I think I need to question the MHRA on the date discrepancies and their FOI answers

My old brain has taken a while to get to this but I'm on the case

Time and time again in nearly every FOI answer the MHRA has answered along the lines of “all the information we used to issue the EUA for the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is included in the Public Assessment reports which we have sent you already”.

But here are the key dates:

• October 2020 UK Government changes the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 to allow the MHRA to grant temporary authorisation of a covid-19 vaccine without needing to wait for the EMA

  UK changed the law to make the covid jabs legal

• Authorisation for the temporary supply of BNT162b2 was granted in the UK on 01 December 2020 based on information received from Pfizer’ trail between October 2020 and December 2020. But as the authorisation was dated the beginning of December it is really from October to November 2020 surely? Can you count just 1 day in a month as long-term data?

• MHRA issue the EUA for the Pfizer jab on 02 December 2020

• First Pfizer jab given on 08 December 2020

• EMA Public Assessment Report (which the MHRA keeps supplying me) was published 19th February 2021

• This updated MHRA Public Assessment Report published 04th June 2021 with no previous copies available but the original has been updated a few times since 02 December 2020, only a statement saying original text hasn’t changed. I think the update is for giving it to 12-15 year olds from the bottom statements at the end -

  • https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1112667/COVID-19_mRNA_Vaccine_BNT162b2__UKPAR___PFIZER_BIONTECH_ext_of_indication_11.6.2021.pdf

• MHRA’s marketing authorisation granted for the Pfizer jab following a European Commission (EC) decision on 21 December 2020 (PLGB 53632/0002).

• Automatically converted to a GB CMA on 01 January 2021

This is explained in this post:

MHRA, EMA and the CHMP

All the regulatory releases are supposedly on this page:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/regulatory-approval-of-pfizer-biontech-vaccine-for-covid-19

So when they kept telling me that the EUA was issued based on the information in the Public Assessment Report they were either factually incorrect or they have withheld documents they used which are dated prior to the official Public Assessment Report they admit to was published.

But when you read their EUA wording it almost matches - almost like a copy and paste job of selected bits - of the EMA Public Assessment Report, which wasn’t published for another 6 weeks.

But then there is another discrepancy.

In previous FOIs from them they state that the Pfizer jab was given authorisation by them, now they say they gave the temporary authorisation then a few weeks later the EU did it’s stuff under CHM, issued a marketing authorisation and the MHRA rubberstamped the change it as per the procedures.