Covid-19 Vaccines. Reported Adverse Reactions and Questions to Department of Health

A large, and growing proportion of the UK population has now received either one or two doses of one of the experimental Covid-19 vaccines. I suspect that the vast majority of these people did so on the basis of what they had been told about them - by the Department of Health, the NHS, and the mainstream media (MSM) - that these vaccines were effectively safe, with few side effects, and would not cause serious patient harm.

Official statistics, data coming from the UK's drug regulator, the MHRA, and published on the UK Governments website, suggest that this is not the case.

The evidence is that the vaccines are causing serious patient harm, with over 1 million side effects being reported by nearly 300,000 patients. This includes reactions such as severe allergic reactions, anaphylaxis, Bell's Palsy, blood clots, cerebral venous sins thrombosis (CVST), Capillary Leak Syndrome, menstrual disorders and vaginal bleeding, Myocarditis and Pericarditis (inflammation of the heart), and fatalities. Indeed the latest MHRA data show that there have been 1,403 reported deaths of patients shortly after they have been given one of the Covid-19 vaccines.

The MHRA, in its regular report, consistently discounts the seriousness of these reported 'side effects', even though its primary function as a drug regulator should be to protect patients from drug and vaccine-induced harm. It is well known that reported side effects represent a small proportion of actual side effects - research has shown this to be somewhere between 1% and 10%. So 1,403 death could actually be 14,030 deaths, or as many as 140,300 deaths.

I cannot think of any other walk of life where such harm could be caused, or even suspected to be caused, without a serious and immediate "Health and Safety" response. An industry that cause serious harm to its workers, or its customers, would be subject to rigorous examination and inspection. A restaurant suspected of causing food poisoning would be closed down. A road junction where there had been numerous accidents would have been subject to increased traffic regulation.

But this does not happen when such health and safety problem relates to the harm caused by pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. "All drugs cause side effects" we are told blandly by doctors and drug regulators; and it is left at that. There has been no public warning from government, from the NHS, or from the MSM. They continue to tell us that the vaccines are safe; and urge everyone to take the vaccine, without any knowledge of the reported side effects.

So I have decided to write to my MP, so that he can ask the following questions of the UK's Department of Health.

1. Can the Department of Health confirm that MHRA statistics relating to Covid-19 vaccines contained on this Government website come from official data, and does not constitute "anti-vaxxer" disinformation?

2. Can the Department of Health confirm that, up to 23rd June 2021, the MHRA has received 1,403 reports of patients dying shortly after receiving one of the Covid-19 vaccines?

3. Can the Department of Health provide me with information about how it has been, and is informing the general public, either through the NHS, or the mainstream media, of all these serious adverse reactions to the Covid-19 vaccines, including death, as reported to the MHRA?

4. Can the Department of Health inform me how many deaths (caused, or suspected to be caused, by these vaccines, or any pharmaceutical drug) it considers acceptable before you respond with appropriate health and safety measures that ensure the general public is made aware of the situation, can make an informed decision about taking the vaccines, and ensure that further deaths are avoided?

5. Can the Department of Health inform me what precautionary measures it has already taken to ensure that people who take the vaccines are not dying as the result?

6. Can the Department of Health provide me with the information it is giving to patients taking a Covid-19 vaccine, and what guidance vaccination staff have about the information they give to patients?

7. Can the Department of Health assure me that everyone receiving a Covid-19 vaccine is being informed that to date 1,403 people have died shortly after taking the vaccine

It is likely to be several weeks before any response is forthcoming from the Health Department. When I receive their response I will publish it here, in full, alongside my response to the adequacy of their response.

So watch this space!

Postscript August 2021

I eventually received a response to my 6 questions, in a letter from the Department of Health and Social Care, dated 20th July 2021. I have copied that letter, word for work, below. But as you will see it does not provide answers for any of them. My questions were very clearly about deaths reported to the MHRA as being caused by the vaccine - not by the virus. It is clear that whoever answered these questions (the letter is signed by Lord Bethell) did not read the questions; and has no doubt provided me with a proforma answer about questions concerned with deaths caused by the virus. For what it is worth, this was the response.

    "I appreciate Mr Scrutton's concerns. Deaths reported by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) are based on the cause of death recorded on death certificates. These can include cases where the doctor thought it likely that the person had COVID-19, even when there was no positive test result.

    "The deaths reported by the ONS will include deaths that are not included in the Public Health England (PHE) definition, which is that a positive test result was confirmed by a PHE or NHS laboratory. They may also exclude cases that are included in the PHE definition because, although the patient had a positive test for COVID-29, this was not mentioned on the death certificate. However, in generally, the numbers of deaths reported by the ONS will be larger than those included in the PHE definition. More information on the PHE definition can be found at www.gov.uk by searching for COVIC-19 investigation and initial clinical management of possible cases.

    "All the deaths data shown on coronavirus.date.gov.uk are for people who have had a positive test restult confirmed by a PHE or NHS laboratory. They also include, for England, deaths of people who have had a positive test resut confirmed through testing done by commercial partners.

    "The data does not include deaths of people who had COVID-19 but had not been tested, people who tested positive only via a non-NHS or PHE laboratory, or people who had tested negative and subsequently caught the virus and died. People who have tested positive for COVID-19 could, in some cases, have died from something else. Death are only included in these figures if they occur within 28 days of a positive test. This makes the recording more accurate because cases where a person has tested positive but then died from other causes some months later are excluded.

    "Data on COVID-19 deaths in England are produced by PHE. These data are taken from three different sources:

• NHS England deaths in hospitals are reported by NHS trusts, using the COVID-19 Patient Notification System;
• PHE Health Protection Teams: the local teams report deaths notified to them, which will mainly be death not in hospitals; and
• linking data on confirmed positive cases to the NHS Demographic Batch Service: when a patient dies, the NHS central register of patients is notified. The list of all lab-confirmed cases is checked against the NHS central register each day, to check if any of the patients have died.

    "Data on deaths from these three sources are linked to the list of people who have had a diagnosis of COVID-19 confirmed by a PHE or NHS laboratory. This is to identify as many people with a confirmed case who have died as possible.

    "Notifications of deaths will often come from more than one source, so the records are checked and merged into one database and duplicates are removed. Automated processes are used to ensure that the data are as complete as possible. Full details of the process of producing the data are available on coronavirus.data.gov.uk/about-data. As referred to above, deaths that occured more than 28 days after a positive test are removed. 

    "This final list of deaths therefore includes all those previously reported by NHS England, and those that were confirmed cases, whether they died in hospital or elsewhere, provided death occurred with 28 days of a test.

     "With regard to annual death rates over the last six years, these canbe found on the ONS website at www.ons.gov.uk by searching for 'Deaths in the UK from 1990 to 2020.

    "Additional, Mr Scrutton can make a Freedom of Information (FOI) request by going to www.ons.gov.uk and searching for 'Freedom of Information'.

    "I hope this reply is helpful.

The reply is not helpful in any regard because has answered questions that I did not ask! Is the response deliberate obfuscation, and attempt not to answer questions about the harm being cause by the Covid-19 vaccines? When I asked the question 1.403 people had been reporting as dying soon after receiving the vaccines. That figure has since risen to 1,536.

In any case I will now write back to my MP, ask him to ask the questions again, and suggests that he advises Lord Bethell to actually reads the questions before his next response.

So once again, I will await an answer - and post them here. So again, watch this space. 

How safe are Covid-19 Vaccines? What is happening around the world? And what are the official websites telling us?

What is the truth about the Covid-19 vaccines? Whatever the arguments for and against them everyone needs to know whether the vaccines are safe, or whether they can cause serious adverse reactions, and even death. We all have to make an informed decision, based on the evidence made available to us.

The Government, the Conventional Medical Establishment (CHE) and the mainstream media (MSM) are all absolutely certain about this. The vaccines are safe, entirely safe. Everyone should get vaccinated. They speak with one clear and decisive voice. Any information contrary to this advice is 'misinformation', 'fake news', or 'conspiracy theory'. And, we are told, listening to 'anti-vaxxers', or responding to 'vaccine hesitancy', could be serious enough to cost us our life. The vaccines are that crucial!

This official message has been consistent and implacable. Often issues of this importance will lead to discussion, disagreement, and argument. Government will debate with opposition parties; newspapers will examine, investigate, and provide us with their conclusions, which usually vary between paper and paper; television news will interview people with different views. But none of this has happened for over a year now. The seriousness of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the safety of the Covid-19 vaccines, have not been a matter for disagreement. 

I AM AWARE OF THAT A DEBATE IS GOING ON. INDEED I AM PART OF THE DEBATE. But the debate Is going on Out Here - it cannot be heard in Parliament; or within conventional medical circles, or even within the MSM, or so-called 'Free Press'. It is not welcome

THE SAFETY OF COVID-19 VACCINES

Yet there are events happening around the world, and published within official government and health websites that raise serious questions about what we are being told, and suggests that we are not being given the whole, unvarnished truth. Moreover, this official information is not open to challenge. It exists - open to interpretation, yes; challengeable, no! I will focus on two issues.

• Over 20 countries around the world have, at one time or another, suspended one or other of the new Covid-19 vaccines. Denmark has permanently banned two of them (the AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines) as a result of the serious adverse reactions suffered by patients. This has been done whilst other countries continue to denied them. This raises important questions. Is it safe for the citizens on one country to take the vaccines, whilst it is unsafe for the citizens of another country to take them?

The suspension and banning of the Covid-19 vaccines is something that can be discussed, debated, and argued about; but the different reactions, the different stances, cannot be denied. And if there is an issue here it is surely one that is important to the personal decision we should all be taking about whether to have, or to refuse the vaccines. If people merely follow Government / CME / MSM advice and get vaccinated without being aware of this debate they are not making an informed choice.

• Official statistics about the reported side effects of the Covid-19 vaccines is another factor. The figures of patient harm are much greater, and more serious than we are being told, indeed, they are on a scale vastly greater than has been admitted by government, the CHE or the MSM. And these are statistics taken from official government/health websites. So they are not misinformation; but it is not information that is being shared widely with the public. Most people are blissfully unaware of what is happening. 

At the time of writing, there have been over 1,000 reported deaths in UK; nearly 4,000 in the USA; and more that 7,500 in the European Union - all these people dying within a few days of receiving the vaccination.

The websites carrying this information, and the sources of their information, are impeccable. As well as death many other serious health conditions have been reported, and so should be linked with the Covid-19 vaccines: it is not just blood clotting. The information is undeniable. Is the importance and seriousness of the information is open to discussion? Yes. Is it of crucial importance to people in making an informed choice about taking the vaccines? Yes. Is it being share with the public? No. But the information is undeniable, and it is evidenced here on these websites.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions/coronavirus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reporting#annex-1-vaccine-analysis-print

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/vaers-vaccine-injuries-climb-pfizer-seeks-full-approval/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=4d3a5a92-4213-46f8-a5f5-c14b564d90cf 

https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/7766-dead-330218-injuries-european-database-of-adverse-drug-reactions-for-covid-19-vaccines/

Unfortunately few people will bother to research these specialist websites. They will listen to, trust and rely on what the government, doctors, and their mainstream news sources tell them. Why should they do otherwise? They would not provide them with misinformation; would they?

If the adverse reactions have been mentioned at all it is usually heavily discounted, or even denied. Or the people/organisations that provided the information will have been discounted or abused; dismissed as 'anti-vaxxers' peddling harmful misinformation.

Yet there remains another question even more important question. If these important official figures are correct, why is it that we are not being told about them? Why are they being censored?

• Why is the conventional medical system (CHE), which is allegedly committed to the Hippocratic oath of "First, do no harm", allowing vaccines to be rolled out when they are aware (or should be aware) they are causing serious patient harm? Do they not have a duty to inform us?
  
• Why are governments around the world complicit in this, even taking draconian powers over our personal freedoms, undermining our social and emotional lives, destroying so many jobs and livelihoods, in order to ensure that we are vaccinated? They too must know about these official statistics. Do they not have a duty to inform us?
  
• Similarly, why does the mainstream media (MSM) not investigate these matters? Are the statistics correct? How serious are they? Is the medical system protecting us from harm? Is the government telling us the whole truth to its citizens? Do they not have a duty to inform us?
  

Instead, all three do no more than to justify their stance. They are still doing it. The vaccines are safe. Side effects are mild; or it is merely an unfortunate coincidence that patients are getting blood clots, et al, and even dying. And, of course, the “benefits of the vaccines outweigh the disadvantages” - although we are never told what lies at either side of this often-used equation.

So what is the agenda of people who are telling us this? What is the agenda of government, the CHE and the MSM. They are all aware of this, or they should be; but they have never mentioned the large numbers of people who have died of the Covid-19 vaccines, not to mention the other serious side effects. None of the families have been interviewed. None of the medical experts have bothered to tell us about them. And Governments continue to peddle the partial propaganda of the pharmaceutical industry.

MEDICAL SCIENCE

The political, medical, and journalistic agenda is the one set down by conventional medical science. Government is 'following the science'; these are not their policies, policy is informed by science. And science is sacrosanct, it speaks with a single voice, and it tells us that Covid-19 is a serious pandemic, that the only solution to it are the new vaccines, and the vaccines are safe. 

Yet Denmark hears this science too; and comes to a decision different to the decision taken in the UK, the USA, and much of the rest of the world. How can it do this?

Does 'science' speak with one voice, as we have been told now for over a year? Is the science sacrosanct, or does this so-called 'science' have to be interpreted?

It is clear that there is more that one voice, that medical science is not sacrosanct. Medical science is not just a matter of combining two chemical and observing the reaction. It is a complex matter of what data is collected, how it is collected, and how it is interpreted. And the statistics that result are open to many different interpretations. Medical science does not have all the answers, and it is so much under the control of the pharmaceutical industry that the answers it provides cannot be relied upon.

When we can see this, understand it, realise what is happening, is it possible to continue trusting the Government, the CHE, or the MSM? They are not doing their job. The entire conventional medical establishment (which now seems to include national governments, and the MSM) are complicit in the failure to discuss the issues. 

I ask - seriously - would anyone buy a second hand car from these people? 

Health, above all else, is a matter of trust. Would you allow yourself to be injected with any vaccine, or persuaded to take any pharmaceutical drug - unless you were utterly confident that you were being told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? But the 'whole truth' is being censored - by a pharmaceutical-led cabal that now includes not only important medical authorities, including drug regulators, and the WHO, but also governments, and the MSM. We are increasingly being controlled, not just about what we do, but what we must think, what we must believe, and what our values should be.

Covid-19 Vaccines are pronounced "safe". How much can we rely on this? The Ages of Drugs: is a new saga beginning?

Anyone who is relying on conventional medicine to overcome the Covid-19 virus is probably ignoring the best defence we have, and even putting their lives at risk.

I am reminded of a story that a Christian friend once told me about "The drowning Christian". It concerns a man faced with imminent death by drowning. He is offered help; by someone in a canoe; another in a speed boat; and eventually by a helicopter. He refuses all these offers of help preferring instead to 'rely on God'. He drowns; and when he meets his God he asks why he did not help. God reminded him that he did send two boats and a helicopter! 

This modern-day parable is told by Christians to gently to encourage us all to help ourselves rather than to rely on any blind faith in God to solve our problems for us.

The fact is that we are all well equipped to help ourselves against viruses! My good, deeply religious friend would no doubt remind me that God has provided us all with an immune system, that we have been given natural immunity from disease. It is not necessary to wait for a vaccine, or indeed anything else that conventional medicine might offer as 'the only' solution to the problem.

The problem with pharmaceutical medicine is that it wants us to place our faith in vaccines. Throughout the pandemic conventional medical 'science' has focused on the need for a vaccine to the almost total exclusion of any mention of natural immunity.

The importance of our immune system is stressed by homeopathy, and most other natural medical therapies. There are two problems with reliance on the immune system. One is that we all have to work quite hard to support and strengthen our natural immunity (I have written about this recently, here). And second, it is not a profitable strategy for the pharmaceutical industry. So the conventional medical establishment wants us to believe that our salvation (literally, that word has been used) rests entirely with pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, and that we should rely on them to the exclusion of everything else.

Reliance on the Covid-19 Vaccines - the beginning of a new saga?

Most people have been waiting for the Covid-19 vaccines. For months we have all been told these vaccines were going to be our saviour, they would return us to normal life, ending the need to wear masks, to socially distance, and to lockdown. Yet now, even after many millions of people have been vaccinated, this is not happening - even for those people who have been vaccinated. 

Then reports started to emerge about people dying shortly after they had been vaccinated. So most European countries suspended one of the vaccines. Days later the drug regulator, the European Medicine Agency (EMA) has assured us that despite the deaths, this vaccine is safe, and the vaccination programme should continue.

So are the vaccines safe? Are the reports of serious side effects, including blood clots and death, to be discounted this easily? And with such complete certainty?

There is little doubt that a new saga has started, as it does with most (if not all) pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. I have described the process before as 'The Ages of Pharmaceutical Drugs', and also when describing 'The Dangerous Drugs of Today'. 

            "There is a regular pattern of 'new' drugs replacing 'old' drugs, always accompanied by strident claims about their miraculous capabilities for the new one - only for these new 'wonder' drugs to be withdrawn (as silently as possible) just a few years later. One of the recurring features of pharmaceutical drugs is that each one appears to pass through a specific life cycle.

Birth. The new drug is announced as a 'medical breakthrough' that will transform the lives of patients who suffer from a particular disease. We are told that they have been 'scientifically' tested, and found to be both safe and effective. 

Childhood. The drug is prescribed to patients, often in great anticipation. However, it is quickly discovered that the new wonder drug has 'side effects', or 'adverse reactions' (which should be known as Disease-Inducing-Effects, or DIEs). However, in these early, hopeful days these are usually considered to be unimportant. The argument is usually that the benefits of the drugs to patients greatly outweigh these ‘minor’ disadvantages.

This is where the Covid-19 vaccines are at the moment - in their childhood - not such a wonder drug - and with the first signs of patient harm having emerged, albeit quickly denied or dismissed. Adulthood will follow, when more serious evidence of patient harm emerges which cannot be denied or ignored, and the use of the drug has to be restricted, prescribed only with great caution, alongside increasing patient 'hesitancy'. Old Age then follows when "patients begin to realise some of the problems caused by the drug, and as a result there is increased resistance to taking them. Doctors are finally forced to accept that the drug does cause damage to patients. The use of the drug declines, and its profitability is severely reduced. By this stage, however, Big Pharma has often come up with a 'new' replacement drug".

The final stage, Death, has been the ultimate fate of most pharmaceutical drugs throughout history. This now happens only "when the drug has been found to be either ineffective or unsafe (and has become less profitable too). But tragically this never happens before millions of patients have been allowed to suffer serious harm to their health, and the drug can be banned "as quietly and surreptitiously as possible" to avoid any negative publicity.

During all this time pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are kept alive by conventional medical science, and a drug regulatory system, both of which have fallen completely under the control of pharmaceutical interests. Both are supposed to protect patients from harm, but essentially they each now serve the interests of the pharmaceutical industry, providing assurances about drug safety. Add to this the fact that the pharmaceutical industry has a long history of dishonesty, corruption and fraud - briefly outlined here.

So this is not a medical system that anyone should trust with their health and well-being. Everyone has within them the means of protection. Like the drowning man we should rely on what we have, some might argue the things God has given us, rather than what is being offered, rather dubiously, by a pharmaceutical industry whose track record in treating illness and disease is quite appalling.

If conventional medicine had our best interests at the forefront of their agenda it would been emphasising the importance of each of us tending to our immune systems, developing our natural immunity through diet, nutrition and exercise, et al. Instead, it has been intent on forcing yet another vaccine on us. It won't be entirely clear, perhaps for many more years just how harmful these vaccines are.

Have Covid-19 Vaccines killed 460 people in the UK? Or is the Drug Regulator (the MHRA) using the Government website to peddle misinformation?

Let's just imagine this for a moment.

• Our doctor wants us to take a vaccine. We are reassured that the vaccine is entirely safe (without any reservation or caveat).
• We then discover that over 400 people have died in the UK shortly after taking the vaccine.

Would we be concerned? Would we want to be told that this had happened? Or would we dismiss the information as "disinformation" or "fake news" and just get vaccinated anyway?

Yet this has happened. Have a look at this link. Covid-19 vaccines have been linked to 402 deaths. It makes the following claim

        "Government data show that, compared with the Pfizer vaccine, there have been 43% more reports of injuries related to the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine in the UK, including 77% more adverse events and 25% more deaths - but no red flags from UK regulators".

Ahh! I hear you say. I know about this. It is disinformation. The government has warned me. The NHS has warned me too. And so has the mainstream media (MSM). So there is no need to worry about this.

But now go to this link. It not only confirms the evidence of vaccine-caused-deaths but it also discusses reports of anaphylaxis (severe allergic reactions), Bell's Palsy, and "events with a fatal outcome". The figures are different - but only because they appear to have grown. So what is this second link? Is it another sources of fake news?

Well, not exactly! It comes from the UK government's official website, posted by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), and is the weekly summary of the Yellow Card reporting system on the coronavirus vaccine. This is what it says:

            "The MHRA has received 212 UK reports of suspected ADRs to the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in which the patient died shortly after vaccination, 244 reports for the Oxford University/AstraZeneca vaccine, and 4 where the brand of vaccine was unspecified."

So 460 people have died "shortly after" getting a Covid19 vaccine! And this is official government information. Yet the government hasn't told us. The NHS hasn't told us. The MSM haven't mentioned it?

WHY?

Is this not a matter of public concern? Is it not something YOU might want to know before agreeing to the vaccine? Would you ask question about describing a vaccine as 'safe' when it has been reported that it is killing large numbers of people?

But wait. It's not a problem. The MHRA explain why the information is not important.....

• "The majority of these reports were in elderly people or people with underlying illness."

Well, that's okay then! Except that for the last year, when daily Covid19 deaths have been reported, the virus was always assumed to be the cause of death, even when the deceased had 'underlying health conditions', as long as there had been a Covid test 28 days prior to the death. Now the rules seem to have changed. People who die shortly after the vaccine have died of their underlying illness, not from the vaccine.

The rest of the MHRA summary follows this dismissive lead. You need to read it for yourself - it is an official public document on the government's own website. A summary might read:

• Yes, there have been reports of serious adverse reactions to the vaccine
• but we don't need to worry (we don't even have to be told)
• the reports can all be explained away, dismissed
  
• the vaccines were not the cause of death
• we can be reassured that all is well
• but we promise to keep a close eye on the situation!
  

This cavalier dismissal by the UK's drug regulator of over 400 reported deaths following closely Covid19 vaccinations is disgraceful. The general public has not been told about this by government, by the NHS, or the drug regulator. And the MSM (for whatever reason) have not even bothered to investigate further, or sought to inform us. So large numbers of the general public continue to accept the vaccines on the basis that they are entirely safe; and no doubt on the understanding that if there were any dangers they would be informed.

• Is there any other walk of life, outside the conventional medical establishment, that would have allowed this to happen? That when informed of 400 plus deaths it would have been allowed to carry on as if nothing had happened, regardless of an adequate explanation, and on the basis of unsupported reassurances?
• That following these deaths, millions more millions more people would continue to queue for the vaccine, still being reassured that it is 'safe', all apparently on the basis of unsupported medical reassurances that all is well?

Health and safety is NOT alive and well within the conventional medical establishment. The 'precautionary principle' is clearly NOT being applied. And the Hippocratic principle of "First Do No Harm?" has been completely forgotten by our doctors.

 

AND THIS IS NOT DISINFORMATION OR FAKE NEWS! 

PostScript: Nor is it disinformation or fake news to say that 1,265 people have died in the USA after taking the Covid-19 vaccines, nearly half of which happened within 2 days of the vaccination. Again, this information (and much more) comes from official sources on 26th February 2021.

Post Script: 12 April 2021. The number of deaths being reported by the MHRA, UK's drug regulator, on the official UK government website, has now been updated to 786, a rise of 314 deaths since writing the original blog. I am still not aware that the government, health bodies, or the MSM have told the public this, even when talking about imposing vaccine passports on everyone.

Numbers of deaths reported by VAERS in the USA have now risen from 1,265 to 2,342 within a similar period.

 

What is a Safe Medicine? Seeking Conventional Medicine's concept of safety

The Conventional Medical Establishment (CME) is telling us all, through national governments, conventional doctors, national and international medical organisations, and the mainstream media (MSM) that the Covid-19 vaccines are safe, entirely safe, usually without any reservation or caveat.

At the same time there are a number of internet websites that are reporting serious adverse reactions, including deaths, which have been attributed to these same vaccines. Indeed, reports of vaccine harm are commonplace on the internet - here are just two of these.

501 Deaths + 10,748 other injuries reported to official CDC 'Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System' (VAERS).

This website has attempted to keep an ongoing record of all reports of serious adverse reactions to these vaccines.

So what is becoming increasingly clear is that these two narratives about the safety of Covid-19 vaccines are mutually inconsistent - they cannot both be true!

The central question is how the Conventional Medical Establishment (ConMed) can continue to make their unreserved claims that Covid-19 vaccines are safe refuting these reports. Do they know about these worldwide reports of patient harm? Are they ignoring them deliberately? Surely, if such reports are untrue, the CME would be refuting them?

Regular readers of this blog will know that there is a credibility gap between the efficacy claims of pharmaceutical medicine, and its actual performance. CME has always made claims about the safety of its drugs and vaccines, and their value for patient health. So the claims about Covid-19 vaccine safety, and their tenuous connection with reality, is not new. It is a well-used, well-rehearsed CME strategy. 

Proxy Advertising

In the advertising industry it is well known that if people/customers are told, frequently enough, that a product is effective and safe it will be believed, and the product will sell. So in order to sell drugs and vaccines it is important that drug companies state that they are safe. So, of course, they do. And every sector of society under the control of the CME, including national governments, world and national health agencies, and the mainstream media (MSM), fully support these assertion. 

Indeed, all the CME does more than merely support the pharmaceutical industry. They provide the advertising for the drug companies. When was the last time you heard the MSM being critical of a drug or vaccine? When was the last time you heard a spokesman from a drug company defending the safety of a drug or vaccine? The pharmaceutical industry is being provided with not only free advertising, but more credible promotion from a supposedly 'independent' source.

If a washing machine manufacturer told us their washing machines were safe and effective we might all say - "well, they would say that, wouldn't they?" We would be sceptical, we would check, we would compare. And we would also assume that if the claims being made were untrue we would be warned about it, by government agencies, consumer groups, the MSM, and the like.

With the pharmaceutical industry, and its drugs and vaccines, this is just not happening.

The Credibility of Medical Science

Allegedly, the proof of the safety of pharmaceutical medicine is medical science. We are told all the time - conventional medicine works because it is based on science. The safety of Covid-19 vaccines are based on the scientific testing programmes to which they have been subjected, rushed maybe, but scientific, and therefore unchallengeable. Just mention the word - "science" - and it must be true - it cannot be questioned, leave alone challenged!

I have argued many times that medical science has become a scion of the pharmaceutical industry, part of the CME, a 'science' that has been bought and paid for, to deliver what its paymaster wants it to deliver - not least of which is that scientific testing has shown a drug, or a vaccine to be safe.

Drug Regulation and Medical Science - why conventional medicine is not scientific

The Credibility of Doctors

Doctors have become one of the most respected of all professions. Gone is the 19th century idea that "an apple a day keeps the doctor away", even though a fruit-rich diet would certainly have had more impact on Covid-19 than any treatment conventional medicine has had available to treat it! Doctors are the experts we see at our surgeries, they are paraded on our television night-after-night, their task to reassure us that a particular pharmaceutical drug or vaccine is safe. They are used by the CME to reinforce the safety message, in a variety of ways.

• The drug/vaccine has been proven to be "entirely safe" for patients. The drug/vaccine is "well tolerated" by patients.
  

Yet this routine reassurance is usually contradicted by the Patient Information Leaflet, which legally has to accompany each drug, and outline all the known adverse reactions the drug or vaccine is known to produce. In other words, what doctors tell us is invariably contradicted by CME's own medical literature.

• If the safety message is challenged, conventional medicine's spokespersons will usually tell us that the benefits of the drug/vaccine outweighs any possible dangers.
  

Suddenly, patient harm is admitted; but instantly discounted. The drug/vaccine is so effective we should not be concerned about the side effects. Who makes this judgement? Who does the 'cost/benefit' analysis? The CME, specifically medical science, of course. Where is it published? Nowhere. It is merely an assertion. This washing machine is safe - because we are telling you it is safe.

The effects of the 'safety' message

Doctors are expected to reassure their patients, just as washing machine salesmen are supposed to reassure their customers. It is safe, there is no need for concern, just don't worry. Listen to what you are being told. In medicine this safety message can, and often does, have consequences far beyond just taking the pill. 

    a) the patient suffers an adverse reaction to the drug/vaccine, but as (s)he had been assured by the doctor it was "entirely safe", it could not possibly have been a side effect. So the patient will often not bother to report the side effect to the doctor. The harm goes unrecognised, either by patient or doctor.

    b) A patient takes a drug/vaccine - and suffers an adverse reaction - and does report it to the doctor. Clearly the complain will cause some embarrassment. to the doctor. "You told me it was safe, you did not warn me it might do this". So the doctor finds it difficult to accept, or just won't accept, that his/her patient has been damaged by a prescribed drug/vaccine. So perhaps it wasn't really a side effect. Perhaps it was just coincidence, or part of the initial illness, nothing to do with the drug/vaccine. So the side effect is not reported, an easier position for the doctor to assume.

So the patient is reassured, it wasn't the drug, it must have been something else. How unfortunate, what bad luck!

Reporting Side Effects

Studies have regularly shown that less that 1% of drug/vaccine side effects are ever reported to drug regulators. It is the national drug regulator who examine reports of side effects, and in face of this under-reporting they can come to the conclusion that the drug/vaccine only affects a very small number of people, especially when compared to the number of people who have received the drug/vaccine. 

So the drug regulator publishes the side effects they have received, as they are legally required to do, but they can 'legitimately' describe them as 'uncommon' or 'rare'.

So in terms of the cost-benefit analysis, the benefits of the drug/vaccine, over-emphasised by a compliant medical science, are not outweighed by the disadvantages, the adverse reactions, which are under-emphasised by the reporting system.

So playing the game of Russian Roulette with adverse drug/vaccine reactions suddenly becomes more acceptable - to both the CME and the patient.

There is a vicious circularity about this situation. A drug/vaccine is safe; and because it is proclaimed as being safe its safety is never seriously questioned or investigated.

CME - don't break ranks - or else

 The CME is powerful, but at its centre is the PME, the pharmaceutical drug companies that generate huge profits (it is by far the most profitable industry in the world) which are spent on controlling the different constituent parts of the CME.

Doctors owe their status and position to the ongoing success of the CME. To break ranks is taboo, and results in the severest of punishments. Medical staff who act as 'whistleblowers', anyone who questions the safety of pharmaceutical drugs/vaccines, is putting himself/herself in professional jeopardy. Dr Andrew Wakefield is perhaps the most notable case in recent years, when he questioned the safety of a vaccine, and had his mainstream medical career destroyed as a direct result.

In any Establishments members expected to close ranks, especially in adversity. This is why the secrecy and lack of transparency within Britain's National Health Service (NHS) has been regularly criticised when it has tried to cover up medical errors, bad practice, and is asked to explain the harm done to its patients. 

At the very heart of this medical secrecy are issues of patient safety, and the safety of the treatments they have been given. 

The routine denial of patient harm has become endemic within the NHS because of the need to defend the safety of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, the very backbone of conventional medical treatment.

But breaking ranks is not reserved for medical staff, it also applies to constituent parts of the CME most people would not think of being part of the CME.

National Governments

The CME needs government backing because they are vitally influential in providing health services to their populations. So they fund politicians and political campaigns. They lobby parliaments. They make huge investments within economies that depend on them. And in return CME expects to receive political support for their medical treatments. Many national governments have become as beholden to the future of the CME as any doctor.

The MSM

The mainstream media is also vitally important to the CME. The MSM controls what the public are told about health, and what they know and understand about medical treatment.

It would have been difficult for the CME is control the Covid-19 agenda without both the support of governments, and the MSM. Remember, it had no treatment, and no prevention to offer patients: yet the competence of conventional medicine has never been seriously questioned. 

Hand washing, masks, social distancing, lockdown have had devastating effects on our emotional, social, recreational and economic lives; but the adequacy and relevance of these policies have never been seriously examined or challenged, nor the immense harm it has done, and is doing to our emotional, social and economic life. 

The CME agenda for Covid-19 did not include any reference to natural immunity. The importance of the immune system has rarely been mentioned, and natural medical therapies have been totally excluded from any discussion.

None of this would have been possible had it not been for the compliant silence of both government and the MSM.

Yet the control of government and MSM has one further major benefit for the CME. Medical claims (perhaps more accurately called lies?) about the safety of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are further safeguarded. They are all safe because there is no-one left to tell us they are not safe.

Claims of Medical Safety

Government and MSM compliance to the pharmaceutical medical agenda reinforces the message about the safety of drugs and vaccines. Doctors and other medical staff are able to tell us they are "entirely safe" because they know they will never be challenged about the veracity of such claims. Doctors can parade these views directly with the MSM, and the main journalistic response is usually "that really is good news, thanks for reassuring us". Just as James Bond has a license to kill, doctors have a license to lie about the safety of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. There is no questioning, no investigation into what they actually mean by 'safe' and 'safety'.

And just as in the doctor-patient relationship, the government-citizen and MSM-public relationship has, as a result, become a hostage to fortune. 

• Government and MSM have repeatedly said that Covid vaccines would be our salvation; in much the same ways they have heralded each new 'wonder drug', or 'miracle cure', as something that would soon "win conventional medicine's war" against disease.
  
• Both have welcomed the arrival of Covid-19 vaccines as "good news, the best possible news", without reservation, without question or restraint; just as they have welcomed new conventional treatments that would "transform our experience" of a particular disease.
• At the same time both have ignored any issue that has been vaguely critical of conventional medicine; that pharmaceutical drugs/vaccines cause serious adverse reactions; the fraudulent activities of medical science; the prosecution of drug companies for serious criminal offences; et al.
• And they have even dutifully attacked the opposition, natural medical therapies, and removed them from any significant role within the NHS.
  

So how can they now admit that there are real safety issues with pharmaceutical medicine when they have supported and praised all their treatments over the decades? 

In order to do so they would have to admit they had been wrong? They had both failed to ask relevant questions. They had failed to investigate the claims of the CME. Their politics were corrupt. Their journalism incompetent. For decades, both had misled the people to whom they had both a duty of care, and a responsibility to inform and protect.

Safe is what we tell you is safe!

So the concept of safety within convention medicine is very different to the kind of safety most people would recognise as 'safe'. Crossing a motorway on foot might be described as 'safe' in the context of the concept of medical safety! You are safe because we would get away with it much of the time, but not all the time. In much the same way conventional medicine can say their drugs and vaccines are safe. 

• The CME might know they cause serious adverse reactions, that they harm patients. It is, after all, in the medical literature, available to doctors, governments and the MSM. But the CME won't openly and transparently admit to it; and there is no-one to tell patients unless the patients look for themselves.
• Government agencies might regularly pay out large sums of money for those patients who have been able to prove they have been harmed by pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines; but responsibility for the damage caused is not formally recognised, and certainly not connected or compared with the CME's 'vaccines are safe' mantra.
  

First do no harm

Since Hippocrates, in 4th century bce Greece, this principle is supposed to underlie all medical practice.  The CME is certainly aware of the the principle, but its concept of safety allows it to deny it is causing harm to patients. So the CME is in trouble; and the more people who recognise that pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines cause harm, the more trouble it will be in. This is why reports of patient harm caused by its new Covid-19 vaccines are so important to ignore, discount and deny.

The future of pharmaceutical medicine depends on its ability 

to maintain its concept of medical safety.

 

DIE's. The Disease Inducing Effects of Pharmaceutical Drugs and Vaccines

For a broader, more direct insight into how pharmaceutical drug and vaccine treatment causes patient harm (and are therefore not safe by any normal definition of safety) this E-Book links the drugs and vaccines that are known to be associated with a wide variety of illnesses and diseases.

COVID-19 Vaccines. The 'bad news' about the 'good news'. The bad news is with us: but we are only told that vaccines are good news

'V' Day. 8th December 2020

Vaccinations begin in UK

It was the day the world was going to be saved from the dreadful COVID-19 pandemic. The new vaccine had arrived, tested and approved, in quadruple-quick-time. And it was very effective indeed, and entirely safe. There was nothing to worry about, other than when we would be offered it.

 

Indeed it was a joyous day. The government and the mainstream media (MSM) were ecstatic. There appeared to be no other news available that day! Everyone could and should now get themselves vaccinated as soon as possible. We had been waiting for this for 10 months - and it had arrived.

 

9th December 2020

But the following day there was a problem, "an allergy warning over the new vaccines". Two NHS staff had an allergic reaction, shortly after taking the vaccine; they were understood to  have had an "anaphylactoid reaction"; something which "tends to involve a skin rash, breathless and sometime a drop in blood pressure.

The issue was heavily discounted (as it always is in the MSM). The two people were now "fine". They had "a history of serious allergies" and "carried adrenaline pens around with them".

Yet the fact was, two people, employees known to the NHS, were vaccinated, and had this reaction. Was this a mistake? Was the allergy reaction unknown? Suddenly the fully tested, 'safe' vaccine suddenly met with a reservation.

"People with a history of significant allergic reactions should not have the Pfizer/BioNTech Covid jab".

 

The UK regulator, the MHRA, was now saying something it had not said the day before. The new advice was to be applied to everyone who had "reactions to medicines, food or vaccines". Patients should be observed for at least 15 minutes after the vaccine, and the vaccine should not be given to anyone without facilities being readily available to treat them.

So was this an isolated event? Or just the first of many to come? This was just two weeks ago, and there has been regular reports of 'problems' with many of the vaccines. Here are just a few of them; and as far as I am aware, few of these have ever being reported in the MSM.

• What is concerning is not only that CIVID-19 vaccines are clearly capable of causing patient harm, but that we are not being told about them.
• It would appear that we are not supposed to know. 
• We are told about the 'good' news. But there is less willingness to tell us about the 'bad' news.
  
• On this basis, anyone of wants to make an informed choice about whether to take the vaccine, or not, we are not being given the full picture.

FDA investigates allergic reaction to Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine after more healthcare workers hospitalised. 

This article states that theFDA, the USA's drug regulator was also investigating "allergic reactions" which had happened in "multiple states".  One hospital in Illinois had temporarily shut down its vaccination programme after 4 healthcare workers developed allergic reactions to the vaccine, one described as 'severe'.

 

The FDA has apparently acknowledged that these reactions may have been caused by PEG, a compound in the Pfizer vaccine which Children's Health Defense had previously told them "could put millions of people at risk". A harmful ingredient? And we have not been told about it?

 

Two Alaska health workers got emergency treatment after receiving Pfizer's vaccine.

Again, this happened when two workers, with a history of allergies, developed symptoms 'just minutes' after taking the vaccine. Apparently one of them had to stay in hospital for several days, part of it in intensive care. Yet, as so often happens,  the situation was discounted.

 

            "Health officials said that the cases would not disrupt their vaccine rollout plans and that they were sharing the information for the sake of transparency".

Again, important information not shared, ignored by MSM, no questions asked, and discounted by the conventional medical establishment.

Yet allergy is not the only reported problem with the vaccine.

 

(Postscript. 6 January 2021. It would appear that the pharmaceutical medical establishment have already decided at an allergic reaction to the Pfizer vaccine is no a problem! "History of anaphylaxis no longer contraindication for Pfizer COVID vaccine" - as long as they are not allergic to any of the ingredients. Of course, we will all know if we are allergic to the ingredients!)

 

Four volunteers develop facial paralysis after taking Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.

 

According to this report, these vaccine trialists suffered Bells Palsy, a form of facial paralysis resembling a stroke, after taking the vaccine. Yet again this event has gone largely unreported, and was again heavily discounted by the conventional medical establishment. The FDA saying that this is "consistent with the expected background rate in the general population, and that there was no clear evidence linking the coronavirus vaccine to the unpleasant medical condition".

So that's okay then, is it? The article continues that side effects from the vaccine were "common" but "appear to be minor".

            "Out of the trial participants 84% experience some kind of reaction. After receiving the jab 63% ..... reported fatigue and 55% said they suffered from headaches. Chills were reported by 32% of participants, 24% complained of joint pain, and 14% developed a fever".

 

A pattern is emerging. It is not 'disinformation'. It is not 'fake news'. It is not conspiracy theory. But it would appear that it is of no interest to the government, to conventional medicine, or to the MSM.

 

And it is not just the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine that is causing problems.

 

Russians warned to abstain from drinking alcohol after getting the Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine

 

Yes, whatever happened to the Russian vaccine? It was, after all, the first on the scene; but it is not promoted by one of the major pharmaceutical companies. Even so it is not problem free, and not worthy of mention, presumably because of possible cross-contamination with more favoured vaccines. Anyway, Russian government health officials are warning that patients should avoid consuming alcohol for 42 days after receiving the vaccine, and also warns against smoking before and after vaccination. 

 

Normal life, apparently, will not be renewed because of the introduction of this vaccine! 

 

Peruvian man suffers Guillain-Barre symptoms after receiving Sinopharm COVID-19 vaccine.

 

On 11th December 2020, Peru’s National Institute of Health (INS) said it was temporarily suspending the Phase 1 clinical trial of an experimental COVID-19 vaccine developed by the Sinopharm Group of Shanghai. This followed one of the participants in the vaccine trials had difficulty moving his arms and legs. These are the typical symptoms of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), and this is now known to be a common adverse reaction to many other vaccines, especially the influenza vaccine.

 

Over 3,000 'Health Impact Events' after COVID-19 mRNA Vaccinations

This article contains some quite amazing information emanating from the USA's CDC (Centers for Disease Control. They have stated on 18th December 2020 that there had been six case reports of anaphylaxis following vaccination with the Pfizer vaccine. They described this as "a potentially life threatening reaction that occurs when immune cells overreact to a substance that has entered the body and a hyper-inflammatory response is triggered involving sudden release of histamine and other chemicals that may cause". It can cause skin redness, hives, and itching; swelling of the eyes, lips, tongue, throat, hands, feet; trouble swallowing and breathing, wheezing; diarrhoea or vomiting; abdominal or chest pain; fast or irregular heartbeat; dizziness, sudden drop in blood pressure; headache; confusion, vision and speech problems; shock/loss of consciousness; cardiac arrest; and death.

 

            ".....between 14th and 18th December 2020 there were 272,001 doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine administered and 3,150 “Health Impact Events” recorded, including 514 events in pregnant women..... The chart gave no further details about the nature of the more than 3,000 Health Impact Events recorded by the CDC. The CDC’s definition of Health Impact Events is “unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to work, required care from doctor or health care professional.”

 

THIS IS NOT A DESCRIPTION OF A SAFE VACCINE.

There is nothing to rejoice about this, not to celebrate, no good reason to queue to take the vaccine.

 

There have been other similar reports; these are just a few of the one's I have seen recently. There will inevitably be more, with all they them invariably be ignored, dismissed or discounted by the conventional medical establishment - an establishment that includes governments and the MSM. 

 

These vaccines are safe - regardless of any information to the contrary.

 

This is an alarming situation, but in effect it is no different to what has happened with so many other vaccines - their benefits exaggerated, and the harm they cause going unmentioned. Indeed, over the coming months it is almost inevitable that COVID-19 statistics, hitherto massaged to exaggerate the pandemic, and to make us fearful of it, will now be massaged to indicate that the vaccines have been successful.

 

So what follows is, at the moment, a black space. It will be filled, in time, with other similar reports of vaccine harm. The problem is not just that the new COVID-19 vaccines are likely to be as harmful as every other vaccines. It is the duplicity of the conventional medical establishment, trying to make sure we do not realise the harm that they are causing.......

 

ADDENDUM

........

* More than 5,000 COVID-19 vaccine recipients have suffered health impact event

* Boston doctor reports serious allergic reaction after getting Moderna's COVID vaccine

* Many Health Care Workers Concerned About Safety of COVID-19 vaccine

* The Bait and Switch of Vaccine Deaths with COVID-19 Mortalities

* Man, 88, dies hours after (COVID-19) vaccine

* Hamilton PSW suffers (no so) rare, but severe reaction to COVID-19 vaccine

* Elderly men die hours after getting COVID-19 vaccines in Israel

* Swiss Nursing Home Resident reportedly dies after getting COVID-19 vaccine

* Mexican doctor hospitalised after receiving COVID-19 vaccines

* Norway investigating death of two people who received Pfizer's coronavirus vaccine

* 'Perfectly healthy' Florida doctor dies weeks after getting Pfizer COVID vaccine

and here, UK's Daily Mail, and here, Miami Obstretician  develops bleeding disorders, and here, Scientist: a medical certainty that Pfizer vaccine caused death of Florida doctor.

* Here's the Video Twitter Removed of a Nurse Allegedly getting Facial Paralysis (Bell's Palsy) from Covid vaccine

* Four persons die days after Covid-19 vaccinations in Portugal, Switzerland and Norway

* 24 dead in NY Nursing home days after getting the jab 

I am now going to cease providing new information because there is an excellent website that is doing just this. World Map of Covid-19 Vaccine Side Effects - provides an overview of known adverse reactions to the new Covid-19 vaccines. Reading this link regularly will help you make an informed choice about whether you want to risk these vaccines.