There follows a guest post by retired dentist Dr. Mark Shaw on the strangeness of this ongoing ‘pandemic’.
I was booked in for a telephone consultation with a new representative from my pension company recently. We introduced ourselves and somehow couldn’t avoid the subject of Covid. I didn’t want to get too involved in a potentially awkward discussion but couldn’t hold back from highlighting the illogic in so much of the Government’s response to the disease. I sensed he too wanted to remain neutral so it was both a relief and quite surprising to hear him respond with: “I have to agree – it all does seem so very odd.”
Do I sense a point in time, a turning point, now where more and more people are thinking the same?
In the last 18 months:
- How is it that cases (in the medical clinical sense) were in the past always referred to as those patients with symptoms (i.e. real patients) but are now classified as people who have tested positive on a (novel and unreliable) test?
- How is it that symptomless people now have to isolate when this was not necessary for people with flu (a deadly respiratory virus) pre-Covid? Where is the evidence that people without symptoms spread illness?
- If vaccination helps stop spread (and most of the population are vaccinated), and the elderly and vulnerable are much less likely to be seriously ill having been vaccinated, then why do the vaccinated need to isolate, and why should any asymptomatic person isolate?
- If most who were seriously ill from Covid were the very old and vulnerable and they have been vaccinated, why should everyone else be jabbed when herd immunity can be reached naturally and is likely to be a stronger, safer form of immunity?
- Why have deaths from Covid been recorded as deaths occurring within 28 days of a positive test when no such recording system was used pre-Covid for infective respiratory diseases?
- How come, for all the years I studied and practised as a dentist, there was no good evidence that wearing masks in public had any beneficial effect whatsoever against airborne viruses, until Covid came along? (Hint: it’s not because there is now good scientific evidence for masks.)
- How come, if I search hard enough on the internet, I’m seeing huge crowds protesting against lockdowns and forced vaccinations in cities across the world, but this is not shown on the BBC?
- Why has the Government not invited any (zero) of the well-known medical experts from organisations such as HART, like Dr Clare Craig and Dr John Lee, and those endorsing the Great Barrington Declaration to scrutinise the data presented by SAGE at the numerous Government press briefings?
- Why has the BBC been interviewing young adults recently who are reluctant to be vaccinated and portraying them as being naïve, lacking intelligence, courage or having extreme conspiracy theories whilst not broadcasting interviews with many thousands of sensible young adults who would question the logic and have genuine health concerns following their balanced, logical risk assessment?
- If the disease is now still so deadly why can politicians, FIFA officials etc. be exempt from some of the restrictions imposed on the public? Why can healthcare workers and other key workers be ‘pinged’ but then exempted from isolating if the disease is so deadly?
- Why has the BBC not openly debated for hours on end the evidence that lockdowns work or that they cause huge overall harm? And if they work why are ‘cases’ plummeting since ‘Freedom Day’, and why have countries like Sweden and some states in America with no meaningful lockdowns or mask-wearing mandates fared no worse than those with strict lockdowns?
- Why have the principles of informed consent, first do no harm, careful prescribing following a thorough risk/benefit analysis, and an ethical obligation to prevent patients from being coerced into accepting a particular course of medical treatment all been abandoned specifically for Covid?
While my own experience of not knowing anyone who has died from Covid may not be representative, I do see hundreds of people each day who are still alive and well. I have talked to many people each week since February 2020 and I have only heard of one relative of these people that died of or with Covid. Maybe my situation is completely unique but I have also searched the internet for celebrities and those in the public eye who have died from Covid and can’t find anyone I know of and, of those listed, many were in their 70s, 80s or over (isn’t this more dying of old age?). I know that people really are dying of Covid and it would be just as daft to pretend people don’t die of flu and old age but if it is so deadly, why don’t I know or have heard of more of them?
Doesn’t it all seem so very odd?
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.
Thanks for doing this.
“covid” was never about “public health”.
I disagree tof. The C1984 was about health – seriously and irreparably undermining it.
To kill
To wound and thus shorten life
To destroy fertility.
At the moment everything looks to be on track for the perps.
Vaccines were never about public health.
Follow the money: How the Case Against Andrew Wakefield was Fixed in 8 Steps
Indeed. “MMR jabs don’t cause autism.”
Vast amounts of time and money were spent to trash any link.Reasearchers looked at the health records of thousands of children and concluded that there was no link whatsoever between autism and MMR jabs.
So, one may be forgiven for thinking that the children were split into two groups, one being perfectly jabbed according to the recommended schedules and the other group unjabbed?
Not quite.
The other group were er, actually more or less fully jabbed – but not compliant with the schedules.
There was of course no significant difference between the groups.
Result – Wakefield trashed.
Bigpharma’s usual “Turtles All the Way Down” (please read the book) in action.
It is not just that the ‘studies’ could not find a difference because they compared jabbed kids to jabbed kids = guaranteed no difference.
The MMR vaccine and the DTP vaccine both cause autism and just one reason we know this is from the US Vaccine Injury Programme list of ‘Table Injuries’.
As long as it can be proven a child suffered encephalopathy 5 to 15 days after MMR vaccine or 24 to 72 hours after DTP vaccine compensation is automatic.
Hannah Poling was able to prove this after 9 vaccines in one day left her autistic. It of course helped that her Dad was not just a neurologist at Johns Hopkins but he worked with Zimmerman who was the US DoJ expert in such cases.
Her confidential settlement case was leaked in Feb 2008 and remained in the top ten US news stories into 2009. All presidential candidates made all the right noises and after the election nothing happened.
Ironically it was John Walker-Smith who publicly linked the MMR jabs to causing autism in a presentation to an international Wellcome medical conference in December 1996 when he presented the results of the first 7 cases – all boys.
Thank you for that – and your post above.
You are welcome.
There is loads more on this site – which is blacklisted by Google for providing reliable and true health information instead of Googlease:
https://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/index/
This is worth a look too: https://pandauncut.substack.com/p/the-dashboard-that-ruled-the-world
Awkward Git sent loads of FOI requests and got sent round the houses, ended up they were all pointing to each other in a big circle, the buck stops nowhere.
Remember the NHS “Rhythm of Life” promotion for vaccination which ended with Jim Broadbent saying “Just get a vaccination” with a tone of contempt?
There was no mention of voluntary and informed consent or side-effects however there were comments such as “Get that vaccine”, “I look fantastic” and “Every vaccine gives us hope”.
In response to a complaint, the MHRA said:
“It is the view of the MHRA that materials disseminated by Government bodies in support of a public health campaign are not caught by this definition [advertisement for a medicine] as they are not ‘designed to promote the prescription, supply, sale or use’ of a specific medicine or medicines. Their purpose is rather to promote public health by encouraging people to seek appropriate medical intervention, in this case uptake of vaccination against COVID 19.”
If someone sought to recruit for a clinical trial using such wording or promotional materials, the MHRA would likely take a dim view of it and it would be considered unethical.
Here’s where the NHS used to have it (currently “video unavailable”): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPjoQ3XpzkM
It’s still here (via BBC news). Rarely have I seen something so slick yet so sickening!
https://vimeo.com/560412988/ce61c92bb1
Thanks!
First time I’ve seen that since I completely ignore the BBC. What an appalling video.
There wasn’t any. Especially not given the way it was marketed to us all. I’m glad I resisted it, and never used it.
The definition of consent quoted in the article is part of this page:
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/consent-to-treatment/
This and some of the other NHS content related to consent came under a bit of criticism in 2021 once the vaccination campaign was rolling.
Concept long gone. My wife was not informed of many of the possible side effects of chemo. Them given CT scans, with Iodine as the trace dye, she was not warned that some people reach very badly to them – which she did. Six months to recover, then they dropped the amount, no change.
Pfizer listed over 1200 (One thousand two hundred) possible side effects of their death jab. Many life changing or threatening.
I know of NOBODY warned of anything more than “your shoulder might hurt for a bit”, or “you may feel a bit fluey”
The medical profession is gone, owned by Big Pharma and their only response it not to tey to heal you but to push pills down you.
I remember receiving my “invitation” to be experimented on, sometime towards the end of Feb 2021. I binned it, but now wish I hadn’t. It was evidence so I should have kept it. I don’t recall it giving me any “possible adverse effects” information whatsoever. Since I wasn’t in a high-risk group I was about 7 on their priority list which had given me plenty of time to do my own research.
I mentally carried out a process for myself, which was very similar to the one Dr Harcombe did by challenging the Welsh Authorities. I reached the same conclusion, resisted the coercion, and have remained un-jabbed.
I’m going to keep a copy of her questions so I can challenge properly in the future, if needed.
I got my proposal bumf through the post from somewhere that did not have a return address on it, or an easy way of declining it. There was a local group that had clubbed together and rented a venue owned by the Council to dish it out. So, what I did was to send a separate letter via email to my usual local surgery (extract here). Not long after that, someone replied and said they would keep a record of it, and that was that. No correspondence from them at all since then; perhaps I’m on a blacklist!
A prime example of gaslighting.
I have a similar 3 page letter from MHRA.
We should frame them….
In Layman’s terms Gaslighting is pissing on someone’s back and telling them it is raining.
I can’t stand those that do it.
Delving into the detail a bit more, re item 5) in the original letter, the statement that “we have had human coronaviruses for 55 years” is not quite right. “we discovered..” would have been better. In reality, we have probably had them for thousands of years; we just didn’t know.
That said, while I don’t agree with all the measures used to reduce mortality, it was a pretty robust assessment of risk versus benefit! The organisations involved seemed to have lost the plot, compared with the normal health & safety mantra “So Far As Is Reasonably Practicable (SFAIRP)” dictated by the Civil Service. Of course, the definition of “reasonable” is often a bone of contention, with money being a big factor. Certain companies have probably made a killing out if it, e.g.
I have tried writing to government agencies about everything from geo-engineering to covid ‘vaccinations’ to climate change and the response is always the same: we are just following orders from above. That’s the totalitarian brick wall you hit every single time. But hey, remember to go out and vote for more of the same, people – put your cross anywhere to signify your consent to this system.
Good article, thank you.
I would point out, however, that a BMI of 20 is below the most healthy level, and not drinking alcohol is less healthy than moderate drinking. Lots of evidence!
Red wine has been known as a good antioxidant for a while, something in the skin of the grape. But what is the quantity before it tips the ballance and becomes detrimental to health.
And yet today on BBC Five Live they were talking about the arrest of an influencer who advised people how to commit suicide and how they should get oFcom to sort all this horrible stuff out. This was that female presenter whose name I can’t remember (or spell) who laughed at the British flag on air. I TXT them that they have some nerve playing the concerned journalists when it comes to death from suicide (though not heard much criticism of Canada’s suicide enabling policies on the BBC) yet they are wilfully not interested in the deaths and injury from those jabs they helped push on the public.