Would it satisfy everyone, if vaccines manufacturers delvedeep into providing factual information so as to establish beyond doubt thatefficacy of their particular vaccine was to a high degree in line with their data from clinical trials that saydenoted that the efficacy was 90% to 95%? That is that 10% to 5% were those whoshowed side effects that were found during clinical trials if the volunteerswere representative in nature. The credibility of the MNCs would be toestablish beyond doubt if they prove to the people in practice as well asduring clinical trials the efficacies matched so as to leave all causes fordoubt and thus ascertain that efficacies were in line with the clinical trialsand thus that the vaccines were more protective than could have harmfuleffects. Would opening up of the companies restore their credibility and thus notmean that there is cause to worry about the doubting Thomases, who regardvaccines as not totally safe? For example could particular co-morbid conditionsof volunteers during the clinical trials mirror the same effects of those inthe new mass inoculation? Would it be clear if the companies reveal in detailthat various specific co-morbid conditions had a particular chance of leadingto failure of the vaccine that was noted during the clinical trials? Vaccinecompanies owe it to the recipients a clear guideline as to what may happenduring mass inoculation which should be in line with clinical trials.Prevention would be better than a later post-mortem.
