore were not discussed in detail at a key advisory committee meeting.
The paper does not conclude that the vaccine caused these deaths. Its central argument concerns reporting timelines and data handling during a public health emergency, rather than establishing a causal link between vaccination and mortality. The authors state that they are calling for greater transparency and reform in how adverse events are recorded and reviewed in future clinical trials.
The Telegraph article suggests that this information was withheld or only recently uncovered. However, health authorities and regulators note that Pfizer’s clinical trial data, including records of adverse events and deaths in both vaccine and placebo groups, have been publicly available for several years through regulatory submissions and court-ordered document releases.
The original trial data formed the basis of authorisation decisions in late 2020 and have since been supplemented by far larger real-world studies involving millions of people. These post-authorisation surveillance studies are widely regarded by scientists as more informative than early clinical trials when assessing population-level safety.
The Telegraph also claims that UK authorities are withholding vaccine-related mortality data. In response, public health bodies point out that extensive vaccination and death statistics are published regularly. The UK Health Security Agencyand the Office for National Statistics release ongoing surveillance reports analysing deaths by age group, time period and vaccination status. These datasets are publicly accessible and have been used by independent researchers to examine excess mortality trends since the pandemic began.
To date, analyses based on these sources have not established a causal link between COVID-19 vaccination and excess deaths. Public health experts note that excess mortality patterns are influenced by multiple factors, including COVID-19 infection waves, delayed access to healthcare, seasonal illness, heatwaves and demographic change.
Mainstream scientific bodies and regulators continue to state that COVID-19 vaccines significantly reduce the risk of severe illness and death. Known rare adverse effects are acknowledged, monitored and reflected in clinical guidance. The issues raised in the commentary paper have not prompted changes to vaccine safety recommendations or regulatory assessments.
While questions around transparency and regulatory process remain a legitimate subject of discussion, experts emphasise that the paper cited does not reveal new evidence and does not alter the existing scientific consensus on COVID-19 vaccine safety.
Also read: Cyprus rainfall brings relief as snow conditions improve
For more videos and updates, check out our YouTube channel
