A Sars-Cov2 vaccine – don’t hold your breath

10th October 2020

[But concern may be in order]

I suppose most people believe the trials on vaccines for COVID19 will be looking to demonstrate that they reduce the risk of infection, death, or serious illness – or suchlike.

Also, you may have heard that several vaccines could be ready for use early next year 2021. Maybe even later this year.

As Dilbert may retort: Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! Oh, let me pause and wipe away my tears of mirth.

Really. Think about it. Then think a bit more…

AstraZeneca (AZ) is thought to be leading the pack with their vaccine AZD1222. Their major clinical trial will recruit 30,000 participants – which is good. You can find the trial description on Clinicaltrials.gov. It goes by the snappy title ‘Phase III Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study of AZD1222 for the Prevention of COVID-19 in Adults.’ 1

You may be interested in the start  and end date of this AZ trial:

Estimated Study Start Date:                                    August 17, 2020

Estimated Primary Completion Date*:                  December 2, 2020

Estimated Study Completion Date:                       October 5, 2022

*date when all volunteers have been recruited onto the trial.

As you can see, even if all goes to plan, their study will not be completed until two years from now. Then they will have to analyse the data and suchlike, which will take a couple of months, even as a rush job. Which means they are unlikely to have everything sorted before early 2023.

For those who were claiming, a few months ago, that a vaccine would be ready by September this year i.e. a month ago, this would be stretching the word ‘ready’ far beyond its natural boundaries.

As for studying deaths from COVID19, this trial will not be looking at anything as tricky as that. Preventing deaths from COVID19 is not an end-point they are aiming for.  

Below I have listed the primary end-points for study NCT04516746. By primary end-points, I mean those outcomes that will be used to determine if the trial has been a success or failure.

Sorry, jargon alert, and boring but also necessary, I feel, just so you know I am not making this stuff up. My comments in brackets [ ].

PRIMARY END-POINTS OF AZ STUDY

1: To estimate the efficacy of 2 IM doses of AZD1222 compared to placebo for the prevention of COVID-19 in adults ≥ 18 years of age [Time Frame: 1 year]

A binary response, whereby a participant is defined as a COVID-19 case if their first case of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR-positive symptomatic illness occurs ≥ 15 days post second dose of study intervention. Otherwise, a participant is not defined as a COVID-19 case.

[You may note that a positive SARS-Cov-2 RT-PCR test is not sufficient to define someone as having been infected with the virus – they must also have symptoms.]

2: To assess the safety and tolerability of 2 IM doses of AZD1222 compared to placebo in adults ≥ 18 years of age [ Time Frame: a: 28 days post each dose of study Intervention. / b: from Day 1 post-treatment through Day 730.]

a: Incidence of adverse events.

b: Incidence of serious adverse events, medically attended adverse events, and adverse events of special interest.

3: To assess the reactogenicity* of 2 IM doses of AZD1222 compared to placebo in adults ≥ 18 years of age (Substudy only) [ Time Frame: 7 days post each dose of study intervention.]

Incidence of local and systemic solicited adverse events.

*In vaccine clinical trials, the term reactogenicity refers to the property of a vaccine of being able to produce common, “expected” adverse reactions, especially excessive immunological responses and associated signs and symptoms, including fever and sore arm at injection site.

At this point I feel the need to point out that preventing deaths from COVID19 is not even a secondary end-point for this trial either. So, whatever else we will find out, we are not going to know if AZD1222 saves any lives. Or, to be technical, the trial is not sufficiently ‘powered’ to reach statistical significance for overall mortality.

Anyway, getting back to the timelines, you may now be thinking, how on earth are they planning to launch a vaccine next year, if they are not going to complete their key clinical trial until October 2022? Do they have a time machine?

Well, it goes like this.

Clinical trials – before a drug is approved – normally go through three clinical phases.

  • Phase I: Evaluate safety, determine safe dosage, identify side effects (in a small group of human volunteers, maybe twenty or thirty)
  • Phase II: Test effectiveness, further evaluate safety (maybe a couple of hundred volunteers).
  • Phase III: Confirm effectiveness, monitor side-effects, compare to other treatments (up to tens of thousands of volunteers).

Following completion of the Phase III trial, the data are sent to the regulatory authorities, who will then determine if the ‘drug’ is both safe and effective. Or at least safe and effective enough to recommend approval.

The AZ trial I have been talking about up to now, is a phase III trial, with 30,000 participants.

However, clearly, with SARS-Cov-2 vaccines, they are not going to (and cannot)  wait for Phase III trials to complete. Instead, they are planning to launch directly after (what would normally be called phase II trials) to finish.

Regarding this, I was sent an e-mail by a friend regarding these phase II trials, and what they are trying to achieve. The e-mail is summary of an article by William A Haseltine who writes this, of himself.

‘For nearly two decades, [William A. Haseltine] was a professor at Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health where I founded two academic research departments, the Division of Biochemical Pharmacology and the Division of Human Retrovirology. I am perhaps most well-known for my work on cancer, HIV/AIDS, and genomics.’

You can look him up on Wikipedia if you like.2 Basically, it sounds like he knows what he is talking about, with regard to science, viruses and suchlike. Although when it comes to research on vaccines for COVID19 he seems to have spotted commercial reality for the first time in his life.

Here was the e-mail, sent to me:

Here is an interesting article about the COVID-19 vaccine trials written by William A. Haseltine, who was a professor at Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health, and who founded two academic research departments, the Division of Biochemical Pharmacology and the Division of Human Retrovirology.

Here are the two most important points he makes, which summarizes what he says in his article, are:

“These [vaccine] protocols do not emphasize the most important ramifications of COVID-19 that people are most interested in preventing: overall infection, hospitalization, and death.”

[The COVID-19 vaccine trials are only looking to see if these vaccines reduce symptoms that may be as mild as cough and headache. They are NOT requiring that the vaccines reduce the risk of infection, hospitalization or death.]

“It boggles the mind and defies common sense that the National Institute of Health, the Center for Disease Control, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, and the rest would consider the approval of a vaccine that would be distributed to hundreds of millions on such slender threads of success.”

He also notes how few people there are in each of these studies for their interim analysis, which he says the companies will probably use to try and get Emergency Use Authorization from the FDA:

  • “For Moderna, the interim analysis includes giving the vaccine to only 53 people.”
  • “For Johnson & Johnson, their interim analysis includes [only] 77 vaccine recipients “
  • “For AstraZeneca, their interim analysis includes [only] 50 vaccine recipients”
  • “For Pfizer, their interim analysis includes only 32 people getting the vaccine.”

“These companies likely intend to apply for an emergency use authorization (EUA)

The full article was published in Forbes magazine, and can be seen there 3 .

In super-short form, the current plan is these vaccines will be launched after giving them to around fifty people – each. At which point we will have no idea if they prevent infection, hospitalisation, or death. In addition, we will not really know if they are safe, as the numbers involved are simply too small – and the timelines too short.

I hope you can now see my scepticism earlier this year, when people were claiming a vaccine could be made available six months after the start of the outbreak. I was aware – as is everyone else who knows how clinical trials are done – that this simply cannot be done. Or to be more accurate, the only way to do it is by cutting some essentially corners. The corners called ‘safety’, and ‘efficacy’.

Yes, I fully accept these are not normal times, and there is certainly a need for speed. Yes, I also accept that we probably should be willing to accept an increased level of risk to tackle the enormous problems caused by COVID19.

However, for the average person, between the ages of twenty and fifty, the upper range estimate of the risk of dying of COVID19, if you get infected, is 0.0003 = 0.03%, which is 3 in 10,000.4 This figure comes from the CDC in the US, which continues to stick to a higher estimated Infection Fatality Rate (IFR), than almost anyone else.

Their lower level estimated IFR for this age group is around one in 15,000. Either way, these are very low risk levels indeed.  Under the age of twenty, the risk is almost incalculably small. So, for the majority of the population, under the age of fifty (realistically under sixty), we really should not be in a mad rush to vaccinate. We need the type evidence for both safety and efficacy that can only be provided by a Phase III trial.

However, I fear that such is the clamour for a vaccine, so desperate the need, we are going to be launching vaccine after vaccine, based on extremely thin evidence indeed. Not only that, it seems that in some countries, whilst reluctantly backing away from suggesting that COVID19 vaccination would be compulsory, are going to make it almost impossible to refuse.

Here is one headline, discussing the ideas being talked about in Australia ‘No overseas travel, and no welfare payments: The way the government will force people to get a COVID-19 jab – even as the PM insists the vaccine will NOT be compulsory.’

  • Australians could face being banned from travelling overseas for refusing jab
  • Federal Health Minister Greg Hunt said he would ‘not rule out’ strict measures
  • Echoed prime minister saying he’d make vaccine ‘as mandatory as possible’
  • Scott Morrison said later on Wednesday he had no power to enforce a vaccine
  • Mr Hunt said government was not considering making inoculation compulsory
  • But said authorities would have option of enforcing policies like ‘no jab, no pay’5

As mandatory as possible? Sorry, but mandatory is binary. It is, or it isn’t. As for the concept of compulsory vaccination. According to the Australian Prime Minister compulsory vaccination would mean pinning people to the floor and vaccinating them. However, telling people that they cannot travel, or work, or receive welfare payments, is tantamount to compulsion.

In my opinion, if we had fully tested vaccines, that were known to be both safe and effective, contemplating such actions would still be several steps too far. However, compelling people to get vaccinated, when all we have is Phase II studies to go on, ventures into extremely worrying territory.

We will effectively be compelling people to become participants in a massive medical research trial. It is my understanding that actions such as this would lie directly within the Nuremberg Code.

Point one: The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. 6

The Nuremburg Code was written after the Second World War to ensure that nothing like the unethical human experimentation carried out then on prisoners would ever happen again.

If people want to take these vaccines, of their own free will, that is up to them, and they may be right to make that decision.

However, I am deeply concerned that many others will be coerced, one way or another, to be vaccinated against their will.

1: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04516746?term=NCT04516746&draw=2&rank=1

2; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_A._Haseltine

3: https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/09/23/COVID-19-vaccine-protocols-reveal-that-trials-are-designed-to-succeed/

4: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html

5: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8642881/Health-Minister-Greg-Hunt-reveals-tough-rules-people-refuse-COVID-19-jab.html

6: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199711133372006

 

275 thoughts on “A Sars-Cov2 vaccine – don’t hold your breath

    1. Binra (@onemindinmany)

      Well they don’t just think it – but act in very disciplined and organised ways.
      The concept of human lab rats or human data points is a result of systems capture.
      Current results show significant support for being managed ‘Stockholm syndrome’ style.
      Our ‘fallen nature’ is the leverage by which to induce us to self-destruct.
      Honey-trap lures and threat of retribution in pain and loss.
      Inflation under proprietary conditions and the choke back of the snare.

      But your point is valid in that WW2 was used to generate a distorted narrative by which to lay deeper deceits. It never was about personalities or even political fronts, but systemic control as the intent of the ‘controllers’ who work all sides of apparent conflicts in multithreaded ways.

      ‘Forever’ is a long time. But the projection of evil as the basis for the right to attack it (in symptom or effect) is the foundation for a process of identifying in action-reaction-reaction scripts that are in effect a machine mind. And the attempt to communicate with a machine mind is the willingness to be scanned, profiled and incorporated into its remit of locking down, dividing and masking over as narrative identity.

      We see this in the application of ‘shocks’ that are applied for the testing and recalibration of the system as a response that locks down or denies any unauthorised movement.
      Where do we accord and accept authority?
      To what do we give power of priority in our mind, perception and response?
      In reaction we shall never know, but only act as if we know.
      Pausing the mind reaction in the desire to know is checking in with the the honesty of the heart. This is what the masking dictate operates to undermine, provoke to attack and deny.
      Cognitive dissonance cannot and will not look within (question its own predicates).
      Withdrawing support is of course ‘looking within’ rather than being reactively worked from without.
      I used the phrase ‘fallen nature’ for a learned and acquired conditioned response, not as a pejorative blame dump.

      Reply
  1. jeanirvin

    Thank you for highlighting this. I am not in the least surprised but this gives me something I can share that may warn my friends and contacts. (I’m not holding my breath though!)

    Reply
      1. Jean Irvin

        Thank you, John. I have signed it and managed to share it on Facebook. I think it’s harder to find now although the Daily Mail had an article about it. Those three brave scientists talk a great deal of sense!

        Reply
        1. Patrick Healy

          Well Jean if you do not already know, Bill Gates and his acolytes in Satan Valley – otherwise known as silicon valley – have censored that GBDeclaration as it does not “comply” with their and the WHO version of New Speak. The social media and main street media are det e remained that whittle people should be silenced. Just look to the censorship of Dr Kendrick.
          They put all anti Chinese stuff into a black hole.
          A great article by our wonderful Doctor.
          Thank you once again

          Reply
  2. James Grit

    Cl. Arvay explains here why and how the vaccine is hurried- “telescoping” of fases …

    You should be worried 😐

    Op za 10 okt. 2020 10:43 schreef Dr. Malcolm Kendrick :

    > Dr. Malcolm Kendrick posted: “10th October 2020 [But concern may be in > order] I suppose most people believe the trials on vaccines for COVID19 > will be looking to demonstrate that they reduce the risk of infection, > death, or serious illness – or suchlike. Also, you may have heard th” >

    Reply
    1. Phil von Hauenschild

      Thank you. This “new” type of vaccine and its mechanism is rarely if never mentioned ( just labelled another vaccine) and if not tested fully ( time restriction), very worrying. And trodden over by politicians. Everybody should have an opinion wether an expert or not.

      Reply
    2. Binra (@onemindinmany)

      What will we say ‘yes’ to, comply with and be sacrificed under, in order to save our own ‘skin in the game?’.
      Whether such biotech actually WORKS to its stated purpose OR to some hidden agenda, is beside the fact that its threatened or fear-leveraged use operates its own form of terrorism.

      The absurdity of what is being massively funded and promoted is not ‘mind boggling’ or a ’cause of concern’, but the requirement or demand to sacrifice our mind and the life that we are to an alien will – for there is nothing human in its operation.

      Risk of death is, as Malcolm once wrote, 100%. But our responsibility and freedom is for the living, not the dead. A deep insanity is being drawn to the surface that threatens our mind and our sense of existence. I don’t see worry and concern as helping anything but to get sucked into a loss of human connection. So whatever else we do, let it be an expression of human connection. Beware of being ‘hijacked’ by fear-porn as an unwitting ‘replication’ and ‘contagion’ of a mindset under which sanity is willingly but unwittingly covered in exchange for a false lure that can seem overwhelmingly crushing or compulsive in its moment.

      Passing through the eye of a needle. No excess baggage allowance.
      The wish to operate genetic control is the wish to own the source code and play god.
      Everyone wants to play god as the wish to make the world fit their fantasy of what they want to be for them. But after toddlerhood, most of us accept a shared reality – but alloyed with strategies of power struggle by which to get what we want by seeming to offer what others want, masking in virtue and believing our own spin. Such ‘cognitive dissonance’ is set in the place of power and authority. But does not call my heart’s recognition or allegiance. There are a lot of very sick people unaware of their true need, who think to now rule the world.

      Reply
  3. Donna Black

    You may be interested in this recent government document. Amongst other alarming changes we have:
    “Regulation 345 of the Human Medicine Regulations transposes into UK law a requirement of EU law that key actors in the medicines supply chain cannot generally be sued in the civil courts for the consequences resulting from the use of an unlicensed product, or a new use of a licensed product, that a national licensing authority is recommending in order to deal with certain specific health threats.”
    https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/distributing-vaccines-and-treatments-for-covid-19-and-flu/consultation-document-changes-to-human-medicine-regulations-to-support-the-rollout-of-covid-19-vaccines

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      Yet David Noakes and Lynn Thyer are in prison in France for using GCmaf, which was treating people successfully. However, the MHRA didn’t like anyone on their turf, and because they couldn’t get a conviction in the UK, they got a corrupt judge in France to trump up some charges, and they were extradited (illegally).

      Reply
    2. Freddy Fox

      yeah, I heard about that. It sucks as we are forced to sign our lives away for nothing and the pharmaceutical companies can do what they want with impunity. If this is part of the new world order, that we are coerced into taking stuff that has not been tested and not allowed to sue for damages if the untested stuff damages us we have lost our human rights.

      Reply
  4. Harry de Boer

    Your concerns are totally justified. Following are mine:
    – Is there any information on what is considered a ‘placebo’ in these experiments?
    – Any reference to a RT-PCR test without mentioning the cycle threshold is totally useless.
    – The sample size of Phase II indeed is appalling.
    – Probably one important reason that the HCQ+ cocktail has been lambasted so much is that acknowledging it as a medicine would prevent the vaccines to get the emergency use authorization (in the USA) as that requires that there is no medicine available yet.

    It’s a very dirty game ‘they’ are playing and it’s easy to see how media and health authorities can be involved through received donations from a certain ‘non-profit foundation’ which has already raked in billions of profits and is going to make a bit whopper on this one. But I’m still puzzled about how the political opposition parties have been silenced so effectively until now…

    Reply
    1. Jerome Savage

      WRT your last point. Politicians fear being caught on the “wrong” side. The vaccine is marketed as the cavalry coming to the rescue. Do they want to be accused of causing deaths ? That’s what will happen. Deaths indirectly caused by lockdown and deaths & injuries yet to be attributed to vaccines, are and will be much less attributable to anyone.

      Reply
    2. Lior Losinsky

      As far as I know, the placebo in the oxford vaccine is the meningitis vaccine. This will definitely skew side effects. But I’m not sure if this is used in every country with this vaccine trial. I see in the South Africa trials they are claiming a saline placebo, but this may not be the truth. I know that Phase II trials in the UK were definitely using the meningitis vaccine as the placebo

      https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/coronavirus-vaccine-why-its-important-to-know-whats-in-the-placebo-146365

      Reply
      1. anna m

        Wow, use of weird and counterproductive substances as placebo is the next scandal. I believe Dr. K had done a post on that not too long ago. Placebo is supposed to be the equivalent of a “harmless sugar pill” perhaps saline in the case of an injection. Using another vaccine is foul play!

        Reply
        1. AhNotepad

          Bev, I think you are right, and it should be an inert placebo. That might show a lot more adverse effects with the drug being tested, and that would never do.

          Reply
        2. Lior Losinsky

          Youre not stupid. They should be saline. But in vaccine science are most often aren’t. Sometimes they use another vaccine, or the exact same “concoction of substances” without the viral particle. This was the case with HPV trials, where they found a 7x higher death rate in girls taking the placebo compared to a normal sample in the population of that age group, but almost identical death rates between “placebo” and vaccine, thus concluding that the vaccine was as safe as a placebo.

          The non inert palcebo is used in many other scientific trials. I think Dr Kendrick has written about this before. Its used to lessen the side effects found.

          Reply
          1. Frango Asado

            “Youre not stupid”.

            But most people are – which is why vaccine manufacturers and governments get away with transparent deception like that.

        3. Eggs ‘n beer

          They’ve stated in the link that the placebo is saline solution. Anyone know what, if any, adjuvant is in AZD1222?

          Reply
          1. Steve-R

            Sounds like that wouldn’t be needed as the vector for the RNA won’t be assisted into cells by an inflammatory stimulation of the immune system.

        4. KJE

          It should be, but if it was very few meds would be shown to be better than nothing or have fewer adverse reactions than the placebo.

          Reply
    3. Cheshire Andy

      The so-called placebos are other vaccines, not as you would expect a sterile saline solution or an injection of the same composition as the vaccine but omitting the active agents. This is normal practise for vaccine clinical studies although it completely negates the placebo concept. It is done because as the US Supreme Court stated, “Vaccines are inherently unsafe” when creating the NVICS (National Vaccine injury Compensation Scheme). Therefore this non-placebo approach is used in order to show that the proposed vaccine is not any more unsafe than existing vaccines. I strongly suggest that everyone look at the facts about vaccines.

      Reply
    4. Aileen

      Harry, I haven’t looked it up again but several months ago I came across a short synopsis on Astra Zeneca’s website which stated that the control would be a meningitis vaccine. I think they said that if the used a saline placebo people would know which arm (no pun intended!) of the trial they were in because the placebo would produce no reaction at the injection site.

      Also of note was their safety/side effect testing: “some” (they didn’t say how many) participants were to complete a daily survey for I think three weeks.

      Reply
      1. AhNotepad

        Aileen, in that case they should be using saline as inflammation at the injection site is an adverse reaction, so should be recorded as such. They are just being devious.

        Reply
  5. KJE

    With reference to “1: To estimate the efficacy of 2 IM doses of AZD1222 compared to placebo for the prevention of COVID-19 in adults ≥ 18 years of age [Time Frame: 1 year]

    A binary response, whereby a participant is defined as a COVID-19 case if their first case of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR-positive symptomatic illness occurs ≥ 15 days post second dose of study intervention. Otherwise, a participant is not defined as a COVID-19 case.”

    Since many people seem to get SARS-CoV-2 (with a positive test) but have no symptoms, how can the trial tell whether that person would have no symptoms even without the AZD1222?
    It really worries me that we are all going to be the test subjects for the Phase III trial.

    Reply
  6. Sue Richardson

    This is awful. The words Black and Mail spring to mind. Our youngest son and our grandchildren live in New Zealand. If they make the vaccine mandatory, we will probably be forced into either having it, or not being allowed into NZ. I could cry.

    Reply
        1. AhNoteapd

          Irelend is using the best covid testing technologies. Er, it is using unreliable and inappropriate tsting. This is not Ireland, but a private firm out to make an immoral profit.

          Reply
          1. Cheezilla

            I’m aware of that. Did you read the Medium article?
            The point is to see the “health passport” in the context of the Chinese Social credits system.
            Scary stuff!

          2. Joe Dopelle

            “The best Covid-19 testing technologies”.

            But there IS no Covid-19 testing technology. The “best” diagnostic test is PCR – which is not a diagnostic test.

            It’s like talking about “the best faster-than-light space drive”, or “the best perpetual motion machine”.

            There ain’t no sich critter.

    1. Jennifer

      Sue, my heart breaks for you and your family, if such a threat comes about. I am afraid of not having the freedom to choose for ourselves. Responsibility comes with freedom. There seems to be an assumption that we will all be irresponsible. Things are getting more and more sinister. What next?

      Reply
  7. Steve B

    Big Pharma will probably be happy to rush out a vaccine whether safe or not because the politicians have given them a free pass.
    Apparently pharmaceutical companies won’t be prosecuted if things go disastrously wrong.
    Every time i use the words ” pharmaceutical companies” or ” politicians” i need to follow with an onomatopeic term that conveys the sound of hawk and spit. An ideas?

    Reply
    1. Frango Asado

      KhhhhrchhhhptOOEY!

      As one who has lived in countries where people still habitually hawk and spit in the street, I am well qualified.

      Reply
  8. Mr Chris

    Malcolm
    Very I te resting and informative.
    Would you care to update your earlier posts on Covid infections, in the light of mounting hospital admissions?
    Also we are in October, the difficult months are supposed to be January February

    Reply
      1. Mr Chris

        No I can’t point you to specific errors because as far as I know there aren’t any.
        However we are awash in a sea of panic, where the most contrarian statistic is the increase in the number of Covid 19;related admissions to hospital. Are these significant?

        Reply
      2. David Bailey

        I track the infections using this convenient website (given to me by someone here):
        https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
        I read that the number of average deaths per day is 87 – presumably based on people who died within 28 days of a positive reading. This is 87 out 1600 people who die normally in Britain (assuming most of them die in hospital). That still sounds an extremely small number of cases – of course if you extrapolate them using an exponential model, you can get any figure you like!

        Reply
        1. Joe Dopelle

          “I read that the number of average deaths per day is 87 – presumably based on people who died within 28 days of a positive reading”.

          Today I read that, 10 days after he was diagnosed with Covid-19, Mr Trump was judged by his physicians to be clear of the disease and not able to transmit it to others.

          Ten days…

          Reply
  9. Geoff

    Thanks, Malcolm for giving us a realistic timeline and the sobering thought that we will be living with COVID for a while. I hope as we come into the Aussie summer we get some relief from winter.

    Reply
  10. Joe Dopelle

    Here are a couple more articles that have a direct bearing on the claimed necessity for vaccines against Covid-19.

    WHO (Accidentally) Confirms Covid Is No More Dangerous Than Flu
    by Kit Knightly (from OffGuardian)
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/10/no_author/who-accidentally-confirms-covid-is-no-more-dangerous-than-flu/

    COVID: The Virus That Isn’t There: The Root Fraud Exposed
    by Jon Rappoport
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/10/jon-rappoport/covid-the-virus-that-isnt-there-the-root-fraud-exposed/

    The first of these articles explains that the US CDC has now officially admitted that the infection fatality rate (IFR) of Covid-19 is roughly 0.14%. Right in line with seasonal flu and the predictions of many experts from all around the world. Note that the CDC has consistently exaggerated the severity of this virus and the danger it poses, so even this latest estimate may be an over-estimate.

    The second article questions whether there even is such a virus as SARS-COV2 or such a disease as Covid-19. The point is that no such virus has apparently been credible isolated and purified; so there exists no reference example of the virus with which to compare any claimed pathogen.

    Put that together with the now widely-disseminated video of Kary Mullis, the inventor of PCR, warning that it was never designed as a diagnostic test and is wholly unsuitable as such; and that, with PCR, you can find whatever you want.

    The resultant conclusion is that we have a global panic and governments imposing unheard-of deprivation of human rights – backed up by the most extreme violence – as measures against a virus that is not known to exist, has not been isolated, has no unique symptoms and for which there is no diagnostic test.

    In short, consider the possibility that every single “case” of Covid-19, and every single death offically attributed to it, may have been caused by something else. Another respiratory virus, a bacterial or fungal infection, pollution, malnutrition, stress… the list is a long one.

    As a scientific discipline, virology turns out to have feet of clay. Just read some of the books about it written by its practitioners. Viruses are just unimaginably tiny, and have evolved for millions – perhaps even billions – of years to invade and colonise living cells. It turns out to be virtually impossible to shut them in or out of anywhere – even the most highly protected labs regularly experience escapes and contamination. But it is the contamination that is not noticed or reported that does the real damage.

    Reply
    1. Joe Dopelle

      I wrote in a previous comment:

      “In short, consider the possibility that every single “case” of Covid-19, and every single death offically attributed to it, may have been caused by something else. Another respiratory virus, a bacterial or fungal infection, pollution, malnutrition, stress… the list is a long one”.

      Please read the interview with a registered nurse on Lockdown Sceptics:
      https://lockdownsceptics.org/#interview-with-an-nhs-nurse-wheres-the-challenge-wheres-the-crisis-wheres-this-covid

      In particular, this:

      ‘If Covid produced different symptoms to other viruses, it would be an undeniable new and frightening virus, but life in hospitals looked exactly the same. If the stories of “this unprecedented new virus” were not constantly flooding all news and media, we would never even have known of its existence’.

      And this:

      “The Covid patients presented no differently to any other respiratory illness, which most Covid patients already had a history of anyway. Previous to Covid we would see patients with the same symptoms in conditions like exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, community acquired pneumonia, hospital acquired pneumonia, some types of heart failure, sepsis and general frailty.

      “Any infection, as we all know, could present with a high temperature and quite understandably if a patient was admitted with a chest infection, we could also see deteriorated respiratory function which would be low oxygen levels. A simple chest infection in the main could look identical to Covid”.

      Reply
      1. Jerome Savage

        Apologies Joe – first half of the above is a repeat of my earlier post. I wanted to say I agree largely with your post.
        anyone.
        The loss of taste & smell is seen to be unique.
        Can you clarify what you mean by ” the contamination that is not noticed or reported that does the real damage”
        Had another point to make but its gone
        Thanks

        Reply
        1. Boulderite

          From the Mayo Clinic web site: “Some loss of taste & smell is natural with aging especially after age 60. However, other factors can contribute to loss of taste and smell, including: Nasal and sinus problems, such as allergies, sinusitis or nasal polyps. Certain medications including beta blockers and ACE inhibitors.

          Decreased sense of smell and taste is a zinc deficiency symptom.

          Reply
        2. Joe Dopelle

          See, for example, “Viruses: More Friends Than Foes” by Karin Moelling
          ISBN13: 978-9813147829

          page 28: “We practiced with a low pressure chamber, under the strictest safety conditions, which would prevent viruses escaping to the outside – however, the chamber collapsed owing to someone opening the wrong valve by mistake, leaving us with a pile of wreckage”.

          page 46: “While we were producing large amounts of the DNA, suddenly all samples, test-tubes and reagents were found to be contaminated with the DNA. There was a leak somewhere – until we could repair it in the safety laboratory, we were all already vaccinated through the air and our nose and lungs”.

          pages 60-61: “Later in my research I more than once encountered fear of our work. This happened with influenza, SARS and cancer viruses, and it affected not only colleagues but also their co-workers and often their spouses. This suspicion was not unjustified, because there have indeed been several accident, such as the escape of SARS (three times!) from a high-security containment laboratory in China; moreover, some laboratory frogs (Xenopus laevi) once escaped and became a plague in California”.

          page 109: “Searching for viruses as a cause of a disease is a permanent fight against contaminations. Laboratories that can identify viruses and do research on them also often have their laboratory space – the refrigerators, deep freezers and sometimes even the air in the laboratory – full of viruses, which get around in aerosols that arise during pipetting or when centrifuges are used”.

          Dr Moelling has some other important things to say:

          page 71: “The [PCR] method is so sensitive that it can amplify amounts of nucleic acids so low that they may be irrelevant – or may not relate to diseases – yet! Thus the ultra-high sensitivity could be counterproductive, and blind faith in it could be wrong or even dangerous. Indeed, we do not know whether small amounts of pathogens or even cancer cells can be removed by our immune system, and would never make us ill – but could be detected by PCR and worry us”.

          The book was published in 2016.

          Reply
    2. Jerome Savage

      WRT your last point. Politicians fear being caught on the “wrong” side. The vaccine is marketed as the cavalry coming to the rescue. Do they want to be accused of causing deaths ? That’s what will happen. Deaths indirectly caused by lockdown and deaths & injuries yet to be attributed to vaccines, are and will be much less attributable to anyone.And the loss of taste & smell is seen to be unique.
      Can you clarify what you mean by ” the contamination that is not noticed or reported that does the real damage”
      Thanks

      Reply
    3. Bev

      Kary Mullis died in August 2019, before COVID came on the scene. The comments attributed to him in the video about the PCR test are false.

      Reply
      1. Joe Dopelle

        Bev, your comment makes absolutely no sense. Were you not aware that PCR was invented in 1984 and has been used, ever since, as a viral diagnostic? (In spite of its inventor himself warning that it is utterly unsuitable for such purposes).

        Reply
      2. KJE

        And your proof is? He wasn’t talking about SARS-COV-2, but about HIV or any other virus or disease. SARS-COV-2 isn’t the only virus in existence you know.

        Reply
  11. Sue-Ann Grant

    I always read your posts, however sometimes my brain can’t adequately process all the scientific information. Regards numbers of those vaccinated, where do you get 50 people from? Even our local health Board in Scotland has asked for several thousands to trial a vaccine??

    Reply
    1. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick Post author

      Yes, but those trials are not going to be completed for a long time. However, vaccines are going to be launched, based on ‘interim’ analysis of the first fifty or so subjects to receive the vaccine. This would normally be called a phase II study.

      Reply
      1. Joe Dopelle

        One problem that may be encountered is finding enough people who catch the alleged disease to test the effectiveness of vaccines.

        As I understand it, they need to recruit test subjects who do not have immunity and do not have the virus, but who will at some time in the future develop actual symptoms. (What symptoms are those? According to the nurse interviewed by Lockdown Sceptics, “Covid-19” has no unique signs or symptoms).

        To get enough test subjects who develop signs and symptoms after being vaccinated, surely they would need to recruit tens of thousands – at least?

        Reply
      2. Richard Gibbs

        The Forbes article had a correction on October 7th that addressed this.

        “A former version of the article stated that 53 people received a vaccination for interim analysis in the Moderna trial. The vaccine was in fact given to thousands of people, with 53 being the number of people who must be infected with Covid-19 to run the analysis”.

        So, they wait until 53 of the vaccine recipients meet the study criterion then do the analysis.

        Thanks for posting this. William Haseltine is a regular contributor on CNN, but I haven’t seen a discussion of what the trials are meant to achieve.

        Reply
      3. Elisabeth Farr

        How on Earth are they going to get enough patients catching the virus within a sample of 50 patients to achieve statistical significance when the prevalence is so low?

        Reply
        1. KJE

          100 cycles of PCR test should find it in any 50 (even better if they have colds) – did anyone say they needed bad symptoms?

          Reply
      4. David Bailey

        Malcolm,

        There are one (or maybe two) people who have had a bad reaction to the vaccine with neurological symptoms. Do you know if this was from the phase II trials (which would be really serious – 1 out of 50) or from the larger trials?

        Reply
  12. Ian Partington

    Thanks, Malcolm! We need to shout this from the highest towers, as loudly as possible. Sadly, too many have been taken by the fear mongers already. Too many refuse to listen to the (real) science! Keep on fighting the good fight, everyone. We can’t just timidly take any more of this crap lying down!

    Reply
  13. Mark

    So according to the primary end-point, the vaccine is deemed a success even if a participant has an asymptomatic infection – when the recent outbreaks at UK universities is showing this to be the case for most of those with the virus?

    Reply
    1. anna m

      Mark,

      The test is not that accurate and 90% of these cases are false, but you are right that some may show that moment when the body throws off the virus without symptoms and who is to say whether the vaccine helped. But perhaps that doesn’t matter; it seems what they are looking for is the failure rate. At least, that’s how I read it.

      Reply
      1. anna m

        Oh, and vaccines do not prevent the body from encountering and engaging a virus, rather they cause the body to create antibodies to it so it can quickly inactivate the virus when it encounters the virus.

        Reply
          1. Joe Dopelle

            Even in the absence (or low abundance) of a given antibody, the immune system can still be armed and ready for a given virus. From Karin Moelling’s book, which I cited in a previous comment (see especially the last paragraph):

            page 228: “There are about 1000 genes available for antibody production. Yet by combinatorial effects they can reach 2.6 million different antibodies and by further mutations up to billions…

            “Indeed, in the immune system the same enzymes are present as in viruses; they merely have different names, because initially no one recognized the relationship between transposons, retroviruses and the immune system”.

            page 229: “Most vaccines were first produced without any knowledge of the molecular biology of the viruses. Killed viruses were injected into people to activate an immune response. This was often successful – but has not been so in the case of HIV. It is just too variable. Expert molecular-biological research is now in full swing – after decades there may be some hope coming up now. We want a vaccine against HIV, because history has taught us that a vaccine is the best way to fight a viral disease.

            “Immune responses can last for a lifetime, if memory cells are produced. They are then already programmed and do not need any time-consuming gene rearrangements (cut-and-paste) but can multiply immediately and therefore react fast when a known antigen shows up. Our immune system has an innate, fast, but unspecific response on one hand, and a second, slow, highly specific, adaptive immunological response on the other. The fast, imprecise reaction is probably the older one”.

          2. anna m

            AH
            Some antibodies last a lifetime, especially if you get the natural disease.But vaccine immunity is not as complete, and often only last a few years. Thus, after 3 measles shots, I have been tested as not having immunity.

  14. Hilary Wallace

    Thank you Malcolm.

    I won’t have a COVID vaccine under these conditions but if not allowed to travel may never see my daughters again!

    There is one easy way around this! If enough people said no, we all refused to be part of what is a big experiment and let their MPs know that they wouldn’t be voting for them again under these circumstances, the Government couldn’t ignore us all. But, of course, this won’t happen. People have been scared witless and think this is being done to save us all.

    Reply
    1. Jennifer

      Hilary. I feel helpless. My MP does not even acknowledge my (infrequent ) letters. I am not a pest, I just want answers from time to time. e.g. access to essential meds, post Brexit.
      I will be informing The Speaker, as he is fed up with MPs disregarding the democratic system….Oh, I am deluded…..that appears to no longer exist.

      Reply
      1. Joe Dopelle

        “My MP does not even acknowledge my (infrequent ) letters”.

        Don’t worry about it, Jennifer. I am one of the majority (I think) whose MPs do answer their letters. I write complaining about something, and giving evidence, etc. Some time later I get a polite letter including a boilerplate account of the government’s existing policies.

        There is no practical difference.

        As for the democratic system – I regret to inform you that it has never existed. merely a wish on the part of the ruling powers to give the appearance of such a system. For some reason they are no longer bothering with the masquerade.

        Reply
      2. Clathrate

        Hello Jennifer – I have (for the 1st time) written a couple of letters recently to my MP (a Conservative taking what was once a safe Labour seat). I have expressed my deep concern about the powers in Schedule 21 of the Coronavirus Act, asked him to represent me and hold the government to account, asked if he agrees with continuing curfews & lock downs (etc.), provided statistics, provided conflicts of Government advisers, provided him with the names of eminent scientists to seek their viewpoints, and reminded him that his actions (or lack of) will be remembered at the next election.

        Like Joe, I have a boilerplate response with an account of government policies & which has included the importance of face mask coverings (as per one of my responses further down, masks really get me going). I was going to write (by e-mail) tonight and provide him with a pdf copy of the HSE report of 2009 ‘Evaluating the protection afforded by surgical masks against influenza bio-aerosols’. [A job for tomorrow night now.]

        Anyone daunted by writing their MP – there is a website where it is quick and easy to compose a letter – http://www.writetothem.com (can do it once and save the letter – then you have a template for the next one without going through the same site).

        Jennifer – I’d recommend writing to your MP again even if only to remind him/her that as your representative it is rude not to reply to your previous letter and that this will be remembered at the next election. If you really want to have a ‘pop’, let them know that you have noticed for the last 6-7 months that they have not been doing the job for which the tax payer pays then around £82k (with pending £3k pay rise), plus allowances. You can also let them know that you do not believe that they have represented you to the government or even tried to hold the government to account.

        Reply
        1. AhNotepad

          Clathrate, thank you for that. I have written to mine using the writetothem page, and had no reply. I will write another one. I think maybe a letter to the constituency office might be more efefctive as it will be harder for them to hide from it.

          Reply
        2. Jennifer

          Clathrate. Thank you for your response. In fact, my email (via the system you recommended) contained all the points you suggested, and it fell on blind eyes. Not even an acknowledgement. My area was a strong Labour seat until the present Tory incumbent, and I suspect that I am on a database somewhere putting me into the category..”don’t bother to reply to this duffer….no chance of ever getting her vote”. ( a correct assumption)
          I asked for my questions to be passed directly to the Secretaries of State responsible for my areas of concern, but I have not received a response since 17th September. That is why I am forwarding my original letter to The Speaker this week ( I reckon a month is long enough to get some response). The MP is our conduit to the Government, and that is how it is supposed to work. I have followed the ‘system’. But the ‘system’ has been ignored, so I will have to go direct to The Speaker to show that my MP is failing in his obligation to represent me in Parliament. For any MPs reading this…. representing your constituents, whether they voted for you or not, is the first role of a Member of Parliament.
          p.s. AH Notepad. I am not sending prompts for a reply this time. Used 1st class Royal Mail in the past…on lockdown now, so not licking a stamp!

          Reply
  15. abamji

    Lots of points. First: vaccine trials are like any other; you test on a small number first to make sure there isn’t some serious nastiness, then you extend the testing to a larger sample, then you conduct a trial of vaccine against placebo, then you release it, assuming all went well through all those stages. Anything short of that is dangerous. Side-effects may indeed be so rare that it takes a large population to be exposed for them to become visible. Thalidomide is one example (it was, of course, never tested in pregnant women to begin with), and benoxaprofen is another – an anti-inflammatory that caused fatal kidney damage but only in the elderly (who were not, of course, included in any trials). If a side-effect occurs in 1 in 20,000 people it doesn’t seem a lot – but 300 or so might get it in the UK, and as they will be spread all over no-one will see enough for it to be twigged.

    Second: the vaccines tested may not work. Is there a vaccine against HIV after 40 years? No. But not for want of trying. However (and thirdly): if you can solve the problem of a serious condition by either stopping it getting serious, or having effective treatment when it is serious, then there is no problem. In other words forget plans that rely on a vaccine appearing and concentrate efforts on developing proper treatment protocols. Which I have been advocating in the UK without success since April, and William Haseltine appears to echo (I wonder if he has been reading my blog, or whether great minds think alike).

    That said if a vaccine did come along I would have it – I am 70 – but only after getting a check to see whether I had T-cell immunity that would already protect me.

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      This, I think, is a reason the UK government of occupation is pushing Johnson’s “Operation Crapshoot”. This is to increase the testing to 10,000,000 (yep, TEN MILLION) PER DAY. https://youtu.be/vvPQEjnvqfA shows this will mean a false positive rate of 230,000 a day, and 20,000 real ones. Oh dear! We’ll have to store all this (and other data) but we can then issue permits to go shopping. By the end of week 1, more than 1,500,000 could be labeled as cases, and presumably require vaccination. his of course is more crap as even if vaccnes work, they do not cure diseases.

      Reply
      1. Joe Dopelle

        “Oh dear! We’ll have to store all this (and other data)…”

        On a completely unrelated subject, I wonder what Microsoft, Oracle, IBM and other IT corporations think about all this. Hmmm… a need for immense quantities of computers and storage… good or bad?

        Reply
      2. Jennifer

        AhNotepad.
        But it’s only crap arithmatic. Start worrying about the actual, physical crap we’ll be consuming on imported USA foodstuffs when we get our shopping permits.. YUK💀

        Reply
        1. AhNotepad

          You mmight say it’s only crap arithmetic, talk to those that are locked up if they think it’s ONLY crap arithmetic

          From Tom Woods:

          “An acquaintance of mine knows someone in Melbourne, Australia, where the lockdown has been especially severe.

          I read this person’s testimony and decided to share it with you as today’s installment.

          We’re told that these crazy measures are designed to “save lives” — but what is human life to these people?

          Read on (I have left the punctuation and usage unchanged):

          Three months since i saw another human face besides [my partner’s]

          7 months since [my partner] and I had a little break together in the form of going and having a coffee down the street

          Over a year since i last sat out in nature

          Sitting staring at the wall for 2 hours, again.. unable to move

          Despair

          Horrible negative emotions virtually all day

          Awake entire nights, distress

          I cant think of anything to look forward to because i dont know when we will be allowed to do anything

          Just go for a drive, go to the forest

          Just go somewhere together, far from all of this

          We are not allowed

          The police could enter our homes at any point and arrest us if we say the ‘wrong’ thing online

          This doesnt feel human

          I don’t smile

          I dont laugh

          I worked out the other day and felt nothing, no pain

          Nothing would register as pain

          I couldn’t feel anything

          I feel far away from myself

          Sometimes i forget how long the day has been going for

          Does it matter?

          You’re not allowed to leave? Even if family members are terminally ill? They could die before we are let out of Melbourne, got told it isnt a good enough reason to be let out of the state

          Literally not allowed to move house

          I think WA is letting Victorians in now but we cant get to the airport to fly out of here because the airport is more than 5ks from our house

          You arent allowed more than 5ks from your house

          You arent allowed to buy a takeaway coffee and sit under a tree or on the ground anywhere that isnt your house

          Inhuman

          This isnt human

          This isnt human

          This isnt human

          This isnt human

          There is no empathy here

          No price is too high

          Suicide is not too great a price to pay

          Self harm is not too great a price to pay

          Structural brain changes in large portions of the population is not too high a price to pay

          Do you know what prolonged social isolation does to the brain?

          We are made to feel it does not matter

          Because all we are, are numbers

          We are not people we are the masses
          without a say

          Without a time period to look forward to when we can hug again

          I am sharing my experience because you should know the truth

          Sincerely

          A faceless number in melbourne

          That about sums it up, doesn’t it?

          The architects of this dystopia refuse to acknowledge collateral damage, including mental health, from the lockdowns, even though at this point it positively swamps the number of deaths from COVID itself (I’ll support that argument in tomorrow’s email).

          Now the CDC is saying you really shouldn’t go trick-or-treating, and you should have a “virtual Thanksgiving.”

          When can we stop doing these inhuman things?

          Who knows? They change the goalposts so much it’s impossible to say.

          So we are expected to live like vegetables indefinitely.

          Someone who isn’t living like a vegetable is Ron Paul: after being hospitalized (not with COVID) on a Friday, on Monday he was back to broadcasting the Ron Paul Liberty Report.

          The Mises Institute is having a one-day event with him next month, so if you’re going crazy without real human contact, you may enjoy this:
          https://mises.org/events/symposium-ron-paul

          Also, the video by Tom Woods Show guest Don Wilson on building a nice online store that the crazies can’t burn or shut down is being taken down tomorrow, so make some time to watch: http://www.tomwoods.com/againstthecrazies

          Tom Woods”

          This is what just crap arithmetic can do.

          Reply
  16. elizabethhart

    In Australia the situation is absolutely grim in regards to mandatory vaccination, this has been building for years. There’s a clique of academics here associated with the vaccine industry who dominate vaccination policy. There’s a musical chairs of these people rotating around influential committees.

    You’ve got similar problems in the UK, e.g. consider the conflicts of interest of Andrew Pollard, Chair of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, and Chief Investigator of the Oxford Vaccine Trial. International vaccination policy is rotten with conflicts of interest, including via the Bill Gates dominated World Health Organisation, Gavi Alliance, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) etc.

    In Australia, current Prime Minister Scott Morrison was Social Services Minister back in 2015 when the No Jab, No Pay Bill was raised in response to the Murdoch media / News Corp Australia’s No Jab, No Play campaign in its tabloid newspapers. This was a campaign for coercive vaccination of children. It was not disclosed during News Corp’s No Jab, No Play media campaign that News Corp is a corporate partner of the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, which is involved in vaccine research, i.e. a massive conflict of interest.

    The No Jab, No Pay law was enacted in January 2016, while Malcolm Turnbull was Prime Minister, with cross party support. States subsequently enacted No Jab, No Play laws, which essentially compel parents to be compliant without question with ever-increasing early childhood vaccination schedules, i.e. ‘informed consent’ has been trashed.

    And 2015 also saw in the Australian Biosecurity Act, which includes the facility to impose compulsory vaccination on people. Under the Biosecurity Act, people who refuse vaccination are at risk of five years imprisonment and/or a $66,600. I’m intrigued to know who exactly was behind this Act.

    This is an emergency power which is currently in force and has been since March, with repeated extensions, currently extended until December 2020, and who knows what after that – will it continue to be extended until ‘the vaccine’ is ready?

    I’ve been investigating vaccination policy since late 2008, starting with investigating pet vaccination, and then leading to human vaccination, which is increasing out of sight. There’s a determination to silence dissent, and we’re all aware of the orchestrated ongoing censorship in this area, and marginalising of people questioning vaccination as ‘anti-vaxxers’. This is such an important issue in regards to our freedom and bodily autonomy, and we must demand accountability.

    Reply
    1. Emily Harrison

      I’m worried about the ongoing extension of the emergency powers to achieve these aims too. But I don’t understand how even the emergency powers can contravene/override a basic, universal human right such as the right to bodily integrity. Surely not? I also think the government enforcing this kind of thing would mark a crossover into fascism that they could in no way come back from. Surely this is beyond comprehension in a liberal democracy.

      Reply
      1. elizabethhart

        Emily, re your comment “I don’t understand how even the emergency powers can contravene/override a basic, universal human right such as the right to bodily integrity.”

        I’ve outlined the potential of the Biosecurity Act re coercive vaccination. It can be challenged, but the fact the threat of coercive vaccination is in legislation is highly alarming.

        And the precedent has already been set with the No Jab, No Pay/No Play laws, which effectively make vaccination with the early childhood schedule mandatory for children, without question. There are many vaccines and revaccinations on the schedule now, particularly for babies, most people have no idea of the number of vaccines children are getting now, see the Australian schedule via this link: https://www.health.gov.au/health-topics/immunisation/immunisation-throughout-life/national-immunisation-program-schedule

        I’ve been investigating vaccination policy in Australia for 12 years, and I’m shocked at how rotten it is with, a cesspool of conflicts of interest. The vaccine industry runs the show via its onboard academics who have all the bases covered. Australia is highly influential in global vaccination policy, including via the World Health Organisation. There’s a massive network internationally, it’s a global web, at the centre of which is the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

        Reply
        1. Eggs 'n beer

          Well, vaccinations are not mandatory (yet). My kids and grandkids aren’t vaccinated, neither are various other families of 4, 3, 4, 7, 4, 4 and 2 that we know about. Two families are home-schoolers but the rest are in the normal school system. Because they aren’t eligible for Family Payment Part A then they aren’t losing out on that, and as sending them to child care just isn’t a consideration then they don’t miss out on that subsidy either, so they wouldn’t be accepting the government vaccinating bribes anyway. Actually, one family does go to childcare, but the grandparents pay for it.

          What I found startling was, after 15 years of navigating the vaccine minefield (“oh yes, the kids have had all the necessary vaccines”) I found that not applying sunscreen was regarded as about ten times more heinous a crime than not vaccinating. After all, didn’t I know that Queensland has the second highest rate of skin cancer in the world? Do I want to murder my kids? I tried, briefly. I pointed out that Queensland also probably has the second highest consumption of sunscreen in the world, so either sunscreen doesn’t work, or just maybe correlation might imply causation? Lol! you can imagine how that went down.

          Reply
      2. Socratic Dog

        My body, my choice.

        But that only applies to killing babies.

        Something wrong with this picture, just can’t put my finger on it….

        Reply
  17. Ruth Baills

    Interesting read. I certainly wondered about the efficacy on the COVID vaccine. Thankmyou once again Dr Malcolm Kendrick

    Reply
  18. Jeremy May

    Dr K, you mentioned in your chat with Dr Cox that (some?) vaccines may target our DNA, alter it indeed, in order to ‘work’. Is this the case with the trials you mention above? If so that’s reason enough to avoid them surely?

    Reply
  19. jduffydo

    The end game is forced vaccination. Not to protect but to actually do harm. To decrease the population. Alter DNA. place nanobots in the body. All I can say is do not get any vaccine of any nature. I invite you to read my articles on Downtoearthmedicine.org and News With Views. Under Dr. Ure. May God bless you all.

    Reply
      1. Melanie

        I’m reminded that,
        This and world governments have adopted and promote a food pyramid which is the greatest contributor to chronic disease
        This and world governments promote severe reduction of cholesterol, the very substance that is necessary for a long and healthy life
        This and world governments have not just ignored, but actively discredited Vitamin D, the very hormone which would immediately reduce the severity and fatality of the Covid-19.
        However, they are to be trusted on a vaccine?
        Whatever this government tells you to do, you’d be well placed to do the exact opposite.
        That is no conspiracy.

        Reply
        1. Joe Dopelle

          It is not just plausible but certain that a very large proportion of the human species is technically malnourished – even if they get enough calories to sustain life.

          As Melanie wrote, since the late 1960s governments and certain financial interests have been pushing the story that meat and animal fats are dangerous, and that we should all eat more “healthy whole grains”.

          Yet a diet largely consisting of refined carbohydrates such as flour and sugar is strongly implicated in all the “diseases of civilisation”, from diabetes to circulatory diseases, cancer, arthritis and other auto-immune diseases. “Primitive” peoples eating their ancestral diets simply do not suffer from those diseases – period.

          Most modern food is severely deficient in essential vitamins and minerals, due largely to the “green revolution” which allowed more and larger harvests from the same soil. Yet the food looks and tastes exactly the same as the old, wholesome food. Fifty years ago Adele Davis wrote a chapter entitled “Which Ornage, Grown Where?” in which she cited studies of oranges that looked and tasted perfectly normal, but contained absolutely no measurable Vitamin C. Bread and vegetables lack selenium… and so on.

          Then there is pollution, which may require larger intake of vitamins, minerals and other nutrients simply to maintain normal health.

          It is quite plausible that diseases such as Covid-19 have emerged only because so many people are malnourished (and of course deprived of sunlight).

          Reply
        2. Jennifer

          Melanie….I am using my precious, 3rd (and last permitted ) entry for today, to thank you for your absolutely great entry. You have summed up all that I feel we have been saying for years on this blog. I want the public to access your sentiments, and see through the dreadful way we are being governed, both here and abroad. I am not religious, now into my mid 70’s, but I feel compelled to shout “GOD HELP US”

          Reply
  20. Ian Markin

    As always, nicely written and explained. I am very concerned, as a registered nurse I worry the vaccination will be compulsory for health care workers and I really hope I can find some way to refuse it if and when the time comes.

    Reply
    1. Steve

      The biggest enemy of free choice in our social network dominated world is not so much regulations and laws but peer pressure based on a lemming like blind obedience to ‘authority’.

      Reply
  21. The Wizard

    Breaking news………

    The Death Secretary Handycock, the self styled and self appointed “Covid Finder General” has announced his latest “science based” policy.

    From Monday all citizens are to paint (“cover”) one of their buttocks red. A new study demonstrates that this will act as an effective “circuit break”.
    The news has given renewed hope to the nation, so much so that the Department of Death has been deluged with calls and emails from enthusiastic but confused citizens. A brief selection of which follow:

    Karen from Salisbury demanded to know why she had to “risk waiting until Monday?”

    Ivor from Cardiff quite reasonably asked “should I shave my arse first?”

    Meanwhile, Sharon from Southend echoed many Brits concerns with a succinct Essex enquiry “which bloody bum cheek FFS?”

    Perhaps the most technical question(s) was posted by Farquhar who resides in Oxford, “do I apply gloss or emulsion? If emulsion, then please stipulate Silk or Matt or Sheen. Any particular brand? What about application, should I use a brush or mini roller?”

    Downing St have yet to formally respond to these and many similar questions but a leaked document suggests that major outlets were “asked” to stock up on “red gloss paint” in December 2019 in preparation for “unusually high demand” in October 2020.

    As at the time of writing, reports are coming in of shelves having been “stripped bare” of red gloss, such has been the demand. Suppliers are struggling but have urged people to calm down and not panic. A junior minister declaring that there “is enough paint in the UK to meet the needs of all posteriors”.

    NB
    The “Red Buttock Covering Regulations (England&Wales) 2020” Statutory Instrument No.666 will be laid before Parliament at 23:59 on Sunday.

    Reply
  22. dearieme

    To give us some of the old “compare and contrast”, doc, would you summarise your views on the flu jab, please? Or refer us to an earlier blog post? Thank you.

    Reply
    1. Joe Dopelle

      Will I do (not a doctor)? How much time have you got?

      https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/10/gary-g-kohls/18-reasons-to-forgo-flu-vaccinations-this-year/
      https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/06/jon-rappoport/dangerous-nano-particles-contaminating-many-vaccines-groundbreaking-study/
      https://bolenreport.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr-nails-the-vaccine-argument/
      https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/02/joseph-mercola/how-aluminum-damages-your-brain/
      https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/03/no_author/65-chemical-cross-contaminants-found-in-popular-childrens-vaccine-infanrix-hexa/

      I can supply another 100 or so articles if you wish. In case you are worried, Lew Rockwell’s is one of the very few Web sites that publishes articles critical of vaccination.

      Reply
  23. Steve

    Dr Malcolm, do you have any thoughts on the Russian Sputnik vaccine ?
    I understand, as much as I’m able, that it’s development is based on a different (incremental) approach.

    Reply
          1. Joe Dopelle

            Austrlia would be unwise as it is the most totalitarian place in the world (with the possible exception of North Korea).

            China is increasingly a very good place to live, but mainly if you are Chinese. People from more individualistic foreign cultures might be uncomfortable there.

            I would recommend Russia – provided you are able to master the language and commit fully to Russian citizenship. It has ample natural resources, a reasonable population, a vast variety of environments to choose from, and the ability to defend itself against aggression. Also it is no longer totalitarian, although its political tradition is more in that direction than, for instance, the UK’s.

            But as the UK is no longer governed in accordance with its political tradition, I judge Russia to be a better place to live. Before anyone asks: no, I shall not be emigrating as I find the language difficult and have too many roots in the UK.

          2. AhNotepad

            What is the definition for “better” education? Is this a euphemism for “brainwashing”? I’m not saying it is, but “education” in many developed countries seems to be a controlling rather than an empowering process.

          3. Eggs ‘n beer

            Lol! Australia is much, much better than the UK! Don’t believe everything that you read in the press. Victoria is not Australia. And in Queensland we have elections in less than three weeks time, so it’s nothing like NK either. Our education system is much less indoctrinative than either the UK, Russia or especially China. Home schooling is well catered for, and the education police, preventing you from removing your children from school for educational trips, don’t exist. Oh, and the weather. Why the 18th century British govt. shipped the criminals out here and left the law-abiding citizens behind I’ll never understand ….. back to front policy as usual.

            Have a great winter, Joe (I cannot reply to your post directly).

          4. elizabethhart

            Yes, things are better in other states in Australia, compared to Victoria. But the situation in Victoria is going to have detrimental effects on the rest of the country and economy.

            And Australians are not free to leave the country without special permission…which is unlikely to be granted unless you’re a sports person, movie star, or politician.

            And many Australians are stranded overseas and unable to return due to limits on numbers entering the country for quarantine.

            While life is pretty much ‘normal’ where I live in South Australia, there are still border restrictions, and other restrictions such as social distancing etc. It’s whether things can change in heartbeat, as seems to have happened in the UK recently, with the threat of lockdown if ‘cases’ rise.

            It seems the plan is to keep restrictions in place until there is a vaccine… An article in The Age reports Tourism and Trade Minister Simon Birmingham saying: “the prospects of opening up widespread travel with higher risk countries will remain very reliant on effective vaccination or other major breakthroughs in the management of COVID.” *

            * Rising COVID cases take Europe and US off the travel list for next year. The Age, 11 October 2020.

          5. elizabethhart

            In regards to lockdowns, this was the plan of the the infamous Neil Ferguson et al report that recommended suppression of the virus as the preferred option.*

            Ferguson et al say: “The major challenge of suppression is that this type of intensive intervention package – or something equivalently effective at reducing transmission – will need to be maintained until a vaccine becomes available (potentially 18 months or more) – given that we predict that transmission will quickly rebound if interventions are relaxed. We show that intermittent social distancing – triggered by trends in disease surveillance – may allow interventions to be relaxed temporarily in relative short time windows, but measures will need to be reintroduced if or when case numbers rebound.”

            So suppression/lockdowns are to be kept up “until a vaccine becomes available”…

            We have no idea of the ultimate social and economic costs of this long-term experiment…

            * Neil M Ferguson et al. Report 9: Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand. Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team. 16 March 2020: http://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf

  24. Cheezilla

    Dear Dr Kendrick.
    Thank you for your very enlightening article.
    I am however, confused by this statement:
    “Yes, I also accept that we probably should be willing to accept an increased level of risk to tackle the enormous problems caused by COVID19.”
    Surely the enormous problems are being caused by the lockdown and the withdrawal of healthcare services?
    From October 8th, covid stats are being conflated with flu stats, which would suggest the covid numbers are not high enough to maintain the dread fear, even though, at 45 cycles, tapwater, pavements and papayas can be proven to have the virus.
    So what increased level of risk are you seeing? Personally, I think there’s much more for the healthy 98% to fear from our government than from covid.

    Reply
  25. Griffith THOMAS

    Looking forward to your views on ‘Crimes against Humanity’ by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich to be
    found on Youtube.

    Reply
  26. Martin Back

    “To estimate the efficacy of 2 IM doses”

    This presumably means two doses of the vaccine, administered by injection into a muscle, one or two months apart.

    Reply
  27. Rodrigo

    It’s just possible the shareholders may wish for an early payout. Making no connection between the two, a certain Mr Cummings made a celebrated visit to Castle Barnwell where eye testing facilities are uniquely available. Another even lesser known facility in said destination is an organisation known as AstraZenica. I’m sure the ethical Mr C was not doing a reckie to assess potential future share price increases, even with eyes wide open

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      Rodrigo, Cummings only went to Castle Barnwell if Castle Barnwell is another name for Barnard Castle, where GSK have an office. Coincidence?

      Reply
      1. Rodrigo

        Problem is, corruption has become normal, shameless and ubiquitous. Many are accepting it as such. It is sad that so few UK docs are speaking out compared to professionals in some other countries. I’ve said before that medics expressing their concerns is one of the few things that could sway public opinion to become more sceptical and questioning. Another would be mainstream investigative journalism, but that has has gone.

        Reply
        1. Frango Asado

          Exactly so, Rodrigo. The possession of large amounts of money has now become the only goal for many people; how you get the money is irrelevant. So corruption is seen as actually a good thing if it enriches you.

          Reply
  28. johnplatinumgoss

    I hope you are right that shortcuts will not be taken. If so the vaccine, even if it works, is only likely to be of use with the current strain of COVID-19. With the Ebola vaccine used in 2014-15 in West Africa they got it out and were using it in 2015. Ebola is deadly killing more than one in every two infected people. A claim was made for 100% success but the epidemic was already on the wane and herd immunity may have played a part. Indeed there may have been no success at all. It certainly did not prevent further outbreaks in Congo.

    https://www.who.int/csr/don/03-september-2020-ebola-drc/en/

    In this article there is a plea for funds. Save your money. The WHO does more harm than good. If you do subscribe you will not be able to tell the WHO where they can invest resources. That privilege is given to Bill Gates and wife.

    Reply
  29. Steve-R

    I see the BMA is calling for the wearing of face masks to be made mandatory at work unless you are working alone.

    They base this on the fact that masks can – not necessarily do – catch virus carrying droplets.

    They probably do, but these droplets are large compared to the 2.5 micron – 2,500nm – openings in the mesh of commercially available masks. Leaving aside the relative chasms where masks (don’t) ‘fit’ to the wearer’s face.

    The SARS-CoV-2 virus is, allegedly, between 70nm and 130nm so why do the BMA ‘experts’ believe that masks that stop droplets will also stop the aerosol virus that is 20 times smaller than the mesh of a mask?

    Cigarette smoke has a slightly larger aerosol size, 0.2microns – 200nm – so if you can smell cigarette smoke when wearing a mask then you are breathing someone else’s exhaust breath. And, when you were last 10 or 20 metres down wind of a smoker was the air clean and fresh?

    In the early days of lockdown I was often passed by smoking workmen in their vans, I obviously didn’t see them smoking, just smelled them.

    And, of course, with the multiplication ability of the ‘tests’ it only takes a single aerosol virus particle in your nose to give a ‘true’ positive. It would be very interesting of someone who has an air pollution monitor outside their property could request a swab test to see the prevalence of aerosol virus in the environment.

    Reply
      1. Steve-R

        Well, a goat and a papaya tested positive so probably yes.
        And, reading.ac has studied the particle size of ‘fine’ sand that finds its way from the Sahara to the UK. The majority range between 2.5 and 5 microns and take between 2 and 10 days to complete the journey of around 2,500 miles.

        The point being that if single aerosol virus particles can cause an infection and aerosol particles larger that them can travel such distances, is it not likely that the right survival conditions for the virus to remain viable – cool low humidity at night to avoid virus killing UVA/B/C in sunlight – will ensure spread regardless of any feasible social distancing and/or lockdown.

        Reply
      1. AhNotepad

        Gosh, that’s terrifying, and they set up a probability model to show …………….., hang on, A MODEL? Don’t we have some knowledge of the validity of these models? I wonder if they concluded “we need to do more research/studies”, otherwise “we want more money”.

        Reply
        1. Steve-R

          It seems not. Maybe they can’t find small enough tweezers to pick out a single virus without damaging it and introduce it politely to a potential host cell.

          But it is undeniable that viruses infect cells and that each single virus does it on its own – it has the tools to do it and only requires the host to provide the necessary cleaving bits and pieces. There aren’t different platoons of specialist viruses in a virus army (sorry Boris) that have to come together as a team to break through cell membranes.

          Reply
  30. Rachel

    It should also be pointed out that the test subjects used are relatively young adults, fit and healthy, with no comorbidities, not pregnant, with no history of autoimmune diseases. It tells us nothing off the risk profile to the general population.
    They have also announced it won’t be taken by everyone, the very old or very sick would not take it. Which begs the question what’s a vaccine for. If only healthy people can take it to build a herd immunity why not use natural herd immunity.
    It is sadly assumed by the majority that vaccine trials use a saline placebo control. As Del Bigtree on the Highwire has pointed out, none of the scheduled childhood vaccines are tested against a saline control, all tested against an older vaccine. The HPV trials did have a very small subset of the control cohort given a saline control but they were lumped into the much larger control cohort who were given an aluminium containing control. The control test subjects were then given the Gardasil vaccine after the trail had ended so that no retrospective analysis could be done.
    This is NOT science!

    Reply
    1. Steve

      wrt basing vaccine trials on the young, ie. those at least risk. It’s also interesting that use of the ‘Track and Trace’ (data gathering and exploitation) app is based on the assumption that all people have a ‘smart’ phone. The fact is, I believe, that the groups that are most at risk, the old and those in care, will not have a smart phone so will not benefit from track and trace, assuming it works and provides any benefits to the user.
      More evidence that their is a policy of implicit culling of the old ?

      Reply
        1. KJE

          Quite, I don’t see how risking being put into forced isolation with no earnings is a benefit. When the person I didn’t actually meet was probably a false positive anyway

          Reply
  31. TNS

    I wonder if it could be possible to have compulsory vaccination using a particular vaccine, but rejecting others.
    For instance, could the use of Sputnik V be declared “insufficient” under some pretexts?

    Reply
  32. Clathrate

    [Apologies that this is not related to the topic of this blog – my contribution to which is that Mr. Hancock can have all my future doses in {preferably up} his ar$$$e.]

    I had my first negative comment re. not wearing a mask upon entering a supermarket (I’ll name and shame Sainsbury’s):

    Me: Displaying exemption on mobile phone as walking in.
    Bloke on Door (BoD): Anyone can download one of those.
    Me: Stopping to face him. Really?
    BoD: Yes, bet you downloaded that off the Government website.
    Me: Yes, you are correct, I did download it off the Government website. Where else would I get it from?
    BoD: Anyone can download one of those.
    Me: Are you challenging me?
    BoD: Anyone can download one of those.
    Me: Do you know that it is illegal to challenge me?
    BoD: I’m not challenging you.
    Me: Fair enough (turn, enter supermarket & do shopping).
    BoD: Anyone can download one of those.
    [Does shopping.]
    Me: (Leaving shop giving BoD a nod and a smile) Goodnight mate, see you next week.
    BoD: [Silence.]

    Reply
    1. KJE

      You should report BoD to customer services and so to Sainsburys management as they are setting themselves up for action under the Equalities Act 2010.

      Reply
      1. AhNotepad

        Also important to get the name of BoD as they are [personally liable under the act. A threat of litigation to aperson may have quite an effect.

        Reply
        1. Clathrate

          Thanks KJE & AhN. I would have reported the BoD if he had challenged me (but in response to my direct question, he said that he wasn’t). Had I been challenged (& to be honest I was half hoping that I was going to be), I know what fines they can be liable for under which Sections of the Equality Act 2010. There could be an argument of harassment but as I was not told to wear a mask (BoD’s needle was simply stuck on ‘Anyone can download one of those’) I left it at that, avoided any rudeness and kept smiling. I feel sorry for those on checkout having to wear masks for prolonged periods – you see them touching and adjusting them, sometimes to speak, and have to wonder how much more invasion of pathogenic microorganisms this will cause.

          Reply
    2. Tish

      Shop assistant (SA): Would you use the hand sanitizer please?
      Me: No thank you. I don’t want to.
      SA: But you may touch something.
      Me: Yes, but I’m not obliged to use the stuff.
      SA: But we have to ask people.
      Me: Yes, so you’ve asked. (False smiles all round.)

      How did it come to this?

      Reply
      1. Joe Dopelle

        Most people (about 95%) will use the sanitizer to avoid even the appearance of conflict, which they cannot stand.

        Reply
  33. Max McCurry

    The IFR for 70+ years: 0.093 or about 1%, which is not insignificant. Plus, how about if you don’t die but instead have long-term sequelae of infection? What percent is that for seniors? 20-50%? Please, Dr. K., analyze the whole picture.

    Reply
    1. Eggs 'n beer

      Yes, analyse the whole picture. Lifeline estimates that suicides in Australia are up 30% because of the lockdowns. I know (knew) one of them. and know of another. I don’t know ANYONE who has had the bug. Can’t see his ten year old daughter, couldn’t go to the gym, clients only contacting via email, nothing to live for.

      And has anyone asked the seniors if they care? The ones that I know of in retirement/nursing homes don’t. They’re fed up with the restrictions, they are old, and they know they’re going to die sooner rather than later. They want to live their remaining months, rather than merely exist. When you’re 105, you accept that your remaining lifespan is months rather than years and you want to be enjoying them. The in-laws (both 89) who are still living by themselves in the family home don’t care either. Totally ignored the lockdown regulations, happier to pay the fines rather than be restricted in their sunset years.

      Reply
    2. AhNotepad

      Max, any long term effects are just as likely with flu. This unproven covid thingy is no different as far as can be ascertained from the data currently available.

      Reply
      1. Max McCurry

        Another problem for seniors is that their thymus gland is not capable of producing adequate T-cells. So even the best vaccine may not work for them. See the article “Aging of thymus gland and immune system” by Heshmat SW Haroun.

        Reply
        1. Steve-R

          Not sure why this is getting downticks as the shrinking of the Thymus is key to why us oldies cannot shrug off infections as well as we did when we were younger, as well as why vaccines have little effect if the Thymus isn’t banging out T-cells like it used to.
          There is now, however, research into therapeutics to stimulate regeneration of the Thymus e.g. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.01745/full – interesting to note that zinc is involved in natural recovery of the Thymus after ‘insult’ by disease.

          Reply
  34. Eggs 'n beer

    It’s well established that those most at risk are those with certain pre-existing conditions. Nearly all of which are related to glycocalyx deficiencies in various parts of the body. So how does a trial involving only healthy people, specifically excluding:

    – confirmed or suspected immunosuppressive or immunodeficient state
    – significant disease, disorder, or finding

    possibly have any relevance in the real world, particularly in relation to adverse reactions?

    And how do they determine if a symptom is caused by COVID, or is another issue? Hay fever causes sniffles, headaches, sinus problems, all of which can be regarded as COVID symptoms. And as all participants are spread across the US only hay fever will always be an issue for some people. Seasonal colds, coughs, bronchitis – how would they know if these are not magnified in recipients of the vaccine due to a reaction?

    Reply
  35. anna m

    Vaccination for medical personnel is already mandatory in many states in the US, not by govt but by the employer.

    Reply
  36. Dr No

    By coincidence, Dr No published a post yesterday on the broader topic of covid hubris, the arrogant belief that we can simply just manage our way out of covid using a technological and social combination of mass testing, social controls and vaccination (despite the fact we don’t have a vaccine yet, and are more than likely never to have one). Vaccination may turn out to be the most hubristic of them all:

    There is No Managed Way Out of Covid

    Reply
        1. Dr No

          Thanks for posting the link earlier – neither of our comments got moderated until ~1900 so didn’t realise you had done this.

          Reply
    1. Joe Dopelle

      Those decorations are worthless. They are given, essentially, for obliging the government of the day. That may be harmless, or it may be extremely harmful.

      The Queen has no say at all in the matter.

      Reply
      1. elizabethhart

        I agree Joe, I wouldn’t give tuppence ha’penny for those decorations.

        Similar awards are handed out in Australia, including such as the ‘Australian of the Year’, given to Ian Frazer, co-inventor of HPV vaccines, in 2006. These awards help with marketing and building a profile. Frazer himself said: “a high-profile award benefits the entire scientific community in Australia, ‘because it gives us a voice and a chance to talk to the public’” *

        It’s claimed HPV vaccination “protects millions from cancer”, but I’m very dubious about the worth of the aluminium-adjuvanted HPV vaccine products.

        * Search for: Vaccine protects millions from cancer

        Reply
  37. Emily Harrison

    Thank you Malcolm. I live in Melbourne and the past six months or so have been absolute hell, not because of the virus but because of the subtle indications coming from the government (culminating in Morrison’s statement) that they plan to coercively vaccinate 25 million of us. Given the fact that the vaccine is unlikely to stop transmission I don’t see how this is in any way defensible, but I suppose that this is the brave new world we are living in. I still fear that we will continue to operate as a country wrapped up in hysteria, and some very serious breaches of human rights could occur.

    Reply
    1. Eggs ‘n beer

      Very serious breaches of human rights have already occurred but the civil rights lawyers, usually so keen to act, have turned out to have the backbone of an amoeba when confronted by rabid medical officials quoting “science”. You can’t contact them (the CMOs) they’re protected by your MP and bureaucracies. They are a law unto themselves. They ignore government research and recommendations such as

      Click to access Social-2019.PDF

      to promote their own agendas and importance. People are committing suicide because of their policies and while they analyse COVID deaths and infections by skin colour, sex, age, location etc. etc. they won’t tell you the number of suicides. You have to go to the suicide hot line people for indications. Or count how many people you know who’ve topped themselves specifically because of their policies.

      Reply
  38. Steve

    Question. Considering historically the virtual wipe out of the indigenous populations in South America and the Caribbean due to infections carried by European invaders. I wonder if extended lockdowns would lead to a situation where populations become more susceptible to viruses because of limited exposure to them ?
    Could lockdown increase susceptibility, or does it have no affect, or is it time dependent ?

    Reply
    1. janetgrovesart

      I’ve been thinking about that situation and something bothers me. Surely those invaders spent weeks at sea, essentially in lockdown. How could the viruses survive long enough to contaminate the indigenous peoples who were invaded. ….just a thought.

      Reply
      1. Steve-R

        It is interesting, and there were enough crew to make it plausible that the diseases just bounced around (see also R. Edgar Hope-Simpson on the debunking of this in the case of the seasonality of influenza)….. but there have been well documented cases of flare ups of disease among isolated communities, in the British Antarctic Survey over three month before an outbreak and on board a squadron of British ships blockading the port of Brest who had to return en masse to Portsmouth with their crew extremely debilitated.

        And I am sure I have read that some virologists consider that we maintain immunity by playing host to suppressed viruses confined to particular cells, something that chimes with ME flare ups brought on by other stresses on the immune system – when the lid isn’t kept on the virus proliferates and you become infectious.

        Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers anyone?

        Reply
        1. Jerome Savage

          Steve R Can I put it that the spread of the condition attributed to C19 that is seen to spread through wards of elderly patients with such devastation as described by Dr Kendrick and his it has been seen to affect other vulnerables who become infected, does not support the Hope-Simpson hypothesis. I hope to look at the Ivor Cummins video on the subject but time limitations keep getting in the way.

          Reply
  39. GeriB

    I am quite concerned about the actual placebo used, as this initial release states :” Adult participants in both the Phase II and Phase III groups will be randomised to receive one or two doses of either the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or a licensed vaccine (MenACWY) that will be used as a ‘control’ for comparison… The reason for using this vaccine, rather than a saline control, is because we expect to see some minor side effects from the ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 vaccine such as a sore arm, headache and fever. Saline does not cause any of these side effects. If participants were to receive only this vaccine or a saline control, and went on to develop side effects, they would be aware that they had received the new vaccine. It is critical for this study that participants remain blinded to whether or not they have received the vaccine, as, if they knew, this could affect their health behaviour in the community following vaccination, and may lead to a bias in the results of the study.”
    https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-05-22-oxford-covid-19-vaccine-begin-phase-iiiii-human-trials#
    Does anyone know if a real saline placebo is now used or are they still comparing it to another vaccine as always?

    Reply
      1. Frango Asado

        If the contents of the placebo are secret, the outcome of the trial is meaningless and demonstrates nothing.

        Reply
        1. Peggy Sue

          Is that right? From memory I thought that placebo details had to be thoroughly described in the study protocol before approval for the trial would be given, by authorities and ethics committees.

          Reply
  40. Daniel Weyandt

    You mention, that the AZ trial is only due to complete in Oct. 2022.
    This is when they formally end all follow up, but can’t they interim-analyse the data as it comes in from the start?
    Like the one that was halted now, because of one patient with a serious adverse effect.

    Reply
    1. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick Post author

      I am sure that they will, although they are not supposed to. The only reason for breaking trails early is to look for serious adverse events, not to decide if you can stop the trial early. It’s like tossing four heads in a row, then decreeing that this coin only tosses heads.

      Reply
  41. Karen F

    Isn’t it interesting that people are suddenly concerned about mandated vaccination when it comes to this “experimental” vaccine, when every single one of the concerns voiced in this article is relevant to every other vaccine that is mandated for children (and increasingly for adults).

    1. There is not one vaccine that has been tested in a double-blind inert placebo study – not one. They have all used other vaccines as “placebo” – which they now call “comparators” because they’ve been called out for calling them placebos. Sometimes they use another vaccine to compare to the one they’re testing, sometimes they use the adjuvant that causes the adverse events (HPV vaccine study used the aluminum adjuvant as the “placebo”). No vaccine has every been adequately tested to determine it is safe. In 2016 the WHO released an ethical standard that vaccines cannot ethically be tested against an inert placebo because it’s unethical to give one person a medical intervention that could be beneficial, but give another person a substance that has no benefit, which is ludicrous on it’s face because all medications are inert placebo tested for safety.

    2. All vaccine safety studies use ludicrously short time lines to watch for adverse reactions. Most vaccines, many of which contain autoimmune inducing substances, such as aluminum, are watched for 5 to 30 days. Studies show that Guillain-Barre can develop up to a year after being injected with aluminum adjuvants. The vast majority of autoimmune disorders do not develop overnight, and 1 week to 1 month of watching for them is totally inadequate to determine actual risk. Moderna’s vaccine alters the way one’s genes function. How can they possibly determine if there are detrimental affects concerning genetic function when watching for adverse events for such a short period of time? Oh, and their using an inadequate sample size is par for the course with vaccine safety studies.

    3. Vaccines are never tested to determine whether they actually prevent the disease. They only look for antibody markers, and then declare that the vaccine is effective because it produces antibodies. Nowhere in these studies will you find them saying that volunteers didn’t come down with COVID; the reports will always talk about the antibodies produced. Antibody production doesn’t equal immunity, especially when talking about a coronavirus vaccine where ADE is of great concern. The immune system is vastly more complicated than antibodies alone, and even more complicated than humoral and cell mediated immunity alone. Our understanding of the immune system has grown exponentially in the past 50 years, and it’s still woefully incomplete. Measuring antibodies does not prove a vaccine effective, period. There’s an old fashioned, yet effective, way of seeing if someone’s immune. Stick them in a room with an active COVID patient and see if they get sick. “We can’t do that! With this deadly disease? Why, that would be unethical!!! And if we pharmaceutical companies, who have paid billions in fines over the years for fraud and misconduct, are anything, we are ethical!”

    4. Yes, it is ludicrous to mandate vaccination for a population which has such a minuscule risk of mortality, as it is for every other vaccine that is forced on children. Measles, chicken pox, mumps, and the like all had mortality rates drop over 99.9% prior to release of the respective vaccines against these self-limiting childhood infections that provide life long immunity and other benefits to the immune system. The chances of dying from one of these infections is one in a million when a child has adequate nutrition and sanitation. A day old newborn whose mother doesn’t have Hep B has zero risk of dying from Hep B. I could give more examples, but this post is too long already. If the argument is valid that the mortality risk of Sars-Cov2 is almost non-existent in younger populations, then it is just as valid an argument concerning mandated vaccines being needlessly (and dangerously) injected into children. Vaccine injury is real.

    Another gem not brought up in the email is what pharmaceutical companies do to make it look like safety is a priority by stopping a study when someone has a severe adverse event, such as Transverse Myelitis (sound familiar Astra Zeneca?). They make a big show of declaring that they are being sooooo careful because they know how dangerous giving an unsafe vaccine to millions of people would be. They are putting safety over profit by bringing a halt to their study out of an abundance of caution. Then the experts furiously meet, like buzzing bees, to thoroughly examine the data, and two days later declare the vaccine innocent of causing that life altering adverse event: “Phew, luckily it was just a coincidence that that woman who was totally healthy suddenly became paralyzed after being injected with our experimental vaccine. March on!” When picking volunteers for their experimental vaccine pharmaceutical companies only accept the healthiest volunteers. That woman who developed transverse myelitis was healthy, the fittest of the fit, or they would have rejected her – and she still developed a devastating neurological disorder! But, nothing to see here… keep moving.

    And one must not forget that any COVID vaccine is going to be protected by the PACE Act – meaning, if a million people are permanently damaged or die as a direct result of a COVID vaccine the pharmaceutical companies cannot be held accountable at all. And it can’t go through the vaccine court either, so you’re on your own. There are billions of dollars in incentive to create a vaccine, but where is the incentive to create a vaccine that doesn’t harm – there is none, just like with all the current vaccines mandated for children now.

    The issues discussed in that email have always been a problem with all vaccines, it’s just that no one cared until now because there’s talk of forcing it onto adults, instead of defenseless babies.

    Reply
      1. Karen F

        Well, that’s kind of my point, it’s just that I’m an American, so I’m a little more blunt than you Scots. Millions of damaged children (and adults – thank you flu shot) don’t get the public’s attention, even when they are all around us. But when governments tip their hand and become obvious in their grab for power and openly goose step toward tyranny, people finally began to notice and became suspicious that maybe their government is not to be trusted. If there is anything good that is coming out of this man-made disaster it is that people are finally waking up and willing to listen to those who have been warning about the dangers of vaccines and the push across the globe to eliminate people’s freedom to decide what is or isn’t injected into our bodies. Leaders in the vaccine safety movement have been warning for years that Agenda 2020 included mandating vaccines for adults. At least people are now ready to listen – except for the ones who are waiting with bated breath to line up for a COVID vaccine, and thinks everyone else should too.

        Reply
        1. Steve

          Karen, I admire your optimism ! However, I think you’ll find that the poorly informed lemmings will queue around the block for their injections. It’s not their fault, they have been brainwashed and are obedient.

          Reply
    1. Jerome Savage

      Karen – Claims for damages can be made against respective health services in Europe. One of one hundred claims for acquired narcolepsy following the swine flu vaccine was settled out of court against the Irish health service in November last.

      Reply
      1. Karen F

        Correct, for vaccines that are not designated as covered by the PACE Act (in the US). But the US government declared this a national health emergency, enacted the PACE Act, and designated any vaccine developed for COVID as falling under the PACE Act. This not only provides full indemnification to the Pharmaceutical Industry for any vaccine they produce – no matter how dangerous it is, but the PACE Act also excludes the ability for any injured party to seek compensation through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Maybe Europeans will be able to retain the right to seek compensation for damages (from the taxpayers, not from the producers who push through a dangerous product), but Americans have lost even that right. The PACE Act was singed by President Bush (Jr). They’ve been setting the stage for this for a long time. .

        Reply
    2. Frango Asado

      “In 2016 the WHO released an ethical standard that vaccines cannot ethically be tested against an inert placebo because it’s unethical to give one person a medical intervention that could be beneficial, but give another person a substance that has no benefit, which is ludicrous on it’s face because all medications are inert placebo tested for safety”.

      An inert placebo is the only kind of placebo that serves any purpose. If a placebo is not entirely neutral in its effects on health, any experiment is comparing an unknown (the effects of the vaccine under test) with another unknown (the effects of the non-placebo).

      It seems that people in authority can talk a great deal of very obvious nonsense with ever being called out on it – let alone suffering any consequences.

      Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      That’s a surprise fom the Murdoch stable, but welcome nevertheless. I sent it to others, thanks for posting.

      Reply
  42. elizabethhart

    BMJ rapid response by Janet Menage, retired GP:

    Re: Covid-19: Where is the virus?
    https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3379/rr-2

    Dear Editor

    We are told that the virus is everywhere – in the air, in our breath, on fomites, trapped in masks – yet public health authorities seem not to be in possession of any cultivable clinical samples of the offending pathogen.

    In March 2020, the World Health Organisation instructed authorities not to look for a virus but to rely instead on a genome test, the RT-PCR, which is not specific for SARS-CoV-2 (1) (2).

    A Freedom of Information request to Public Health England about cultivable clinical samples or direct evidence of viral isolation has no information and refers to the proxy RT-PCR test, quoting Eurosurveillance (3).

    Eurosurveillance states: “Virus detection by reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) from respiratory samples is widely used to diagnose and monitor SARS-CoV-2 infection and, increasingly, to infer infectivity of an individual. However, RT-PCR does not distinguish between infectious and non-infectious virus. Propagating virus from clinical samples confirms the presence of infectious virus but is not widely available (and) requires biosafety level 3 facilities” (4).

    The CDC admits that, “no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available”, and used a genetically modified human lung alveolar adenocarcinoma cell culture to, “mimic clinical specimen”(5).

    It appears, therefore, that we have public health bodies without clinical samples, a test which is non-specific and does not distinguish between infectivity and non-infectivity, a requirement for biosafety level 3 facilities to even look for a virus, yet we are led to believe that it is up all our noses.

    So, where is the virus?

    Reply
    1. elizabethhart

      Another BMJ rapid response from retired GP Janet Menage:

      Re: Covid-19: Ignoring the knowns | The BMJ
      https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m3979/rr-5

      A CDC paper of June 2020, entitled, ’Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States’, describes the results of experimentally attempting to infect cell culture lines with clinically-obtained “SARS-CoV-2” virus samples:
      “Therefore, we examined the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect and replicate in several common primate and human cell lines, including human adenocarcinoma cells (A549), human liver cells (HUH 7.0), and human embryonic kidney cells (HEK-293T). In addition to Vero E6 and Vero CCL81 cells. … Each cell line was inoculated at high multiplicity of infection and examined 24h post-infection. No CPE was observed in any of the cell lines except in Vero cells, which grew to greater than 10 to the 7th power at 24 h post-infection. In contrast, HUH 7.0 and 293T showed only modest viral replication, and A549 cells were incompatible with SARS CoV-2 infection.”(1)
      However, the 13th July 2020 CDC paper, entitled, ‘CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel For Emergency Use Only Instructions for Use’, stated that: “Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/μL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen.”(2)
      It appears, therefore, that despite knowing that the virus obtained from, “Patient with Coronavirus Disease”, could not be demonstrated to exhibit a cytopathic effect (CPE) in the human cell culture line A549 (human lung alveolar adenocarcinoma cells), the very same cell line was subsequently genetically modified to,”mimic clinical specimen”, in order to develop a RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2/’Covid-19’.
      Given that there was no prior evidence of lethality of the clinically-obtained virus in human cells, why was a test developed on the basis that it was a dangerous pathogen causing a life-threatening disease? And why was the same cell culture line used which had already been demonstrated to be uninfectable by the virus?
      In addition, the CDC stated,” We have made the virus isolate available to the public health community by depositing it into 2 virus reagent repositories”. (1).
      In which case, why did Public Health England state that they had no cultivable clinical samples or direct evidence of viral isolation? (3). 

      Reply
  43. Astrogeezer

    Prof. Sunetra Gupta interviewed by Andrew Neil said there are 1000 deaths each week from pneumococcal pneumonia and influenza in the UK. The current death rate (allegedly) from COVID 19 is c.80. The conclusions should be obvious to all, and until you realise how easy it is for your mind to be manipulated, you remain the puppet of someone else’s end game. Goebels is alive and well and living somewhere in Westminster.

    Reply
  44. Steve

    It’s quite clear that the major beneficiary from any vaccine is going to be ‘Big Pharma’. Public and private health providers will have to stump up billions out of their health budgets to satisfy the snake oil salesmen, and complicit governments with the aid of their corrupt media organisations will use the carrot and stick approach to force the public into accepting the vaccine to allow them to be released from their virtual imprisonment.
    It was quite clear on day one when Trump referred to the ‘Chinese Virus’ what was going on, and big Pharma knew that Xmas had come early.

    Reply
  45. Joe Dopelle

    Apologies for posting this link here. It seems important to me, and I would like to know other people’s reactions to it – especially, of course, Dr Kendrick’s.

    He called it a ‘scamdemic.’ Then his family fell ill, one by one.
    Tony Green, as told to Eli Saslow, The Washington Post
    Oct. 10, 2020
    Updated: Oct. 11, 2020 8 a.m.
    https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/What-are-we-so-afraid-of-15636693.php

    I noticed it through a link on Slashdot (the social media bulletin board for, mostly, programmers and other techies). It’s already had over 400 comments, as far as I can see every single one of them blaming the “perpetrator”.

    Is it just me, or are there problems with this story? To sum it up: this guy, his partner, and all four of their parents met at their house for a weekend. On Saturday they watched some films, had some meals, and went for a drive. Within about 24 hours all six of them were seriously ill – and then there is a lot of lurid description of how awful it was (at least one died).

    The author says that “I have about 4,000 people in my personal network, and not one of them had gotten sick. Not one”.

    So we are told that six people, none of whom had been sick with Covid-19 before, met for about 48 hours, and within that time all six of them fell ill with the virus.

    So what about the incubation period? Even taking the story at face value, it’s unlikely that more than one of the participants was infectious. Otherwise they would have infected other people back home, and/or showed symptoms themselves.

    But how does one infectious person make five others ill ***within 24 hours***? They would all have had to be infected several days earlier to fall ill on that Sunday. Which implies…

    All it takes to make a story unbelievable is one impossible claim.

    So what’s the alternative? Could it be a fake story planted – with or without collusion by the Washington Post? If I were asked to write a short article that would terrify as many people as possible as thoroughly as possible, and persuade them to do exactly as they are told in future, it would come out precisely like this.

    Reply
      1. Joe Dopelle

        My thought exactly, AhNotepad. Food poisoning would be expected to hit everyone, at about the same time. But how could the authorities blame it on Covid-19?

        If they were all tested on admission to hospital, they might all have tested positive – from what we know of PCR and the distinct possibility they had all previously been infected without knowing.

        But could the doctors fail to notice food poisoning and treat for Covid-19 instead?

        Reply
        1. AhNotepad

          Joe, what the people were treated for, and what was published in the oh-so-honest-media do not have to be connected in any way, apart from being in the same week perhaps.

          Reply
        2. vaultpress7a4902efcb7abd9e3458ef205b82b8ce

          … or maybe another environmental poison of some sort? Picked up on one of their outings?

          Not to detract from this family’s suffering — assuming the narrative is largely true — but I do find it stretching belief somewhat for them all to keel over with the same viral infection within hours of each other…

          Reply
    1. Jerome Savage

      Got a text last week on someone who maybe 50 yr old, did a half marathon, got tested shortly after – positive . Her test was as a result of her husband’s positive and who is feeling horrible with a nasty headache.
      And I agree , nothing adds up in that story.

      Reply
  46. Craig E

    My burning question relates to whether or not the virus has definitely been purified. Some others have commented on this. The covid-19 seems to have been sequenced and somehow genomic sequencing is used to determine who got covid from whom. For example in Victoria the authorities are saying that 90% of the current cases in Victoria can be traced back to the hotel quarantine circus.

    So does this virus have some kind of common core unique to it and just varies around the margins?

    Does anyone know whether it has been confirmed that the isolated virus causes disease in animal models?

    Finally, given the symptoms of covid are shared with many other viruses – fever, cough etc, if the PCR test hasn’t been validated against “the” virus, who is to say we’re not detecting something else?

    Reply
  47. crisscross767

    “………..Last week, I wrote and published two articles exposing the root of the poisonous tree: the CDC admits it does not have an isolated COVID virus.

    Therefore, SARS-CoV-2, the pandemic virus, has never been proved to exist.

    This shattering fact reveals the whole pandemic is a fraud. The virus, the test, the case numbers—all fraud. And the lockdowns were unnecessary and criminal………….”

    https://nomorefakenews.com/

    So what are the vaccine designers intentions?

    Reply
    1. Steve

      IMO, CV-19 is just a case of bad flu and if we do what we should do for any flu, protect the vulnerable and act hygienically, then it won’t be a major problem. Unfortunately, the powers that be have whipped up the hysteria and we are now in a hole with no obvious way out.

      The big question is: what really happened in Wuhan, China when this ‘apparently’ started ?
      Was it an MSM generated faux storm or was there something bigger/different that happened ?

      Reply
      1. crisscross767

        Snakes in suits

        In 2018 The Institute for Disease Modeling made a video in which they show a flu virus – which is a coronavirus – originating in China, from the area of Wuhan, and spreading all over the world, killing millions. They called it ‘A Simulation For A Global Flu Pandemic.’ That is exactly what happened, two years later…………

        In 2012 a strange comic book was produced by the European Union, for distribution among their employees only. (2B) The title of the comic is ‘INFECTED’ and it shows a new virus originating in a Chinese lab and spreading across the world. The solution for this pandemic is outlined in the comic book: globalists enforce one global health plan. This means:

        Two years before the outbreak of COVID-19, nations around the world started exporting hundreds of millions of diagnostic test instruments for… COVID-19.

        Several movies predicted the coronavirus pandemic

        https://www.stopworldcontrol.com/planned/

        Reply
        1. Steve B

          I will never dismiss movies as utter nonsense ever again because, who would have thought, they correctly predict the future !!

          Reply
      2. mmec7

        Steve and Criscross767 – So long as it transfers, here is an X-Ray of a Covid-19 lung – like to small balls of cotton. Somewhat different to what one may find in a straight flu lung!
        Photo of the X-Ray refuses to transfer over, what a pain. Sigh. Anyway, looks bad. Don’t think that we can dismiss Covid with a wave of the hand. It is proving a lethal bug, and IF as is claimed, was cooked up in a lab, then is assuredly going to be more than a straight flu bug !

        Reply
        1. Steve-R

          If you know what ‘ground glass’ looks like then that is what an x-ray of Covid-19 lung looks like. But I should really have said ‘lungs’ as the disease is an equal opportunity infector and unless you have only one lung, all your lungs will have the same appearance.

          Reply
        2. Steve

          mmec – I think the whole point is that Covid is NOT proving to be a particularly lethal bug. Yes, people have died and the excess deaths number is increased but we have no idea of knowing if all of the excess deaths are from Covid or from Covid related causes, such as lockdown. The actual facts/the data is being manipulated so we will probably never know the true Covid death rate – albeit that it is probably a bit higher than a bad Flu year. I maintain that the actions of our (UK) government have unnecessarily increased the number of deaths during this crisis. And, they continue to follow the same approach, even though it patently doesn’t work !
          I’m not convinced the bug was cooked up in a lab, I think that’s more likely to be Trump’s anti Chinese agenda at play.

          Reply
      3. David Bailey

        I have heard it said that viruses often start as very unpleasant, but rapidly change to become less virulent. Could this be what happened in Wuhan, and might it also be an explanation for the various previous coronavirus scares that never amounted to much? Perhaps the only deliberate action was to spread this bug far and wide while it was still dangerous.

        Using this site: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
        I see that the number of daily deaths due to CV19 has dropped quite a bit – from 87 down to 50. There are 7-day rolling averages, so the data is somewhat smoothed, but I don’t see any sign of a pandemic ramping up again even though the number of detections inevitably rises the more tests get performed!

        Reply
        1. Steve B

          Maybe you’ve jumped the gun a bit. There were 143 CV19 deaths recorded today.

          I know i know, you just can’t trust worldometer lot

          Reply
          1. AhNotepad

            They may have been recorded today, but when did the deaths occur? Never mind that it is not possible to know what caused them.

    2. David Bailey

      Crisscross,

      Your link eventually lead to this CDC document that is supposed to be an admission that CV19 has never been isolated. At a glance, and using a few search keywords I can’t see that it contains such an admission.

      Can you explain where the admission is – because this is a crucial development if it can be verified.

      Reply
      1. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick Post author

        Yes, I think that the virus has been isolated. Of course that is not what the PCR tests look for. They look for bits of RNA, then multiply them up. Isolating, culturing, and growing the virus is an extremely complex and time consuming task with many slip-ups possible along the way.

        Reply
        1. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick Post author

          Interesting, I read the report and it does appear to mean that the CDC (who I would imagine would be the sort of organisation to make sure they did) does not have any of the virus available. As with many such documents, the exact meaning is opaque – usually quite deliberately. However, I think the extrapolation from this, that Sars-Cov2 does not exist, is a stretch. Although I wouldn’t fall off my chair in surprise if it turned out to be true.

          Reply
  48. Studs Ramrod

    Dr Kendrick – Have you seen this? https://www.amnesty.org.uk/care-homes-report
    Interesting that the report does lay heavily into lack of testing and “test, test, test” etc.
    Though presumably using a PCR test that we know is fundamentally flawed.
    So what possible test is there for COVID19? Other than symptoms?
    Though Amnesty International are very clever – it could be that they are using the government’s own narrative against them
    The government could argue that the PCR test is useless anyway. But I doubt that’s a line of defence they’d be prepared to admit.

    Reply
  49. Steve-R

    Dr Kendrick, why do you think that SAGE has not given out any advice to the general public on how to strengthen their immune systems to resist the resultant inevitable 2nd wave?

    I am thinking specifically of D3 C and Mg and Zn as we don’t make enough D3, can’t make sufficient C when under oxidising attack, and have no way of knowing whether our diet includes enough Mg and Zn to maintain healthy cellular levels.

    Reply
  50. elizabethhart

    Today, the Australian newspaper ran an article promoting SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (incorrectly described as a ‘Covid-19’ vaccine…)

    The article includes the statement below – is it correct? What do you think about those statistics, i.e. that the risk of death from COVID-19 is 10-20 percent for those in their 80s? Is that 10-20 percent of all people in their 80s? Or 10-20 percent of people in their 80s diagnosed with COVID-19?

    The risk of death from COVID-19 increases with age – much less than 1 per cent for those under 40, to close to 4 per cent in the 60s, and 10-20 per cent for those in their 80s. Assuming a vaccine that decreases the risk of infections by half also decreases death by half, a vaccinated 80-year-old will then have the risk of a 60-year-old — still many times more than even an unvaccinated young person.

    The article is titled: Covid-19 vaccine is on the way, but virus will remain part of our lives, and is probably behind the paywall of The Australian.

    The article was written by Shitij Kapur, dean of the faculty of medicine, dentistry and health sciences, and assistant vice-chancellor for health at the University of Melbourne.

    Reply
        1. James DownUnder

          Instructive that there is a growing convergence of opinions (with evidence provided) – from divergent credible sources, all of them challenging ‘Official Narrative(s)’

          Reply
  51. fusspot57

    I wonder when this vaccine goes “live” how many of our MP’s are going to be willing to take it, or will they go on live television to show them being vaccinated with the “look folks, it’s safe” show but in fact be injected with sterile saline?

    Reply
  52. elizabethhart

    About six weeks ago I asked the UK Office for National Statistics if there were any statistics on comorbidities of the people who died attributed to COVID-19 available.
     
    I received this response from ONS today, which is likely to be of interest to people following the coronavirus situation:

    You can find information on co-morbidities of people who have died with COVID-19 here: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19englandandwales/deathsoccurringinjune2020#pre-existing-conditions-of-people-who-died-with-covid-19

    Reply
    1. elizabethhart

      I also asked about the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 being reduced in the UK, and presuming that this reduction was being reflected on the ONS website, and received this response:

      On the deaths involving COVID-19 being reduced, I think you are referring to the Public Health England numbers? We discuss differences between the ONS data and other data on COVID-19 deaths here: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsregisteredweeklyinenglandandwalesprovisional/latest#comparison-of-weekly-death-occurrences-in-england-and-wales ; the ONS numbers have not been reduced as they are based on death certification rather than testing.

      Reply
  53. elizabethhart

    See below a response I received from Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison today, what appears to be a form letter response. Note the last two paragraphs…

    Dear Ms Hart

    Thank you for writing to me regarding a COVID-19 vaccine. COVID-19 is a threat to lives and livelihoods.

    Already the virus has claimed more than 1 million fatalities worldwide, including many hundreds in Australia. It has been estimated that the pandemic has cost 500 million jobs worldwide.

    A vaccine is vital to keeping people safe and restoring our way of life.
    To this end, we are working towards securing a COVID-19 vaccine for all Australians.

    An agreement with the UK-based drug company AstraZeneca will mean that every Australian will be able to receive the University of Oxford COVID-19 vaccine for free, should trials prove successful, safe and effective.

    The Oxford vaccine is one of the most advanced and promising in the world. If the vaccine clears the trials, it could be available next year.

    Australia is also in advanced discussions with other vaccine candidates. These include our very own CSL-University of Queensland molecular clamp vaccine, among others.

    Vaccination is strongly encouraged to prevent a range of deadly and debilitating diseases in Australia. Vaccination is not compulsory in Australia and it will not be compulsory to have a COVID 19 vaccine.

    However, a COVID-19 vaccine is the best way to protect the Australian community from this virus. As such, we want to achieve the highest rate of vaccination possible. The Government will explore all avenues to achieve this goal, guided by the advice of medical and scientific experts.

    Yours sincerely
    SCOTT MORRISON

    Reply
    1. Janet Love

      Of course it won’t be ‘compulsary’, but you won’t be able to buy or sell – or receive an age pension (which itself is not…. compulsary, either) Or maybe your passport may not be renewed…
      What about suicide ? Not compulsary, but what about up to 30% more attempts in the Free State of Victoria

      Reply
      1. elizabethhart

        Janet, Scott Morrison says:

        “Vaccination is not compulsory in Australia and it will not be compulsory to have a COVID 19 vaccine.”

        And

        “…a COVID-19 vaccine is the best way to protect the Australian community from this virus. As such, we want to achieve the highest rate of vaccination possible. The Government will explore all avenues to achieve this goal, guided by the advice of medical and scientific experts.”

        Consider this information from a News. com. au article dated 20 August 2020:

        Australia’s Deputy Chief Medical Officer Nick Coatsworth has raised the possibility of restrictions for people who refuse to get the COVID-19 vaccine when it is available, if proven successful.
        Speaking at a press conference on Wednesday, Dr Coatsworth said rules like ‘No jab no pay’, which would restrict government payments, could be brought in to ensure more Australians are immunised against the coronavirus.
        He mentioned regulations around international and interstate travel, and even moving within the community, would need to be reviewed.
        Australian pubs and restaurants could also refuse entry to people who refuse to get vaccinated.
        It comes as Prime Minister Scott Morrison backtracked on his comments that a coronavirus vaccine will be as “mandatory as you can possibly make it” for all Australians if the Oxford University version proves successful in Phase III trials and is approved for use.
        But Mr Morrison did say he was “open to all options” to get as many Australians as possible vaccinated.
        News. com. au revealed Wednesday that the Morrison Government confirmed a landmark agreement with drug giant AstraZeneca to manufacture one of the world’s most promising coronavirus vaccines currently being developed by Oxford University researchers.
        If it’s proved safe to use, Prime Minister Scott Morrison believes the agreement will ensure Australians will be among the first countries in the world to secure the jab, revealing this morning it could be available to Aussies as soon as early next year.
        The UK Government has already ordered 100 million doses.

        Reference: Coronavirus Australia: Deputy CMO Nick Coatsworth reveals possible restrictions for refusing vaccine. News. com. au, 20 August 2020

        Reply
      1. Eggs 'n beer

        Scott Morrison, 1st July 2020:

        “We’re about having the freedom to live our lives as we choose – in an open and democratic society, without coercion or fear. We won’t surrender this – ever”

        We already have 14 of the 15 most venomous snakes in the world. Looks like we have a 16th.

        Reply
    2. Eggs 'n beer

      He is starting to lose the Christian vote with these comments. He claims to be a born again Christian, and attends a pentecostal church regularly. There are just so many lies in that letter ….
      a) over a million people may have died WITH the virus, but definitely not OF the virus.
      b) the “pandemic” (the numbers, as proportions of populations, are not great enough to qualify it as a pandemic) hasn’t cost 500 million jobs worldwide. Governments’ responses to the outbreak have caused those losses
      c) a vaccine is unnecessary, or at least definitely not vital. We have never had a successful vaccine against a coronavirus. What happens if we never get one? Humanity dies out?
      d) as discussed here, the Oxford vaccine cannot possibly clear trials before October 2022. That means that if he pushes ahead with his roll-out timetable, it will obviously not be tested for safety or efficacy.
      e) the unelected, unmedical and unscientific idiots who got us into this mess will, I am sure, willingly retain their dictatorial powers by continuing to advise you in the manner that you crave.

      Reply
      1. elizabethhart

        Eggs ‘n beer, you say:

        the unelected, unmedical and unscientific idiots who got us into this mess will, I am sure, willingly retain their dictatorial powers by continuing to advise you in the manner that you crave.”

        Are you suggesting I’m ‘craving’ this advice?!?! I thought it was clear from the comments I’ve left on this post and other posts on this blog that I’m challenging “the unelected, unmedical and unscientific idiots who got us into this mess” and “their dictatorial powers”…

        See for example my recent email to Professor Allen Cheng seeking clarification for conflicts of interest: https://vaccinationispolitical.files.wordpress.com/2020/10/disclosure-of-conflicts-of-interest-professor-allen-cheng.pdf

        Cheng is one of the key figures in the powerful ‘vaccination clique’ in Australia, academics who dominate public health policy, and who have been getting away without scrutiny for years.

        Reply
        1. Eggs 'n beer

          My sincere apologies, a slip of the fingers. I’m well aware of your position. The “you” was a generic you, meaning the population as a whole. Although such is their hubris that EH is definitely included in their “you”, as they cannot really comprehend how anyone could crave otherwise …..

          But as for writing to Cheng, whilst it certainly gives a bit of relief letting off steam, surely you realise that in his mind you are nothing but a troublesome grub? If he ever reads your email, which he probably won’t. I can’t even talk to my local State member, she’s so well protected by minions. My email to ScoMo, after five weeks, got a standard reply from the deputy PM. If you don’t believe our science, go away and stop bothering us, is the message from both parties. the agenda is set. Resistance is futile. Here was my pressure relief message,

          “So now that the WHO has admitted that COVID is no more dangerous than the ‘flu

          https://off-guardian.org/2020/10/08/who-accidentally-confirms-covid-is-no-more-dangerous-than-flu/?__cf_chl_jschl_tk__=81732e5c497770879d3a06564214dd1258588b17-1602455401-0-AToBxtvEKxjem6jjum7709En1g8HnAMFpd_khpLpmvTu2_Os60Cr8-1JeEzrx-Mdt41V_Cv_ibhrLpINSQ8rzHyOui9VEuGWUurnRcRHgy2cC4d6Kb53zz_8ku5buJlh-rNM9Ot9hzNmSX8FZ5L1wsgai7vF5gnl6dOuD8fLcvZAc20SXw1Bn2qPfLe-8j8Y-LEcPCIZP8D1YUfPbs3cEZI3UTpJyEpN3yxh3-UYgeI0hQLBshT25JHJHV4OZJppnRVvOqxA8wUEWkrGLtP2welGWjBiAOtbQn2xg1fo_HUaaQERGI5rdntkTKcRxjJHElAuR-5ZDshfEP4NktLpJhIXjONQx0z46I29dDGWG3OGknRHZHUE5i7kZV10TQ2Qgg

          and now state that all lockdowns should be lifted as they are so detrimental

          https://www.news.com.au/world/coronavirus/global/coronavirus-who-backflips-on-virus-stance-by-condemning-lockdowns/news-story/f2188f2aebff1b7b291b297731c3da74

          Note that this is an instruction from the WHO, “ Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method”, not a recommendation.

          So why does the labor (sic) party still have us in lockdown? Suicides are up 30% according to Lifeline, I personally knew one who committed suicide purely because of the lockdown. And I know of another. Your government has blood on its hands with its draconian policies.”

          followed up with a phone call to a minion who spluttered her way through excuse like “there is no government at the moment because of the election” – well, she walked straight into three more broadsides with that comment, and she finished with “is there anything else I can do for you today” which got “nothing I could say over the phone” ( I was thinking of cliff, jump). But like any drug, the high from each shot lasts a shorter time.

          Once again, my apologies, and keep up the fight.

          Reply
          1. elizabethhart

            Eggs ‘n beer, Scott Morrison says: ”…a COVID-19 vaccine is the best way to protect the Australian community from this virus. As such, we want to achieve the highest rate of vaccination possible. The Government will explore all avenues to achieve this goal, guided by the advice of medical and scientific experts”.

            Allen Cheng is one of the ‘medical and scientific experts’ Scott Morrison says are guiding the Australian Government.

            I’m seeking transparency and accountability for the advice provided by ‘medical and scientific experts’. I want to know who are these people advising the government on coronavirus vaccination, what are their qualifications and affiliations, and if they have any conflicts of interest. This is information that should be publicly accessible in our liberal democracy…

            It’s important that we have this letter from Scott Morrison on the record, on Prime Ministerial letterhead and signed off with Morrison’s signature. This letter outlines what the Morrison government is planning in regards to coronavirus vaccination, i.e. that it wants “to achieve the highest rate of vaccination possible” and that it “will explore all avenues to achieve this goal”.

        2. Eggs ‘n beer

          After carefully, and respectfully, demolishing the links in an email from my local member purporting to provide ‘science’ behind social distancing and hygiene measures, I finished with this:

          “ So, where to now? As the CHO’s office hasn’t been able to come up with anything of substance to back up the measures implemented, can I have a meeting with someone from her office to discuss real data relating to the pandemic? Based around the vascular disease (which causes the respiratory symptoms) and is the only explanation for the death demographics (elderly, vascular co-morbities, lack of O2 transmission in the alveolar, COVID toe, loss of senses of taste and smell etc.etc.) and experiences from other countries? So that we can get Queensland back to work.”

          I got this in response:

          “ I understand that the information I provided is not what you were hoping for, and that you do not agree with the science or the government’s response to the pandemic.

          At this stage the government is focusing on keeping Queenslanders safe and recovering from the impacts of the virus. While you may not agree with the science of our precautionary measures, COVID-19 has undeniably had an impact on the world. With over 600,000 deaths from COVID-19 in the first 6 months of this year, it has already surpassed Influenza is in mortality rate. A worldwide pandemic is unprecedented in modern times, and for Xxx her focus is on doing all she can to support her constituency get through the emergency.

          Xxx appreciates the time you have taken to share your view with her ,and as previously discussed, I have passed these onto the Premiers, and Minister for Health office.

          Thank you again for your time, and if we can be of assistance in any other way please let me know.”

          In other words “piss off COVID denier and leave us alone”.

          This is what I mean by the decision makers being protected. You won’t be allowed to contact them, and in any case, even if you could, they are far too hubristic to listen to you. They would just talk over you. Have you not noticed this in interactions with the authorities over vaccination policies? Surgeons, and other specialists are the same. They don’t listen to you, you read the letter they sent to your GP detailing their proposals and you wonder where they got half their data from ….. always with the final paragraph “Thank you for referring Mrs $400 to me.”

          Reply
    3. Rozalia Niedościgniona

      . AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine trial volunteer dies in Brazil ( october 22)
      A volunteer in a COVID-19 vaccine trail drug-maker AstraZeneca is conducting with the University of Oxford has died in Brazil, the South American nation’s National Health Surveillance Agency said Wednesday. The agency said it was formally notified Monday. The cause of death was not released, but Ian Jones, a professor of virology at the University of Reading in the United Kingdom, said it probably wasn’t vaccine-related. AztraZeneca said in a statement to NBC News that the trial would continue. “We cannot comment on individual cases in an ongoing trial of the Oxford vaccine as we adhere strictly to medical confidentiality and clinical trial regulations, but we can confirm that all required review processes have been followed,” the statement said. [NBC News]. AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine trial volunteer dies in Brazil
      A volunteer in a COVID-19 vaccine trail drug-maker AstraZeneca is conducting with the University of Oxford has died in Brazil, the South American nation’s National Health Surveillance Agency said Wednesday. The agency said it was formally notified Monday. The cause of death was not released, but Ian Jones, a professor of virology at the University of Reading in the United Kingdom, said it probably wasn’t vaccine-related. AztraZeneca said in a statement to NBC News that the trial would continue. “We cannot comment on individual cases in an ongoing trial of the Oxford vaccine as we adhere strictly to medical confidentiality and clinical trial regulations, but we can confirm that all required review processes have been followed,” the statement said. [NBC News]

      Reply
    1. Mr Chris

      Clathrate
      I am a convinced taker of vitamin D, but I have to admit that following your link to Dr D Grimes astonished me. So even Trump was treated with Vitamin D
      Great stuff, thank you

      Reply
    2. Jennifer

      Clathrate. Many thanks for this link to Dr Grimes….just the sort of stuff this blog is good at doing….educating me.

      Reply
    3. elizabethhart

      Quoting from David Grimes website:

      The pandemic of Covid-19 provided an opportunity to correct widespread vitamin D deficiency and at the same time to conduct a wide range of clinical trials with assessment of the clinical value of vitamin D.  Unfortunately with a few exceptions research bodies seem to have been asleep. The Covid-19 Therapeutics Accelerator (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation plus Wellcome Foundation) refuses to fund any research relating to vitamin D.

      Surprise… The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation doesn’t want to fund research into a vitamin D, a substance that might negate Bill Gates’ ‘race for coronavirus vaccines’.

      Reply
      1. Clathrate

        Whenever I see or read anything about Bill & Melissa and the web that they have spun which funds the likes of all our ‘favourite’ modellers, Chief Medical Officer of England, plus everyone else baked in the pie, all I can ‘see’ is the ‘Gates of Hell’. I have no words for their stance on Vitamin D.

        For my small part, I try and educate anyone (usually family members) that thinks B&M are saints and point out conflicts, and provide examples of considerable damage they have caused with vaccines (Kenya, India, … ) plus provide the link to them not having had their own children vaccinated.

        Reply
        1. AhNotepad

          Finding a link to Kill Bates and not vaccinating children is near impossible. Do you have a reliable link? All thatI find say the claim is a hoax.

          Reply
          1. Clathrate

            AhN – Interesting that the link is gone & after doing a bit of digging, I found that there seems to be a bit of a campaign to rid the internet of these ‘false’ & ‘fake’ news. Seems that from May this year Melinda has been ‘debunking’ the claims (as she would if they were not true and as she would if they were true as it would not fit the B&M narrative). The particular claim relating to what the Gates family personal physician said can still be found, e.g. link below (& which I’ve copied along with the text into a document in case it goes ‘missing’) with the following 3 paragraphs cut & paste from the article:

            https://www.uspoliticsandnews.com/why-didnt-bill-gates-vaccinate-his-own-children/

            Given that the vaccination issue now impacts all families in America, directly or indirectly, you’d think it would have garnered more media attention when it was learned that vaccine champion and Microsoft founder Bill Gates refused to allow his own children to be vaccinated.

            This admission came from the Gates family’s personal physician in Seattle, who was speaking behind closed doors with other doctors at a symposium last year (someone at the conference leaked the conversation, so the doctor himself technically did not violate doctor-patient confidentiality rules).

            The doctor reportedly told his colleagues, “I don’t know if he (Gates) had them vaccinated as adults, but I can tell you he point blank refused to vaccinate them as children.”

  54. elizabethhart

    Thanks to Steve-R for sharing this article on Malcolm’s latest blog post, an article by Mike Yeadon:

    Sage and the two fatal errors | The Conservative Woman
    https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/what-sage-has-got-wrong/

    Essential reading, and consider this in his conclusion:

    No Need For a Vaccine
    There is absolutely no need for vaccines to extinguish the pandemic. I’ve never heard such nonsense talked about vaccines. You do not vaccinate people who aren’t at risk from a disease. You also don’t set about planning to vaccinate millions of fit and healthy people with a vaccine that hasn’t been extensively tested on human subjects. This much I know after 30 years in the pharmaceutical industry. Yet there are such moves afoot. One think piece suggests that anyone who refuses vaccination should be subject to indefinite house arrest (Mello et al, 2020). In some countries, there is talk of “no jab, no job”. There have even been job adverts for openings in NHS Wales for people to “oversee the vaccination of the entire population”. Any such proposals are not only completely unnecessary but if done using any kind of coercion at all, illegal. I would completely understand and would consider accepting early use of a vaccine only if done with fully informed consent and, even then, only if offered to the most vulnerable in our community. Other proposals have, to me, the whiff of evil about them and I will oppose them as vigorously as I have followed the pandemic so far.

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      JohnC, this is appalling. What is the point of a vaccine fo NHS workers? If the need vaccinating, they are so vulnerable they should not beworking in that situation. Once again, they should listen to Mike Yeadon before getting jabbed.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s