An NHS hospital is being sued after it hauled a popular nurse over the coals for calling a six-foot transgender paedophile “Mr” – despite him lunging at her and calling her a “n*****”. The Mail has the story.
Like all good nurses, Jennifer Melle projects a mixture of benevolence and calm authority. Patients greet her warmly as she glides around St Helier Hospital in Carshalton, Surrey, dispensing smiles and soothing words. For as long as she can remember, nursing was her chosen profession. As a schoolgirl newly arrived from Uganda, she was told by her father that Britain was a place where she could fulfil her dreams.
Taking nothing for granted, she worked hard, gratefully seizing every opportunity. Now aged 40 and a mother of three, she is universally liked and respected.
Not once in her 12-year career has she received a complaint.
That, at least, was the case until one day last year when a burly 6ft-plus convicted paedophile, shackled to two prison escorts, shuffled into Ms Melle’s ward and loudly complained about a urinary problem.
Legal reasons prevent Patient X’s identification, though why this person, who was jailed for grooming young boys, is afforded such protection will doubtless confound many. Not least because that night, in a fit of rage, Patient X screamed racist abuse at Ms Melle – calling her the N-word three times.
She says: “It was terrifying. I’d never been called that word before. And I thought I was going to be attacked.” At one point Patient X lunged towards her, straining against chains.
“The whole thing – the terrible racial abuse, the aggression, which all happened in front of patients and staff – left me traumatised. And I was only trying to help.”
It is what happened next, though, that truly beggars belief. One might imagine that on hearing that one of its black employees was on the receiving end of possibly the most insulting and inflammatory slur in the English language, the diversity-obsessed NHS would back her to the hilt. Instead, her bosses decided she was in the wrong.
In the eyes of Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals Trust, the greater sin was that Ms Melle had referred to Patient X – who was born male but now identifies as a woman – as “mister” and “he” during a phone call with a doctor [about the removal of a catheter]. It was this which prompted Patient X’s aggressive outburst.
Afterwards, Ms Melle was investigated and disciplined and, having been labelled a potential risk to the public, now fears losing her job. She wonders what happened to the “England of fair play” of which her father once spoke.
After being given a final warning by the trust, she received a letter from the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) last month saying it was investigating concerns about her fitness to practise because she “referred to a patient in a manner inconsistent with their gender identity”.
Yet it is one of the ironies of this case that Patient X had exploited gender identity by posing as a teenage girl online to incite under age boys to perform sex acts.
Ms Melle says: “I was put at risk, but I am being treated like a criminal. Sadly, if you put your head above the parapet and speak truthfully on these issues in the NHS, the risk is that you will be knocked down, punished severely and demoted. The message to me during the investigation was that I should put up with extreme racism and deny biological reality and my deeply held Christian beliefs for the sake of inclusivity.”
Culture wars’ excesses abound and to some extent we have grown inured to them. But Ms Melle’s experience, say campaigners, is “on a whole new disturbing level”. Last night there were demands for urgent government intervention.
In an unprecedented legal action, meanwhile, Ms Melle is suing the hospital trust for harassment, discrimination and human rights breaches. It is, of course, a case in which the NHS once again risks being accused of sacrificing common sense on the altar of gender ideology, and follows that of eight nurses from Darlington who took their trust to court after being forced to share a changing room with a biological man who identifies as a woman.
There is also the ongoing case of the nurse suspended after complaining about a trans medic using her female changing room. Sandie Peggie was put under a disciplinary investigation for a year by bosses at Victoria Hospital, in Kirkcaldy, Fife, after she objected to sharing the facility with Dr Beth Upton.
Worth reading in full.
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.
Last I checked the official advice for the Pfizer ‘vaccine’ stated not to give it to pregnant women or those intending to become pregnant as the necessary tests had not been carried out. So someone is lying… again.
Any advice tainted with the word “official” cannot be trusted. Unofficially it is abundantly clear that the best advice would be to stay well clear of all of the genocidal Covid vaccines, whether or not you are pregnant.
Like the government says there’s no evidence that it’s not ok for pregnant women so what’s the problem ?
(sarc).
So when the evidence appears?
Anybody getting vaccine injection are daft, but no intelligent pregnant woman would even consider it
Indeed, that was Pfizer’s official position on the patient info leaflet in December 2020. Mysteriously, the advice turned neutral in February. I asked a friend who was in touch directly with the public affairs person in UK to ask the company if they’d obtained new data, such as a reproductive toxicology study. The answer was no, but the warnings had been softened or deleted.
Nod we’ve got this new guidance. No new data.
I regard this as reckless & unethical.
Outrageous!
How can they recommend something that they cannot say what the longterm effects are , as there has been insufficient time to assess.
I find it disturbing that humans are being used for experimentation in the first place, but to now experiment on pregnant women and the foetus where will this all end? When does the madness stop? Does it have to be when sufficient numbers suffer 3 or 4 years down the line? By which time many thousands might be suffering. The thing is nobody knows as this drug has been rushed through the pharmaceutical companies cannot give any guarantees because they haven’t had the time to test and see any negative effects. No the general population are the Guinea pigs
Oh ffs..make up your mind! Its people’s and babies’ lives at stake here. On second thought, just leave it to mothers to decide…they know best.
““There is no evidence to suggest that other vaccines are unsafe for pregnant women, but more research is needed,” it added.”
Very reassuring. If I were a woman likely to get pregnant, I would want to see results of studies where large groups had taken the vaccine before or during pregnancy, and comparisons to a control group who had not, and check outcomes for mother and baby, up to maybe 1 or 2 years old. Somehow don’t think that data is available.
I could just as well concoct some random chemicals and offer them to people, saying “there’s no evidence to suggest this is unsafe”. It’s the inversion of the normal assumption that vaccines are unsafe until proven otherwise.
Exactly – especially when the measured benefits are absolutely minimal. For a quick visual representation :
… and yet, even here, there are still those labouring under the illusion that the “vaccines” are useful.
Sadly the research is going to be done on the population in general, where as any other medicene would’ve undergone fertility studies in animals.
Absolutely disgusting! This government is passed redemption!
I come back to the essential issue of the actual worth of the ‘vaccines’ as measured by absolute risk reduction.
This paper encapsulates the hole in the reporting :
https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/57/3/199
The abstract summarizes :
“Relative risk reduction and absolute risk reduction measures in the evaluation of clinical trial data are poorly understood by health professionals and the public. The absence of reported absolute risk reduction in COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials can lead to outcome reporting bias that affects the interpretation of vaccine efficacy. The present article uses clinical epidemiologic tools to critically appraise reports of efficacy in Pfzier/BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccine clinical trials. Based on data reported by the manufacturer for Pfzier/BioNTech vaccine BNT162b2, this critical appraisal shows: relative risk reduction, 95.1%; 95% CI, 90.0% to 97.6%; p = 0.016; absolute risk reduction, 0.7%; 95% CI, 0.59% to 0.83%; p < 0.000. For the Moderna vaccine mRNA-1273, the appraisal shows: relative risk reduction, 94.1%; 95% CI, 89.1% to 96.8%; p = 0.004; absolute risk reduction, 1.1%; 95% CI, 0.97% to 1.32%; p < 0.000. Unreported absolute risk reduction measures of 0.7% and 1.1% for the Pfzier/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, respectively, are very much lower than the reported relative risk reduction measures. Reporting absolute risk reduction measures is essential to prevent outcome reporting bias in evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy.”
In relation to the particular issues of jabs for pregnant women and children (who do not suffer from the virus in any number), you would need to have a considerably greater risk reduction than ~1% to justify such a procedure, when weighed against known harms.
Bluntly : any professional administering such jabs is behaving unethically.
Too bloody right! I like your picture diagram above.
Problem is nobody is listening, they are living in their own insulated world. While they experiment on the rest of the human race. Big drive to get the Indians to vaccinate now, must be dropping a load of readies into New Delhi.
These vaccines aren’t even vaccines. They are gene therapies and they are killing people in the long and short-term.
Stay away!!
https://thewhiterose.uk/category/vaccination/
18 Reasons I Won’t Be Getting a Covid Vaccine
https://www.deconstructingconventional.com/post/18-reason-i-won-t-be-getting-a-covid-vaccine
Quotes are only part of what the author has written in the original piece which has some excellent links, including links to all the animal studies conducted in the past for coronavirus vaccines, all of which failed, which is why there is no coronavirus vaccine on the market.
#1: VACCINE MAKERS ARE IMMUNE FROM LIABILITY
“If a company is not willing to stand behind their product as safe, especially one they rushed to market and skipped animal trials on, I am not willing to take a chance on their product.
No liability. No trust.”
#2: THE CHECKERED PAST OF THE VACCINE COMPANIES
“The four major companies who are making these covid vaccines are/have either:
#3: THE UGLY HISTORY OF ATTEMPTS TO MAKE CORONAVIRUS VACCINES
“There have been many attempts to make viral vaccines in the past that ened in utter failure, which is why we did not have a coronavirus vaccine in 2020. ”
“In other words, never before has any attempt to make a coronavirus vaccine been successful, nor has the gene-therapy technology that is mRNA “vaccines” been safely brought to market, but hey, since they had billions of dollars in government funding, I’m sure they figured that out.
Except they don’t know if they have…”
#4: THE “DATA GAPS” SUBMITTED TO THE FDA BY THE VACCINE MAKERS
“When vaccine makers submitted their papers to the FDA for the Emergency Use Authorization (Note: An EUA is not the same as a full FDA approval), among the many “Data Gaps” they reported was that they have nothing in their trials to suggest they overcame that pesky problem of Vaccine Enhanced Disease.
They simply don’t know–i.e. they have no idea if the vaccines they’ve made will also produce the same cytokine storm (and deaths) as previous attempts at such products.”
#5: NO ACCESS TO THE RAW DATA FROM THE TRIALS
“Would you like to see the raw data that produced the “90% and 95% effective” claims touted in the news?
Me too…
But they won’t let us see that data.”
#6: NO LONG-TERM SAFETY TESTING
“Obviously, with products that have only been on the market a few months, we have no long-term safety data.
In other words, we have no idea what this product will do in the body months or years from now–for ANY population.
Given all the risks above (risks that ALL pharmaceutical products have), would it not be prudent to wait to see if the worst-case scenarios have indeed been avoided?
Would it not make sense to want to fill those pesky “data gaps” before we try to give this to every man, woman, and child on the planet?”
#7: NO INFORMED CONSENT
“What most who are taking the vaccine don’t know is that because these products are still in clinical trials, anyone who gets the shot is now part of the clinical trial.
They are part of the experiment.”
#8: UNDER-REPORTING OF ADVERSE REACTIONS AND DEATH
“According to a study done by Harvard (at the commission of our own government), less than 1% of all adverse reactions to vaccines are actually submitted to the National Vaccine Adverse Events Reports System (VAERS) – read page 6 at the link above”
#9: THE VACCINES DO NOT STOP TRANSMISSION OR INFECTION
“That’s it…lowering your symptoms is the big payoff we’ve been waiting for.
Does that seem completely pointless to anyone but me?
#10: PEOPLE ARE CATCHING COVID AFTER BEING FULLY VACCINATED
“Talk about a bummer.
You get vaccinated and you still catch covid.”
#11: THE OVERALL DEATH RATE FROM COVID
“According to the CDC’s own numbers, covid has a 99.74% survival rate.
Why would I take a risk on a product, that doesn’t stop infection or transmission, to help me overcome a cold that has a .26% chance of killing me–actually in my age range is has about a .1% chance of killing me (and .01% chance of killing my kids), but let’s not split hairs here.”
#12: THE BLOATED COVID DEATH NUMBERS
“Something smells really funny about this one.
Never before in the history of death certificates has our own government changed how deaths are reported.
Why now, are we reporting everyone who dies with covid in their body, as having died of covid, rather than the co-morbidities that actually took their life?”
………
You can find raw data (see above). But you have to search hard to find mention of the real (absolute) risk reduction calculation – because it’s minimal.
Continued…..
#13: FAUCI AND SIX OTHERS AT NIAID OWN PATENTS IN THE MODERNA VACCINE
“Thanks to the Bayh-Dole Act, government workers are allowed to file patents on any research they do using tax payer funding.
Tony Fauci owns over 1,000 patents (see this video for more details), including patents being used on the Moderna vaccine…which he approved government funding for.
In fact, the NIH (which NIAID is part of) claims joint ownership of Moderna’s vaccine.
Does anyone else see this as a MAJOR conflict of interest, or criminal even?”
I say criminal because there’s also this pesky problem that makes me even more distrustful of Fauci, NIAD, and the NIH in general…..”
#14: FAUCI IS ON THE HOT SEAT FOR ILLEGAL GAIN-OF-FUNCTION RESEARCH
“What is “Gain-of-Function” research?
It’s where scientists attempt to make viruses gain functions–i.e. make them more transmissible and deadlier.
Sounds at least a touch unethical, right?
How could that possibly be helpful?
Our government agreed, and banned the practice.
So what did the Fauci-led NIAID do?
They pivoted and outsourced the gain-of-function research (in coronaviruses no less) to China–to the tune of a $600K grant.
You can see more details, including the important timeline of these events in this fantastically well-researched documentary.
Mr. Fauci, you have some explaining to do…and I hope the cameras are recording when you have to defend your actions.
For now, let’s turn our attention back to the virus…”
#15: THE VIRUS CONTINUES TO MUTATE
“Not only does the virus (like all viruses) continue to mutate, but according to world-renowned vaccine developer Geert Vanden Bossche (who you’ll meet below if you don’t know him) it’s mutating about every 10 hours.
How in the world are we going to keep creating vaccines to keep up with that level of mutation?
We’re not.
Might that also explain why fully vaccinated people are continuing to catch covid?
Why, given that natural immunity has never ultimately failed humanity, do we suddenly not trust it? ”
#16: CENSORSHIP…AND THE COMPLETE ABSENCE OF SCIENTIFIC DEBATE
“Wasn’t it great seeing public health officials (who never treated anyone with covid) have their “science” questioned?
Wasn’t it great seeing the FDA panel publicly grill the vaccine makers in prime time as they stood in the hot-seat of tough questions about products of which they have no liability?
Oh, wait…you didn’t see those debates?
No, you didn’t…because they never happened.
What happened instead was heavy-handed censorship of all but one narrative.
#17: THE WORLD’S LEADING VACCINOLOGIST IS SOUNDING THE ALARM…
“When someone who is very pro-vaccine, who has spent his entire professional career overseeing the development of vaccines, is shouting from the mountaintops that we have a major problem, I think the man should be heard.”
#18: I ALREADY HAD COVID
In full:
“#3: THE UGLY HISTORY OF ATTEMPTS TO MAKE CORONAVIRUS VACCINES
There have been many attempts to make viral vaccines in the past that ended in utter failure, which is why we did not have a coronavirus vaccine in 2020.
In the 1960’s, scientists attempted to make an RSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) vaccine for infants.
In that study, they skipped animal trials because they weren’t necessary back then.
In the end, the vaccinated infants got much sicker than the unvaccinated infants when exposed to the virus in nature, with 80% of the vaccinated infants requiring hospitalization, and two of them died.
After 2000, scientists made many attempts to create coronavirus vaccines.
For the past 20 years, all ended in failure because the animals in the clinical trials got very sick and many died, just like the children in the 1960’s.
You can read a summary of this history/science here.
Or if you want to read the individual studies you can check out these links:
The typical pattern in the studies mentioned above is that the children and the animals produced beautiful antibody responses after being vaccinated.
The manufacturers thought they hit the jackpot.
The problem came when the children and animals were exposed to the wild version of the virus.
When that happened, an unexplained phenomenon called Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE) also known as Vaccine Enhanced Disease (VED) occurred where the immune system produced a “cytokine storm” (i.e. overwhelmingly attacked the body), and the children/animals died.
Here’s the lingering issue…
In other words, never before has any attempt to make a coronavirus vaccine been successful, nor has the gene-therapy technology that is mRNA “vaccines” been safely brought to market, but hey, since they had billions of dollars in government funding, I’m sure they figured that out.”
O level biology tells us that a successful pregnancy relies on fertilisation of an egg, implantation, growth of a fully functioning placenta, re-jigging of the maternal immune system, extra load on maternal kidneys, liver, etc, production of the right hormones to maintain pregnancy, adequate blood flow to placenta and a whole bunch of other complex and not fully understood processes. So what fool would ever recommend injecting anything into a pregnant woman? The body’s immune system is modified so as not to reject the foreign foetal tissue, so why would you even risk tinkering with such a complex process? It would be unethical to even run a trial. Oh, wait….
Spot on.
I understood that Dr. Mengele left us in 1979, but he’s either resurrected himself or else his well-trained acolytes are busy. Of course, as we’re all in one large concentration camp, it’s highly appropriate that questionable, unethical and quite possibly lethal medical experiments should be conducted upon the inmates
emergency licensed vaccines should be used (if at all) for emergencies. pregnant women aren’t at risk of covid. nor are children – nor are most people. its just wrong to use the vaccines in a way that they aren’t licensed for.
The JCVI must know that the long-term safety of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna is unknown and will not be reported (in the case of BioNTech) to regulators until December 2023. How can it be reassurred by US data on short-term effects? Has any journalist asked? Are journalists unaware of the fast-track exemptions that the vaccine makers received?
“Black Lives Matter May Have Reduced Spread Of Covid, Says Sage
Scientists advising government concluded BLM “facilitated open dialogue which increased knowledge” about the pandemic.”
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/black-lives-matter-covid_uk_60706561c5b6616dcd772211
So that’s the quality of advice from SAGE. In other words, best ignored.
https://sebastianrushworth.com/2021/04/17/is-the-astra-zeneca-vaccine-killing-people/
Is the Astra-Zeneca vaccine killing people?
“Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis is a condition in which a blood clot has formed in one of the veins that drain blood from the brain. Since the blood is not able to move forward through the vein, it gets stuck. This often results in a stroke (the death of part of the brain due to a lack of oxygen). Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis is very rare, occuring in roughly one in 300,000 people per year.
Heparin induced thrombocytopenia is an auto-immune disorder that sometimes occurs in people who are being treated with an anti-coagulant drug called heparin. Thrombocytopenia literally means “lack of platelets” (platelets are cells in the blood that form blood clots, in order to prevent bleeding, when a blood vessel is damaged).
Thankfully, heparin induced thrombocytopenia is rare, which is why the drug is still used in clinical practice.
So it is extremely uncommon for a patient to develop heparin induced thrombocytopenia in combination with a cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. In fact, it’s so uncommon that only a handful of cases have been reported in the entire medical literature. Up to now, that is.”
There have been two series of cases reported in Norway and Germany.
It’s worth reading the whole article.
And now the government and its advisors want pregnant women to get these vaccines, when they’re at negligible risk from CV19.
According to the government’s own Yellow Card data on the AZ and Pfizer vaccines, there have been 57 spontaneous abortions and 5 foetal deaths/stillbirths following vaccination. Presumably quite a small number of pregnant women will have had the vaccine to date in the UK given the government prioritising the over 50s and the guidance to date that pregnant women should not have the vaccine.
You’d have thought these foetal deaths might have given the authorities pause for thought but it’s almost as if the vaccination programme must proceed at any cost.
It’s hard to escape the conclusion that the people in charge are evil.
Yes!
Thank you, I knew I’d seen the figures before but couldn’t remember what they were. They will obviously increase.
Don’t forget, depopulation is a conspiracy theory. Marianna Spring said so (the best part of her ran down her mother’s leg)
Statement of the bleedin’ obvious time: pregnancy only lasts nine months. So why not wait nine months, then discuss the risks and benefits? We might actually have a slightly less confused idea of the risks by then.
i think we should give it to newly born babies. Perhaps inject it into the eyes of kittens and puppies.
This has to be on of the most unethical pieces of advice ever given to pregnant women. Vaccinating babies and children runs a close second.
But offer a pregnant woman a glass of wine, or let her use the wrong type of essential oil for a massage, and you are a menace to both her and her unborn child.