Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

ALERT: All Parents In U.K. With Children Aged 12 – 15 years

By Dr. Mike Yeadon | August 26, 2021

I’ve just been informed via someone senior in the vaccination authorities that they will begin VACCINATING ALL SCHOOL CHILDREN AGED 12 – 15 years old STARTING SEPTEMBER 6th 2021.

WITH OR WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT.

Children are at no measurable risk from SARS-CoV-2 & no previously healthy child has died in U.K. after infection. Not one.

The vaccines are NOT SAFE. The USA reporting system VAERS is showing around 13,000 deaths in days to a few weeks after administration. A high % occur in the first 3 days. Around 70% of serious adverse events are thromboembolic in nature (blood clotting- or bleeding-related).

We know why this is: all of the gene-based vaccines cause our bodies to manufacture the virus spike protein & that spike protein triggers blood coagulation.

The next most common type of adverse events are neurological.

Death rates per million vaccinations are running everywhere at around 60X more than any previous vaccine.

Worse, thromboembolic events such as pulmonary embolisms, appear at over 400X the typical low rate after vaccination.

These events are serious, occur at a hideously elevated level & are at least as common in young people as in elderly people. The tendency is that younger people are having MORE SEVERE adverse events than older people.

There is literally no benefit whatsoever from this intervention. As stated, the children are unquestionably NOT AT RISK & vaccinating them WILL ONLY RESULT IN PAIN, SUFFERING, LASTING INJURIES AND DEATH.

Children rarely even become symptomatic & are very poor transmitters of the virus. This isn’t theory. It’s been studied & it pretty much doesn’t happen that children bring the virus into the home. In a large study, on not one occasion was a child the ‘index case’ – the first infected person in a household.

So if you’re told “it’s to protect vulnerable family members”, THAT IS A LIE.

The information emerging over time from U.K. & Israel is now showing clearly that the vaccines DO NOT EVEN WORK WELL. If there’s any benefit, it wanes.

Finally, the vaccines ARE NOT EVEN NECESSARY. There are good, safe & effective treatments.

IF YOU PERMIT THIS TO GO AHEAD I GUARANTEE THIS: THERE WILL BE AVOIDABLE DEATHS OF PERFECTLY HEALTHY CHILDREN, and severe illnesses in ten times as many.

And for no possible benefit.

KNOWING WHAT I KNOW FROM 40 years TRAINING & PRACTISE IN TOXICOLOGY, BIOCHEMISTRY & PHARMACOLOGY, to participate in this extraordinary abuse of innocent children in our care can be classified in no other way than MURDER.

It’s up to you. If I had a secondary school age child in U.K., I would not be returning them to school next month, no matter what.

The state is going to vaccinate everyone. The gloves are off. This has never been about a virus or public health. It’s wholly about control, totalitarian & irreversible control at that, and they’re nearly there.

PLEASE SHARE THIS INFORMATION WIDELY.

With somber best wishes,
Mike

Dr Mike Yeadon

 

August 27, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

The Dubious Ethics of ‘Nudging’ the Public to Comply With Covid Restrictions

By Dr. Gary Sidley | The Daily Sceptic | August 22, 2021

A middle-aged woman, walking along a pavement in the afternoon sunshine, sees a young family approaching and instantly becomes stricken with terror at the prospect of contracting a deadly infection. A man in a queue in a garage kiosk leans into the face of another and screams, “You selfish idiot! Hundreds of people will die because you don’t wear a mask.” The aggressor is oblivious to the fact that his victim suffers a history of asthma and anxiety problems. A neighbour puts on a face covering and plastic gloves before wheeling her dustbin to the end of her drive. These are three recent examples of many similar events I’ve observed or read. What could be the main reason for such extraordinary behaviour? Has the emergence of the SARS-COV-2 virus magically re-wired our brains, transforming many of us into vindictive germaphobes?

No, of course not. These extreme human reactions are, I believe, primarily the result of the Government’s deployment of covert psychological ‘nudges’, introduced as a means of increasing people’s compliance with the Covid restrictions.

In an article in the Critic, I discussed the remit of the Government’s behavioural scientists in the Scientific Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviours (SPI-B), a subgroup of SAGE which offers advice to the Government about how to maximise the impact of its Covid communications strategy. The methods of influence recommended by the SPI-B are drawn from a range of ‘nudges’ described in the Institute of Government document, MINDSPACE: Influencing behaviour through public policy, several of which primarily act on the subconscious of their targets – the British people – achieving a covert influence on their behaviour. The three ‘nudges’ to have evoked the most controversy, among both psychological practitioners and the general public, are: the strategic use of fear (inflating perceived threat levels); shame (conflating compliance with virtue); and peer pressure (portraying non-compliers as a deviant minority) – or ‘affect’, ‘ego’ and ‘norms’, to use the language of behavioural science. (Specific examples of how each of these covert strategies have been used throughout the Covid crisis are described here).

The British Psychological Society (BPS) is the leading professional body for psychologists in the U.K. According to their website, a central role of the BPS is: “To promote excellence and ethical practice in the science, education and application of the discipline.” In light of this remit, I – together with 46 other psychologists and therapists – wrote a letter to the BPS on January 6th, 2021, expressing our ethical concerns about the use of covert psychological strategies as a means of securing compliance with Covid restrictions. In particular, our alarm centred on three areas: the recommendation of ‘nudges’ that exploit heightened emotional discomfort as a means of securing compliance; implementing potent covert psychological strategies without any effort to gain the informed consent of the British public; and harnessing these interventions for the purpose of achieving adherence to contentious and unevidenced restrictions that infringe basic human rights.

Responses from the BPS to our initial letter were slow and circuitous. However, on July 1st we received an email from Dr. Roger Paxton, the Chair of the Ethics Committee, which clarified the BPS’s position: in the Committee’s view, there is nothing ethically questionable about deploying covert psychological strategies on the British people as a means of increasing compliance with public health restrictions.

An in-depth inspection of Dr. Paxton’s defence of the BPS reveals that it is evasive, disingenuous and wholly unconvincing.

First, he quibbles about the use of the word “covert”, arguing that the compliance techniques under scrutiny are more appropriately described as “indirect”. Behavioural-science documents routinely refer to the psychological strategies underpinning Government communication campaigns as evoking responses from people that are “unconscious”, “subconscious” or “automatic”. The crucial point is that the human targets of these ‘nudges’ are often unaware that the intention of the SPI-B psychologists is to scare, shame them and socially pressure them to conform. The MINDSPACE publication – co-authored by Professor David Halpern, an SPI-B and SAGE member – seems to concur: “Citizens may not fully realise that their behaviour is being changed… Clearly, this opens Government up to charges of manipulation… [as] it may offer little opportunity for citizens to opt-out.” (p. 66)

Second, Dr. Paxton rejects the idea that it would be ethical to offer citizens an opportunity to opt-out by asserting that the application of covert psychological strategies to shape people’s behaviour falls outside the realm of individual consent. The BPS appears to be claiming that an appeal to some nebulous, ideologically-driven concept of social decision-making exempts psychologists from the fundamental requirement to seek a person’s informed agreement before delivering an intervention. So according to the BPS – the formal guardians of ethical practice in the U.K. – the Covid communications strategy, aimed at achieving mass behavioural change, was intended to influence some anonymous collective rather than the actions of as many individuals as possible.

Again, the BPS stance is at odds with Professor Halpern’s position. In his 2019 book, Inside the Nudge Unit, he states: “If Governments… wish to use behavioural insights, they must seek and maintain the permission of the public. Ultimately, you – the public, the citizen – need to decide what the objectives, and limits, of nudging and empirical testing should be.” (p. 375)

Third, Dr. Paxton’s claim that the levels of fear throughout the Covid pandemic were proportionate to the viral threat is ill-informed and does not stand up to scrutiny. The minutes of the SPI-B meeting of March 22nd, 2020, demonstrate that its endorsement of a covert psychological strategy was a calculated decision to scare the British people, recommending that: “The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent… using hard-hitting emotional messaging.” In her book, A State of Fear, Laura Dodsworth interviewed members of SPI-B who confirmed that there had been a concerted effort to elevate the fear levels of the general public. One committee member, Educational Psychologist Dr. Gavin Morgan, admitted: “They went overboard with the scary message to get compliance.” Another SPI-B member – who wished to remain anonymous – was even more forthright: “The way we have used fear is dystopian… The use of fear has definitely been ethically questionable. It’s been like a weird experiment. Ultimately, it backfired because people became too scared.”

The mission to indiscriminately instil fear in the British public has been highly effective. An opinion poll prior to ‘Freedom Day’ suggested most people were worried about the prospect of lifting the remaining Covid restrictions. Even now, when all the vulnerable groups have been offered vaccination, many of our citizens remain tormented by ‘Covid Anxiety Syndrome’ – a disabling combination of fear and maladaptive coping strategies – with 20% of the population ‘markedly affected’. And this psychology-assisted fear inflation will be responsible for a substantial proportion of the extensive collateral damage associated with the restrictions, including excess non-Covid deaths and mental health problems.

Fourth, Dr. Paxton’s response makes no reference to the use of shame and scapegoating, and whether these are acceptable strategies for a civilised society to use. One can only assume that the BPS either views these tactics as acceptable, or that they seek to avoid acknowledging that psychologists have recommended practices that, in some respects, resemble the methods used by totalitarian regimes such as China, where the state inflicts pain on a subset of its population in an attempt to eliminate beliefs and behaviour they perceive to be deviant.

The dismissal of our ethical concerns by the BPS was predictable: a cursory glance at the scientists comprising the SPI-B shows that several of its members are also influential figures in the BPS; a major conflict of interest that renders the impartiality of their views highly questionable. What was surprising was the strident tone of Dr. Paxton’s rejoinder, as exemplified by his assertion that the psychologists’ role in the pandemic response demonstrated “social responsibility and the competent and responsible employment of psychological expertise”. I suspect the lady trembling on the pavement, the young man being verbally abused in the garage, and the neighbour donning mask and gloves to wheel out her dustbin – along with the many others in similar positions – might all beg to differ.

Dr. Gary Sidley is a retired NHS Consultant Clinical Psychologist.

August 27, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

NHS plans Covid-19 vaccination for 12-year-olds that would NOT require parental permission – reports

RT | August 26, 2021

The UK National Health Service (NHS) has reportedly made plans to vaccinate children as young as 12 without the need for their parents’ permission – a plan that government advisers have not yet supported.

Under the NHS’ plan, children between the ages of 12 and 15 would start being vaccinated in less than two weeks’ time after returning to school following the summer holidays, according to The Telegraph, which obtained emails sent by the NHS’ regional offices. The newspaper also reported on Thursday that the children “would not need parental consent” to get vaccinated.

Though Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine has been approved in the UK for children aged 12 and over, the Department of Health said on Wednesday that a decision on the vaccination of young children had not yet been made.

Government advisers on the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) have been reviewing whether to approve widespread vaccination of children, but had earlier said only children with certain health conditions would receive jabs.

Earlier this month, England’s deputy chief medical officer, Jonathan Van-Tam, expressed his support for the vaccination of under 18s, claiming to be “very much in favour” of 16- and 17-year-olds getting jabbed.

Vam-Tam also said that it was “more likely rather than less likely” that the number of children between the ages of 12 and 15 who were eligible to get vaccinated would soon expand.

News of the NHS’ plan angered many people on social media who pointed out that the risk vs reward conclusion for vaccinating young children was still uncertain.

Reform Party leader Richard Tice called the plan “shocking” while pub entrepreneur Hugh Osmond called it “grotesque.” Conservative academic Adrian Hilton – a former adviser to Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove – pointed out that “12-year-olds cannot consent to a medical procedure.”

Other Brits protested that “the government does not own my child” and threatened to pull their children out of public schooling.

Some supported the idea, with one Welsh social media user stating that she agreed 12- to 15-year-olds “can consent” and are “mature enough to make that call,” but thought it should be “done near to medical care like mine was, not in school.”

In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advises all Americans aged 12 and over to get vaccinated against Covid-19. Roughly 600,000 children between the ages of 12 and 15 were vaccinated in less than a week after Pfizer’s vaccine was approved for under 16s in May.

Many European Union countries have also started vaccinating children, with the EU approving Pfizer for 12- to 15-year-olds in May and Moderna in July.

August 26, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , , , | Leave a comment

Silenced and smeared – the hounding of Dr Sam

By Sally Beck | TCW Defending Freedom | August 25, 2021

As I reported in TCW Defending Freedom here, Dr Sam White, a former partner in a Hampshire GPs’ practice, was suspended by NHS England after tweeting a resignation video in February explaining his concerns around Covid vaccination and what he felt about the government and NHS’s over-zealous response to the pandemic.

Now the independent Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) has ruled that there were no grounds for suspending Dr White – but he must still be gagged.

For the next 18 months, Dr White ‘must not use social media to put forward or share any views about the Covid-19 pandemic and its associated aspects’.

Dr White’s lawyers will appeal under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998, which states that everyone has the right to freedom of expression, although the law may be subject to conditions or restrictions necessary in a democratic society. Surely doctors should never be silenced in a democratic society? Dr White said: ‘If I lose my ability to speak freely so will other doctors.

‘I have been forced to agree that I will erase the video and any other Covid criticism from my Twitter and Instagram accounts.

‘In the wake of the Jane Barton issue [Jane Barton was dubbed “Dr Opiate” after 650 patients in her care died after she prescribed powerful painkillers] the Royal College of General Practitioners commented that doctors should feel able to report promptly systemic failings and that is what I did. So to be punished for that is confusing to say the least.’

The RCGP guide for whistleblowers states: ‘When a professional working in the NHS is aware that care is threatened, sub-standard or dangerous for whatever reason, they have a duty to make these concerns known and for those in charge to assess and, if necessary, act.’

Last Tuesday (August 17) the MPTS, which is independent from medical personnel regulators the General Medical Council (GMC) who are investigating Dr White over alleged fitness to practise issues, said they had received 18 complaints connected with his social media output but did not name any complainants.

They are also relying on the evidence of the manager at his former practice who had not complained about him to bosses while he worked with her, only since she was contacted by NHS England. She is alleged to have stated that the practice had ‘significant concerns’ about Dr White, and that he had expressed ‘strange ideas’ and used inappropriate language whilst at work. Dr White strenuously denies the allegations.

Francis Hoar QC, who defended Dr White, told the tribunal: ‘The NHS and GMC had relied on hearsay with no signed statements being available, no validation of the identity of the complainants, no investigation as to whether his [Dr White’s] remarks were supported by science or clinical practice and no investigation by the NHS of the complaints he has made.’

In fact, Dr White, 41, talked through his concerns about the Covid response to a local GP during his annual appraisal and spoke again to a responsible officer acting on behalf of the GMC and NHS England during his five-year revalidation (relicensing) procedure, but received no meaningful response. He says he turned to social media as a last resort.

His main bones of contention were that the vaccination programme had been rolled out in breach of legal requirements in relation to free and informed consent. As we have reported, informed consent is not being taken seriously at vaccine hubs with people receiving details about potential serious adverse events only after receiving the jab. Dr White also voiced concerns about face masks. He felt elderly patients should not have to wear them and that he should not have to wear one in an NHS setting unless consulting with patients, which he did willingly.

Without investigating any of Dr White’s concerns, which included worries about inaccurate PCR tests that are being abandoned in America by the Centers for Disease Control in December; or vaccination harms, with reports to the Medical Healthcare products Regulatory Agency of 1,596 fatalities post vaccination up to August 11, the tribunal concluded that they had serious concerns about his conduct.

They said: ‘Dr White posted misinformation on social media platforms’, but did not go into detail.

A popular method of silencing doctors wanting to challenge the narrative is to question their mental health. In April, Swiss cardiologist Thomas Binder, 58, based in Baden, an open critic of coronavirus measures and treatment, was taken away from his practice by a SWAT team and locked in a psychiatric ward. He managed to fire off a tweet, minutes before his arrest and before his Twitter account was suspended for criticising the Swiss government, which said: ‘In front of my practice there is a SWAT team from Aargau. They are here to arrest me. Help!’

Dr White’s mental health has been questioned too by a senior NHS England clinical adviser. After a phone conversation with him she urged NHS England in June to ‘consider an emergency suspension given the suspicion that he was suffering from paranoid beliefs and mental ill health’. She concluded this without meeting Dr White and without any kind of formal mental health assessment. Dr White taped the conversation, and the tape reveals that at no time does she ask any direct question about his mental health, so it is hard to know how she came to that conclusion.

The tribunal ruled that Dr White should inform the GMC of any new job he takes so that his behaviour can be monitored, but the ruling will not prevent him from practising as an integrative doctor, a locum or as a GP in any NHS practice.

Dr White maintains: ‘Everything I have said or written is substantiated by peer-reviewed papers or by expert witness testimony, all of which has been discussed by professionals with the lawyer Dr Reiner Fuellmich at his International Corona Committee. [Weekly interviews with respected doctors, scientists, academics, journalists, concerned with the global pandemic response.]

‘I knew that there were problems with the way medicine had become protocol driven and not patient focused but had no idea of the scale.’

Dr White is crowdfunding to pay for his legal expenses.

August 26, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

July’s Age-Standardised Mortality Rate Was Equal to the Five-Year Average

By Noah Carl  • The Daily Sceptic • August 24, 2021

The ONS announced on Monday that there were 40,467 deaths registered in England in July, which is 4.8% more than in June, and 7.6% more than the five-year average. In fact, the number of deaths registered in England was above the five-year average in all four weeks of last month.

These increases make sense, given that there has been a small uptick in COVID-19 deaths associated with the ‘Delta wave’. Although COVID-19 was only the ninth leading cause of death in July, deaths from the first eight causes were all below their five-year averages.

However, because the English population is ageing, the absolute number of people at risk of dying each year is going up. You’d therefore expect to see a greater number of deaths each year, even without a pandemic. What’s more, people who die from COVID-19 tend to be slightly older than those dying of other causes, so the average COVID-19 death is associated with fewer life-years lost.

For these reasons, it’s more informative to track age-adjusted measures of mortality. In July, the age-standardised mortality rate was only 1.3% higher than in May, and was approximately equal to the five-year average. (The exact figure was marginally higher, but the percentage difference was only 0.4%.)

This chart from the ONS shows the age-standardised mortality rate for the first seven months of the year, each year, going back to 2001:

Although 2021’s figure was higher than the figure for 2019, it was 3.6% lower than the figure for 2015 and 2.0% lower than the figure for 2018. This means that – despite higher-than-expected mortality in the winter – the overall level of mortality in the first seven months of 2021 was still lower than three years before.

As a matter of fact, the age-standardised rate from January through July was only 0.8% higher than the five-year average. Another month without many excess deaths and 2021 will officially be an ‘average year’ for English mortality.

August 26, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Northern Ireland Doctor, Anne McCloskey, suspended over online video showing concern over vaccinating kids

By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | August 25, 2021

A Northern Ireland doctor has been suspended over a YouTube video (now only available on Odysee after being deleted by YouTube) where she expressed concerns about young people taking the COVID-19 vaccine.

A Health and Social Care Board (HSCB) investigation is being carried out as a result of concern raised over Dr. McCloskey’s comments in the video.

Her comments on the COVID-19 vaccinations appeared in a video posted online after treating patients at an after-hours clinic.

During the investigation period, McCloskey, a former Aontú councillor, will not be permitted to participate in health service activities.

Several assertions were made by Dr. McCloskey in the nine-minute video uploaded on Sunday, among them that she had come across a girl that had a blood clot in her upper arm and alleged she spoke to a boy who couldn’t get out of bed two weeks after getting vaccinated.

Allegedly, GPs and members of the public have complained about the video, according to the BBC.

“There is no evidence to support Dr. McCloskey’s comments,” the BBC stated.

According to the Derry GP, “I dealt with very many sick, distressed, worried, traumatized people, almost all of them, with the exception of small children, have been double jabbed.”

McCloskey said that some vaccinated young people she treated at the weekend became ill because they were “damaged” by vaccination.

She said that many young people had been “coerced, bribed, or bullied” into getting them.

She stated, “… This whole hype has largely been a figment of the media, and the government and their lying scientific advisors and their deceptions.”

According to the Health and Social Care Board (HSCB), Dr. McCloskey was suspended “as a precautionary measure,” while an investigation was being conducted.

“Suspension is not an automatic occurrence when undertaking an investigation” a spokesman stated, “but may be necessary where there are concerns regarding patient safety and in the public interest.”

Dr. McCloskey, on the other hand, told BBC News NI she stands by her views.

As per the HSCB, Dr. McCloskey works for Western Urgent Care, which provides GP out-of-hours services in the western area, on a sessional basis, however, the Western Urgent Care (WUC) is also conducting its own “investigations and internal processes in regard to the matter,” the statement reads.

August 25, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Britain Hypes the Green Hydrogen Economy

By Eric Worrall | Watts Up With That? | August 17, 2021

A few months ago, a colossal suspected hydrogen coolant leak explosion at a power plant in Australia, which caused blackouts up and down the East Coast, reminded us that hydrogen is not a gas to be toyed with. But nothing appears to be standing in the way of BoJo’s rush to push pressurised hydrogen gas into British vehicles and homes.

Green hydrogen ‘transitioning from a shed-based industry’ says researcher as the UK hedges its H2strategy

Am I blue? Am I green? Government report isn’t quite transparent

The UK government has released its delayed hydrogen strategy which – in a strange move for a colourless gas – hedges its bets between green and blue.

The government claimed the UK-wide hydrogen economy could be worth £900m by 2030, potentially £13bn by 2050. In the next 10 years the universe’s most abundant element could decarbonise energy-intensive industries like chemicals, oil refineries, power and heavy transport by helping these sectors move away from fossil fuels, it claimed.

Light, energy-intensive and carbon-free “hydrogen-based” solutions could make up to 35 per cent of the UK’s energy consumption by 2050, helping the nation meet its target of net-zero emissions by 2050, according to the government paper.

But navigation from the current state of the hydrogen industry to that worthy destination might require some tricky manoeuvres. The vast majority of industrial hydrogen is extracted from natural gas [PDF] in a process that releases greenhouse gasses and requires energy, which often comes from carbon fuels.

In theory, the simplest way to overcome this problem is to use renewable electricity to extract hydrogen from water using electrolysis – so called green hydrogen. The problem is, although it works in the lab, the process has yet to be industrialised on a scale comparable with other fuels in the global energy supply chain. Green hydrogen received a fillip as researchers found methods to make electrolysis more efficient at lower capital costs.

An alternative is to continue to use natural gas as a source of hydrogen but to capture and store the methane and CO2 byproduct, and use renewable energy to power the process. But a recent study found making blue hydrogen was 20 per cent worse for the climate than just using fossil gas over its entire lifecycle. … Read more: https://www.theregister.com/2021/08/17/uk_government_hydrogen_strategy/

As a kid I used to play with hydrogen, used a cheap chemical reaction with ingredients most people have in their homes, to fill party balloons with hydrogen, and tie birthday cake candles or firecrackers to the balloons. A lot of the balloons exploded while we were filling them, if we forgot to squeeze the balloons before filling, or if the rubber didn’t form a good seal with the pipe, the gas swirling inside the balloon and mixing with a trace of air was enough to cause an impressive bang. One time we loaded 5 balloons tied together with so many crackers the balloons failed to ascend above head height – we all hit the deck face down real fast. The blast rattled the windows of my parent’s house, frightened my mum.

The thought of piping pressurised hydrogen into homes, or parking an automobile with tens of litres of compressed hydrogen in the gas tank in an enclosed space, or anywhere near a house, is total insanity. The fuel air blast from an entire leaky gas tank full of hydrogen would likely destroy the house, and smash the windows of all the neighbour’s houses, with obvious consequences for anyone in the vicinity.

August 22, 2021 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

The Persian Gulf is Once Again at the Center of Western Provocations

By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – 17.08.2021

As part of a concerted effort to pressurize Iran ahead of the expected resumption of nuclear talks in Vienna, Washington and its European allies appear to be using a mysterious and not entirely understandable attack on an oil tanker operated by Israel to extract additional concessions from Tehran. In doing so, says the well-informed Iranian newspaper Ettelaat, they are unwittingly playing into the hands of an Israeli scheme aimed at railroading the very nuclear deal that Washington and the Europeans are supposedly trying to revive. The controversy over the recent attack on the Israeli Mercer Street continues unabated, and the US and Britain rushed to bring the issue even to the UN Security Council. However, they failed to reach a consensus on Iran there.

In this connection, it may be recalled that an Israeli ship was attacked off the coast of Oman on July 29 while it was sailing from Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, to the Port of Fujairah, United Arab Emirates. An oil tanker operated by Zodiac Maritime, owned by Israeli shipping magnate Eyal Ofer, was reportedly attacked by suicide drones. A Zodiac Maritime spokesman said two crew members, British and Romanian nationals, died in the attack. The attack, for which Tel Aviv, London, and Washington instantly issued unsubstantiated accusations against Iran, marked the beginning of a coordinated diplomatic campaign against Tehran at a time when nuclear talks on the 2015 Iran nuclear deal had stalled after six rounds of painstaking negotiations in Vienna. The last round of talks in Vienna was completed more than a month ago, and differences over how to revive the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) are still unresolved. The US has steadfastly refused to lift all sanctions imposed by the Donald Trump administration and to give assurances that it will not withdraw from the JCPOA again, as it did in the past. The sixth round was also held when a transfer of power in Iran connected with the June 18 presidential elections, in which Ebrahim Raisi won a confident and predictable victory.

In a separate statement, US CENTCOM spokesman Capt. Bill Urban said that based on the fact that “the vertical stabilizer is identical to those identified on one of the Iranian UAVs designed and manufactured for the one-sided kamikaze attack, we could assume that Iran was actively involved in the attack.” In a joint statement, the foreign ministers of the G7 countries (Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United States) condemned Iran for the attack. “This was a deliberate and targeted attack and a clear violation of international law,” the statement said. “All available evidence points to Iran.” There is no excuse for this attack. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh instantly responded that the G7 condemnation consisted of unfounded accusations. “Israel is likely to be the real culprit behind the attack,” the spokesman added. “For experts and those who know the history of our region, it is nothing new that the Zionist regime is scheming such plots,” Said Khatibzadeh emphasized.

Sensing a change of plans in Tehran, the US and its European allies launched a diplomatic campaign to intimidate Iran into returning to the talks in Vienna without any new demands. Washington’s main concern was that the negotiating team of new President Ebrahim Raisi would return to Vienna with new spirit and demands, amounting to a reversal of the American progress made in the last six rounds. This concern is not groundless: the Tehran Times, which presents the official point of view, reported that the Iranians were even considering, among other options, abandoning the results of the Vienna talks under Hassan Rouhani. The same newspaper, citing official sources, concludes that Tehran may reject the results and set a new agenda for negotiations with the West to resolve the remaining issues in a new format and spirit. This is why the US, in an apparent attempt to influence the plans of the Iranian ayatollahs, has sought to increase diplomatic pressure on Iran since the end of the sixth round. They have threatened and are threatening to withdraw from negotiations, openly opposed to lifting all sanctions, and have even prepared new oil sanctions against Iran.

Then there was the incomprehensible attack on Mercer Street, which the US and its allies saw as a gift to exert further pressure on Iran. While the hype surrounding this attack is still going on, the known provocateur, Britain and its allies, in a spirit of high probability, have concocted several stories about the hijacking of commercial ships off the coast of the United Arab Emirates in the Gulf of Oman. Once again, they have accused Iran, without evidence and with impudence, of playing a role in these events. How can we not recall the dirty work of London and its notorious international organization Médecins Sans Frontières in accusing Damascus of the use of poisonous substances?

Iran fully understands the ulterior motives behind this drama, which the West has habitually turned into a farce. Iranian officials warned the West not to engage in dirty propaganda games to gain concessions. Commenting on the alleged attempted seizure of a ship in the Gulf of Oman, the Iranian Embassy in Britain stated on Twitter: “To mislead the public around the world for diplomatic gain in New York is not fair game.” But this unfair game can lead to the opposite result. The US and Britain have enlisted Israel’s help in their campaign of putting pressure on Iran, which is likely to have unintended consequences for them.

“We have just heard a distorted statement about the Mercer Street incident. Immediately after the event, Israeli officials blamed Iran for the incident. That’s what they usually do. This is a standard practice of the Israeli regime. Its purpose is to divert world attention from the regime’s crimes and inhumane practices in the region,” said Zahra Ershadi, the charge d’affaires ad interim of Iran’s permanent mission to the United Nations. She made the remarks after a closed-door UN Security Council meeting on the recent oil tanker incident in the Gulf of Oman.

Israel’s ambassador to the US and the UN, Gilad Erdan, threw aside his restraint and revealed some of these targets. He said that Israel would ultimately like to see the current regime in the Islamic Republic of Iran overthrown. “In the end, we would like [the government] to be overthrown and [for] regime change to take place in Iran,” Gilad Erdan said when asked about Israel’s strategy toward the Islamic Republic, according to the Times of Israel. The statement was made after Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s blunt remarks that Tel Aviv allegedly knows for a fact that it was Iran that attacked Mercer Street.

Regardless of Israel’s goals for Iran, the current approach of London and Washington is unlikely to produce results, as Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi has unequivocally and firmly made it clear that the West is unlikely to succeed in intimidating the Iranians and the country’s leadership. Moreover, no one will force the Iranians to give up their legal rights and freedoms.

August 17, 2021 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, False Flag Terrorism | , , , | Leave a comment

Telegraph: “Government climate tsar’s dirty secret: he still drives a diesel car”

By Eric Worrall | Watts Up With That? | August 11, 2021

British climate tsar Alok Sharma, leader of Britain’s push to ban gasoline vehicles, who regularly ignores quarantine when returning from countries on the Covid-19 red list, has promised to trade his diesel automobile for an electric vehicle at an unspecified time in the future.

What can I say – whether its President Obama’s epic maskless birthday bash, Gavin Newsom’s shameful visit to the French Laundry restaurant, Nancy Pelosi’s Hair appointment during a lockdown, the Chicago teachers union leader partying in Peurto Rico, while claiming its “too risky” to return to work, Sharma’s contempt for quarantine rules and travel restrictions everyone else in Britain has to observe, or Sharma’s love for his diesel vehicle, a kind of vehicle he is working to deny to everyone else in Britain, one thing is clear.

Our elites no longer even try to hide their disdain for living by the rules they inflict on ordinary people.

August 15, 2021 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite | | Leave a comment

If Net Zero crashes and burns, the press will have only themselves to blame

Global Warming Policy Forum – 13/08/21

The passengers on the global warming bandwagon are worried. With the big climate conference in Glasgow at the end of the year getting ever closer, it now looks very much as if the big emitting nations are not going to sign up to a Net Zero agreement, and that the Prime Minister will be left with a humiliating failure on his hands.

It’s not just the conference that is in jeopardy. The government’s whole Net Zero agenda looks increasingly threatened, as Conservative MPs look nervously at the costs, and wonder what it might do to their chances of reelection.

If it goes all pear-shaped, the journalists and commentators who have been promoting the decarbonisation agenda for years have only themselves to blame. It has been clear to anyone who took the time to question the narrative that the aims were impractical, the figures presented were implausible, and that it was only a matter of time before there was a public backlash.

However, questioning things seems to nowadays be only a peripheral part of journalists’ job descriptions, particularly those on the climate and energy beat. Today’s Times’ leader, and James Kirkup’s recent article in the Spectator, both on the subject of net zero, are cases in point.

Both authors have clearly been briefed that the Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR) has estimated the cost of decarbonising the economy at £1.4 trillion. Unfortunately, that is wrong. The OBR has not prepared any estimate of the cost – it simply relays the figure prepared by the Committee on Climate Change (CCC). Similarly, the Treasury, currently engaged on its review of the Net Zero project, is not actually assessing the bill to be paid either; it too accepts the CCC’s figures on trust.

This is a problem, because the CCC – beset as it is with extraordinary conflicts of interest – is the last organisation you’d entrust with coming up with reliable figures. And if you had any doubt, you only need to consider the tens of thousands of pounds it has spent on lawyers in order to keep the calculations underlying its estimate secret to realise that there really is a problem.

Even simple arithmetic shows the CCC estimate is entirely implausible. Twenty million homes needing heat pumps at £12,000 a time adds up to a cost of hundreds of billions of pounds. Most of them will need major insulation works too, at a cost running to tens of thousands of pounds each. That’s half of your £1.4 trillion gone already.

More arithmetic reveals further problems. The Times claims that electric cars will be cheaper than petrol and diesel by 2025. Really? To deliver that, you’d need to deliver price reductions of £2500 per year. But in recent years, the EV cost premium has hardly come down at all, and indeed looks as if it may even start to grow, because of upward pressure on battery prices.

Still, the Times does rather better than James Kirkup, who makes some wild and entirely unsubstantiated claims about the cost of renewables. Onshore wind down 40%? Reviews of the financial accounts of onshore windfarms reveals no such decline, nor indeed any decline at all. Offshore wind down a third? Even if that were true (it isn’t), that would still leave it several times more expensive than traditional power sources, leaving consumers facing sustained electricity price rises, and ultimately being priced off the roads and left unable to afford to heat their homes.

To be fair, there is a wrinkle with offshore windfarms, in that several have signed agreements to supply the grid at very low prices. But as the International Renewable Energy Agency notes, these kinds of deals may merely be part of a long-term pricing strategy, and should not be taken as representative of the underlying costs; in other words, that we will just end up paying more later. That suggestion is borne out by the financial accounts of the UK’s offshore windfarms, which show that costs remain very high, and are at best falling only slightly.

These issues are of vital importance to the UK economy, because if costs are not coming down then the CCC’s estimate of the cost of delivering net zero is understated, possibly by several trillion pounds. It’s a pity then, that journalists opining on net zero have mostly ignored them.

Before I finish, it’s worth raising one final example of a failure to question, this time from the Spectator article. In closing his piece, James Kirkup relays some official estimates of the financial disaster that potentially besets us: the OBR, he notes, has said that national debt could rise to 289 percent (presumably of GDP) if we do nothing about climate change. But here we see again that the pronouncements of officialdom can get you into trouble, or at least if you fail to question them. That’s because the choice is not between doing nothing and trying to change the weather by installing windfarms. There is a third choice: adapt.

Consider this: the biggest cost of global warming is supposed to come about through sea level rise, and here the cost of doing nothing will undoubtedly be very high – one study said we could face a bill of 11% of GDP every year.

But as the seas, rising 2–3 mm per year, started to overtop the sea walls, would we really do nothing, and let our homes be swamped and our children drown? Or would we improve our sea defences? The cost in that case has also been estimated, and is a thousand times smaller than doing nothing. Moreover, such a bill will be readily affordable in the future because of the world’s growing wealth.

The environmentalists and the renewables industry have done well to obscure the painful truth about the decarbonisation agenda from the public. The media have managed to turn a collective blind eye. But times have changed, and the costs can no longer be hidden. If, as seems likely, Net Zero crashes and burns, and all that money is wasted,  they will have nobody to blame but themselves.

August 15, 2021 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

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

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

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »