18 March 2021
Dissing the Jab
MRDA
By John Watson
Great Philosophers? Who is your favourite? Aristotle? Descartes? Bertrand Russell? Mandy Rice-Davies? Mandy who? For the younger reader, Mandy was the attractive Welsh party girl who gave evidence at the trial of Stephen Ward, part of the Profumo affair which racked the British establishment in the 1960s, and her contribution to philosophy was the famous reply she gave in the witness box when told that Lord Astor denied her evidence that she had had an affair with him. The words, in the slightly extended form in which they have become famous:
“Well he would say that, wouldn’t he?”
Although Ms Rice-Davies became a celebrity after Profumo, with a circle of friends wide enough to include Margaret Thatcher and Andrew Lloyd-Webber, it was this response that was her contribution to modern philosophy, that earned her a place in the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations and which has given her immortality in the margins of countless official documents where the note “MRDA” is widely recognised as short for “Mandy Rice-Davies Applies”. They would say that, wouldn’t they?
So does the rule apply to the controversy regarding the Astra Zeneca vaccine where a number of EU jurisdictions have suspended its use because of concern that it may increase the incidence of blood clots? We do not have the scientific skills to analyse the evidence for this but, for the moment, suffice it to say that our regulators, the EU regulator and the WHO all consider the vaccine safe. Now let’s look at the matter in MRD terms.
Begin with us. The UK has charged into the vaccine programme and millions of us have had our first jab of AstraZeneca as part of a programme which has been widely sold by our leadership, from the Queen downwards. Many public figures have publicly put their arms where their mouths are to help persuade the public to accept inoculation. To discover a significant problem at this stage would be worse than embarrassing. Our authorities are adamant that all is well and the experience of the huge number of people who have had their jab would seem to bear this out, but nonetheless MRDA applies, doesn’t it?
Now let’s cross the Channel (or duck down under the Irish border) into Euroland. There, despite the views of the WHO and the EU Regulator, they suggest that there might be dangers based on the reaction of three young health workers in Norway and seven cases of the rare condition, Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis, in Germany. That is a convenient conclusion for those in the EU, including the leaders of Germany and France, who are currently under pressure because of the problems there have been about the speed of rollout, at a time when Brexit considerations make it particularly important to compare well with the UK. So much less embarrassing to say “our decision to proceed with great caution is justified in the light of the doubts that have emerged” than “unfortunately we cocked it up.” It would of course be better if they had not previously held the vaccine back from the over 65s on the basis that it was ineffective for that age group and then changed their minds, but there we are. The margins of the reports of the French and German governments should, like those of our own health ministry, be decorated with those cautionary initials, MRDA.
So what are the possible outcomes? A finding that the vaccine could cause blood clots would impede the roll out in Britain, Belgium, Canada the Czech Republic and other countries which are merrily jabbing away. Whether it would stop the programme altogether must depend upon how many casualties there were. In theory, medical ethics begin with the principle laid down by Hippocrates – “First, do no harm” – but that has to be taken in context. In the same way as a doctor might decide that it is best for a patient to carry through a risky operation, so it might be in the interest of a patient to accept the small risk of a clot in the interest of inoculation against a dangerous disease. It is a question of balance, and it is no coincidence that it is Frank Vandenbroucke, the Health Minister of Belgium – a country with a particularly high death level – who said that:
“For us, the balance is clear and clean, it’s a race against time.”
The other outcome is that it all turns out to be nonsense and that the various governments involved have to perform a volte face and restart the programme. That will not play well with citizens who already believe that they were far too late off the mark and many will suggest that politics were being played, putting the joy of dissing a UK product before public health. And elections are coming up in France and Germany. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear!
However this plays, we have one piece of advice for the observer. Get an ink stamp made up with the letters “MDRA” and one of those ink pads that you need to go with it. Before this is over you are going to need them.
