Official denial
Direct link to TV Parliament site, https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/168f642a-5708-4b1a-9857-d8eacf475252
Direct link to Hansard
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-04-18/debates/9F01F787-D758-43D4-B8D1-4FA357EB3EED/Covid-19ResponseAndExcessDeaths
Let me move to some of the questions that we must raise and answer today, openly and transparently, and with full access to ONS record-level data. I am not saying that that should be disclosed to all and sundry, but surely the Government cannot defend the position that they are not willing to release that information to interested clinicians and clinical academics as a minimum. Those are the people who need to interrogate the data. It is of little relevance to me—I do not have the means or academic ability to interpret it—but it is something that interested clinical academics should have access to.
Let me move on to what we know about some of the issues surrounding mRNA technology. We know that it does not replicate locally, as we were assured it would do on launch. It metastasises to distant tissue, and replicates spike protein systemically distant from the site of administration. That is problematic for a number of reasons. According to the University of London Professor of Oncology, and principal of the Institute for Cancer Vaccines and Immunotherapy, Professor Angus Dalgleish, this has precipitated various serious and sometimes fatal consequences due to antibody development mediated by the spike protein. I will not go into the detail of that, but at a meeting convened by the hon. Member for North West Leicestershire, Professor Dalgleish told us that the UK Government and their agencies are in serious denial about this issue, resulting in many deaths being poorly understood.
Let me give a couple of examples. Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia is one of the principal causes of blood clot formation, which can cause stroke, pulmonary emboli, and other cardiac-related events including heart attacks, all of which can be life-limiting or fatal. Another antibody linked to the
Toggle showing location of Column 528
spike protein exerts an effect on myelin, and is associated with Guillain-Barré syndrome and transverse myelitis, which is a swelling around the spinal cord. Professor Dalgleish believes that that constitutes medical negligence, because the facts are there for all to see. He contends that many deaths are as a direct result of unnecessary vaccination. Furthermore, he advises that there are a greater number of yellow cards in MHRA for covid vaccines than for all other vaccines recorded, and nothing has really been done.
In a recent written answer to me, it was confirmed that the MHRA has received 489,004 spontaneous suspected adverse drug reaction reports relating to the covid-19 vaccine, up to and including 28 February this year. Across the United Kingdom, 2,734 of those reports were associated with a fatal outcome. Of course the true number is unknown—that is the nature of yellow card reporting, as only a fraction of adverse events are reported—and that is probably because of limited public awareness about some of the potential consequences and complications of vaccines, and the well-understood under-reporting of those adverse events. That is important, because the yellow card system is a key element of safe and effective clinical care. If things are not being evaluated properly, I can think of no greater betrayal of the MHRA’s clinical governance responsibility. I suggest that accountability for that must be swift and decisive. The rigorous assessment of these data is essential and must be actioned urgently. Will the Minister now engage with the MHRA and invite it to come to the House to explain the facts on these reports?
Another issue, which arises from a further written question that I tabled, relates to the role of the MHRA. It has a crucial role—in fact, it is a statutory function—to provide post-marketing surveillance and to operate the yellow card system, but the Minister responded to my question about the assessment of the potential implications of the BMJ article “Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is ‘likely’ responsible for deaths of some elderly patients, Norwegian review finds” by stating:
“The MHRA communicates safety advice based upon consideration of the totality of evidence from all relevant information sources, rather than the strengths and limitations of individual data sources.”
Surely, a fundamental step in any meta-analysis of published data is to interrogate the robustness of those data and for the public to have confidence that that is happening.
-
11:00
Dr. John Campbell
2 days agoBill Gates and his new vaccines
48.6K454 -
58:26
Michael Franzese
4 hours agoTriumph Over Tragedy | 4-Time Cancer Survivor Steve Fleischmann
26.3K11 -
55:49
The Amber May Show
22 hours ago $0.03 earnedBuilding A Parallel Medical System | CEO Of The Wellness Company Peter Gillooly
12.9K3 -
53:10
Michael Feyrer Jr
1 day agoGet Your Live Streaming Questions Answered! LIVE
12.8K1 -
DVR
Quite Frankly
7 hours ago"The Tartarian Empire: Questions & Theories" Jack of The Observation Lounge 5/8/24
18.7K8 -
The Big Mig™
4 hours agoSafe & Secure Elections My ASS
15K14 -
1:20:13
Redacted News
6 hours agoALERT! AstraZeneca Covid BOMBSHELL, Boy Scouts go Woke, Zelensky bans Christians | Redacted Live
92.5K211 -
1:28:53
Dr. Drew
9 hours agoDr. Kelly Victory: AstraZeneca Pulls COVID-19 Vaccine, Chris Cuomo Promotes Ivermectin, Pigs Begin Flying & Hell Freezes Over w/ Viva Frei – Ask Dr. Drew
58.3K80 -
50:36
VIVA TV
6 hours agoWho is the Best Bags Player in the Barstool Chicago Office?
34.4K3 -
2:01:36
Darkhorse Podcast
8 hours agoAnecdote in Science: The 224th Evolutionary Lens with Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying
50.7K44