AstraZeneca trial
What was the government and institutional response when COVID vaccine trial participants reported severe adverse effects from the AstraZeneca vaccine?
When Brianne Dressen and another participant reported identical severe neurological injuries from the AstraZeneca vaccine trial, the NIH responded within 24 hours to their reports. Despite acknowledging these injuries, government messaging continued to promote vaccine safety, telling people to "go get your shot" while claiming they were just working on FDA paperwork. Ten days after the reports, two significant actions occurred: AstraZeneca was pulled from consideration in the United States, and the National Institutes of Health initiated a formal study to investigate neurological complications following COVID vaccines in general. This response highlighted the disconnect between official safety messaging and the serious adverse events being documented by trial participants.
Watch clip answer (00:47m)
VICE News
16:28 - 17:15
What happened to Brianne Dressen during the COVID-19 vaccine trials and how is she responding to her experience?
Brianne Dressen, a healthy school teacher and mother of two, volunteered to participate in COVID-19 vaccine trials but experienced severe traumatic side effects that dramatically changed her perspective on vaccines. Her negative experience was so significant that she transformed from being a vaccine proponent to becoming a critic and advocate for vaccine safety. As a result of her ordeal, Dressen is now pursuing legal action by filing a groundbreaking lawsuit against AstraZeneca that could potentially reshape the vaccine industry. She has also become an advocate through React19.org, working to raise awareness about vaccine injuries and pushing for greater transparency in public health decisions and policies.
Watch clip answer (00:48m)
VICE News
00:06 - 00:54
What are the potential implications of RFK Jr.'s appointment as Health and Human Services secretary for vaccine safety oversight and transparency?
RFK Jr.'s appointment as Health and Human Services secretary represents a significant shift in federal health policy, particularly regarding vaccine oversight. Given his history as a vaccine skeptic and President Trump's promise to "open up the books" on COVID vaccine controversies, this appointment signals a potential major investigation into vaccine safety protocols and pharmaceutical industry practices. The appointment comes at a time when vaccine injury cases like Brianne Dressen's are gaining attention, highlighting gaps in the current system's ability to address adverse reactions from clinical trials. This could lead to enhanced transparency requirements for pharmaceutical companies and more robust safety monitoring systems. The implications extend beyond individual cases to broader public health policy, potentially reshaping how vaccine trials are conducted and how adverse events are reported and compensated, fundamentally altering the relationship between government oversight and pharmaceutical accountability.
Watch clip answer (00:58m)VICE News
00:01 - 00:59
What legal action is being taken regarding alleged government censorship of vaccine injury victims on social media platforms?
Brianne Dressen and other vaccine injury advocates are pursuing legal action through lawsuits that involve subpoenaing evidence and going through discovery processes to prove government censorship. They allege the federal government, specifically the White House, directed social media platforms like Facebook to restrict or shut down their ability to share their experiences and advocate for vaccine injury awareness. The case is strengthened by recent admissions, including Mark Zuckerberg's acknowledgment that the White House pressured Facebook to censor content. If proven, this would represent a significant case of government collusion with private tech companies to silence victims discussing their medical experiences, which has broader implications for free speech and transparency in public health matters.
Watch clip answer (01:27m)
VICE News
55:18 - 56:46
What happened to Brianne Dressen when she volunteered for COVID-19 vaccine trials, and what legal action is she taking?
Brianne Dressen, a healthy school teacher and mother of two, volunteered for COVID-19 vaccine trials but experienced severe neurological complications following her participation. Her traumatic experience led her to file a groundbreaking lawsuit against AstraZeneca that could potentially transform vaccine safety protocols and accountability measures. Her case highlights critical issues surrounding vaccine transparency, medical responsibility, and the challenges faced by individuals who suffer vaccine-related injuries. The lawsuit aims to address the need for better informed consent processes and reform in vaccine safety protocols, representing a significant legal challenge that could have far-reaching implications for the vaccine industry.
Watch clip answer (00:16m)VICE News
00:38 - 00:54
What led to AstraZeneca's COVID-19 vaccine being pulled from consideration in the United States?
AstraZeneca's vaccine was removed from the U.S. market after trial participant Brianne Dressen and another person reported identical serious neurological complications to the National Institutes of Health in January 2021. Despite initial promises that the vaccine was safe and effective, these adverse events were not disclosed to participants during the trial phase. The NIH responded within 24 hours to their reports, and within 10 days, two significant actions occurred: AstraZeneca was pulled from consideration in the United States, and the NIH initiated a study to investigate neurological complications following COVID vaccines in general. This demonstrates how individual adverse event reports can directly impact regulatory decisions and public health policy.
Watch clip answer (01:22m)VICE News
15:53 - 17:15