What follows is a press release written by the doctors behind the HOPE Accord, an online petition calling for the suspension of the COVID-19 vaccines.
Thousands of doctors and healthcare professionals have signed a petition calling for the immediate suspension of all COVID-19 mRNA products because they are contributing to an alarming rise in disability and excess deaths.
The online petition, known as the HOPE Accord, makes five calls to the international community in relation to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines that were given emergency use authorisation, stating that “a growing body of evidence suggests that they are contributing to an alarming rise in disability and excess deaths”.
The petition calls for “independent investigations to be properly resourced to allow a comprehensive re-evaluation of all COVID-19 products. There must be a full exploration of mechanisms of harm to provide insight into their effect on the human body, both short and long term.”
There are additional calls for immediate recognition and support for the vaccine-injured. “The vaccine-injured must be recognised, and every effort must be made to understand their conditions. Support should include readily accessible multidisciplinary clinics offering investigation and treatment, as well as appropriate compensation for all those who have been harmed.”
It also states, “The medical profession must lead by admitting we lost our way. By drawing attention to these medical and ethical issues surrounding the COVID-19 response, we hope to validate and amplify the call to ensure the relevant facts are known and vital lessons are learned. An honest and thorough investigation is needed, addressing the root causes that have led us to this place, including institutional groupthink, conflicts of interest and the suppression of scientific debate.”
An open letter to the General Medical Council of the U.K., written by Consultant Cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra and signed by several leaders in health, also makes reference to the petition of which he is a co-founder. The letter was CC’d to key figures, including the Chief Medical Officer Sir Chris Whitty, the Chief Scientific Adviser to the British Government Patrick Vallance, and the Secretary of State for Health Wes Streeting.
Dr. Malhotra says that, given the level of evidence of unprecedented harm, their position not to suspend the Covid mRNA products is now untenable. Re-analysis of Pfizer and Moderna’s original randomised controlled trials on the Covid mRNA products by independent experts, including the associate editor of the BMJ, revealed a greater risk of serious harms from the vaccine than from being hospitalised with Covid. This rate of serious harm is 1 in 800 at two months, suggesting the harms are likely much greater, as it does not take into consideration medium- to long-term harms, including heart attacks, strokes and cancer. Conversely, the level of benefit in the highest-risk group – those over 90, according to U.K. HSA data for 2024 – is 1 in 7,000 to prevent a Covid hospitalisation. In other words, there is at least an eight times greater risk of harm than benefit in this group.
A similar story of the overstatement of findings without attention to methodology applies to the highly publicised headline, “millions of lives saved” from a WHO report. While the headline is attractive, the data is derived from a modelling study that doesn’t enter into the hierarchy of evidence-based medicine studies (poor-quality evidence) and has been described by the Director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at the University of Oxford, Carl Heneghan, as “implausible”. It’s like saying the best football team in the Premier League is a fourth-division club, whilst completely ignoring the Liverpools and Manchester Cities of this world. In other words, such a claim is fake.
Two of the world’s pre-eminent experts in oncology and immunology, respectively, feel there is strong mechanistic evidence, through different pathways including prolonged immunosuppression and DNA contamination, that the Covid mRNA vaccines cause cancer. The thought that billions of people have been injected with a potential carcinogen is so horrific to bear that one can understand why medical professionals who encouraged patients to take the vaccine would rather choose to bury their heads in the sand. But such wilful blindness will not eliminate an ongoing problem. It is staggering beyond comprehension that the U.K. is still recommending this product, given its poor efficacy and serious, unprecedented harms, including the irrefutable risk of death in the short term for a sizeable minority.
The letter to the GMC also explains why the medical regulators for drug approval, such as the MHRA and FDA, cannot be trusted to be independent because they take most of their funding from the pharmaceutical industry, an industry that has been diagnosed as psychopathic in its pursuit of profit. It describes the recent revelations by the Secretary of State for Health at the time, Matt Hancock, ordering the MHRA to “shut down” vaccine concerns when the AstraZeneca vaccine was being rolled out as a “scandal”.
Failure to acknowledge the clear and overwhelming evidence of serious harm from these products, which have caused a “public health calamity”, is due to either ignorance, wilful blindness or commercial corruption, Dr. Malhotra writes.
He concludes: “At this point in time, the evidence of the Covid mRNA product doing significantly more harm than good is overwhelming, even for the highest-risk groups. The longer the General Medical Council, the Secretary of State for Health and the Chief Medical Officer delay acting on this, the greater the harm to public health, the further decrease in trust in the medical profession, and the more strain on an already failing NHS. It is evident that many physicians and medical leaders remain either unaware of the latest evidence or too deeply entrenched in the corrupted ties between the healthcare profession and the pharmaceutical industry to recognise clear conflicts of interest.
Expert reaction
Emeritus Professor of Oncology at St George’s University Hospital, Angus Dalgleish, said:
My own observations in cancer were that I witnessed an outbreak of melanoma relapses in patients who had been stable on my immunotherapy treatment programmes for over 5–18 years. The only thing they had in common is that they had all had booster vaccines, which, as predicted, were causing T-cell suppression. I continue to see these relapses, as well as rapid cancer progression, after these totally unnecessary boosters. The tragedy is that all oncology doctors are seeing this but are afraid to speak out, with a few exceptions. Having reviewed how mRNA vaccines can cause cancer for special evidence to Parliament and specialist bodies worldwide, including the Australian Senate most recently, I am horrified that they are still available. Evil is done when good men do nothing, and evil has certainly been done by all our institutions, including the MHRA, who should have banned these vaccines within three months of rollout; the Chief Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Adviser, who should have intervened; the Department of Health; and the NHS, who are still pushing these vaccines, with the Government paying Moderna to make £250 million a year for the next 10 years. Doctors who support the continued vaccination are clearly clinically incompetent or have been infected with groupthink straight out of 1984; they are the ones who need to be held to account.
Emeritus Professor of Immunology, Robert Clancy, said:
The spike protein generated via message expressed within injected mRNA is systemically distributed – the packaged mRNA in its lipid nanoparticles – and can potentially infect every cell in the body. Spike protein can be found in body fluids and tissues at least 12 months after injection. It is a foreign protein, evoking an immune response, causing inflammation and tissue destruction. I support the position taken by Dr. Malhotra that mRNA vaccines have attracted a forest of red flags, including unprecedented mortality and morbidity, unknown genetic confusion and disappointing clinical value. His call for the cessation of mRNA vaccination, pending objective scientific review, is one widely shared by those who have braved the tidal wave of cognitive dissonance. It is the only evidence-based way forward to protect the health and lives of our communities. I am beyond despair that it is even necessary for me to be asked to provide this support.
Former General Secretary to the Congress of South Africa and Cabinet minister under Nelson Mandela, Jay Naidoo, said:
I owe Dr. Malhotra immense gratitude for his unwavering commitment to the truth around very critical issues concerning the Covid pandemic response, including the safety and efficacy of the Covid injection. It’s clear to me that information on the harms caused by the Covid injections is deliberately withheld to prevent a robust public debate. This is an attack on our freedom of speech and right to protest, which have been cornerstones of democracy for many decades. Having been a victim of demonisation that created a toxic environment around me and the leadership of the freedom struggle, which saw my name appear on death lists several times, this victimisation campaign against Dr. Aseem Malhotra reminds me of how the apartheid regime sought to discredit us during the freedom struggle. Dr. Aseem Malhotra is regarded as a hero for exposing the deep complicity of the pharmaceutical industry, which has committed fraud on a global scale and has killed, harmed and maimed millions around the world, and been found guilty on innumerable occasions of criminal negligence. In the current global context, when the veil of secrecy is being lifted over the harm that has been done by the pharmaceutical industry, it’s important that Dr. Aseem Malhotra’s call for the suspension of the Covid jab be accepted until the data is studied independently, and recommendations be made on the overhaul of the whole health sector so that the rights of patients are fairly balanced with the role of the medical industry and its regulation, which is driven by profit and medical capture by pharma interests.
Former Wimbledon champion and BBC tennis commentator Pat Cash said:
In my view, from everyone I’ve spoken to, including people I personally know who are severely vaccine-injured, there is more than enough evidence for the Chief Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Adviser to the Government to call for a pause in the use of Covid mRNA vaccines and to carry out an independent investigation into their true benefits and harms. The vaccine-injured deserve this for the unwitting sacrifice they have made.
To read the full open access letter, click here.
The HOPE Accord can be viewed and signed here.
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.
Honestly if men want to wear dresses, I really don’t care at all, and I don’t think they should be prevented from doing so in the workplace. I think we have to draw a clear distinction between adults cross dressing and the indoctrination of children to the toxic notion that they should medicalize experimentation with gender identity. If we put it all in the same bucket, it’s so easy to conflate actual child abuse with adults doing things that are actually harmless to those around them.
Put more simply, my flight is going to be no more or less relaxing if a man on the flight is wearing a dress. Children’s lives are potentially going to be destroyed by what is happening with gender identity brainwashing in schools and other settings. Getting upset about the former makes it easier for the practitioners of this abuse to accuse us of bigotry when we try to stop the latter.
Not me. If I’m getting on plane and I see that a male pilot is all decked out in women’s clothing, I’m getting off quicker than a flash.
You’ve missed the point. The former leads to the latter. Every action has a reaction, some reactions are knee-jerk and immediate, some reactions are delayed and take place over decades. They all matter of course, but the knee jerk is easier to see and dismiss. We are currently suffering from the side effects of decades of feminism, where the traditional understanding of male and female, together with the natural, social bond of family, has been trivialised to the point of mocking. What is born from from the ideology of sameness is the idea of togetherness, and what is born from that is the lack of individuality i.e. we become less individual and become part of a mindless blob. It’s difficult to see the roots, but they’re there if you dig deep enough
Their true identity? Mentally ill.
If memory serves Sir Richard Branson spent his whole dressing up as stewardess, as we used to call, so plus ca change….
Doesn’t a uniform itself restrict the expression of one’s individual identity, more or less by definition?
The key is in the word: uniform.
Being able to chose between one particular pair of trousers and one particular skirt isn’t exactly broadening the scope for self expression, unless what you are looking to express is your grasp of reality.
I’m running out of adjectives to describe the stupidity and sheer inanity of these people.
I think this will justify some Croc Dundee style verification of gender
By wearing skirts? Good luck.
I think my preferred pronoun is I’m a f**kwit. That should work beautifully in most English sentences instead of Mr.
It’s all very well, but how does a passenger know that the flight crew’s grasp of their complex machine is not underpinned by the same denial of reality?
Agreed, and I ask myself how long before this abandonment of reality spreads to the maintenance staff responsible for the safety of the aircraft.
On a more serious note, I think the true identity of these people is male or female flight attendant insofar the passengers – supposedly the customers whose well-being they’re supposed to care for – are concerned. They may well have other, truer identities in private but this shouldn’t be of concern to people who only meet them in their professional capacity.
For Virgin Atlantic read Ratners
Branson panders to the Woke lobby in bid to sell seats. I don’t think there’s too much else to say about this nonsense. It’s a typical Branson promotional stunt: get in there first, be bold, be brash, sell, sell, sell and make more spondoolies for Sir Dick. Branson really doesn’t care much about what he does as long as he makes money so he misses the point that pandering to this movement in a massive virtue signalling act only adds to the erosion of boundaries, the loss of identity, and confusion. To a child, needing some clear certainties, this must be quite unsettling and it’s the children who are most at risk in all of this.
The chap on the left end looks like a man. Not sure about the others. Not a pilot among them.
Hands on hips …. they all gay to me!!
Transvestites at work, great. Surely if they are transexuals they can transition? Why do men have to be allowed to wear a skirt?
Because you’re supposed to accept that common gay antics are normal and that whoever doesn’t employ them isn’t. This is supposed to be achieved by an unending barrage of them.
Corollary: Freddy Mercury was a lot less of a great singer than Bruce Dickinson who already isn’t.
Not long ago, a study found that the natural human reaction a man has to seeing this kind of perversion is equal to viewing grotesque images of maggots and rotting flesh. Good parents would also object to their children being subjected to this kind of degeneracy whilst travelling to their exciting holiday destination.
It’s a two-pronged attack – one is cultural terrorism, the other is to dissuade people from flying.
No worries – kilts have always been accptable
Should make the “Mile High Club” interesting.
Could also be interesting if a plane crashes into the sea and there aren’t enough life rafts available. “Women and children first” will be pretty meaningless if everyone can choose to be whatever gender suits them at the time. Where do non binary and gender questioning people fit into the evacuation plan?
Bloody good point.
I (male) started wearing skirts with otherwise masculine attire when the masks came in, mandatory in closed spaces where I live. I reckon skirts are just as good as protection against viruses as masks, but are not visually as off-putting. They also have the advantage of coming up at the back 3 inches higher than even high-waisted made-to-measure trousers, which makes for vastly improved comfort. Also more practical for a sit-down wee, as we prostate oldies need.
I started wearing skirts when the masks came in, mandatory where I live. I reckon they are as good a protection against viruses as masks, but are not so off-putting. Besides they come up at the back three inches higher, which makes for vastly more comfort. Higher that is that even high-waisted made to measure trousers. Besides, for those elderly of us who have to sit to wee, more practical.