Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Where’s the information for ‘informed consent’?

By Sally Beck | TCW Defending Freedom | August 13, 2021

THE NHS has a rather lovely, colourful, ‘easy to read’ form to be handed to people receiving Covid-19 vaccines. It explains in simple language why you should get it, what to expect when you’ve had it and how it will protect you from Covid. You sign your name to indicate that you have read the form, and that you understand and agree that you have given informed consent.

The only side-effects the easy-to-read form mentions are a sore arm, fatigue or headaches. Nowhere does it talk about blood clots that you can develop after the AstraZeneca shot, Bell’s palsy, which is facial paralysis that Pfizer has just added to its list of adverse reactions, or anaphylaxis that you can suffer if you’re allergic to any of the ingredients in any of the shots.

Sight of the form is as rare as a balanced BBC Covid report. According to a straw poll of ten people who suffered serious adverse reactions, none had been asked to sign a consent form, which means informed consent was not given. Most get to read about potential serious side effects only after they’ve received the shot. 

One woman, who does not want to be identified but let’s call her Julia, whose pro-vaccine father died after receiving the Pfizer vaccination in January, secretly filmed the ‘informed consent’ process at one of the UK’s biggest vaccine hubs. The 12-minute video, taken at the Greater Manchester Vaccination Centre, shows how little information you can expect before receiving what could be a life-changing jab.

It is no secret now that the AZ can cause vaccine-induced thrombosis (VITT), but official vaccinators say that it’s as rare as being struck by lightning, with a one in four million chance of developing blood clots. We know that the Medicine and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the body set up to protect us from Big Pharma, has recorded 73 deaths from VITT, with most occurring in the 50-59 age range, although it is still recommended to that group. Only under 40s are advised not to get the AZ jab.

Julia waits in line for 45 minutes to see the triage nurse. During that wait she could have been reading the public information leaflet that she must be given. At the triage booth a nurse tells Julia she is receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine but will not give her the ‘What To Expect After Your Covid-19 Vaccination’ leaflet beforehand. She tells her: ‘Once you’ve had your injection, you’ll be given an information leaflet, the important information is on page 5.’ (This is information about severe headaches, blurred vision, difficulty with speech, drowsiness, seizures and blood clots. All quite important information.)

Anxious, Julia asks about blood clots and side effects and is told: ‘I see thousands a week, half have side effects half don’t.’ The nurse does not say whether these were serious reactions or the 48-hour flu-like symptoms you might expect.

Julia is asked some basic questions about whether she is taking blood thinners, has suffered an allergic reaction to any vaccine or has ever taken part in a vaccine trial, then proceeds to the vaccine booth. The leaflets she would like are piled high, but Julia has to ask three times before she is given one, though she is allowed no time or space to read it. A team leader is called to reassure her. ‘The side effects you have from the AstraZeneca are the same as for the Pfizer and Moderna,’ she says. ‘They’re all the same.’ Wait though, the all-important page 5 contradicts that and says: ‘Not all Covid-19 vaccines are the same – some tend to cause more side effects at the first dose, others cause more side effects at dose two.’ It does not elaborate on which vaccine causes which.

The UK Medical Freedom Alliance (UKMFA), a campaign group that includes health professionals, scientists and lawyers, are outraged and concerned at the lack of informed consent. They have produced a fully referenced letter which says what information you should expect to receive before receiving a vaccination or any medical procedure. They are clear that the courts have decided that informed consent is part of English law, that you should be given information about treatment options available, what they involve and their risks and benefits. You must then base your decision on that advice. Your decision should be voluntary and not influenced by pressure from medical staff, friends or family.

Senior UK lawyer and retired army officer Anna de Buisseret, who is the head of the campaign group Lawyers For Liberty, says the whole thing is a shambles. She said: ‘We have had lots of reports that people are not being given the patient information leaflet that actually contains a lot of warnings about the side effects and what you need to do to ensure you have had a clinical individual risk assessment prior to going along for your injection.

‘The Pfizer leaflet says you should get an allergy test for all the ingredients, including the active one. You cannot be informed of that if you’re given the patient leaflet after you’ve had the injection, which is what is happening all over the place.

‘I went to clinics in my local community and have sufficient evidence that they were not obtaining informed consent from people and that people were dying and being seriously injured by the vaccine.

‘If you are injecting another person with this substance, it is entirely upon you [nurse, doctor or health practitioner] as the individual, because it is personal, civil and criminal liability you’re facing [if it goes wrong], to make sure you have obtained fully informed consent, freely given.

‘The problem is that an awful lot of vaccinators are not obtaining informed consent.

‘We [Lawyers For Liberty] are working with a senior NHS whistle-blower who is a surgeon who trains people in informed consent. I asked him to check the protocols that were being given to the vaccinators. He examined them and he said there was nothing in them about the law and informed consent. It was all about how to administer the injection.

‘Nurses and doctors are not routinely taught about the law or routinely taught about Nuremberg and what happened there. It appears the whole informed consent thing is being pretty roundly ignored.’

De Buisseret has tried, and failed (so far), to get the police to investigate the many Covid crimes she is looking into. She said: ‘The Covid response has not been legal, lawful, ethical or moral. So many different laws are being broken us lawyers are absolutely gobsmacked at the number being trashed. Nobody seems to care to uphold them. It is a crisis.’

August 13, 2021 Posted by | Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

Responsible journalism, RIP

By Liz Hodgkinson | TCW Defending Freedom | August 12, 2021

WHEN the American actress Jennifer Aniston declared that she would ‘unfriend’ anybody who had refused the Covid vaccine or was an anti-vaxxer, she gained thousands, if not millions, of new fans who agreed with her.

Since then, others have stepped in to say that the unvaccinated are no longer their friends.

For me, it is just the opposite. I fear I am fast losing friends among the vaccinated, among those who proudly proclaim that they have not only been double-jabbed, but will be queueing to have the booster, so-called, that will be ‘offered’ in the autumn.

Have these people, I wonder, read anything about the vaccines, studied how they work and what they do inside the body? I doubt it. Even journalists, who are supposed to have inquiring minds, have no hesitation in condemning those who have chosen not to be jabbed even while admitting that they are ignorant about vaccines.

The latest was Hilary Rose, writing in the Times on Monday. Having stated that she knew nothing about vaccines, she went on to say: ‘If the entire medical establishment says that something is for my own good and – crucially – those around me, then who am I to disagree?’

But Hilary, love, the entire medical establishment is not saying that these vaccines are for your own good. Far from it. All over the world, eminent doctors, scientists and virologists – those who DO know something about vaccines – are asking awkward questions about their efficacy and safety.

Hilary blithely ignores all this and instead denounces the ‘rabid anti-vaxxer conspiracy theorists who foam at the mouth in Trafalgar Square’. Warming to her theme, she adds: ‘They’re beyond help and beyond contempt.’ How can she be so sure they are ‘beyond contempt’ if she herself knows nothing about vaccines? Maybe it would be a good idea to mug up on the subject before castigating those who have the courage to protest against the imposition of an experimental drug on ever-younger members of society.

So the question I am asking is: why are we listening to people such as Jennifer Aniston, Sean Penn, Hilary Rose, Daily Mail columnist Amanda Platell and the ultimate loudmouth, Piers Morgan – none of whom know anything about the science of vaccination – and ignoring the research of informed doctors and scientists who are emphatically not ‘rabid anti-vaxxers’ and nor are they foaming at the mouth?

Instead, these scientists are presenting careful research in a calm and considered manner.

As a journalist myself, I used to be proud of my trade. I was given the opportunity to research and investigate many controversial areas, and report on them after I had amassed enough information to be able to write with some authority. I remember one fine journalist, Peter Martin, telling his employers the Sunday Times that he needed three months to research and write an article on cancer that was commissioned by his editor. As an old-school journalist, he wanted to get to the bottom of the subject before feeling confident enough to write about it.

All that has gone by the board since Covid reared its hydra head.

I have yet to read an informed, properly researched article in the mainstream media about coronaviruses, how they work and how they are best treated. No, that is too much like hard work. Much better to castigate all dissidents as nutjobs and crackpots without for a minute listening to what they have to say.

It seems that the louder you shout, the more you will be believed. The still small voice of truth is being drowned out while these ignoramuses – and I use the word in its literal sense – are allowed massive coverage in all sections of the media.

August 13, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

UN official voices concern over Israel’s detention of rights defenders

WAFA | August 12, 2021

GENEVA – Mary Lawlor, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, expressed concern yesterday over arrests, harassment, criminalization and threats targeting human rights defenders by the Israeli occupation forces.

“Arrests and raids on the homes of Palestinian human right defenders [by Israeli occupation forces] form part of a wider crackdown against those defending the human rights of Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,” she said.

Lawlor was alarmed by the arbitrary arrest and detention of Farid Al-Atrash, a human rights defender and lawyer at the Independent Commission for Human Rights (ICHR).

Mr. Al-Atrash was detained by Israeli military forces after peacefully participating in a demonstration in Bethlehem on 15 June and released on bail eight days later.

The rights expert also voiced concern over the forcible transfer of Palestinians living in the Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan neighbourhoods in Jerusalem.

“Muna Al-Kurd, Mohammed Al-Kurd and Zuhair Al Rajabi, human rights defenders at the forefront of protecting their communities against forced displacement, have been arrested and interrogated,” she said.

Another activist, Salah Hammouri, a Palestinian-French human rights defender and lawyer, is also at risk of having his permanent residency permit in Jerusalem revoked.

“I am shocked that members of the Health Work Committee, who provide health services to Palestinians living in remote areas of the West Bank, were arrested, interrogated and may be criminalised because of their human rights work,” Ms. Lawlor added.

Three Committee personnel are currently in prison. Director Shatha Odeh and former project coordinator, Juana Ruiz Sánchez, are being held in one facility, while accountant Tayseer Abu Sharbak, is in another. They are being tried on charges of participating in what has been described as “an illegal organisation”, said Ms.

Lawlor called on Israeli occupation authorities to immediately release them, and to investigate allegations of ill treatment against the two women rights defenders.

“The deteriorating health of Odeh and the solitary confinement of Sánchez are extremely worrying,” the UN expert said, noting that the rights defender, who has chronic underlying health conditions, had initially been denied access to necessary medication and clean clothes.

Lawlor underlined the importance of safeguarding Palestinian human rights defenders in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, especially those who are protecting their communities’ rights to housing, healthcare and freedom of assembly and association.

“I call on the [Israeli] authorities to stop targeting these human rights defenders and allow them to carry out their legitimate and peaceful work free from any kind of restrictions,” she said.

August 13, 2021 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture | , , , | 1 Comment

Canada: Fast-moving proposal creates filtering, blocking and reporting rules – and speech police to enforce them

BY CORYNNE MCSHERRY AND KATITZA RODRIGUEZ | EFF | AUGUST 10, 2021

Policymakers around the world are contemplating a wide variety of proposals to address “harmful” online expression. Many of these proposals are dangerously misguided and will inevitably result in the censorship of all kinds of lawful and valuable expression. And one of the most dangerous proposals may be adopted in Canada. How bad is it? As Stanford’s Daphne Keller observes, “It’s like a list of the worst ideas around the world.” She’s right.

These ideas include:

  • broad “harmful content” categories that explicitly include speech that is legal but potentially upsetting or hurtful
  • a hair-trigger 24-hour takedown requirement (far too short for reasonable consideration of context and nuance)
  • an effective filtering requirement (the proposal says service providers must take reasonable measures which “may include” filters, but, in practice, compliance will require them)
  • penalties of up to 3 percent of the providers’ gross revenues or up to 10 million dollars, whichever is higher
  • mandatory reporting of potentially harmful content (and the users who post it) to law enforcement and national security agencies
  • website blocking (platforms deemed to have violated some of the proposal’s requirements too often might be blocked completely by Canadian ISPs)
  • onerous data-retention obligations

All of this is terrible, but perhaps the most terrifying aspect of the proposal is that it would create a new internet speech czar with broad powers to ensure compliance, and continuously redefine what compliance means.

These powers include the right to enter and inspect any place (other than a home):

“in which they believe on reasonable grounds there is any document, information or any other thing, including computer algorithms and software, relevant to the purpose of verifying compliance and preventing non-compliance  . . . and examine the document, information or thing or remove it for examination or reproduction”; to hold hearing in response to public complaints, and, “do any act or thing . . . necessary to ensure compliance.”

But don’t worry—ISPs can avoid having their doors kicked in by coordinating with the speech police, who will give them “advice” on their content moderation practices. Follow that advice and you may be safe. Ignore it and be prepared to forfeit your computers and millions of dollars.

The potential harms here are vast, and they’ll only grow because so much of the regulation is left open. For example, platforms will likely be forced to rely on automated filters to assess and discover “harmful” content on their platforms, and users caught up in these sweeps could end up on file with the local cops—or with Canada’s national security agencies, thanks to the proposed reporting obligations.

Private communications are nominally excluded, but that is cold comfort—the Canadian government may decide, as contemplated by other countries, that encrypted chat groups of various sizes are not ‘private.’ If so, end-to-end encryption will be under further threat, with platforms pressured to undermine the security and integrity of their services in order to fulfill their filtering obligations. And regulators will likely demand that Apple expand its controversial new image assessment tool to address the broad “harmful content” categories covered by the proposal. … Full article

August 13, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | 1 Comment

Guidance on How To Request a Religious Exemption for COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates in the Workplace

Rutherford Institute | August 13, 2021

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. — Responding to concerns from employees in both the public and private sector about workplace requirements regarding COVID-19 vaccines and a desire to express their religious objections to such requirements, The Rutherford Institute has issued guidance and an in-depth fact sheet and model letter for those seeking a religious exemption to a COVID-19 vaccine mandate in the workplace.

“For good or bad, COVID-19 has changed the way we navigate the world and the way in which ‘we the people’ exercise our rights. As a result, we find ourselves grappling with issues that touch on deep-seated moral, political, religious and personal questions for which there may be no clear-cut answers,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People. “One thing is clear, however: while the courts may defer to the government’s brand of Nanny State authoritarianism, we still have rights. The government may try to abridge those rights, it may refuse to recognize them, it may even attempt to nullify them, but it cannot erase them.”

Daily, growing numbers of public and private employers are requiring employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and using the threat of termination to force acceptance of the vaccine. Unfortunately, legal protections in this area are limited. While the Americans with Disabilities Act protects those who can prove they have medical conditions that make receiving a vaccination dangerous, employees must be able to prove they have a sensitivity to vaccines. The requirement established by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that employers provide religious accommodations may be invoked by employees who have sincere religious beliefs against receiving vaccinations. But an employer’s duty of accommodation is not absolute, and if it can show that accommodating the worker’s objections to vaccinations will interfere with its operations or workplace safety, the employee may face the choice between keeping her job or violating her religious beliefs.

Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on religion. Title VII further defines religion broadly to include not only beliefs, but also religious practices and observances. As a result, the federal employment discrimination law forbids discharging an employee because the employee chooses to engage in certain conduct, or not engage in certain conduct, that is a part of the employee’s religious beliefs and practices, and holds that someone cannot be discriminated against by their employer based on their religion unless the employer cannot reasonably accommodate an employee’s religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business. Although there have been very few cases that have dealt specifically with Title VII’s ban on employment discrimination based on religion in the context of religious objections to vaccines mandated by the employer, it appears established that if an employee holds sincerely-held religious beliefs in opposition to receiving a vaccination, an employer that has a rule requiring that vaccination must reasonably accommodate the employee’s beliefs. For an employee who objects to an employer’s vaccine requirement, the first step is to give notice to the employer of the religious objection to receiving the vaccine. To this end, The Rutherford Institute has provided a model letter for use in requesting a religious exemption from a COVID-19 vaccine mandate in the workplace.

The Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit civil liberties organization, provides legal assistance at no charge to individuals whose constitutional rights have been threatened or violated and educates the public on a wide spectrum of issues affecting their freedoms.

DOCUMENTS

Fact Sheet: “Know Your Rights: How To Request a Religious Accommodation for COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates in the Workplace”

Model Letter: Requesting Religious Accommodation in the Face of COVID-19 Vaccine Workplace Mandate

August 13, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | 2 Comments

The persecution of courageous Dr Peter McCullough

By Kathy Gyngell – TCW Defending Freedom – August 12, 2021

IN his post for TCW Defending Freedom yesterday, Neville Hodgkinson drew our attention to possibly the most courageous and clear thinking of the doctors to take on the official Covid narrative. Painstaking and meticulous, Peter McCullough has the clarity and capacity to get the simple heart of the matter.

For those doubling down in the establishment and officialdom who find themselves beset with ever more uncomfortable evidence to accommodate in their commitment to coercive and mandatory vaccination, his truths must be very disconcerting.

This, I have no doubt, is why the only references to him you’ll find in a Google search attempt to vilify or discredit him.

Apparently it is not sufficient to cancel this persistent thorn in the side. Baylor Scott & White, a medical centre and health company with which Dr McCullough was once affiliated, have taken it upon themselves to sue him, ostensibly for his references to his prior affiliation with BSW. It is hard to see the action as motivated other than by an intent to discredit him.

Two of his horrified colleagues have written a detailed and heartfelt letter in support of him and condemning the action of BSW. You can read it here.

August 13, 2021 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science, Solidarity and Activism | , | 1 Comment

Did the AZ ‘clotshot’ make these seven people ill?

By Sally Beck | TCW Defending Freedom | August 12, 2021

THERE are three Covid-19 vaccines in use in the UK, but none is causing more havoc than the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab, now known as the ‘clotshot’ because it can cause vaccine-induced thrombosis (VITT). By July 28, 73 VITT deaths had been reported to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the body that makes sure new pharmaceuticals are safe. Deadly blood clots are not the only side-effects; there are many more affecting one in 110 people according to official figures. Some last for months and could be permanent even if they aren’t fatal.

Neurological occupational therapist Carla Freitas, 31, who works for the NHS, took part in the original AZ trial and is one of 11 women and men who reacted to the same batch of AstraZeneca Covid vaccine, batch number PV46671, earlier this year. The group are countrywide as it is common practice to distribute a batch to different areas. The PV46671 injured found each other on Twitter so there may be more victims not using social media out there. I talked to seven of them.

All seven received the jab before the MHRA began investigating adverse events reported to the Yellow Card Scheme, not originally flagged up by AstraZeneca. Carla said: ‘I was deemed fit enough to join the Oxford trial after thorough medical examinations. In December 2020, I was told I had been given the placebo and offered the jab once it was available, so I did not hesitate to take it. I was fine after the first injection but two weeks after the second one everything changed. I have been off work for five months since March trying to find solutions to my health problems. The doctors from the AZ trial have been unhelpful.’

BBC food broadcaster Jules Serkin, 63, from Canterbury, whose original tweet alerted the others, was ‘desperate for the vaccine’ but she has also suffered horrific side effects. She said: ‘My doctor agreed my reaction was from the vaccine. I contacted AstraZeneca and I’ve had five emails from them asking if they can contact my GP. I responded yes, of course. They never have.’

This close-knit, previously healthy group, aged from their early 30s to early 60s, have all developed chronic illnesses since vaccination. Some experienced symptoms within minutes of the jab being administered while others received PV46671 as their second jab. And while some are recovering slowly, others are getting worse.

Rachael Matthews, 31, and Claire Hibbs, 48, both developed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) (blood clots usually caused by the anticoagulant drug heparin, typically used in the treatment of heart attacks but AZ victims seem to develop it despite the fact they are not taking heparin) and have tested positive for the heparin-PF4 antibody.

Other symptoms include heart problems, low blood platelets, palsy, excruciating headaches, insomnia, tinnitus, muscle pain, dizziness, disorientation, inflammatory autoimmune disease, pins and needles in hands, feet and face, fatigue, brain fog, difficulty swallowing, sore eyes and eye problems and stomach pains.

In the patient information leaflet, AZ, who have renamed their jab Vaxzervia, list many of the reactions the group have suffered but Serkin says: ‘Health professionals more often than not deny the connection.’

The leaflet says: ‘In clinical trials there were very rare reports of events associated with inflammation of the nervous system, which may cause numbness, pins and needles, and/or loss of feeling. However, it is not confirmed whether these events were due to the vaccine.

‘Following widespread use of the vaccine there have been extremely rare reports of blood clots in combination with low level of blood platelets. When these blood clots do occur, they may be in unusual locations, e.g. brain, liver, bowel, spleen.’

Both Matthews and Hibbs developed a clot in the portal vein which leads to the liver, while Serkin, Howard Griffiths, 52, and Dave McGuire are suffering numbness and pins and needles.

Despite their symptoms, some of those who reacted to their first dose are under pressure from GPs to have the second. This is inexplicable but one consultant suggested it could be because GP practices receive £25.16 for each double-jabbed person. With an average of 9,000 patients for each practice (although under-16s are not yet eligible for the jab) that could be a maximum £230,000 incentive. Patient health be damned!

Despite the MHRA’s denials – they say most adverse events are coincidental – logic suggests that if someone receives a vaccine that is designed to provoke an immune response and then develops autoimmune disease or other problems with their immune system, the jab should be first in the frame. However alleged vaccine damage seems to be rarely investigated or taken seriously.

Adverse reactions can be caused by a ‘hot lot’, a faulty batch of vaccine with too much of one ingredient. Big Pharma has known this for decades, and this problem was legally accepted in 1992 during an Irish court case involving Kenneth Best, 23. As a four-and-a-half-month-old baby, Kenneth suffered brain damage and seizures after he was given Wellcome’s diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (DTP) vaccine in 1969. The Irish Supreme Court ruled: ‘The documentary evidence surrounding the particular batch out of which the vaccine given to the Plaintiff was taken indicates that it was excessively high in both potency and toxicity.’

It is hard to know if this happened in this case because the MHRA and AstraZeneca have not responded to repeated requests for information. Contacted on July 29, AZ has not responded (even after Oxford University press office contacted them on TCW’s behalf) while in an unsympathetic email the MHRA confirmed that they had not investigated the group’s concerns.

An MHRA spokesperson said: ‘We are sorry to hear of the health problems these people are experiencing. We are not aware of any batch-specific safety issues for the AstraZeneca vaccine. We are also not aware of any issues with individuals involved in Covid-19 vaccine AstraZeneca trials who subsequently received this vaccine outside of the trial but will follow this up with the investigator.’

Meanwhile those in the group who have been advised by medics not to have a second vaccine fear they will become victims of medical apartheid. Adele B, 57, worries that she will be labelled an antivaxxer because she linked her health problems to the jab. She said: ‘I’ve always believed in vaccines so nothing could be further from the truth.’

Serkin, Freitas and Hibbs would like to travel when they feel well enough, but worry they will not be allowed without vaccine passports. Hibbs says: ‘I so want to visit my son in Cyprus, I’m wondering if I should have the second jab just to go.’

Here are the stories of the seven in detail.

CLAIRE HIBBS, 48, works for easyJet, lives in Luton, and is married with two children.

‘I’ve been signed off work now since the end of March. I’m now concerned about returning to work if I’m vulnerable. Devastated with the travel rules that you have to be double vaccinated, and I cannot have the second dose. My son, 18, is in the Army and is moving to Cyprus. I planned to visit regularly, but not with blood clots in my lungs.’

1st jab date: March 31

2nd jab date: Advised not to have second jab

Health issues before the jab: None

Reactions: ‘I began feeling unwell on April 5 and developed blood clots in the vein leading to the liver (portal vein), also in my lungs. I’m suffering constant headaches, muscle, joint and neck pains, constant eye twitching. I’m off balance and have brain fog. Can’t get through the day without falling asleep.’

Tests done: Blood tests but liver scan cancelled due to staff shortages. D-dimer (checks for tiny clots), CT, ultrasound and MRV scans which detect VITT. Positive HIT test. Positive test for portal vein thrombosis. Appointment with gastro team. Official diagnosis: ‘Thrombocytopenia (low blood platelets) and portal vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism (clot in the lung) induced by the AZ vaccine.’

Doctor’s response: ‘No luck with doctors, just keep getting fobbed off, mostly saying it’s stress. I’m feeling very let down.’

Time off work: Unable to work since March

Response from MHRA and AstraZeneca: ‘Filled in a Yellow Card. Acknowledgement but no other response. AZ have emailed me to ask for consent to contact my GP three times. I said yes but they have not contacted the GP.’

RACHAEL MATTHEWS, 31, an accountant from Norfolk, is married with one daughter.

‘I had my vaccine on my daughter’s first birthday at my GP surgery. I was apprehensive because I wanted to try for another baby in the spring. I’d had a complicated pregnancy, had a blood clot in my leg, but I was told I needed to have the jab to keep my daughter safe. Ironically, it nearly killed me which would have left my daughter without a mum. I’m now not well enough to consider having another baby. I’ve been told I was one of the first VITT cases in the UK.’

1st Jab: March 6

2nd Jab: ‘No second jab although I’ve been under pressure to take it.’

Health issues before jab: None, apart from pregnancy-related blood clot.

Reactions: ‘Started a week after the jab with stomach cramps, nausea and diarrhoea, very heavy legs. Struggled with everyday things I felt so weak. Couldn’t sleep, was struggling to walk, stopped being able to lift my daughter. Unable to get on to the doctor’s couch for a routine smear, a nurse insisted I went to A&E. I might have died otherwise. GPs had dismissed my symptoms. Blood clot found in the portal vein to my liver. VITT and HIT.’

Tests done: Two A&E visits, admitted to hospital for six days. Ultrasound, daily blood tests while in hospital. Endoscopy. Tests for HP4 heparin antibodies show HIT still present.

Time off work: ‘I work for my dad’s firm, so I fit in work when I’m well enough.’

GP’s response: ‘I asked about blood clots and was told it was fake news. Went to A&E and was told to take Gaviscon although routine blood tests showed very low blood platelets, around 50. When I was finally diagnosed with a blood clot I kept asking if it was the vaccine and no one would answer me.’

MHRA and AstraZeneca response: None.

HOWARD GRIFFITHS, 52, an events broadcaster for BBC, ITV and Channel 5, unmarried, lives in South Wales 

‘I’m not Howard at the moment and I just want Howard back. I feel like my body has been hijacked, I’m desperate to get rid of the hijackers. I have always been highly motivated and full of energy. Before the jab I ran up Pen y Fan (highest peak in south Wales). After the jab I struggled to walk up hill to the shops.’

1st jab date: April 4

2nd jab date: ‘NHS say I cannot have second AZ but want to give me Pfizer.’

Health issues before the jab: None

Reactions: ‘Anaphylaxis. Within three minutes of the jab my lips and mouth became swollen, and I thought I was having a heart attack. My face went red. I have inflammation of the nervous system. I’m left with tingling and numbness in the hands, face, mouth and beneath the nose. Throbbing headache for ten days, changed to mild headaches but have now gone. Insomnia, which I never had before, dizziness, disorientation and fatigue. Tinnitus in left ear, throbbing in back of the neck and brain fog. Slight improvement but not back to normal.’

Tests done: Blood tests which showed low vitamin D. Three visits to GP and one to the hospital.

Time off work: Scaled down work at the beginning of pandemic anyway but would not have been able to carry on as normal

GP’s response: ‘Made no connection with the AZ.’

MHRA and AstraZeneca response: Filled in Yellow Card via phone call directly with MHRA but no contact since. Did not contact AZ.

JULES SERKIN, 63, freelance radio presenter for BBC specialising in food, married with three grown-up children and lives in Canterbury.

‘Too much stress at the moment. All I am doing is bouncing from pillar to post. Different GPs saying different things. Apparently, I’m a complex case.’

1st jab: March 5

2nd jab: Advised not to have second jab

Health issues before the jab: ‘Underactive thyroid. Initially, I was told it was safe to have the jab, but the advice has changed now for people with thyroid issues.’

Reactions: ‘Shivers were the first symptom, I felt like I had full blown flu. I was in bed for two days. Then blood clots came out of my nose for three weeks, I developed sinusitis. I began sleeping a lot, couldn’t look at a screen because my eyes were so sensitive. Developed a pain in my calf and headaches, which I’ve never had, with pains in my temples. Numbness in cheek and pins and needles in feet. Now my left eyelid has started to droop. I’m feeling tearful too.’

Tests done: Positive D-dimer test for blood clots. Blood tests show elevated liver enzymes which suggests liver damage. Ultrasound scan. MRI scan.

Time off work: ‘It’s affected my work for five months. I’ve been working but resting as often as possible.’

GP’s response: ‘You’re having a reaction to the vaccine.’

MHRA and AstraZeneca response: ‘AZ have sent five emails asking if they can contact my GP, but they haven’t yet. Filled in a Yellow Card in May, I’ve had an acknowledgment but that’s it.’

ADELE B, 57, is a retired communications co-ordinator, from Preston, who lives with her partner.

‘I’ve suffered weeks of weird symptoms. I feel it just can’t be coincidence that everything came at once. It also impacts on your family and friends. I feel like my partner is always checking on me. It’s put a cloud over my life. I cannot recall a day since I had the vaccine that I have felt completely well.’

1st jab: March 14

2nd jab: Advised not to have it while taking steroid medication to correct adverse reaction

Health issues before jab: None. Rarely went to the doctor.

Reactions: ‘Immediately after the vaccine I had chills, a sleepless night followed by a day with a headache and five days of feeling fatigued. The following week began with muscle aches and weakness in my shoulders, upper back, thighs and hips. Lack of sleep due to pain and I struggle to stand up after inactivity. These symptoms point to polymyalgia rheumatica (stiffness in neck and shoulders), an inflammatory autoimmune disease. My vision became blurry, and I had floaters in my right eye coupled with feeling disorientated when I sat down. I have heart palpitations, a strange rash behind my knee, dizziness and disorientation. Nerve pain and numbness in face, legs and feet and electric shock type sensations across my body. Health professionals are at a loss for a true diagnosis.’

Tests done: Several doctor’s appointments, seven blood tests, a 111 call, a visit to A&E, referral to rheumatology, referral to neurology, MRI scan of head, neck and spine, chest X-ray, eye examination.

Doctor’s response: ‘My doctor has advised me not to have the second AstraZeneca vaccine. Rheumatologist has indicated that she has seen several people reporting with autoimmune disorders since having their vaccine.’

MHRA and AstraZeneca response: Filled in Yellow Card, had a standard acknowledgement but nothing since. Didn’t contact AZ.

CARLA FREITAS, 31, highly specialist occupational therapist in neurology, neuro-cardiac and neuro-outreach at St George’s University Hospital, south London.

‘I was deemed fit enough to join the phase 1 Oxford Covid vaccine trials last April. I received the placebo and was offered the vaccine in January due to being an NHS worker. In the first few weeks of suffering nasty side effects and not understanding what was happening to my body I was in a very lonely place.’

1st jab: Jan

2nd jab: March 27

Health issues before jab: ‘None, 10-15-mile hikes at the weekend, scuba diving, travelling, you name it . . .’

Reactions: ‘No immediate side effects post second jab but after two weeks everything changed. I began getting headaches in the back of the head and pain in my neck. Stiff neck, pins and needles in my head and neck. Fatigue and short of breath during hikes. I had to stop after every lap when swimming. I tried to carry on as normal but couldn’t.’

Tests done: Four A&E visits and two admissions, one a suspected stroke the other because she couldn’t swallow, suspected VITT and Guillain-Barré syndrome (rapid onset muscle weakness), burning in hands and feet and leg weakness. Fifteen GP appointments, numerous blood tests, MRI of brain and spine, endoscopy, recorded heart rate for 24 hours, neurological physiotherapy, and exercises to help improve balance and reduce dizziness.

Time off work: Five months but hoping to return to work fulltime as feeling much better.

GP’s response: ‘I was told this is all stress and anxiety, in other words, all in my mind. Denial that the vaccine has anything to do with it. Doctors in the clinical trial have been unhelpful.’

MHRA and AstraZeneca response: Not known

DAVE McGUIRE, personal details not given. Dave provided three emails but has not been in contact since.

‘I’ve been talking to my best chum recently who had his first Pfizer jab a few weeks back. He’s now a fully-fledged member of the post vaccine headache world. What on earth is in these vaccines?’

1st jab: details not provided

2nd jab: not known

Health issues before jab: None

Reactions: Constant headaches, dizziness, abnormal heart rate, chest pain, reflux, fatigue, muscle pain and weakness in legs and arms, pins and needles and tingling in my right little finger, nausea, inflammation and stomach pains.

Tests done: Not known

Time off work: ‘Chest pain and muscle aches seem to be waning away and my heart is no longer racing like it used to.’

GP’s response: ‘One was hopeful that from her experience of seeing people with long-lasting effects from other vaccines that these should disappear with time.’

MHRA and AstraZeneca response: Not known

NOTE: By July 28, 24.8million people had received 48.4million doses of the AstraZeneca with one in 110 people reporting adverse reactions to the MHRA’s Yellow Card Scheme. A total of 20.46million have received 34.26million doses of the Pfizer with a reporting rate of one in 208 adverse events. Only 1.3million people have received 1.7million doses of the Moderna and 1 in 110 have reported serious side effects.

August 13, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

W.H.O. Concedes The COVID Virus Is Just Like The Common Flu

August 2021

August 13, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , | 6 Comments