We’re publishing a round-up of Covid vaccine safety reports and news compiled by a group of medical doctors who are monitoring developments but prefer to remain anonymous in the current climate. By no means is this part of an effort to generate alarm about the vaccines or dissuade anyone from having them. At Lockdown Sceptics we report all news about the vaccines whether positive or negative and give no one advice about whether they should or should not be received. Unlike with lockdowns, we are neither pro-vaccine nor anti-vaccine; we see our job as to report the facts, not advocate for or against vaccines. The vaccine technology is novel and the vaccines have not yet fully completed their trials, which is why they’re in use under temporary and not full market authorisation. This has been done on account of the emergency situation and the trial data was largely encouraging on both efficacy and safety. For a summary of that data, see this preamble to the Government’s page on the Yellow Card reporting system. We publish information and opinion to inform public debate and help readers come to their own conclusions about what is best for them, based on the available data.
News Round-Up
- COVID-19 vaccines are to be investigated by the European Medicines Agency for side-effects including Guillain Barre Syndrome, face-swelling anaphylaxis and blood clots.
- AstraZeneca faces further bans in Slovakia, Quebec and Brazil (for pregnant women).
- 57 Scientists and Doctors have created a report that summarises key concerns on COVID-19 vaccines regarding long and short term health implications.
- The Israeli People’s Committee have released a report on the adverse events related to the COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer).
- Concerns continue to arise around COVID-19 vaccination and pregnancy. The MHRA have announced that the vaccines are safe for pregnant women, following the results of a “preliminary study” in the New England Journal of Medicine which only included a small group of 827 women, 13.9% of whom suffered pregnancy loss. Cases of spontaneous abortion have been reported to Yellow Card, VAERS and Eudravigilance and countries like Brazil have currently banned certain vaccines. Hundreds of thousands of reports have been made of hormonal disruption, bleeding and miscarriage with Facebook groups being censored and removed, as also reported by the BBC. Fears could centre around the effect of the virus (as replicated by vaccination) as flagged up in this study in the Journal of Cells on the effects on the placenta of COVID-19.
- The MHRA has given approval for the mixing of vaccines following the publication of the Com Cov Study by Oxford University in the Lancet. This is despite findings that there is some increase in adverse events with the mixing of vaccines.
- A useful article in the Pharmaceutical Journal summarised all the current approved vaccines and treatments for COVID-19 and others currently in development.
- Concerns about the connection between COVID-19 vaccines and blood clots are ongoing – this week in relation to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.
- In a study by Radboud University Medical Center and Erasmus MC in the Netherlands, and the Helmholtz-Centre for Infection Research (HZI), Hannover Medical School (MHH), and the University of Bonn, in Germany, researchers have found possible links between mRNA vaccines and the reprogramming of the innate immune system.
- VAERS update: The U.S. vaccine adverse event reporting system has recorded 4,057 deaths relating to COVID-19 vaccines as of May 7th 2021. This is over twenty times the average annual number of all vaccine-related deaths usually reported to VAERS (under 200 per year) in a period of less than four months. Forty six per cent of these deaths occurred in people who fell ill within 48 hours of being vaccinated.
Summary of Adverse Events UK
Updated report published on May 6th 2021 from MHRA Yellow Card Reporting up to 28th April 2021. (NB: Reported adverse events are not necessarily caused by the vaccine.)
Cumulatively 20 weeks for Pfizer (approx 19.5 million doses) and 16 weeks for AstraZeneca (approx 28.5 million doses) and two weeks for Moderna (approx 0.1 million doses); 34 million unique people received one or two doses; 215,939 unique reports filed with Yellow Card.
Total Events 757,564; Total Reports 215,939; Total Fatalities 1,102.
Key Summary of Adverse Events (for full table see below)
- Acute Cardiac events 8,079
- Anaphylaxis 875
- Blood Disorders 10,296
- Eye Disorders 11,336, of which 178 resulted in Blindness
- Psychiatric Disorders 13,930
- Spontaneous Abortions/Foetal Death 114
- Facial Paralysis 763
- Disturbances in Consciousness 9,983
- Strokes and CNS haemorrhages 1,391
- Guillain Barre Syndrome 214
- Tremor 8,910
- Thrombosis & Embolism (All types) 3,515
- Seizures 1,578
- Paralysis 592
- Haemorrhage (All types) 2,017
- Reproductive/Breast issues 3,987
Adverse Event Analysis
Based on 20.1m doses of Pfizer and 30.8m doses of AstraZeneca (with Moderna there are still far too few doses), Pfizer has one Yellow Card for 361 doses and AZ one for 184 doses. The average number of adverse events (i.e., symptoms) per report remains consistent: 2.9 for Pfizer, 3.7 for AZ. Pfizer has one fatal report per 54,324 doses and AZ per 40,741.
Yellow Card Reports Summary
Source: Pfizer; Moderna; Astrazeneca; Unspecified. “F” denotes Fatal
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
How about EudraVigillance reports of total 10,000 fatalities?
I also noticed serious lag between UE reporting and my country local reporting
The first lockdown inadvertently ran an experiment on infant routine vaccinations, as they didn’t get them. Unexplained infant deaths reduced. BMJ routine vaccination during covid-19 pandemic response https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m2392/rapid-responses
Thanks for this, good article and info
I work as an ophthalmologist in a community setting.
I have never before needed to use the Yellow Card system to report vaccine complications.
Today I will fill in my fourth since February. One erythema multiforme, 2 Bell’s Palsies and one Branch Vein Occlusion. All occurred within a week of the vaccination. AZ and Pfizer have both been involved.
This is only at the anecdotal level of evidence and proper studies may show my assumption of cause may be wrong, but I am very suspicious.
Epic! That means we can now VaxxMaxx!
This is satire by the way.
MHRA, Oxford University and The Lancet. Partners in crime.
“we are neither pro-vaccine nor anti-vaccine; we see our job as to report the facts, not advocate for or against vaccines. The vaccine technology is novel and the vaccines have not yet fully completed their trials, which is why they’re in use under temporary and not full market authorisation. This has been done on account of the emergency situation and the trial data was largely encouraging on both efficacy and safety”
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE WHETHER THEY ARE UNDER ‘TEMPORARY’ AS OPPOSED TO ‘FULL’ MARKET AUTHORISATION WHEN THE JABS ARE INTENDED TO BE SHOVED INTO EVERYONE’S ARM, TWICE AND MAYBE EVEN THREE TIMES BY PSYCHOLOGICAL MANIPULATION AND COERCION???
The precise prose implies that Will is walking an editorial tightrope here.
I listened to James Delingpole’s most recent podcast yesterday – the lady he interviewed stated that from a GP practice of 20,000 patients she knew of only 1 Yellow Card report that had been made by a clinician, despite receiving thousands of calls a week since the roll-out. Unusual menstrual bleeding, prostate problems, heart issues, lumps, leg ulcerations… most of them dismissed as nothing to do with the vaccination. It’s insanity. Although she has obviously been a sceptic from the start and there’s obviously going to be some bias there – even if only 10% of what she said was factual then we’re buggered.
Although she chalks down to greed clinician’s unwillingness to entertain the idea that vaccinations may be linked to some of these serious adverse reactions and deaths I do wonder whether rather the idea that any kind of Nuremberg-style trial would hold them equally accountable to the gov or pharma has led them to feel any kind of admission of harm from vaccines would be damning, despite evidence to the contrary -.all with a vague hope that such a thing would never come to pass.
A relative since having his vaccine has had dizzyness and has actually collapsed. He’s now been taken into hospital for a blood transfusion and for investigation. They are saying its low blood pressure which he hasnt had before. He hasnt filled in the yellow card. Must be many similar cases
Yes – most people I know who have suffered quite severe,but passing side effects (30%-50%) haven’t reported it.
“This has been done on account of the emergency situation and the trial data was largely encouraging on both efficacy and safety. “
Which government shill site am I reading????
There was no ’emergency’. Drilling into the data, the ARR was only ~1%. And the safety rapidly emerged as crap.
But underlying it all was the big lie about cutting trial rigour – by definition that was a no-no in most circumstances except the most desperate – which this wasn’t.
Follow the money.
Most miscarriages occur at the start of pregnancy. The overall probability of a pregnancy ending in miscarriage in the UK is: 25% at four weeks; 5% at eight weeks; 1.7% at 12 weeks; and 0.5% at 16 weeks.
More than 80% of miscarriages occur within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. After 12 weeks, the rate decreases rapidly.’
Vaccinations appear to be given , in the USA ( it is hard to find anyone committing to this in Uk ) after 12 weeks .The above is all from the NCT site . So it does seem as though the miscarriage rate is extremely high if it is the case that these jabs are given after the time when the vast majority of miscarriages occur .
https://therealslog.com/2021/05/20/vaccine-deaths-time-for-another-colour-of-card/
I can add the case of my father’s neighbour, the most fit 93 year old on Earth, who suffered a stroke shortly after being gene therapied and who is now wheelchair bound.
Neither he, his family, the neighbours or any doctor fathomed, let alone stated or reported, that his stroke might have had anything to do with ‘the vaccine’, and they still wouldn’t even entertain that thought.
Horrific story of three previously healthy US nurses who developed chronic convulsions following vaccination https://thehighwire.com/videos/they-dont-want-to-see-people-like-us/ – they are being censored and shunned. So much for accurate assessment of adverse events.
The Tucker Carlson interview with Dr Peter McCullough noted that, “…pregnant women, and women of child bearing age seeking to become pregnant, were explicitly excluded from the vaccine trials…..Dr McCullough followed up….’we NEVER let anything pathogenic into a pregnant women, only inactivated vaccines are allowed, the Covid vaccine produces the virus protein spike which means it is directly pathogenic.”
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/05/19/shocker-why-is-this-substance-in-the-moderna-covid-vaccine/
Another one, plus the two in conservativewoman.
Plus, plus, plus…
makes you wonder if we are in for a cancer epidemic down the line – a lot of protracted painful deaths, but only after big-pharma has had another big bite of the cherry by way of drugs and chemo
An excellent summary and comment by Will again. The Dutch/German investigartion was new to me and can cause trouble for the Pfizer vaccine
In the below link about the reprograms of innate immune response the following quotation below was very interesting.
Remember BBC from India reporting about blindness and fungal infection? The link is also below. We don’t know yet whether these Indian patients were vaccinated and they all seem to have been diabetic.
https://www.news-medical.net/amp/news/20210510/Research-suggests-Pfizer-BioNTech-COVID-19-vaccine-reprograms-innate-immune-responses.aspx
“In addition, the production of the anti-inflammatory cytokine interleukin-1Ra was reduced in response to Toll-like receptor 4 and C. albicans. This also suggests a shift towards increased inflammatory responses to fungi following vaccination, say the researchers”
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210519-mucormycosis-the-black-fungus-hitting-indias-covid-patients
My wife and a friend are both suffering from labyrinthitis (the friend spent several days in hospital) after their second Oxford AstraZeneca jabs.
Sorry to hear that. Lots of inner ear/balance related side-effects from the AZ vaccine – more than 3000 cases reported with the AZ vax alone, according to the Yellow Card scheme.
Scarily only about 10% of reactions are reported.
Also in the US massive reporting of tinnitus by the mRNA vaccine as highlighted by Berenson
So your chance of dying from the vaccine is 1,102 in 34,000,000. Isn’t that far lower than your chance of dying from COVID by many orders of magnitude?
It’s more like 11,020 deaths and 7,576,540 total events. Why isn’t this being reported? It is an absolute disgrace and profoundly evil.
We simply have no idea to what extent having the “vaccine” affects life expectancy. There is every reason to believe that there may be many delayed adverse effects. Which could lead to premature death. Of course, by the time we start to see long-term effects, it’s way too late. What people don’t realise is that once these experimental gene therapies are inside them, there’s no getting rid of the internal chain of events they triggers. There is no way to detox, to get back to how you were pre-injection. It’s not like it just wears off. It doesn’t.
Age and underlying conditions related death of covid
For your chances of dying from the virus, you need to multiply the probability of catching it with the probability of dying if you have been infected.
Across the globe, your chances of dying from COVID-19 if infected are 0.15% or 1 in 6666. Deaths are heavily weighted towards the elderly, so your chance of death if you are under 70 are considerably less than that.
Your chance of catching SARS-COV-2 depends on its prevalence in the community at any time, and your level of exposure to people who have it.
According to the ONS, currently the prevalence of COVID in the community in the UK is 1 in 1340 or 0.07%
Most people are not at high risk of exposure to an infected person – since the infection primarily spreads in health care settings. But let’s be generous and assume that the probability of the average person being close enough to an infected person at some point to become infected themselves is 100%
So for the average person in the UK at the current time the chances of dying from the virus are (1/6666) * (1/1340) * (1/1) = 1 in 8.9 million
Compared to about 1 in 34,500… Read more »
Apologies, there’s an error above. chance of dying from the virus globally if infected is 1 in 666, not 1 in 6666. But the chance of dying following the vaccine is still 25 times MORE than dying with the virus as things stand in the UK.
It’s not just the risk of death – it’s the risk of serious long term (possibly permanent) illness or disability as a result of the “vaccines”. So you have the Vax and end up blind or deaf or in permanent pain – great you didn’t die and are now “protected” (possibly) from something that, in the vast majority of people, a normal functioning immune system would deal with an a week or two. And before anyone pulls the Long Covid card out of the pack – post viral fatigue syndrome has been well recognised for decades and is no where near as long term (like permanent) as side effects of the “vaccines” which are already occurring – never mind what mind come along in the the future.
“According to the ONS, currently the prevalence of COVID in the community in the UK is 1 in 1340 or 0.07%”
This is based on testing – i.e. useless data.
The real figure of infectious disease will be a much higher ratio.
Absolutely. I used it because I wanted to show the worst case, to be scrupulously fair to the vaccine zealots, since this is neither a pro- nor an anti-vaccine website…
According to the ONS, currently the prevalence of COVID in the community in the UK is 1 in 1340 or 0.07%
Most people are not at high risk of exposure to an infected person – since the infection primarily spreads in health care settings. But let’s be generous and assume that the probability of the average person being close enough to an infected person at some point to become infected themselves is 100%
So for the average person in the UK at the current time the chances of dying from the virus are (1/6666) * (1/1340) * (1/1) = 1 in 8.9 million
Uhm – not sure about your logic. It makes little sense to compare vaxx to not vaxx without a timescale. A sensible timescale would be the average time the vaxx protects you, but we don’t know that yet. So just for the sake of an example let’s assume it is a year. If you are not vaccinated what are your chances of getting Covid in the next year? Really hard to say but one way of getting at it would be to assume things stay as they are and that the reported confirmed cases are roughly the number of… Read more »
The chances of dying from ‘Covid’ are actually unknown, since the data is totally f.ed.
No! That’s the chance that if you die shortly after taking the vaccine it will be reported – quite a different thing. Your chance of dying in say the month after taking the vaccine is about 1 in a 1000 – that’s the usual death rate of the population. Your chances of dying because you took the vaccine is tiny – about 5 in a million.
I sent an email to my MP with details of the open letter re not vaccinating children. Here’s the reply I received…
“Thank you for your latest e mail, which Kevin has read.
As mentioned previously, Kevin has sat on many of the Committees advising Government on Covid in his role as a Minister. Participants at these meetings have included Professor Chris Whitty, Sir Patrick Vallance, and Professor Jonathan Van Tam.
Kevin has once again asked me to point out that such people are the pre eminent experts in their fields – hence their senior positions. Kevin also asks me to point out that in the age of the internet and social media, a lot of armchair experts have been created in the last 12 months. Such people do not have qualifications in either virology or epidemiology, and whilst their concerns are understandable, they tend not to be fact based.
Kevin respectfully disagrees with your views on vaccinations, and this is not a position that is going to change.”
I respectfully suggest that Kevin Foster MP for Torbay, a ‘committed Christian’ has sold his soul to the devil.
Ha ha, so what does he think Mike Yeadon’s qualifications are? Of for that matter the ‘doctor’ featured in another piece today who is advising against opening up the country?
I have just sent the following reply..
Dear Nicholas,
Thank you for relaying Kevin’s response. As always I find the tone to be dissmissive and patronising.
The forty signatories of the open letter requesting that children not be given vaccines that have no research on mid to long term side effects and are not due to be licensed until 2023, would, I am sure be surprised to learn that despite the numerous letters after their names, which match those of Van Tam, Witty and Vallance, they are only armchair experts.
The only difference I can find between the signatories and the Governments ’eminent experts’ is the eminents close ties to the large pharmaceutical companies now producing the vaccines.
There is always a danger when those in power take repeated advise from a small group of ’eminents’ that a balanced view is unattainable. After all Hitler thought the work of Mengele to be proportionate.
I am however delighted that your email has confirmed Kevin’s important and close ties to the advisors and decision makers which should make him a reasonably early participant in any future inquiries or legal proceedings.
Well done. Let’s hope he’s taken particular note of the last paragraph.
Indeed – Mike Yeadon has made conscious decision to no longer leave it up to people to “join the dots” for themselves and is now not only pointing out that the things that governments are doing are scientifically wrong and positivel harmful but is also now explaining why he thinks what is behind their actions:
Why are we being lied to about Covid? There’s no good reason | The Conservative Woman
“because there is no benign interpretation of the acts of commission and omission consistently imposed upon us and no explanation of the statements which are flatly wrong other than an intention to deceive the population.”
and
“ it appears we will soon be required to possess VaxPass apps if we wish to continue to access our lives.
This system can run effectively only if everyone is vaccinated. This is a monstrous concept, because it is known that all four vaccines in use in Europe contain a fatal design flaw: they cause the fusogenic, pro coagulation spike protein to be expressed wherever the vaccine is taken up. In some people, especially those so young that they’re at no measurable risk of death if infected by the virus, vaccination results in their… Read more »
Whitty, Vallance and Van Tam’s positions are essentially political, not scientific and their longevity in their roles depends on their willingness to bend to their political masters’ will.
There are plenty of equally qualified scientists who disagree with what they are doing. It’s just that the government has chosen not to listen to alternative points of view, because the pandemic response is entirely political, not scientific or medical.
He is evil and is encouraging child abuse. I would be tempted to reply and say do you mean armchair scientists such as Mike Yeadon and Sucharit Bhakdi?
“The MHRA has given approval for the mixing of vaccines…This is despite findings that there is some increase in adverse events with the mixing of vaccines.”
Hmm, they really have the safety and well-being of people at the heart of everything they do!
Bottom line is that they just do not care. They truly are evil monsters.
I think it’s worse than they don’t care. I think they actively hate us plebs.
good news
and old friend of mine is passionately pro-vax – got his (aged 45) and now thinks he’s bullet proof – good for him
I sent him the latest must-sign petition
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/586017
about not jabbing kids
he’s signed and forwarded on extensively.
Intrigued by the Mail link to Patel’s Quarantine Knockers, I was surprised to see a link lower in the page which says:-
“Professor Neil Ferguson suggested mixing jabs might boost immunity;”
I didn’t realise that this discredited soothsayer had now obtained medical, pharmacological or some other relevant qualifications, which now enable him to pontificate thus. Perhaps he’s found time in between producing his nonsense models to take a swift OU course, or maybe he’s just bought a qualification from somewhere.
Given past performance, the monster is certainly wrong in this, as in everything else.
everyone is an expert now. there’s no science left
look at Devi Sridhar. They actually call her an epidemiologist in the press!
mixing jabs apparently increases the chance of adverse effects
Well done for producing this data. The only other organisation I know that does similar is the UK Column.
You certainly won’t see this information via the usual suspects e.g. BBC, ITV, Sky…
Thanks for this much needed run down of articles that are be exterminated by the F*ct Checkers.
This from Norway, should really be included, as it points to the real situation for the younger age groups. ( Thanks to Swedenborg )
https://legemiddelverket.no/Documents/English/Covid-19/20210514%20Reported%20suspected%20adverse%20reactions%20coronavirus%20vaccines.pdf
To all those short-sighted individuals who have criticised TY or WJ: For goodness’ sake! It is essential for LS to be non-partisan on this for what to most people would surely be obvious reasons!!
I agree Deborah. I have thought for some time that people in the public eye who were lockdown sceptics have been ‘allowed’ to continue to broadcast their scepticism on condition that they did not show any opposition to the vaccines. And in the case of Lord Sumption and others, maybe they were obliged to state that they’d had the vaccine. I wouldn’t put anything past the deep state machinations that are going on.
I feel sure Lord S has had the vaccine, as has Peter Hitchens etc. And I’d guess some of those writing for LS will have. Some won’t. Some might ‘prefer to wait’ (until there is more information on long-term effects). Some will never have it – full stop. I’m just so fed up with people here attacking Toby et al for simply doing what’s necessary for this informative and encouraging site to continue existing. If anyone here really feels TY is ‘controlled opposition’ (yawn), I just wish they’d go away really…I just pray that TY, WJ etc are tough enough to ignore the snipes, as, really, we only have a few people in the public eye brave enough to present views, studies, data, from both ‘sides’, rather than just one.
Yes, this site and TCW are the only ones presenting good and informed articles. I don’t think we have any idea how much sceptics are being ‘got at’ by the PTB and if by not opposing vaccination it means they can continue to give us the quality of info they provide, then I’m afraid that’s what they have to do.
I don’t think that being a lock-down sceptic is analogous to being a vaccine sceptic. I am sceptical of both, but I don’t write-off people who hold sincere beliefs just because they’ve succumbed to the vaxx!
Like me not having it, they might have very good reasons for why they have done it. If they are adults it is their decision.
What difference is there between people who don’t want the vaxx harrying people who do, and vice versa?
Finding other websites who are vaguely questioning the narrative is well nigh impossible, and I am grateful to LS. Anyone who is here must be well aware how hard it is to find any opposite stuff online, and how many people and sites have been banned/disappeared from the web.
Agree re lockdown vs vaccine sceptics. I don’t blame some of my friends who are elderly and have other illnesses from deciding to have the vaccine although having seen some outcomes, I don’t necessarily agree with their decision.
I wonder if some opinions are formed due to the reaction that they have encountered among their family and friends. I am fortunate in that although my sister and BIL and my cousin, all around my age (in 70s) have had vaccine, they accept my decision not to take it and certainly haven’t encouraged me to change my mind. Ditto the small number of close friends I have.
More difficult i guess if you have a lot of pressure and unpleasantness from family/friends as that always tends to polarise opinion nowadays.
I fully agree. The above declaration about their vaccine coverage is good and balanced and not interfering in anyone’s individual decision. The criticism of TY and WJ is deeply unfair for the only website in UK having the most balanced reporting.
I agree with you Deborah.
I think B.F.Finlayson’s criticism of Toby and the LS team is harsh – although I fully support his right to express his views. And that’s what Toby is really all about: free speech.
I’m happy with LS’s position on vaccines so long as it continues to do the following two things:
A. Remain unbiased on the issue, but, most importantly . . .
B. Stands up for and supports those who (like me) choose not to get vaccinated.
If the day comes when it adopts an openly pro-vaccination agenda and/or fails to support people who choose not to get vaccinated then, to say the very least, I’ll be bitterly disappointed. As things stand, their neutral policy makes sense, not least because as you infer in your post, if they come out all guns blazing against vaccines it’ll be easy for the establishment and MSN to write off LS as a website for dangerous conspiracy theorist, tin hat wearing nutters who don’t warrant being taken seriously. LS would be completely marginalised and the little public exposure Toby currently receives would, I suspect, all but evaporate. So, LS’s current policy is the correct one – ditto for… Read more »
LDS is not non-partisan, it can’t be, no news outlet can – and that is no bad thing. Politically LDS is an unashamed Tory website; stuck in a contradiction that the very Big State jack boot it would have railed against had it been Corbyn & co in control belongs to TY’s close chums.
It remains cautious, even constrained, in its reporting and (often deliberately) weeks behind the curve, despite its ‘sceptical’ handle. Its avowed mission was to present a sceptical lockdown counter narrative (at least that’s what it used to say), not a definitive ‘non-partisan’ viewpoint as it now seems to be claiming with the experimental vaxx.
Lockdown and Experimental Vaxx, like it or not, have been inexorably linked as driving carrot and stick government policy compliance from the get go. LDS wants its cake and wants to eat it, and this fence sitting is failing to produce a compelling sceptical counter narrative to the increasingly aggressive MSM anti-vaxx (ie pro-lockdown) bias.
For those who want a nice cosy balance, with no uncouth criticism, maybe write to TY and suggest he will officially changes the site to Lockdown Digest. I’m sure CCHQ might help fund it, Big Pharma too…
Correction, should read.
‘…increasingly aggressive MSM anti anti-vaxx (ie pro-Lockdown) bias’.
You keep saying, that in your opinion, that lockdown and vaxx are inextricably linked. So if you are for or against one, you are for or against the other. In my opinion this is just quite simply wrong.
I see no problem with someone, in their eighties, feeling on balance that they should have the vaccine, but being strongly and morally against lockdown, one thing does not depend on the other.
Lockdown Sceptics was, has and is sceptical of Lockdowns. This has always been its main thrust.
It’s not called Vaccine Sceptics, and doesn’t have to fulfil any counter narrative against the Government or MSM just because you think it should.
Maybe you need to start a website that suits your narrative and see how long you last before you’re blocked or disappeared.
lockdown and vaxx are inextricably linked
They are at a policy level, this is indisputable. PM Johnson made the connection from day 1, that the lifting of lockdown was conditional on the administering of the experimental vaxx.
A person’s individual choice to be vaxxed is another point altogether, provided it is an INFORMED voluntary choice and not coercion. But can that choice be voluntary when MSM blocks the Yellow Card figures, and denies at least 1143 deaths to date from the vaxx? It is now seeking by the day to demonize and shame the undecided into being jabbed. This media and government pressure breaches all previously agreed ethical protocols including the Hippocratic Oath and the Nuremberg Code. Besides, any ‘info’ that the NHS is handing out is only given to patients after they have the jab, and so is no help in the decision making process.
So, are kids now going to be given the real figures of the risks they are running from the vaxx (which are many and varied, including a 1:44000 chance of dying, and possibly a 1:4400 chance) against the reality that for 10-15 year olds the chance of dying from C19 is 1:2,500,000, and under… Read more »
Besides, any ‘info’ that the NHS is handing out is only given to patients after they have the jab, and so is no help in the decision making process.
That wasn’t true in my case. I was sent a leaflet along with a letter inviting me to make an appointment for a jab (which i didn’t). The leaflet is definitely economical with the truth but did say that the ‘vaccine’ would not prevent me from getting covid or stop me transmitting it.
I’m genuinely pleased to hear it. Those patients that complained about lack of pre-vaxx info presumably got to read this un-illuminating literature at their leisure afterwards.
You’re correct – mine was more or less the same (there have been different versions aimed at age groups etc). However, their large scale posters and other things are contradictory to those leaflets!
My wife has been vaccinated (I can’t yet for a couple of months for health reasons). No only do you get the leaflet you get a short interview with a nurse beforehand.
What use is a leaflet and an interview if they are both biased and fail to fully inform people about the risks and benefits so they can make an informed decision (which actually no one can make because we don’t know anything about long term effects – it is, after all, still experimental).
I agree with your objection to mass vaccination 100%. IMO, your argument is watertight. However, as ‘ebygum’ says, I don’t see that Toby and LS have to mirror their stance on lockdowns with a similarly sceptical view on vaccination. After all, when LS started there were no vaccines and, at that time, the consensus view was that there wouldn’t be any for many years to come. Additionally, although I personally don’t want the vaccine (for the reasons you cite), I accept that it is in the best interests of my 70 year old sister who has advanced MS and my 95 year old aunt. For them, the risks are worh taking.
To the best of my knowledge, Toby and his team are genuinely neutral and I have every confidence that they agree with you that everyone must be fully informed about the risks of vaccination and made aware of the adverse effects. Furthermore, if/when those of us who do not want the vaccine get marginalised, abused, cancelled or refused NHS treatment etc., I’m sure they will highligh that injustice and do everything they can to support us.
One of your criticisms of Toby is that he’s very much a… Read more »
I know that you are passionate about what you are saying but I just don’t agree the two are as linked as you suppose. In the same way that I and many others on here have worked this out for ourselves, I believe others can as well, and it’s not my fault, and certainly not the fault of Toby and The Lockdown Sceptic site that all of the above stuff you talk about isn’t getting out to the public. There are many on this site who for whatever reason, be it family pressure or work pressure, age or infirmity have had the vaxx, that doesn’t disqualify them from having very strong opinions about children having vaccinations, lockdown or masks.
“Maybe you need to start a website that suits your narrative and see how long you last before you’re blocked or disappeared.”
yes I suspect Toby et al have been told in no uncertain terms what they have to do to avoid being cancelled (for now)
I am beginning to think we have some subtle vipers in our bosom. Spouting their own opinions as science, morals and right. What would happen if we all agreed and LS was taken down? Yes I think that is the plan, wrapped up in a so-called moralistic stance.
Eh???
A lot of level headed, informed and very concerned commenters here simply want TY (who is after all a political animal and therefore very hard baked) to ditch the softly-softly pro-government stance and oppose the aggressive pro-vaxx MSM propaganda before it leads to further injury and unnecessary loss of life, especially among young people who (using the government’s own statistics) don’t need to risk taking this experimental vaxx. Does the fact that Big Pharma refuses to indemnify vaxx victims not tell you something? This is 100% an existential ethical issue, not a moralistic one,
BTW, there’s no fiendish plan to take the site down, in fact the opposite is true as LDS thrives on the increased hits generated BTL!!
This is my last comment on this.
Everything you talk about is of concern to us all.
Toby and Lockdown Sceptics gives us a great platform to discuss these concerns.
Toby owes you and me bugger all.
So we’ll agree to disagree. Fair enough!
These vacines should be stopped. They are dangerous for many and there is no emergency. They don’t even prevent any kind of infection- that was never the endpoint of the trials. Hospitals are currently overwhelmed- most likely adverse reactions. No one is giving informed consent which is a legal requirement- Montgomery case, NHS Constitution, Art 6.1 UNESCO Universal Decl on Bioethics and Human Rights 2005 etc etc.. There needs to be a legal case and injunction now. No one is being told they are taking part in a trial and no one is being told they risk cardiac arrest, blindness and paralysis etc all listed on the yellow card system. Have a look at the detailed full list on the MHRA website which only shows a tiny % of the reality. According to some sceptic Scientists and Drs the spike proteins are intentional ingredients because they detrimentally affect fertility in both male and females and can also induce miscarriages. John Bell from Sage admitted as much in an interview back in Nov. The potential long term effects such autoimmune illnesses, cancers, Prions diseases, death due to ADE are all to come.
It would be interesting to know what the age loss adjusted figure of this is like compared to Covid deaths. The comparison needs to be with real covid deaths, not the ‘within 28 days of a test’ figure as that means nothing.
If you factor in the under reporting of vaccine deaths, and factor in the over reporting of covid deaths, I suspect that we are already at the stage where the loss of potential life is already greater for the vaccines. Then consider that we have young people to vaccinate and also include the number of pregnancies that are being terminated and I fear the chances of permanent infertility, and what we have on our hands is one huge vaccine disaster from the public’s point of view. Probably what the forces of evil were hoping for.
And who knows what the long term effects of this all are?
Is it just possible that this is part of the depopulation agenda? Am I right in thinking that it is the pharmaceutical companies that are calling for them to be given to people in the third world? Is it possible too that the pharmaceutical companies would be happy to gloss over millions of people starving in the developing world due to the lockdowns and related restrictions?
My theory is that the spike protein is the danger.
From the virus it principally targets the elderly and already ill, especially the obese.
This is obviously not good enough for their plans so they have to turn everyone else into spike-producing factories, including the children
The loss of life for the programme as a whole is already huge, in the sense that promising treatments with high effect sizes have been routinely suppressed by the media/pharma/government complex. Even with a safe and effective vaccine candidate it would take them a long time to make up that deficit.
“By no means is this part of an effort to generate alarm about the vaccines or dissuade anyone from having them.”
Sorry Will – that’s pathetic. Puts you in the WEF-Big Pharma camp. You should be generating alarm and dissuading young healthy people from having the vaccine! Or are you not interested in saving lives?
Best laugh of the night.
TY consistently checks with his chums in government to ensure LDS stays on message, while dressing it up as a counter narrative. Promoting the GBD has become a permanent feature, although GBD is driven by more vaxx-happy experts with a penchant for age based apartheid – but since they are not as bad a SAGE they must be OK? And how about the recent promo for Prof ‘jab-em-all’ Dingwall? So where’s the balance?
While there is a constant drip-drip of pro-vaxx articles dressed up as fence sitting, there is a notable absence of anti-vaxx articles. Over 1,143 dead (not 1, 102), and possibly over 11,000, but LDS seemingly unwilling to get to grips with what is actually going on with vaxx deaths, reactions and chock-full hospitals since the roll out.
While I agree with a lot of what you’re saying, I think that encouragement is more effective than heavy criticism when Will bucks the trend on LDS to write about the harms of so-called Covid vaccines. Yes, still some way to go to describe the enormity of the dangers, and the figures are somewhat out of date, but I’m pleased to see any criticism of the “vaccine” rollout ATL here, and I hope Will gets even braver in his future articles. The above article certainly isn’t pro-vaccine, unlike much of what’s written by other LDS writers.
Are we talking about professional, hard baked, agenda driven journalists here; and (certainly in the case of TY) writers with serious political ambitions – or school children? They have called the site Lockdown Sceptics not Lockdown Undecided, so I do think a bit of doing what it says on the tin should reasonably be expected.
Experimental Vaxx and Lockdown have been inseparable strands of the government’s C19 policy from March 2020, and probably months before. This is a blunt and deliberate carrot and stick approach – backed up with aggressive duplicitous MSM pro-vaxx coercion, that conveniently ignores all vaxx ADRs.
Lockdown scepticism cannot avoid the ever mounting tragic vaxx death toll, which on a daily basis is currently outstripping apparent C19 deaths (even including false positives). And that is before one considers thousands of non-fatal life changing adverse reactions from what is (statistically) a wholly unnecessary health risk for the vast majority (and perhaps even all) of the UK population.
In this context I don’t think my criticism is heavy at all, given the serious daily existential threat this experimental therapy poses. 1046 dead, possibly as many as 11,000, and counting.
What is important to ascertain is whether it is likely to be only 10% of fatalities reported as well as 10% of “severe adverse reactions”. Obviously 10,000 plus vaccine deaths would be very serious but, whilst it is tempting to infer this from the under reporting of adverse reactions, is there any further strong evidence that this could be the case? It may be a similar figure to the adverse reactions, but not necessarily. And if it is different, in what way?
Quoting directly from the govs MHRA Yellow Card website:
It is estimated that only 10% of serious reactions and between 2 and 4% of non-serious reactions are reported.
Personally I think 1143 deaths to date is bad enough (and these are undisputed), as this indicate an approx 1:44,000 chance of death from the vaxx, which for all u65 groups is far worse than C19. The under reporting element simply strengthens the case against the roll-out to an ever younger demographic, that simply don’t need it. The chance of a secondary school kid dying from C19 is given at 1:2,500,000!
As for strong evidence the UK Column is pursuing this, with initial reports suggesting some GPs are refusing to fill in the Yellow Cards (this was covered in the Wed 19th May edition). However, UKC is wisely holding fire until the evidence is corroborate and cross checked.
It is known, however, that the MHRA have not been processing physical paperwork for some time due to it moving offices – so there is a backlog that is yet to show up even in the official figures.
Overall I accept your concerns, but this is 100% the fault of the government. The very… Read more »
Yes, though one wonders if even 1 in 4,000 chance of vaccine death would be enough to stop the hard sell. Of course in an ideal world, an unbiased broadcasting corporation would be posting daily updates of vaccine deaths. The other obvious question is, are these 1:44,000 deaths evenly spread, or do they affect certain age groups/gender etc. disproportionately? Do they affect young people to the same degree for example?
One might have hoped that since we’re still in early Phase III, recording of deaths following treatment would have been automatic.
I wonder if people are routinely informed of the Yellow Card system when they are treated?
Nope, definitely not in Scotland anyway. Though I think there is small print on the ‘information’ leaflet.
Let’s just jab them and find out, eh? seems to be the official government response. After all they are just compliant Guinea Pigs for phase 3 trials of an un-indemnified experimental Big Pharma gene therapy program.
with the prospect of a third jab coming down the line after a rushed “trial” which will be used to assure the population it is completely “safe”. Would like to know if other countries are also doing this or if it is only UK – are we in some kind of race to be the “top nation” in the world government for when the Great Reset happens because that is what it feels like at the moment – as if we are neck and neck with Israel. Nice company to be in.
Apparently Germany has “hinted” that a third jab will be required i.e. setting the scene as is the norm.
So a third jab is on the way for sure.
“Personally I think 1143 deaths to date is bad enough (and these are undisputed), as this indicate an approx 1:44,000 chance of death from the vaxx”
I am not sure how you got to 44,000 but don’t confuse “death from vaxx” with “death with vaxx”. With 30,000,000 people vaccinated you would expect about 25,000 of them to die every month anyway (more because they are the older half of the population).
The figures are from government MHRA Yellow Card ADR reports – filled in by the medical profession, these are NOT expected deaths. Most were perfectly healthy before the jab.
The 1:44,000 is the last time deaths per jab was looked at. Do some research here, it also covers the many tens of thousands of non-fatal ADRs:
https://yellowcard.ukcolumn.org/yellow-card-reports
Thanks for the link, as it happens I am familiar with the ukcolumn figures. I am just curious about the 1:44,000. It is not a big deal. In fact I would have thought it would be more like 1:34,000 (1143:39,000,000).
More to the point, how do you know they were perfectly healthy before the jab? I don’t see that being reported anywhere in the Yellow Card stats. (As I am sure you know, yellow card reports can be filled in by anyone, they don’t have to be in the medical profession).
As I understand it, a non-fatal ADR can be anything from a sore arm to a heart attack. Please correct me if I have got that wrong. If I am right then the figures don’t seem to be very significant. According to the Zoe app two thirds of people vaccinated report some soreness of the arm and one in four report symptoms such as headache and tiredness. So that is many millions of people. It is hardly surprising that about 250,000 people have self-reported some kind of adverse effect. It would only take a small proportion of those who had a side effect to decide to report them.
how do you know they were perfectly healthy before the jab?
Many reports of deaths have been about people in avowedly perfect health, so this is necessarily anecdotal. Besides, perfect health does not seem to be a pre-requisite for being jabbed, unless you know differently? I would have assumed that the vaxx should be safe to use on most members of the population, irrespective of most underlying health conditions – and that pre-vaxx patient checks would be thorough anyway. Unfortunately it would seem that medical staff are not asking questions, nor are giving out guideline info until after the jab has been given. Again, the fault lies with the government for not providing this info.
a non-fatal ADR can be anything from a sore arm to a heart attack.
Yes, and the UK Column Yellow Card website allows one to look at ALL reactions to the extent of the info/figures provided by MHRA – which can be contradictory, as UK Column have frequently pointed out. This figure should be seen alongside the MHRA caveat that:
‘It is estimated that only 10% of serious reactions and between 2 and 4% of non-serious reactions are reported.’
So it is likely the… Read more »
I agree that perfect health is not a prerequisite for being jabbed. Which supports my point that people being vaccinated are not going to be any healthier than average for their age and the expected proportion of them will become ill, and even die, independently of the vaccine.
Yes -all the evidence I have seen from the clinical trials, and from proper studies of the masses of real life vaccination data, is that the vaxx are safe to use on most members of the population irrespective of health conditions i.e. they don’t add to your risk if you have some other problem. There are exceptions e.g. allergic reactions and you are asked about these before being vaccinated. Before you are jabbed you are interviewed by a nurse who asks if you have had Covid symptoms and if you have any allergies. This seems to be much the same level of checking before any other vaccine. Were you expecting a full medical?
How do you know that in practice yellow cards are only being filled in by qualified medical staff? I haven’t seen any evidence to support this.
The quote from the MHRA:
It is estimated that only 10% of serious reactions and between 2 and 4% of non-serious reactions… Read more »
But not within days of having the vaxx, or with symptoms that they have previously not reported (but have been associated with the vaxx). Unless you can show that everyone who died would have keeled over anyway in the immediate period after the vaxx then it becomes a zero sum game.
Given the reported withholding on Yellow Card reports by GP surgeries it could actually be worse, who can tell until the Govt updates the info? If the Govt leaves it available as a live page, then we presumably can trust its content.
From UKC, on a recent Monday or Wednesday (as it was a Brian Gerrish item). He keeps going back to it.
“But not within days of having the vaxx, or with symptoms that they have previously not reported (but have been associated with the vaxx).”
They are as likely to die in the days after having the VAXX as they are any other period of the same length. What is needed is statistics on people who die in say the week after being vaccinated as compared to what you would expect in a week. I am not aware of anyone reporting this data. So it is a zero-sum game in that neither of us can prove that more people than expected die in the week following vaccination. So we have to resort to other measures e.g. that the RCTs did not show any more deaths among the vaccinated than among the placebo groups; that we aren’t seeing a rise in non-Covid mortality as the number of vaccinations go up (in fact the trend is down).
I don’t see any evidence that they were dying of symptoms associated with the vaxx. In any case, what are the symptoms associated with the vaxx? By far the most common ones (sore arm, flu like feeling) are very mild and not associated with any kind… Read more »
Anyway, I did have another look and managed to track down a link which was part of yesterday’s UKC broadcast at 1:00:30:
https://www.openvaers.com/
This isn’t the episode I was referencing but it is probably (if I remember correctly, note caveat) the same source of that stat about the damage currently being done by C19 vaxxes in the USA compared with previous vaccines. Open VAERS is a useful resource nonetheless.
I worry about the adverse effects more than death to be honest, with some truly dreadful outcomes such as blindness, deafness and paralysis, all of which to me could be a fate worse than death! The last figure I saw for adverse effects was approx 1 in 45! If the x10 estimate is applied to that it’s around 1 in 4 !
So far 37 million people in the UK have received at least one dose. I think we can assume that if 1 in 45 of had become blind, deaf or paralysed in the last 5 months we would have noticed!
There have been 786,350 total adverse reactions reported from all C19 vaxx treatments at the latest count. 622k from AZ alone. These figures will be revised tomorrow.
The 786,350 figures is total reports – but it is only for 225,000 people (people fill in multiple reports). To quote from the MHRA report on these same figures:
“ the overwhelming majority of reports relate to injection-site reactions (sore arm for example) and generalised symptoms such as ‘flu-like’ illness, headache, chills, fatigue (tiredness), nausea (feeling sick), fever, dizziness, weakness, aching muscles, and rapid heartbeat. Generally, these happen shortly after the vaccination and are not associated with more serious or lasting illness.”
This is far cry from some 800,000 people becoming blind, deaf or paralysed in the last 5 months.
Key Summary of Adverse Events (for full table see below)
At what point do you deem it to be an unacceptable level of paralysis, for example, in the quest to reduce symptoms of a relatively low level virus with a bog-standard mortality rate of 0.15%?
How many paralysed, blinded people, or blood clots, or dead people., is acceptable in the “war against Covid”?
We know these figures are under-reported too, so keep that in mind when assessing how much needless harm to people with their entire lives ahead of them is OK with you
Not to mention “Psychiatric Disorders 13,930” which in the context of the galloping mental health crisis induced by the “pandemic” and the lockdown measures is a bit of a worry.
At what point do you deem it to be an unacceptable level of paralysis, for example, in the quest to reduce symptoms of a relatively low level virus with a bog-standard mortality rate of 0.15%?
Surely that is the wrong question? The question should be what is an acceptable level of excess paralysis. A certain number of people will become paralysed anyway in this period. (It is also unclear exactly what paralysis means – how long did it last? what parts were affected? was all movement prevented or just some limitations?). 600 out of 39 million doesn’t seem that extraordinary but I don’t have the data, do you? However, I am pretty sure the MHRA and equivalent organisations do have the data and are doing the statistical analysis which is how they picked up the blood clot risk.
We know these figures are under-reported too
We don’t know if they are under-reported because we don’t know what it it means to report correctly.
Now multiply them by 90 since the MHRA have stated that approximately only 10% of adverse reactions get reported.
I think you mean 10 not 90! But please see above. The MHRA statement seem so be quoted widely without giving the date or the context so people think is about the Covid vaccines.
1143 deaths, my typo.
I’m not objecting to your heavy criticism of LDS for its mostly pro-vaccine stance. I flagged up my concerns about Toby’s position on covid vaccines as they were starting to become apparent, back in the autumn (to which I got many downvotes from his supporters/defenders on this site!). I’m not making any excuses for blinkered, unquestioning, biased or agenda-driven journalism. All I’m saying is that when someone does actually post an article ATL that starts to question the gov narrative that these injections are safe, then I think we should encourage this through reinforcement, and encourage them to go further with their investigations. It’s called shaping. What we want are more articles taking the dangers of the vaccination programme really seriously. While you and I already know where we stand re the vaccine, there will be people (hopefully as yet unvaccinated) coming across this site who are still undecided.
It’s called shaping.
You would be wasting your time, LDS is shaped only by approved Tory government narrative, and too often refuses to follow its own self professed sceptical agenda when there is a conflict of interests.
I think we should encourage this through reinforcement
LDS is now driven by a necessity to be seen to be sceptical and therefore relevant – it does the bare minimum and as such is weeks if not months behind the curve despite the growing existential threat being posed to our young people by government policy.
The damning vaxx info has been growing out there for months, ever since the steep rise in care home deaths in December due to the (now acknowledged, but initially denied) post-vaxx drop in immunity. LDS has paid no more than lip service, preferring to big-up the likes of Hitchens or pro-vaxxers from NERVTAG, GBD etc.
Further, the aggressive Vaxx-all-before-conditional-freedom-only lobby dominates the MSM. Its baseless Haw-Haw inspired psychologically targeted propaganda is pumped out hour after hour, and needs an effective referenced counter narrative that LDS has always threatened to provide, but somehow never fully signed up to.
Quoting from yesterday’s Independent headline for Sean O’Grady’s rant:
No… Read more »
Brave? WTF?
I haven’t yet seen a reference to the ARR of the vaccine.
That would make no sense – the ARR is a property of a trial not a vaccine – it varies depending on the prevalence.
Just trying to spread the word.
Beeb likes to ignore our protests.
bring some eggs. We shall donate our eggs to the bbc at our next March.
in return for our egg presents, we shall likely get some reporting.
Lame.
Thank you all for an incredible piece of work.
Tip o’ the hat to LS Editorial Team.
Why the down vote?