Returning to COVID19

31st January 2023

With the resignation of Jacinda Ardern, my thoughts were dragged back to Covid once more. Jacinda, as Prime Minster of New Zealand was the ultimate lockdown enforcer. She was feted round the world for her iron will, but I was not a fan, to put it mildly. Whenever I heard her speak, it brought to mind one of my most favourite quotes:

‘Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.’  C.S. Lewis

At one point she actually said the following:

“We will continue to be your single source of truth” “Unless you hear it from us, it is not the truth.’

If I ruled the world, anyone who said, that, or anything remotely like that, would be taken as far as possible from any position of power, never to be allowed anywhere near it again. Ever.

Yet, there are still many who believe her to have been a great and caring leader. She certainly hugged a lot of people with that well rehearsed pained/caring expression on her face.

Enough of that particular woman. But it got me thinking about lockdowns again and the whole worldwide madness of Covid. This was a time of such blundering idiocy that I find increasingly difficult to believe it ever happened. A bad dream.

The sky is falling, the sky is falling…’ Cue, everyone running about in panic. People, allegedly, dropping dead on the streets. Mortuaries, allegedly, overflowing. Freezer lorries, allegedly, stacked with dead bodies. Bring out your dead!

I worked with doctors who strode around the wards in positive pressure protective gear. There were GPs who simply refused to visit elderly residents in nursing homes. On my patch this was all GPs and all nursing homes. Meanwhile I happily visited away with a mask stuck to the top of my head.

During the Covid pandemic I travelled far past angry, to reach a point of utter weariness. Instead of becoming outraged by the latest rubbish that was being pronounced, I very nearly washed my hands of it. However, after learning of Jacinda’s resignation I roused myself to have another look at what actually did happen. Or to be more specific, what was the impact of Covid on overall mortality. The only outcome that really matters.

Rid your mind of the numbers claimed to have died of Covid. The, never to be clarified distinction between those who died ‘of’ or ‘with’ Covid. Or those who read an article on Covid and then, overwhelmed with fear, stepped out in front of a bus. Thus, becoming a Covid related…associated, something, anything to do with Covid, death.

Over time the Covid figures became so ridiculous and unreliable as to become meaningless. I should know, I wrote some of the death certificates myself. Let me think… ‘She died of COVID, she died of COVID not. Eeny, meeny, miney mo…’

I am not saying that Covid did not kill a large number of people. But the fact that deaths from influenza disappeared completely for two years tells me all I need to know. ‘Roll up, roll up, Ladies and Gentlemen, to see the amazing lady influenza disappear before your very eyes.’ An astonishing trick, all the way from La La Land. ‘You expect me to believe that?  Ho, ho, ho, very funny….Oh, sorry, you actually do.’

Anyway, to clear my internal database of horribly unreliable figures, I went back to look at my favourite graphs on EuroMOMO. This website looks at overall mortality, and only overall mortality. Their data comes from countries who do know how to record deaths, honestly. Unlike some others, who shall be nameless … China.

However, the main reason to focus on EuroMOMO is that overall mortality is something you cannot fake. About the only thing you can do to manipulate the figures is hold back data for a month or two – which has been done, but not to any great degree. So, without further ado, let us move onto EuroMOMO. Below is a recent graph. I have deliberately removed most of the information you need to know what it is showing. I wanted people to avoid jumping to conclusions … that they might then find it difficult row back from.

I found myself examining this graph idly and thought. Imagine if you had no idea what you were looking at here. What would you think? It’s a squiggly line, yes. Very good, gold star. What else?

To give you a bit more detail. This is a graph of overall mortality, across a large number of European countries. All of those who provide data to the EuroMOMO database anyway. Norway, the ultimate European lockdown champion, has mysteriously disappeared from the database. Maybe they shall return …. I have begun to see everything as a conspiracy nowadays.

The graph itself begins in January 2017 and finishes in January 2023. As you can see (if not terribly clearly) there are two wavy dotted lines. These lines rise up in the winter, and then fall back down in the summer. Something seen every year. This is because, every year, more people die in the winter than in the summer.

Everyone thinks they know the reason for this winter summer effect, but I am not so sure they do. But that is an enormously complicated topic for another time.

The lower, dotted lines represent the ‘average’ mortality you would expect to see [with upper and lower ‘normal’ limits] year on year. Above those wavy dotted lines sits a solid spikey line. This represents the actual number of deaths that occurred. Not just from Covid, but from everything.

This does raise an immediate question. If we keep seeing more deaths than we would expect in the winter, year on year, then the ‘average’ number of deaths should rise? Thus, the wavy dotted lines ought to be going up and up, in the winter. But they don’t.

I am not entirely sure why this is not the case. But it is a statistical question of such mind-boggling complexity that I am, frankly, unable to answer it. I have looked into it, but I was scared off by the sheer scale and difficulty of the mathematics involved. Too many equations for my poor wee brain.

Anyway, this graph starts in the winter of 2017 and ends about now. The vertical lines are drawn at midnight on Dec 31st each year. Which means that we have almost exactly six years of data. Excellent data, not manipulated in any way. I say this because, whilst the diagnosis of ‘Covid death’ may be disputed, the diagnosis of death cannot.

What stands out? Well, there was a very sharp peak of deaths in early 2020. This, as you have probably worked out, was when Covid first hit. I find it fascinating that it was so transient. It came, it went…gone. For a bit anyway.

Was the precipitous fall due to strict lockdowns? Some will doubtless argue this. However, we all locked down again in autumn 2020 and the death rate went up, and stayed up, for about six months. Until, that is, January came along, and it all settled down again. Which follows pretty much the pattern of 2017, 2108 and 2019. And the pattern of all pandemics. They come, and they go. Some a little earlier, some a little later.

What else do you see – now that we are all pretty much fully vaccinated? I think another thing that stands out is the sudden and sharp rise in mortality in November 2022. Which is virtually identical to the spike in 2020. Strange?

However, to my mind, the thing that shouts most loudly about this graph is that the years of Covid pandemic panic really do not look that much different from the previous three years. Half close your eyes, and there is almost nothing to see. The Covid peaks were a little higher, and a little longer – maybe.

If you knew nothing about the Covid pandemic I don’t think you would exclaim. ‘My God, look at these vast waves of death in 2020, 2021. What amazing, never seen before thing, happened here?’ Yes, first spike of early 2020 was certainly sharp, and unusual, but it was short. And very little different to the spike at the end of 2022. As for the rest?

Now, I would like to turn your attention to Germany. The most populous country in Europe. Here it is even more clear that the years of the Covid pandemic are not remotely unusual. If I had removed the calendar years off this graph, you would be hard pressed to spot the Covid pandemic. In truth, you would be more than hard pressed. You couldn’t.

The 2018 influenza spike was equally dramatic to Covid peak of 2021, if not more so. [You may have noticed that there was no peak in 2020] In addition, at the end of 2022, we have the highest peak of all. Future historians might well look at this graph and ask. ‘Tell me, why did the world go mad in 2020, and remain mad through 2021? Why did everyone lockdown in March 2020, and then do nothing whatsoever in December 2022?’

It almost goes without saying that, had we locked down again in November 2022, it would have been claimed that lockdown saved us all. Look at how quickly it came, then went. Well, they could have claimed it. But we didn’t lock down again, did we? In direct contrast to Germany. What of the people living in Luxembourg?

Luxembourg is surrounded by Belgium France and Germany. People move freely from one to the other, always have done, and still do. The ‘deadly’ Covid pandemic raged all around them. Here, absolutely nothing happened. Mind you, they also seem to have been unaffected by influenza.

Whilst the Germans were dying in large numbers in 2018, the Luxembourgians carried on serenely, not an extra death to be seen. Why? Discuss. [It seems that most/all countries unaffected by Covid, were also unaffected by earlier flu epidemics].

I know some of you may be thinking that Germany is much bigger than Luxembourg so … so what? If you are going to see an effect on mortality, you are more likely to see it happen, more dramatically, and rapidly, in a country with fewer people.

I should explain that the figures on the left axis, on the German and Luxembourg graphs (unlike the first one), do not represent total deaths, they are the ‘Z score’. That is, the deviation from the mean.

The upper dotted line represents a Z score of five. That means, five standard deviations above the mean. It has been decreed that if you hit more than five standard deviations above the mean, for any length of time, this is a signal that ‘something bad’ is happening. The alarm starts goes off, and epidemiologists run around bumping into each other. ‘The sky is falling… etc.’

If you use the Z score it makes no difference how large the population is. It has been specifically designed to make it possible to compare changes in overall mortality, in populations of very different sizes. I feel the need here to make it clear that Luxembourg is not that small. It has more than twice the population of Iceland, for example.

Enough of the maths already.

So, deep breath, and trying to bring all these random thoughts together. What does EuroMOMO tell us? It tells us that Covid was a bit worse than a bad flu season, with 2018 being a good reference point. [There have been far worse flu epidemics than 2018, and I am not talking about 1918/19].

What EuroMOMO makes most clear, at least to me, is that Covid was not, repeat not, a pandemic of unique power, and destructiveness. It could have never have remotely justified the drastic actions that were taken to combat it.

Belatedly, this is becoming recognised, as has the damage associated with lockdowns. Here is the abstract of an article from 2022. A bit dry, but worth a read. ‘Are Lockdowns Effective in Managing Pandemics?’

‘The present coronavirus crisis caused a major worldwide disruption which has not been experienced for decades. The lockdown-based crisis management was implemented by nearly all the countries, and studies confirming lockdown effectiveness can be found alongside the studies questioning it.

In this work, we performed a narrative review of the works studying the above effectiveness, as well as the historic experience of previous pandemics and risk-benefit analysis based on the connection of health and wealth. Our aim was to learn lessons and analyze ways to improve the management of similar events in the future.

The comparative analysis of different countries showed that the assumption of lockdowns’ effectiveness cannot be supported by evidence—neither regarding the present COVID-19 pandemic, nor regarding the 1918–1920 Spanish Flu and other less-severe pandemics in the past.

The price tag of lockdowns in terms of public health is high: by using the known connection between health and wealth, we estimate that lockdowns may claim 20 times more life years than they save. It is suggested therefore that a thorough cost-benefit analysis should be performed before imposing any lockdown for either COVID-19 or any future pandemic.’ 1

In the face of such evidence, the argument for lockdown seems to be transforming into a somewhat pathetic whinge. ‘We didn’t know. It’s all very well people saying we shouldn’t have locked down now. We didn’t hear you saying it at the time. We were just following The Science, don’t blame us. Better safe than sorry. Don’t blame us …I think you’re being very nasty to us.’

This, of course, is nonsense. There were plenty of scientists arguing against lockdown at the time. However, they were all ruthlessly censored, attacked, and silenced. Experts such as Prof. John Ioannidis, Prof. Karol Sikora, Prof. Sunetra Gupta, Prof. Carl Heneghan. These last two UK professors argued very strenuously against lockdowns. They were ignored, then vilified. Here from an article written in January 2021:

‘…Sunetra Gupta. She’s been getting flak from the mob for months but it reached a crescendo yesterday when she was on the Today programme. Why is the BBC giving space to a nutter, people asked? She isn’t a nutter, of course. She’s an infectious disease epidemiologist at Oxford University. But she bristles against the COVID consensus and that makes her a bad person, virtually a witch, in the eyes of the zealous protectors of COVID orthodoxy. Professor Gupta has written about the barrage of abuse she receives via email. ‘Evil’, they call her.’

‘…her chief crime, judging from the hysterical commentary about her, is that she is critical of harsh lockdowns. She is a founder of the Great Barrington Declaration, which proposes that instead of locking down the whole of society we should shield the elderly and the vulnerable while allowing other people to carry on pretty much as normal. It is this perfectly legitimate discussion of a social and political question — the question of lockdown — that has earned Gupta the most ire.’ 2

I would like to point out that I was arguing against lockdown, right from the very beginning. Yes, I do enjoy saying, ‘I told you so’ from time to time. It is one of the few satisfactions I get in life nowadays. Here is a section from a blog I wrote in March 2020. Once again, right from the start:

‘…However, there is also a health downside associated with our current approach. Many people are also going to suffer and die, because of the actions we are currently taking. On the BBC, a man with cancer was being interviewed. Due to the shutdown, his operation is being put back by several months – at least. Others with cancer will not be getting treatment. The level of worry and anxiety will be massive.

Hip replacements are also being postponed and other, hugely beneficial interventions are not being done. Those with heart disease and diabetes will not be treated. Elderly people, with no support, may simply die of starvation in their own homes. Jobs will be lost, companies are going bust, suicides will go up. Psychosocial stress will be immense.

In my role, working in Out of Hours, we are being asked to watch out for abuse in the home. Because we know that children will now be more at risk, trapped in their houses. Also, partners will suffer greater physical abuse, stuck in the home, unable to get out. Not much fun.

Which means that we are certainly not looking at a zero-sum game here, where every case of COVID prevented, or treated, is one less death. There is a health cost.

There is also the impact of economic damage, which can be immense. I studied what happened in Russia, following the breakup of the Soviet Union, and the economic and social chaos that ensued. There was a massive spike in premature deaths.

In men, life expectancy fell by almost seven years, over a two to three-year period. A seven-year loss of life expectancy in seventy million men, is forty-nine million QALYs worth. It is certainly a far greater health disaster than COVID can possibly create…3

And lo, the damage is coming to pass. Maybe not so many people dying of starvation as I predicted, at least not in the West. In poorer countries, however …

Another terrible thing that happened during lockdown was the vilification of anyone who dared question the official narrative. Yet almost everything they predicted has come true. Have the likes of Professor Gupta been forgiven and welcomed back into the fold? Have a wild guess on that one.

What of those who deliberately whipped up the panic and led the dreadful behavioural psychology teams. They quite deliberately frothed the population into a state of terror. What of those, whose ridiculous models kicked the whole damned thing off? The Professor Neil Fergusons of this land? Yes, you.

These people are all still comfortably ensconced, advising away. Their positions fully secure. In the UK they were mostly given knighthoods, damehoods, and other shiny gongs to impress their friends with. This, I find hard to swallow.

More worrying is that there will never be an honest review on the pandemic. Why, because so many people in positions of power would be seriously threatened by it. Which means that any such review will end up as a completely bland whitewash.  ‘In general the actions taken were reasonable, and in a situation where so much was unknown, it was better to try and protect the public … blah, blah.’ Case closed.

The reality is that these lockdowns were a complete disaster. A complete disaster. The fact that we will never have a proper debate about them, means that we will learn nothing from what happened. This, in turn, means that another disaster is on the way. Those who should be listened to will be attacked, silenced and censored, again.

Those who got it all horribly wrong last time will be handed even greater powers … next time. The reason why lockdowns did not work, they will argue, is because they were not strict enough, or long enough. We need proper lockdowns next time. You have been warned. Cast your eyes over China.

I will leave you with the conclusion of the paper ‘Are lockdowns effective in managing pandemics?’

  • Neither previous pandemics nor COVID19 provide clear evidence that lockdowns help to prevent death in pandemic
  • Lockdowns are associated with a considerable human cost. Even if somewhat effective in preventing COVID19 death, they probably cause far more extensive (an order of magnitude or more) loss of life
  • A thorough risk-benefit analysis must be performed before imposing any lockdown in future.

Which can probably be summed in in the words: Primum non nocere. First, do no harm.

The central guiding principle of medicine that was hurled out of the window in March 2020 by people who seem not to exhibit a scrap of humility, or humanity. Nor apology.

1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9368251/

2: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-censorious-war-on-lockdown-sceptics/

3: https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/03/29/a-health-economic-perspective-on-covid-19/

413 thoughts on “Returning to COVID19

  1. andy

    If more people die every winter, then less people must die in summer (or sooner or later) to compensate?
    If the total buried + cremated has remained the same, year on year, for many years (I saw this for Cornwall) why is this?
    What are the mortality rates for flu in the last four years?

    If no-one can explain this to me, in the funeral industry, then I remain forever a sceptic.

    Reply
    1. sundancer55

      I said this in the beginning. There are always more flu-related incidents in winter than in summer, but I have no idea why, because many many people enjoy winter (me being one of them) and when I was younger and still had my husband with me, we spent the entire winter skiing or snowshoeing. We NEVER were sick, occasionally a cold but that’s it. Colds lasted for about 3 days and we were ready to roll again!

      No sir, no one will ever convince me this was anything more than the old-fashioned, ordinary flu, from the get-go. It was a ploy to keep old man biden in his basement bunker so the world didn’t know what they were getting. Well, now we know and we should have MADE those dimwit dems expose this man for who and what he was – a LIAR, CHEAT and THIEF. Not a good image for the USA.

      Reply
      1. akslagor

        The answer to why winter is in your comment, you were out and about, most people aren’t. A petty venality in the greater scheme of things is how long it took them to add ‘fresh air’ to Covid ‘hands, face, space’ dictum, costing Gods-only-know how many lives, on top of a fear campaign that had green miasma coming in through your keyhole. Fear & fug won the day.

        Reply
        1. Paul Fruitbat

          I treasure the memory of the policeman who curtly ordered a mother to take her young children back indoors from her own front garden, informing her that “The virus doesn’t stop at your fence, you know”.

          That little episode sums up almost everything that went wrong. Ignorance, arrogance, and the characteristically British “pocket Hitler” syndrome.

          Reply
          1. Geoff

            Likewise I know of a Filipina who got fined for being outside in her own courtyard (gasp!) hanging laundry. How dare she have the audacity to be out in the sunshine and gentle breezes?

      2. JB

        I don’t understand why no one gets this. Flu never disappeared, at least not in the U.S. For at least 2 years now, the CDC has been lumping flu and Covid together. Flu has been the top “comorbidity” on this page for at least 2 years running:
        https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm

        Readers of this blog might also be interested in my 2 articles here:

        https://vermontdailychronicle.com/brook-sars-cov2-deliberate-u-s-creation/

        https://vermontdailychronicle.com/study-justifies-any-flu-season-as-pandemic/

        (I hope there are no typos above. Your comment window doesn’t work on my iPad. I can’t really see what I’m typing.)

        Reply
        1. AhNotepad

          Comment windowdoesn’t work on my iPad either. ios 12.2.2. Works on my iPhone. If I have much to write I do it in a blank email then copy and paste.

          Reply
      3. alphaandomega21

        Re “There are always more flu-related incidents in winter than in summer”

        This is due to build up of toxins in the body due to metabolism and reduced vitamin D levels in the winter in the northern hemisphere above a certain latitude. I explain more in detail on my site, but the ‘flu, the influenza, is a poisoning of the body with chemicals and not a bug or virus as currently defined in germ theory.

        Reply
  2. Rosemary wellman

    Thank you for this full summing up of past misdemeanors by nearly all people who should have known better.I’m not quite sure what possessed me early in the pandemic, my choice was not to comply with any of the mad ideas, I think I got away with it but then I’m pretty old and don’t like being told how to live. Bless you.

    Reply
  3. AhNotepad

    Another piece to support sanity, thank you. One of the few pieces I read through completely before commenting. Vernon Coleman has been banging on along the same lines, much to the disgust of worthy experts as Madazolam Matt, (worthy of what I wouldn’t say in polite company. Now all those who ruined the lives of so many, are tryingto pretend they are human. Thanks for simply explaining the mortality so even Ardern and Hancock should understand. It’s a pity “NHS Trusts” haven’t worked it out yet and are still using the mask will protect everybody fantasy. A fantasy I suspect not believed by most of the medical staff

    Reply
    1. 186no

      I think the “NHS Trusts” have worked it out and that is one reason why they continue with the Mask Madness – if they did not do so, “they” would have to explain very embarrassingly, and quite possibly career enduringly for some, why “they” have suddenly changed tack…and that presents difficulties so great “they” will never address willingly….imho. “Self preservation is what’s really going on today” as someone sang.

      Reply
      1. Paul Fruitbat

        May I cite Jerry Pournelle’s Law of Bureaucracy?

        “In any bureaucracy, the people devoted to the benefit of the bureaucracy itself always get in control and those dedicated to the goals the bureaucracy is supposed to accomplish have less and less influence, and sometimes are eliminated entirely”.

        It’s entirely serious, and based on observation over several decades.

        Reply
  4. Millie Thornton

    Very interesting and balanced. As you say, lessons will not be learned so that none shall be named or shamed and there will certainly be no apologies.
    We did learn that the population can be persuaded to believe that which is not true and also that they can be persuaded to turn against each other.
    Hopefully, this type of situation will never happen again but we shall see.

    Reply
    1. Jean Irvin

      “We did learn that the population can be persuaded to believe that which is not true and also that they can be persuaded to turn against each other.
      Hopefully, this type of situation will never happen again but we shall see.”

      If we learned it then so did the establishment. I have spoken with friends on the lines of ‘What silly things we believed in the lockdowns! I’m sure we won;t let it happen again’ and had some very unsettling responses.

      Reply
    2. Can ASENA

      Have you read the work of Mattias Desmet ‘The Psychology of Totalitarianism’ ? Desmet has also been interviewed on YouTube by Ivor Cummins.
      I think Desmet has made some very good points regarding how the psychology of the public is easily manipulated.

      Reply
        1. Can ASENA

          I’m afraid I don’t know what the acronym UMC stands for but I am assuming it’s one of the thousands of medical councils.

          I think that Desmet explains extremely well how the population behaves. Much of the blame lies with the public and their need for ‘mothering’ by their government. The government is more than welcome to comply with the majority of people who fell for their appalling scam of course escalate to the government’s own financial and power advantage.

          “If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?
          Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago 1918–1956

          Reply
    3. Paul Fruitbat

      “Once your faith, sir, persuades you to believe what your intelligence declares to be absurd, beware lest you likewise sacrifice your reason in the conduct of your life. In days gone by, there were people who said to us: “You believe in incomprehensible, contradictory and impossible things because we have commanded you to; now then, commit unjust acts because we likewise order you to do so.” Nothing could be more convincing. Certainly any one who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices. If you do not use the intelligence with which God endowed your mind to resist believing impossibilities, you will not be able to use the sense of injustice which God planted in your heart to resist a command to do evil. Once a single faculty of your soul has been tyrannized, all the other faculties will submit to the same fate. This has been the cause of all the religious crimes that have flooded the earth”.
      – François-Marie Arouet (Voltaire). Translation from Norman Lewis Torrey: Les Philosophes. The Philosophers of the Enlightenment and Modern Democracy. Capricorn Books, 1961, pp. 277-8.

      Widely used paraphrase: “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities”.

      Reply
      1. Paul Fruitbat

        On reading through my previous comment, I noticed something unusual: a flagrant error published by Wikiquote.

        Namely, “the sense of injustice which God planted in your heart” should of course read “the sense of justice which God planted in your heart”.

        See, for example, https://voltairefoundation.wordpress.com/2021/02/16/voltaire-on-capitol-hill-anyone-who-can-make-you-believe-absurdities-can-make-you-commit-atrocities/

        It seems the quotation comes from a passage by Voltaire that was translated into English *** and then translated back into French *** – a process that is well known for producing nonsense.

        Reply
        1. Ben the Layabout

          Ah yes, the perils of machine translation. For example, the false cognate. “Inhabitable” (English) means precisely the opposite in Spanish, which would translate back to English as “uninhabitable,” an example of what you described.

          Reply
          1. AhNotepad

            Have you noticed on Waitrose savoury biscuits the statement “Baked to Imperfection”? 😂😂😂

  5. Andrew

    You confirm succinctly what we know and horrifyingly you confirm the problem is about power we have handed over to people who are showing no sign they are acting honourably. Follow the money .
    taken at face value you might say it looks like a war against humanity. You get more compassion from a smartphone 🧐
    Even worse we are not holding them to account for potentially the worst crimes I have ever witnessed against people. Even worse still, decent people have been pulled in and we have seen the worst behaviour and coercion and breaches of human rights at there hands, those in power and those above them pulling there strings.
    They can’t claim ignorance

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      Just need to remember Ardern was a brown noser to Tony B Liar, well known middle peace envoy, who just happened to be instrumental in murdering over a million Iraqis.

      Reply
      1. Harry de Boer

        She also was one of the many ‘Global Young Leaders’ from Klaus Schwab’s WEF. Just like more than 50% of Trudeau’s (him included) cabinet, which he (Schwab) gloatingly declared ‘penetrated’ by the WEF.

        Reply
  6. jeanirvin

    Thank you! I was also very sceptical of the lockdowns and was shouted down by neighbours. I welcomed and signed the Great Barrington Declaration and was very disappointed to realise that it was not considered. The saddest thing I saw was a family – two adults, two children – out on a country walk, all in masks who moved to the edge of the path and turned their backs when we (maskless) passed them.

    Reply
    1. David Lonsdale

      My saddest story from the Time of Great Madness was when a woman pushing a young child in a buggy stopped to chat on our allotment site. As we exchanged pleasantries the child started howling. “I’m so sorry” the woman explained “but when he sees any adult without a mask on he is terrified.”

      Reply
      1. Can ASENA

        I think there is no end to sad stories: my friend’s daughter, in her twenties, committed suicide. This haunts me, it is impossible to imagine the devastation to her family. Loss of hope is crippling for young people.
        My son volunteers for the Samaritans and continued to do so during the ‘pandemic’, he said he was constantly getting desperate calls from people who were losing hope.

        Reply
      2. Mark Gobell

        I took a photo of the chained gates to our children’s play park, adorned with a parish council sign warning that, to use the swings would constitute a criminal offence…

        Reply
        1. AhNotepad

          Mark, you should write to the council and ask them to explain the statute under which the offence would have been committed, and ask for an apology for generating fear of offending against NOTHING. The councillors are complicit and should be held to account. Also attend the meetings to ensure it is dealt with as a matter of public record.

          Reply
          1. Paul Fruitbat

            Apology hell. The person or people responsible should themselves be prosecuted and, if possible, imprisoned. The arbitrary misuse of power is something against which we must be forever on guard.

          2. AhNotepad

            Not much chance of a prosecution let alone a successful one nowadays. https://youtu.be/Jdr_Jn12j3Q I can confirm this as I know someone who does the training for recruits since Prince Nut Nut (BJ) ordered thousands of extra police officers.

    2. Paul Fruitbat

      The other day we went for a walk in Basingstoke, and came to a place where another path intersected ours. Walking down the hill along the other path came a woman wearing a full black mask. (It was fairly cold, with a stiff Northerly breeze, and no one else was in sight in any direction).

      As we are quite elderly we expected this youngish woman to wait for us to pass, but on the contrary she showed no signs of giving way and strode on. As I braked suddenly to avoid colliding with her, she burst into a violent diatribe (most of which I could not make out, muffled as her voice was by the mask). The gist of it was clear enough: we were rotten, selfish people who not only went out without masks, but had dared to come close to her and thus put her at risk!

      She stormed away, and we continued wordlessly, each trying to grok what we had just experienced. It’s a frightening thing to witness an apparently normal adult behaving like a lunatic.

      Reply
      1. AhNotepad

        Sorry to read your story Paul. She is the selfish one as she was only worried about your putting her at risk. Falsely of course as what ever she was using as a mutt muzzle wouldn’t stop anything in the way of a disease. If only you could refer her to the study carried out in 1981 by Neill Orr in Several’s hospital, Colchester. He was an orthopaedic surgeon and looked to see what would happen if operating theatre staff did not wear masks. One of many links if you use a simple search https://jdfor2020.com/2020/08/1981-surgeons-medical-mask-study-concludes-minimum-contamination-can-best-be-achieved-by-not-wearing-a-mask-at-all/https://jdfor2020.com/2020/08/1981-surgeons-medical-mask-study-concludes-minimum-contamination-can-best-be-achieved-by-not-wearing-a-mask-at-all/

        Reply
        1. Paul Fruitbat

          Thanks! However, I doubt if such people would even condescend to look at actual evidence. It seems to me that they revel in the chance to condemn and rail at others.

          Reply
          1. AhNotepad

            IfI get a muzzle tirade, I now just ask “Have you heard of Neil Orr? You can guess the answer. So then I can trot out my well rehearsed reference, and as you can see from the comments by Arthur Firstenberg, there are plenty of studies confirming the work. I don’t do it to be nasty, but to try and help people out of the anxiety they are obviously affected by. I admit that bit is selfish on my part, because I would rather be with someone calm than with someone who is anxious, and could turn dangerous.

    3. Ian L

      I was similarly ‘shunned’ by an old couple doing an about-face while I walking out in the woods. It was horrible and made me so angry.

      Reply
  7. Sharon

    What I noticed from your first Euromomo graph is that we have barely touched normal mortality levels since about May 2021. We’ve continually been above normal. Post pandemic we should be running at less excess deaths (due to those brought forward) not more. What is your view on the reasons for that Malcolm?

    Reply
    1. alexei

      Yes, many Substack blogs have been focusing on the significant number of “excess deaths” now showing up in heavily vaccinated countries. This refers to the number of deaths being recorded over and above the average rate in pre-Covid years, the implication being they’re a consequence of the vaccines.

      Reply
      1. Gary Haines

        I think it’s more than an implication – check out the thousands of top- level athletes around the world dropping dead of heart failure or suddenly ‘retiring’ from their sport at the peak of their careers.

        Reply
        1. Eggs ‘n beer

          And the Joker only dropped one set in the whole tournament to win the Aussie Open, despite no training on the non-match days. Surely not all the vaccinated players who were supposed to give him a run for their money can be so unfit because of the vaccine? Against an old crock like him? Surely not! (Sarcasm alert)

          Reply
    2. Martin Back

      Exactly. If there are more deaths this year there should be fewer deaths next year as we revert to the mean. But it seems that excess deaths have become the new normal.

      Incidentally, the wavy dotted lines do rise slightly from left to right, but they have obviously been smoothed out by giving more weight to older data and not so much to newer.

      Reply
  8. Jeremy May

    Yes, beautifully expressed.

    I read yesterday, ‘The Tyrant is never satisfied’.
    The tyrant in all this has been the establishment, ‘The Machine’.
    It is incredibly influential and powerful and, as you say, can’t afford to admit wrongdoing. There is just too much at stake for too many high-up people to admit guilt or apologise.
    The tyrant has no option but to keep going.

    Reply
  9. sueadlam

    Once again, you have articulated my thoughts perfectly. 👏 I do wonder what comes next… and whether the real reason this nonsense was propagated will ever be revealed. Logic has gone and I find myself wondering where Alice is in this looking glass world we now inhabit. 🤔

    Reply
  10. Jerome savage

    Thank you
    And now the medical & politicial power base has forever been tainted for those capable of critical thinking. For the critically thinking, there is despair at how easily the population was nudged in to a position of subordination.

    Reply
    1. Paul Fruitbat

      I wrote off our political, financial, and business “leaders” decades ago. But since 2020 the majority of my fellow citizens have also shown themselves incapable of reasoning or discrimination.

      Now I feel rather lonely. It is all the more delightful to join with Dr Kendrick and his readers and feel, for a short while, the calming atmosphere of sanity.

      Reply
    2. Ben the Layabout

      Yes! Here’s my bio (as brief as possible.) I trusted my doctors until mid-2022 when I was prescribed Paxlovid. “This is starting to affect me personally” I said, at that point. I declined Paxlovid. I was inspired to check routine preventive medications I was taking (aspirin, statin, hypertension.) The process of education included introducing me to Kendrick’s works. Long story short, I decided none of these are for me I have a prepared statement for my doctors, not very favorable, on the one hand crediting them for never pushing the Covid-19 jab, but also faulting them for never recommending against it, as well as my disgust at finding out I’d been placed on three regimens that were all but worthless. My trust in doctors not not entirely gone, but going forward I intend to minimize contact with them and when possible, do my own investigation of a proposed substance before it enters my body.

      Reply
  11. Krystyna

    „Well, there was a very sharp peak of deaths in early 2020. This, as you have probably worked out, was when Covid first hit”.
    Poland did not have a higher number of deaths in the first half of 2020! What’s more – it was lower than in the same period of 2018, which was exceptional in terms of the number of deaths! An increase in the number of deaths among Poles began to be recorded only in the autumn, when the completely disorganized health service stopped functioning, and the treatment of influenza in hospitals was served only… respirators!

    Reply
  12. holidaycornishcottages

    So so true, 3 weeks into lockdown I was anti lockdown and yup called a conspiracy theorist, and yes all I said would happen, has happened, but there are so still so many in Chimp Brain, sadly most of them run the country & will not learn by their mistakes.

    Reply
  13. Dr Damien Bush

    Well said. And what role do the safe and effective Quaccines play in the current excess mortality seen in all highly quaccinated countries…?

    Reply
    1. Ben the Layabout

      Now comrade, we must not repeat such falsehoods. We all know that the vaccines are thoroughly tested and are safe and effective. Big Brother has assured us of that. It’s true that more citizens are dying but it must be due to other causes.

      Reply
        1. Alan Thomson

          And as anyone with even just a little knowledge of statins knows, for there to be any measurable change of outcome, you wouldn’t see it after only two years.

          Reply
  14. Robert Dyson

    “This was a time of such blundering idiocy that I find increasingly difficult to believe it ever happened”. I end my diatribes with a similar sentence. I agree that we will not see an honest analysis for decades, there are too many big egos and profits to protect. A history will be written at some time when we are long gone. Like you I have medic friends who deeply believe covid19 was terrible and the ‘vaccines’ are the way out. I keep off the topic, they will wake up eventually.

    Reply
    1. Cathy

      Thank you for this round up and review in terms easy for the layman. It really is a ‘Pandora’s Box’ that was opened in March 2020, and it enriched many to the tune of millions (so many new millionaires created and not from the ‘peasant’ class) and, at the same time, degraded and debilitated people, society and the economy. We need to see these reviews and appraisals of the data pretty frequently lest others think their actions have been forgotten, memory-holed, thought of with a shrug of the shoulders.

      Reply
  15. Penny Meakin

    Absolutely brilliant! In a nutshell. Thank you Malcolm!
    To quote author and attorney, Michael P Senger, “Covid was never a global health emergency. It was a global coup.”

    Reply
    1. David

      Indeed. Read Dr. Peter Breggin’s 2021 book, its basic title is ‘Global Predators: We are the Prey’. It makes a good trio along with Robert Kennedy’s 2021 book ‘The Real Anthony Fauci’ and Dr. Peter Gotzsche’s 2013 book ‘Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime’.

      No-one including me will ever look at the medical industry in the same way again. None of the above authors have been sued for libel yet they make the most awful allegations about the pharmaceutical industry and its hangers-on. People who had a ‘sheltered upbringing’ may look at the human condition in a totally different way.

      But the only way to improve things is to get through to friends who don’t read the websites of Malcolm Kendrick, Vernon Coleman, etc. So I’ll try to get back to that …

      Reply
      1. charlie892847

        Thank you for those reading recommendations. I have just downloaded Peter Breggins’ book onto my Kindle. Not sure when I will have the strength to start it, as I’m still reeling from the revelations in “The real Anthony Fauci”. Like you, I will never see the medical profession in the same way again, and I say this as a retired doctor who believed everything I was taught at medical school, including all the bollocks about “evidence based medicine”, peer review etc. How naive we were! How sad to think we were totally fooled by Big Pharma.

        Reply
  16. Andrew H

    Thank you for a healthy dose of sanity again.
    Yes – I also enjoy saying “I told you so” and was utterly vilified by friends & family for questioning the covid narrative, and then covid jabs.
    I’ll admit that also NOT wearing a mask in shops and public transport also brought a level of satisfaction.
    As well as the above, there was also a clear correlation between those pushing the covid narrative and statins, which immediately raised alarm bells. ( see the recently knighted Chief Medical Officer’s comments blaming people not taking statins for the recent rise in mortality)
    Dr Zoe Harcombe was another who was immediately stating in March 2020 that “we don’t lock down for a bad flu year”, only to receive replies that if we didn’t, the UK would “literally have people dying in the streets” – which never happened, anywhere.

    Reply
  17. Carole

    Thank you Malcolm so true. Unfortunately, my blood pressure has just escalated again with the sheer ridiculousness of the last 3 years and continuing beliefs that a large part of the population still has
    .

    Reply
  18. John

    I could never understand why anyone with even half a brain could imagine that the lockdown and masking rules could ever work. Totally illogical. A chiffon scarf across your face will stop you dropping dead in the street. But you don’t need it when you sit down in a cafe. And, obviously, a disease can measure 6ft in countries that still use imperial but knows it must expand to 2m in metric countries, can’t go round or over a perspex screen and is never blown by the wind. It’s fine to go to work if you are a delivery driver or a supermarket assistant or a mechanic or an engineer (for example) but not if you are an office worker or a teacher or work in a bookshop. It was obvious that it would cause galloping inflation, closure of many small businesses, and a whole bunch of (mostly) public sector workers who now can’t be bothered to go to work

    Reply
    1. Mike C

      No no. You’ve got it all wrong. You must wear a mask if you go outside. Only take it off at home.; the bug can’t get through net curtains.

      Reply
  19. Wendy

    Bravo… depressingly accurate, I work in the NHS and find it hard watching the harms unfold from ALL the ridiculous measures implemented, I’m still, almost 3 years later, being told to wear a mask and test 2 x weekly!! obviously I completely ignore that advice, they’ve left me alone so far, other colleagues elsewhere in the UK are not so lucky and are losing their jobs because they refuse to comply.

    Reply
    1. Norman

      Can they take legal action for a forced medical intervention by their employer … a mask qualifies as that. English common law provides more protection of individual rights than other legal systems do.

      Reply
      1. Wendy

        It appears not, the nurse in question, there are others I don’t know personally, has been suspended on full pay and is awaiting her fate, she’s been waiting 15 weeks for a risk assessment for her employer to prove the wearing of a mask all day is necessary and won’t pose a risk to her health. Union involved, it’s ridiculous and it’s pot luck some areas enforcing the ‘rules’ others not. She’s gonna quit anyway, she’s had enough, 30 years of nursing experience gone just like that!

        Reply
    2. Tom Welsh

      Out walking this morning we met a couple of acquaintances and stopped for a brief chat. They told us that their adult son had nearly missed the family Christmas because “he got Covid”. But then, we learned, he “tested negative” with just four days to go, so he could come after all.

      I very much wanted to ask, “But was he ever ill at all?” But I held my tongue.

      Reply
  20. Roger Murphy

    Thanks again Malcolm ! On a side note ..one of your major topics..I see that NICE are advocating a new policy on Statins..going from 20% CVD risk to 10%..bringing in up to 15million more happy customers…Kerrching !!

    Reply
    1. 186no

      “bringing in up to 15million more happy customers…Kerrching !! – surely there are not enough GPs working the hours to prescribe at such a level………( apologies to Dr MK and other like minded colleagues..)

      Reply
      1. Wendy

        Don’t need GP’s to prescribe them they’ve got pharmacists who do it for them, and without ever seeing the patient I might add, I was asked to do it as a nurse prescriber I refused.

        Reply
  21. C. Anders

    Absolutely correct, cannot believe how it was so easy to dupe the public,with the most atrocious lies.
    Friends and relatives I previously thought to be intelligent simply succumbed immediately to all the lies and rules, even now they still believe it all , astonishing !

    Reply
  22. johnplatinumgoss

    You have pretty much nailed it. Except you did not mention where the narrative Jacinda Ardern is following came from. She, like Macron, Trudeau and others all went through Klaus Schwaub’s (WEF) New Global Leaders programme which is designed to enslave the rest of us. Until ousted she was pushing the agenda. To the globalists that is no big deal. They will find her something else and another puppet to take her place.

    As to the figures, I suspect there is worse to come. We only know the short term effects of the killer shots but the increase in deaths due to “vaccines” by the authorities’ own statistics are alarming.

    https://johnplatinumgoss.com/2023/01/27/why-people-must-wake-up-before-they-die/

    Reply
  23. nicholascoulson

    A brave, lucid and necessary post. Thank you for having the moral courage to keep pointing out the truth. Just don’t expect any thanks from the sheeple and their “leaders”. I’m waiting for someone to be brave enough to do the same for the economic disaster which was Johnson and Sunak’s response to the pandemic.

    Reply
  24. Rob

    There are so many stories to come out of this time. We need a truth and reconciliation process, and it cannot be left in the hands of the officials (obvious).

    Reply
  25. Donna Black

    Exactly. And let’s also not forget the disastrous toll in employment. My husband (like all working in the Care sector) was given a deadline of 15 November 2021 to get the jab or get fired. Literally jab or job. Many just resigned, like my husband, leaving the Care sector in dire straits. And then, at the eleventh hour, the government dropped this illegal enforcement. Or terrorism, as I call it. The whole thing was pure terrorism. What exactly is in that bloody jab that they’re so desperate for the whole world to take it?
    PS: My mother died in March 2022 of a sudden and terrible cancer. She had her 3rd booster shot and was dead nine weeks later.

    Reply
  26. Robert Malcolm Kay

    Very good article. Of course, Ireland also had a flatline, Sweden had a small bump, and Scotland went into freak-out mode but calmed down for the folowing summer completely. Seasonality was a factor, so was artificial ventilation and the ruthless and fearful evictions of our poorest old folk into insanitary and badly staffed nursing homes, but there were other variables at play, not least poverty, ethnicity and social class, and it would be great to try to list some of them more accurately.

    Reply
  27. 10thman2021

    Yes, lockdowns were mad. Never before have we quarantined the healthy. The fall out, in terms of harms to society, the economy, child development etc., were obvious from the start, so the upside had to be clear and compelling. But there were no upsides.

    Mad as this was, it is the vaccines that need more scrutiny. Once a pandemic is in full swing it is too late and not advisable to try vaccinating everyone (immune escape). And why vaccinate everyone anyway? What about those that have recovered from Covid19? Try to explain the theory of vaccination without referencing natural immunity. To ignore natural immunity was criminally mad. Vaccines have historically taken many years to develop and test before gaining marketing authority. Not covid19 vaccines. Does anyone believe medium and long term issues were understood in the 9 months the mRNA jabs took to develop? Remember how people just turned up at vaccine centres and were given whatever jab the centres had? No choice. No alternatives. You could even get first jab Moderna, second Pfizer or any combination and it didn’t matter. And no worries about what you had for your first two jabs when you got your booster. Or your second booster. Does anyone think these combinations were tested? How do you test it’s safe for pregnant women in just 9 months?

    You didn’t need to be a virologist, or even medically trained to see that the vaccine roll-out was, at best, a huge gamble. And that gamble, for those that take the vaccine, is with their life. At the time there were experts warning against the vaccines. Dr Mike Yeadon. Professor Sucharit Bhakdi. Soon others joined. Dr Ryan Cole. Dr Tess Laurie. Dr Peter McCullough. Dr Robert Malone. The list goes on. These doctors were silenced and vilified too. But more have joined recently as more is understood Dr Byram Bridle. Dr Aseem Malhotra. Again the list goes on. But still the authorities won’t investigate the jabs.

    Now we have almost every database showing the same numbers. More people appear to be being harmed or killed by the jabs than were ever injured or died where it was attributed to Covid19 itself (and we all have our reservations about the truthfulness of the “with Covid” statistics). And still the authorities won’t investigate the jabs.

    The pharmaceutical companies admit they haven’t carried out key toxicity and bio-distribution tests. They have produced data their own test data that shows there were serious harms attributable to the jabs but this was ignored (or hidden). Their contracts to supply to the world’s nations included indemnity for the Pharmaceutical companies should anything go wrong. Indemnities that India wouldn’t agree to. So India didn’t have the vaccines. What happened there? If Covid was so deadly, and the vaccines so indispensable in saving lives, they must all be dead by now, right?

    In recent years what a constitutes a pandemic has been redefined. The meaning of the term vaccine has been modified. Herd immunity has changed meaning too. Now almost any potentially global viral infection, even one that causes no harm, can be declared a pandemic. Vaccines no longer need to provide immunity. And Herd immunity can only be achieved through vaccination. Even though vaccination probably doesn’t provide immunity? How does that make sense?

    Now we have treaties in place where the WHO can dictate not just what is a pandemic but also what the response all countries must take needs to be. In short they can mandate what measures signatory countries must take. What medication they must give to their citizens. No exceptions. How is that even a good idea? No single entity should have that level of control over a person’s health.

    Asymptomatic transmission has never been clinically significant. But now we are supposed to believe it could cause unimaginable levels of harm and suffering and justifies all the crazy measures taken.

    How long have we got before a new pandemic is declared? A pandemic that we cannot see. Where Asymptomatic transmission is again claimed as the reason for draconian measures to be enforced. And next time they’ll mandate the vaccines. They may even have the tools in place to ensure no one can escape (digital IDs, CBDCs etc.,)

    What do you think? You have a platform where you reach thousands. People need to understand what has happened and what could happen in the future or we’ll all get caught.

    And I haven’t even talked about why the vaccines could be so dangerous.

    The spike protein is the toxic part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Why did 4 pharmaceutical companies all create vaccines based on this (within weeks of each other) and not some other part (less toxic) of the virus? LNP can cross the blood-brain barrier. So the mRNA can get into the brain. Which would lead to brain cells developing the spike and being identified as “foreign” by your own body’s defences leading to immune responses (killing cells, inflammation, clots etc.,) in the brain. All the body’s major organs can have cells “infected” with the mRNA. The jabs are supposed to be intra-muscular but could easily get into the blood stream. Injectors were not told to aspirate first. The spike protein itself cause clots. It’s why AstraZeneca is no longer given out. How much mRNA is in each dose? No way of knowing I’m afraid. How long the body keep on producing the spike protein once the mRNA enters the body? Again no way of knowing. But you can be sure the more jabs you have the longer this process will go on and the more harm will be done. Could the jabs cause a cytokine storm? Could they lead to ADE?

    By the way all of this is in the public domain. If I know this, if I have these reservations, why doesn’t Chris Whitty?

    I’d love to hear what you think of all this? Have I got it wrong? Can you tell me why I am wrong? I don’t think I am – I want to be wrong – but I don’t think I am.

    Thanks for reading, Stuart

    Reply
    1. Marion

      Stuart, for what it’s worth I don’t think you are wrong and I agree with everything your write here. However I believe that these ‘vaccines’ were being developed long before 2020 – covid was all about getting as many ‘vaccines’ into the bodies of as many people as possible: for money, for control, even as a way of culling what the evil ones think of as useless eaters. The evil people who began all this (many, many years ago) could have called the cold bug anything, their propaganda machine ensured that 99% of the Western world especially believed that a deadly plague was upon them. Television and all the MSM have a very great deal to answer for.

      (From all the reading I’ve done over the last three years I have doubts that ‘Covid’ or any virus even exists, and if they do may even be harmless; the book Virus Mania is very interesting on this topic).

      Reply
      1. lingulella

        Your belief is well-founded. Look up Dr David Martin, his knowledge of the US Patent system has allowed him to piece together the story from before the first SARS-Cov was released on the human ‘lab rats’ in Asia.

        Reply
      2. 186no

        Correct; Moderna patented part of their eventual so called vaccine in 2013 if memory serves and a certain Mr Rothschild applied for a patent concerning a Covid 19 test in 2015 – according to recent disclosures – very smelly, very concerning…

        Reply
    2. Can ASENA

      Hello Stuart,
      Here’s my answer to most of your questions – Money, Money, Money.
      This astonishing ‘pandemic’ has seen the biggest wealth transfer to the already extraordinarily wealthy, all of whom can be found on the RSVP list of the WEF.

      Reply
    3. Tom

      If you happen to read or listen to articles by Sasha Latypova and Katherine Watt (both can be found on substack), you will get a whole new perspective about the pandemic and the aftermath.

      Reply
    4. Paul Fruitbat

      “If I know this, if I have these reservations, why doesn’t Chris Whitty?”

      May I suggest that you compare your sources of income with his.

      Reply
  28. Hazel Rank-Broadley

    Thank you Dr K. Your work is invaluable. I print it out so I can draw on it to put facts on this topic to friends. Not that I have many left after assuming an ultra – sceptical stance. Sincerely, Hazel

    Hazel Rank-Broadley HPD CNHC NCH Reg Solution Focused Hypnotherapist http://www.gettingclear.co.uk

    >

    Reply
  29. Eggs ‘n beer

    I remember you posting similar graphs on the overall mortality for England, Wales, Scotland and NI. Only England had spikes.

    A chief fearmonger in Oz was saying deaths and hospitalisations from Covid are 50x to 100x that of the flu. He’s lying. And it’s not worth my time to illustrate it anymore. I still don’t know anyone who’s died of Covid. Mind you, that might be because of an irritating habit of mine of pinning anyone I know showing the slightest signs to the floor whilst administering zinc and ivermectin to them …. but still, no one’s died yet. Not even of suffocation.

    Reply
  30. lorrainecleaver7

    I see the whitewashing has begun in earnest now too. Even Dr Malhotra is making excuses for Esther Rantzen’s despicable comments about the unvaccinated. I rarely forgive and I never, ever forget.

    Reply
  31. Tish

    I’m afraid to say that I am left with a contempt for humanity. A (shameful?) bitterness. I know I’m supposed to feel more compassion but I remain outraged at the behaviour of most of the world. I no longer want to go abroad as people seem stupid everywhere. I will never again believe anything in mainstream media. I don’t trust charities either. I’m disappointed by younger people too. I wonder how I could have admired people I no longer admire. How is a person to choose sensible friends? — It’s obviously not as easy as I thought. My eyes have been opened wide, wide, wide.

    People will soon be preaching forgiveness but it’s going to be bloody hard.

    Excellent blog. Thank you.

    Reply
    1. Marion

      I feel exactly the same, Tish. The stupidity of so many, many people is hard to comprehend – the idiotic masks to me were (and still are as some still wear them even outside) a signal of utter stupidity and sheep-like conformity. I cannot bear to see anyone wearing one of the filthy things. My husband and son wore them and I still feel horribly let down by their gutlessness – for this is what it was for some, afraid of a nonentity giving them a nasty look or telling them off. I no longer talk to my foolish, (Labour voting, nhs worker) neighbour as she actually told me that she thought the government should be doing more to fight the ‘virus’. I loathe her so much now it’s hard for me to even say good morning if I see her in the street.

      Reply
    2. Mark Gobell

      Welcome to the machine Tish, you have escaped Plato’s cave … Well done!

      Enjoy the ride and hopefully, given time, you can hone your skepticism and refine your nascent misanthropy so that you can be proud of your new outlook and not be troubled by it.

      Remember that whatever the subject. we were all true believers once … Bon voyage.

      Reply
  32. John McEvoy

    Not to mention the knock on affect on businesses and personal finances ……

    From today’s FT
    “Insolvency dam’ bursts as 22,000 UK companies go bust in 2022
    Daniel Thomas ion London

    The number of companies going bust in the UK has reached the highest level since the financial crisis in 2009 as inflation costs, rising interest rates and falling consumer confidence batter British businesses.

    Statistics revealed that the total number of company insolvencies registered in 2022 was 22,109, the highest number since 2009 and 57 per cent higher than 2021.

    Christina Fitzgerald, president of R3, the insolvency and restructuring trade body, said that “2022 was the year the insolvency dam burst”. The liquidation rate in 2022 was the highest since 2015, but lower than the recessionary peak in 2009. Personal insolvencies hit a three-year high at 118,851 in 2022.

    Fitzgerald added: “After two years of being suppressed by government support programmes, corporate insolvency numbers hit a 13-year high last year.

    “After nearly three years of trading through a pandemic, and in the face of the end of government support, rising costs and a cost of living crisis, many directors simply ran out of road this year and chose to close their businesses before the choice was taken away from them.”

    Reply
  33. Ann Hazell

    Any other issues of note?

    Was a celebrity speaking about comments by a cardiac surgeon friend covered up recently?

    My husband had an aortic dissection last year and we’re convinced it was due to the vaccine. There was a poster on the wall in resus about if certain symptoms present, to consider this condition as there were a huge spike in cases.

    My husband sat in A&E on a hard wooden chair for 12hrs after a normal ecg, like a ticking time bomb, before he eventually got a scan and diagnosis. I went home planning his funeral that night because the ambulance crew that turned up to transfer him to a regional specialist heart centre refused to take him because they weren’t trained in using the equipment keeping him alive. It wasn’t worth his pension to take him – said the paramedic.

    What about all these people, who are living with catastrophic consequences of the pandemic? My husband was a fit 59 year old who now cannot work. His aorta is synthetic from the root down to his abdomen. He’s mentally different from the length of time he spent on bypass. The procedure took much longer than usual because the aorta had torn all the way down and was much worse than the scan Indicated.

    Too much information is being swept under the carpet and buried, out of sight of the media.

    Reply
  34. Alison Morton

    Well said as usual. As a health professional of over 50 years (theatre nurse, health visitor, medical herbalist) I have shared your views from the outset. Your blogs provided me with reassurance during the lockdowns; with a panicked family exhorting me to stay in and not go out at all I needed someone to confirm that I wasn’t living in la-la land with my insistence that we all needed to keep our immune systems healthy and primed and that meant having contact with other people. Most of my herbal colleagues felt the same way as I did but it was heartening to read accounts from someone on the orthodox medical side. I share your dismay and anger, would like to stuff the ‘gongs’ in a muckheap. Keep it up, you’re not alone. Thank you.

    Reply
    1. Paul Fruitbat

      One small upside is that those capable of rationality have had a chance to reveal themselves – even if only to themselves.

      I am reminded of the Bene Gesserit pain test in “Dune”.

      Reply
  35. Peter McCutcheon

    Brilliant stuff! Thank you!
    I remember adding my thumbprint to the Great Barrington Declaration, then the GBD disappeared. Coincidence, I hope.

    Reply
  36. MarciaT

    Starting with Jacinda Ardern, she who was the class of 2022 commencement speaker at Harvard, for pity’s sake – and continuing with all the rest of the authoritarian gang – it truly makes me sick that they’re still running things and not running for cover. Thanks, once again, for this brilliant column, and for reminding us of why we’ve stuck to our guns and avoided the jabs (that I refuse to call vaccines). My daughter is a nurse who refused the nonsense. At first she was threatened with losing her job, but she prevailed, was allowed a religious exemption, and proceeded to watch almost all her colleagues get Covid – after getting all the shots they could get. Somehow they never made the connection. She still works in a hospital but was removed from the ER to an office job (after treating patients sick with covid for a year before the jabs were available), has to wear a mask at all times because her office mate is afraid of getting covid from the “unvaccinated” co-worker (my daughter – the only other person in that office), even though said office mate has had every possible shot – and has had covid. The office mate, btw, doesn’t have to wear a mask at work – while in the same office as my daughter. Honestly? You can’t make this stupidity up. I also love the fact that the nursing staff calls Remdesivir, “run, death is near.” So they all know – but everyone is terrified to speak out.
    The primary reason I thought the shots were to be avoided at all costs was the New York City Krispy Kreme outfit who promised anyone with a vaccine card the joys of a free donut – every day for the rest of the year – while at the same time no one from the FDA, the CDC, or big Pharma was talking about how to stay healthy. Eyewateringly cruel, imho. . . .

    Reply
    1. Marion

      I’m sorry – nurses and, who knows, doctors, nickname that horrible drug ‘run death is near’ as though it’s just a nasty, dark joke, even as they administer it? They should be prosecuted – I hope their consciences bother them terribly. Too terrified to speak out? Why? Are they going to be murdered, too? Or will they just lose their jobs….But they can’t sack them all, can they? Cowards, the lot of them. I have known many nurses and a few doctors in my life, not one of them was any good. Your daughter sounds like a fine exception. Her co-worker sounds like an utter fool.

      Reply
      1. MarciaT

        Marion – I keep saying if they all just stood up and said no, you are so right – they couldn’t fire the lot of them. That said, I’m still stunned at how many intelligent people – scientists too including those who should be terrified of a repeat of what ultimately caused the Nuremberg trials – who’ve bought the whole thing hook, line, and sinker. And are still buying . . . . sigh. My daughter is a fine exception, but she was a complete wreck for two plus years.

        Reply
    2. Paul Fruitbat

      It’s very hard for those of us who are normal, rational and (somewhat) moral to understand, but in this world people get, not what they deserve, but what they go after single-mindedly.

      Thus, those who want wealth above all else tend to get wealth. Those who want power above all else get power.

      And most of us, who just want to live a decent life with friends and family while doing something useful and productive, get stood on.

      Of course, when things occasionally go too far, it also happens that those who desire blood get blood.

      Reply
  37. Marjorie Daw

    Covid must be a psyop. What else could explain putting the world in hyper hysteria panic mode for the last three years?

    Reply
  38. ShirleyKate

    Hi Dr Kendrick. Such an interesting article, loads to digest. You’re talking here about lockdowns etc. ‘It could never have remotely justified the drastic actions that were taken to combat it’. True. And, if the powers-that-be had been clairvoyant in 2020, they would have spotted that. But they, and we, were not clairvoyant, just poop-scared.
    I’d like Professor Norman Fenton to run his eyes over the statistics. (Maybe he has?) He would sort them out for us.

    Reply
  39. Tom

    Excess mortality? What needs to be done, if it can be, is that the entire world’s population needs to be compared over the last 10 years, at least, to see if the upward trend has been dented. Just citing individual countries or areas really doesn’t give us the “entire” picture.

    However, the Luxembourg/Germany/EU comparison needs some further explanation. Not sure I will trust the “experts” to provide it.

    As far as lockdowns, distancing, masking and the other nonsense goes, my idea is that viruses are not transmitted through the environment…therefore none of these simpleton ideas will ever matter.

    There may be some other transmission mechanism (assuming you believe viruses even exist) that is in force, but with the scientific method all but thrown to the curb, no studies will ever be done to discover the truth apart from what the modern stone-age medical mafia provides.

    Reply
  40. Steve

    Well done Dr K. You’ve been a beacon of sanity in all the madness, your blog has given me confidence that I am not alone.

    As an interesting aside (?), the first graph bares a remarkable resemblance to my gas and electric usage figures over the last five years !

    Reply
  41. lingulella

    Easy to forget, what with shitstorm created by the NPIs and the experimental gene therapies, but Dr Malcolm was one of those who asked his health board very early on that Hydroxychloroquine be made available for all his care home patients, but was firmly rebuffed. This refusal to treat Covid flu with existing protocols, as we had always treated flu that brings susceptibility to pneumonias, was yet another departure from normal medical practice that passed unremarked by journalists around the globe. And it was not an unfortunate accidental mis-step, as in other western nations Hydroxychloroquine was removed as an otc medicine with a 50 year plus safety record many months before the WHO even mentioned Covid-19.

    Reply
  42. lingulella

    Struggling to comment here…. But
    Just wanted to point out that very early on when the move to clear out hospitals into care homes was afoot that I recall Dr Malcolm noting that his health board refused his request for a supply of Hydroxychloroquine.
    The fact that other European countries were also withdrawing HCQ from pharmacies in 2019, was an early marker that there was no intention to prevent a large scale culling, starting with unjustified changes in the normal treatment of URT ILIs.

    Reply
    1. 186no

      If the withdrawal of HCQ was started in 2019, what was the reason stated in each of the EU/non EU countries – surely there was no coordinated plan of action before SARS COV2/CV was announced to the world?

      Reply
      1. Eggs ‘n beer

        In Australia the bollocks given was that HCQ was banned for Covid treatment to ensure adequate supplies were available for the traditional uses, lupus, arthritis etc. My sister thus finally found an upside to crippling rheumatoid arthritis – the treatment ensured she didn’t get Covid, at least, not until they changed it last October, then BAM!, Covid.

        They didn’t even give an excuse later when they banned ivermectin. I guess they couldn’t claim prioritising sheep over people, as by that time there weren’t any distinguishing features between them.

        Reply
        1. Sasha

          I saw multi-year remissions of RA in an Ayurvedic clinic in India. If your sister is interested, I can give you the name of the hospital.

          Reply
          1. Eggs ‘n beer

            Thanks Sasha, I’ll ask her. I know she’s tried various alternative treatments over the years, but not whether Ayurvedic is one of them.

  43. Paul Murphy

    Here’s something I wrote in Nov of 2020:

    The first law of government is: “if it doesn’t work, do more of it.”

    Shutdowns are counter-productive – so I expect we’ll see a resurgence of this nonsense.

    Masks spread the disease – so I expect to see increased demands for more and better masking.

    National Quarantines don’t work: so places like Taiwan that show great success in containing the disease but know that opening up will destroy that success are going to keep the barriers in place – it’s much like airport security: a show for fools and a massive victory for the bad guys, but not something government will give up without a major fight.

    So what does work? doing nothing. Pull a Sweden: bite the bullet, take some early loses and let human physiology do its work. (winface.com/node/16 – q.v. “A brief history of Covid” on the same site.

    So I agree with you – but.. there’s a problem. Specifically we’re seeing a backlash (of which your essay here is an element) against lockdowns in general when, in reality, lockdowns can be the best available tool if the situation warrants it – and the current backlash may end up killing people by taking away this tool.

    Lockdowns work when the disease has a short incubation period, distinctive symptoms, is highly infectious, and cannot easily be defeated in specific patients. So lockdowns work against ebola, but not covid – and could work against whatever the next one turns out to be if it meets the criteria and the public accepts the necessity – and the latter criterion means we should not be saying lockdowns are wrong; saying, instead, that the people who imposed covid lockdowns ignored the science to force something both inappropriate and very stupid.

    Reply
    1. MarciaT

      Paul – And here’s one of the biggest problems with the whole mess – is that really true about Ebola being contained by lockdowns or is that just another Pharma ploy to get more people to be vaccinated? The erosion of trust in anyone and everything is probably the worst fallout from this who sorry situation.

      Reply
      1. Geoff

        “The erosion of trust in anyone and everything is probably the worst fallout from this …sorry situation.”

        Actually, that’s a good thing; they never deserved any trust in the first place.

        Reply
        1. Eggs ‘n beer

          Absolutely. I would rewrite Marcia’s comment to “the exposure of untrustworthiness in anyone and everything is the best result from this situation “.

          Think. (Just that, think). Don’t blindly accept.

          Reply
          1. Geoff

            Exactly.

            And the last few years have given me a huge booster dose of “Question everything, especially‘authority'”.

          1. AhNotepad

            I thought of the same question. As with medical data, and the recommendation to read “Doctoring Data” before you draw a conclusion, reading “Virus Mania” before assessing effectiveness of interventions, might be a good investment.

  44. Antony Sanderson

    This measured, informative analysis of the lockdown phenomenon is as close and reassuring as to listening to the bedside manner of your family doctor. . . . Of course, you are a Doctor. Thanks

    Reply
    1. ShirleyKate

      In my corner of the UK it’s been years since most of us have seen a ‘family doctor’ anywhere near a bedside. A voice on the phone after a 40-minute wait in a virtual queue is the best we can hope for. If you’re sick enough to be in bed, that’s where you have to stay until, hopefully, Doctor Nature gets you fit enough to pick up the phone and start begging for help!

      Reply
      1. Antony Sanderson

        Shirley, I am 72 . . . I was going back to the 60 and 70s when our doctor did do home visit rounds. It is sad that many later generations do not have this experience of the family doctor as a family friend.
        With things the way they are with the Health Service I am trying to give Mother Nature a fighting chance . . . by keeping the weight down (keto-diet) – keeping inflammation down (no seed oils) – help with immune/repair system (VitD, VitC ) and if I feel a cold virus coming on, thanks to my grandson’s nursery, there is lactoferrin, quercetin/zinc and ivermectin (really for flu).

        Reply
    1. Paul Fruitbat

      I think it’s that “the Covid viruses terrified the weaker flu viruses and drove them away”. Or something of the kind. No science required, of course – it’s “intuitively obvious”. Just like the way excess fat obviously clogs arteries.

      Reply
    2. Jerome savage

      – disappearance of FLU – this I believe was posted in these pages 2 years ago – made sense at the time.
      “Robert Edgar Hope-Simpson in his seminal 1981 work on Flu talks about the latency effect each year in which he hypothesises that the virus effectively wakes up in asymptomatic carriers and that these carriers shed virus particles. He then suggests that a dominant strand with most chance of survival infects other people.
      I know that coronavirus is not flu too but this mechanism is one potential explanation for why flu has gone away. It has been superseded by this year’s dominant Covid strand that has “woken up” seasonally (eg triggered by weather, vitamin D deficiency or whatever, causes not fully known) and outperformed the other seasonal strains in the fight for its own survival.
      Clearly, these arguments based on Hope-Simpson are all hypotheses but they explain much of the annually observed data such as simultaneous outbreaks of the same strain of different viruses in the past in different countries on the same latitude such as Cirencester and Prague, where direct transmission seems implausible. They also explain the failure of various attempts in 1918 directly to infect people with flu by transmission from sick people and the effects that various other studies found over the years where intra household infection from one ill person to others was far more limited than might be expected.
      The absence of flu does therefore not “prove” the benefits of lock downs, I am afraid. Much of what counted for true science pre March 2020 seems to have been thrown away in the panic that society has got itself into. Science is also choosing to state too much with certainty that ought not to be. When one reads Hope-Simpson it is very refreshing. He looks at data, creates hypotheses and is clear about what he thinks he can demonstrate with evidence and what he thinks is uncertain. Our current politicised scientific community are really behaving like witch doctors”

      Reply
        1. Jerome savage

          True –
          Tho I often have to take a deep breath at the scale of the deceit, across pharma (of course), government and the complicit useless media. Its biblical.

          Reply
  45. Frank P.

    A thought provoking article for sure, Dr. Kendrick.

    In a book titled “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 & 2022” by Edward Dowd, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Gavin de Becker, the authors simply present the excess mortality data on healthy young people provided by insurance company information. A portion of the overview of the book provides these statements: “The CEO of the OneAmerica insurance company publicly disclosed that during the third and fourth quarters of 2021, death in people of working age (18–64) was 40 percent higher than it was before the pandemic. Significantly, the majority of the deaths were not attributed to COVID.” The authors provide neither opinions nor speculations, just the data.

    What is this madness that has been going on for the last three years? I would recommend the insights of an eighty five year old Holocaust survivor, Vera Sharav, founder of the Association for Human Research Protection, and director of the five part movie series, “Never Again Is Now Global”. Part I was first shown Monday, January 30, 2023, with the remaining four parts being shown each day this week at this site: https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/chd-tv/events/never-again-is-now-global/. If we don’t learn from past mistakes, we are destined to repeat them.

    Reply
    1. Martin Back

      The same pattern has been observed in South Africa. In a press release dated 1 December 2022, The Ongoing Impact of COVID-19 on health and mortality, Discovery Employee Benefits says:

      “Analysis of our annual claims data reveals a visible and concerning increase in the incidence of deaths associated with cardiovascular disease among our client base – that is, illnesses which affect the heart and blood vessels – as well as an increase in the incidence of deaths from cancer,” says Guy Chennells, head of Product at Discovery Employee Benefits. “Claims for cardiometabolic conditions have more than tripled since 2020, with a 200% increase in claims recorded over the past year.”

      He adds that there has also been a dramatic uptick in death claims resulting from cancer, compared to pre-COVID levels, with cancer deaths increasing from just two deaths per month recorded by Group Risk in 2018, to six deaths per month in 2022.

      According to Chennells, there are three key drivers – all consequential from COVID – which are the causes for the increases being recorded in the claims data. These are ‘long COVID’; a marked decline in individuals conducting annual health checks and screenings (termed a ‘screening deficit’); and a reduction in individuals exercising regularly.

      Note this is data from half a million working age people, not the elderly who we know were badly affected by Covid.

      Their conclusion: It’s all our fault. We got sick, we didn’t go for screening, and we didn’t exercise.

      And in all 1551 words of the press release, you will not find one mention of arguably the greatest threat to public health of the last two years, the word VACCINE.

      Reply
      1. Sasha

        Cancer screening is a very controversial issue, I think. There are researchers who question how useful it really is. I know of these books:

        “Risk Savvy” – has a chapter on screening
        “Should I get checked for cancer? Probably not.”
        Prof Goetzche book on mammograms

        A few years ago US Preventative Services Task Force recommended against PSA screenings. US urologists.went nuts and actually tried to push through Congress a law that would prohibit anyone but urologists to set policy on these matters.

        Reply
  46. Lorrie Pearson

    I have been following you since you first began talking of cholesterol. I agreed with you then and again on lockdowns. However, if I tried to voice that I did not agree with lockdowns was met by stearn comments and vilified for being selfish? Unfortunately, I feel too many people accepted without question the governments line. Which I believe was led by the media and their hysterical reporting.
    I really feel that the media, along with the so called experts, has a lot to answer for in the resulting lockdowns.
    Thank you for standing your ground and your common sense approach. I for one am grateful that there is somebody who is willing to make a stand.

    Reply
  47. David S

    Clearly the eagerness of politicians to impose draconian lockdowns, social-distancing and enforced masking, without any risk-benefit analysis or studies, suggests that there were hidden political agendas, such as manufacturing consent for covid passports (leading to a worldwide biosecurity database), cashless CBDC-based monetary systems, Chinese-style social credit score system, as well as creating food shortages to “justify” changes to our food system, such as forcing people to accept GMOs without labelling and restricting high quality sources of protein, i.e meat and eggs. All of which “conveniently” aligns with the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset”. How weird is that?

    I would love to see some kind of Great Reset, but I am thinking more along the lines of France in 1789.

    Reply
  48. maggie melvin

    Thanks as always, Malcolm, for your cogency and, of course, courage. These last few years have shattered me as I pissed in the wind trying to alert my adult children. I have zero trust in institutions and will do my damndest to avoid any and all health services (compromised drug pushers), no offence!

    Reply
    1. Gary

      As I understand it, most medical schools have significant funding from drug companies, so it’s not surprising. I too despaired at my adult children getting sucked in by the nonsense – you thought you’d brought them up to be critical thinkers until that point. Until many more people wake up to the fact that the mainstream media lies to them constantly, there’s not much hope I’m afraid.

      Reply
  49. Elaine Wilson

    Dr Kendrick, thank you again for your excellent blog .
    It has not been easy understanding how people could not see what was happening from the beginning.
    As a retired nurse , the constant fear mongering ,senseless contradictions , and lockdowns were totally the opposite to anything I had been taught.
    Then there was the masks ( the rock we perished on in the summer 2020 )
    I stopped following MSM in April 2020 .
    I followed and still do yourself, HART group ,Dr Claire Craig , Ivor Cummins, John Bowe to name but a few .
    When you speak to people who have followed the narrative , and did what
    ‘ the tele told them to do’ you realise how little they know about what has happened and still is .
    I find this so frightening .
    I never thought I would live in a world where evil appears to prevail, but we have to live in hope!
    Thank you again for all your work.

    Reply
  50. MarianneK

    “Gates Foundation’s holdings in BioNTech went from 1,038,674 shares to 148,674 shares over the course of the third quarter of 2021, downsizing the Gates position in the mRNA vaccine manufacturer by 86 percent of shares held.
    In September of 2019, just months before Covid hysteria made its way through the world, The Gates Foundation secured its shares in the Pfizer vaccine partner through a pre-IPO equity deal with an agreed upon purchase price of $18.10 per share. With an average sale price of around $300 per share in Q3 of 2021, this means that the Gates Foundation banked roughly $260 million in cash from the sale, with $242 million being untaxed profit, given that the money was invested through the foundation. And that doesn’t account for the additional 2 million shares that the Gates Foundation sold prior to that from its original pre-IPO equity investment. In the Q3 2021 sale, the Gates Foundation secured a return of over 15 times more than its initial investment.”

    This was never about lockdowns nor The Virus. It was about the vaccines.

    Reply
    1. Martin Back

      It could be argued that investing in vaccines in September 2019 was a lucky guess because the Wuhan flu was only known about in December of that year, so we can’t begrudge his foundation their profits.

      But in all the many interviews after Covid had struck, where Gates was saying vaccinate, vaccinate, vaccinate, I cannot recall any interviewer saying, Mr Gates, your foundation stands to profit enormously from mass vaccination. How can we be sure that you are motivated by concern for the public’s health and not concern for your foundation’s finances?

      Reply
      1. Sasha

        But Gates foundation has been repeating the vaccination mantra for years. Wouldn’t it be reasonable for them to invest in vaccine manufacturers in hope that sooner or later the vaccination drive of everyone against everything would pay off? I think it could have been more than a lucky guess for them.

        Reply
        1. Geoff

          Correct. There was no lucky guessing involved. The whole thing smacks of being planned and played. I call it insider trading and a pump and dump scam. Billy Boy profitted by buying it, puming it up, then dumping it as he badmouthed it while no doubt shorting it on the way down. Classic insider plays.

          It’s folly to give the criminal cabal the benefit of the doubt; they are best considered guilty until proven innocent.

          Reply
          1. Sasha

            I just listened to a podcast on America Out Loud. It’s an interview of Mike Yeadon and Hadley Rees. Both are pharma insiders, one is R&D, the other – manufacturing.

            Mr Rees discussed Biontech, specifically. Listening to him, it becomes obvious that the whole thing was a classical financial insider play.

  51. Cookie

    The whole pseudo pandemic went as predicted, all the “built up snow” that modern pharmaceuticals keep alive are shook down by a bad flu (its what covid is remember, a rose is a rose by any other name), once cleared the deaths rate return to normal this time society didn’t, it was taken for a ride.

    The mass corporate media should be broken up…they were the biggest criminals.

    Pandemics kill indiscriminately through all age groups, at least the mask manufacturers are still reaping the rewards.

    Reply
  52. Joris Verbiest

    Dear Dr. Kendrick,
    As always, I’ve enjoyed reading your post. However, you make a mathematical mistake in your interpretation of the Z-score. Unlike your claim, the Z-score *does* have sensitivity to the population size. The reason we use a Z-score in statistics, is because it allows ready interpretation of the likelihood of an event — but that also does depend on the population size.

    Specifically, Z is defined as the value divided by its uncertainty: Z = X/sigma. For large populations, however, the value X increases linearly, while the uncertainty only grows as the square root, i.e. Z also grows with the square root of the population size. For example, assume Germany has 10 regions. Let’s assume these 10 regions all had the same mortality and uncertainty: X and sigma_x. Then the numbers for the whole of Germany would be given by combining these 10 regions: Y = X1+X2+X3…+X10 = 10*X, here X is the mortality in any of the 10 regions of Germany, and Y is the total mortality in Germany. Following Gaussian error propagation, the uncertainty of Y can now be calculated as follows: sigma_y^2 = sigma_x1^2+sigma_x2^2+…+sigma_x10^2. Assuming all these small countries had the same uncertainty, this adds up to: sigma_y^2 = 10*sigma_x^2, i.e.: sigma_y = sqrt(10)* sigma_x.

    Now we can calculate the Z-score: for any of the ten regions, we have a Z-score of Z(x) = X/sigma_x. Meanwhile, for the sum of the 10 regions, we have: Z(y) = Y/sigma_y. Given that Y = 10*X and sigma_y = sqrt(10)*sigma_x, it follows that Z(y) = 10*X/[sqrt(10)*sigma_x] = sqrt(10) * sigma_x.

    In other words, since Germany has 800/6 = 133 times as many inhabitants as Luxembourg, one would naturally expect the Z-score of any event to be sqrt(133) = 11.5 times as significant. Given that the highest peak in Z in your graph of Germany is about 20, that would correspond to a peak of about 20/11.5 = 1.7 in the graph of Luxembourg. There are plenty of such points in the graph of Luxembourg.

    Consequently, the Euromomo graph does *not* show that Luxemburg somehow did not see the events Germany saw. All it shows us, is that the small population of Luxembourg does not provide us enough statistical sensitivity to be able to detect this event.

    This is the exact same reason why scientists tend to average their data: because more data provides more sensitivity. And in this context, more “data” means more people. Imaging taking a picture of a star: if you increase your exposure by a factor of 10, you’re going to get a lot more sensitivity. The picture with the long exposure may detect something which the picture with the short exposure would not. Similarly, if you combine 10 short-exposure images, you may start seeing things, which none of the individual images show. It’s the same with mortality: combine the data from 133 small countries like Luxembourg and you may see a signal which none of the individual small countries’ data would show. That doesn’t mean the signal is not there: it just means your noise is higher.

    I hope this helps. Of course I agree with all your other conclusions, but let’s try to make sure we make valid scientific (and statistical!) claims, not like those who brought disaster upon us.

    Respectfully.

    Reply
    1. Tom Morgan

      Joris,
      I do believe the Z-score does account for population growth, and is independent of it. My understanding is this for a given population:
      Z-score = ( P – mean(P) )/ Std.Dev.(P)
      where P is the ‘population’ you are studying, ‘mean(P)’ is the mean value of that population, and Std.Dev.(P) is the standard deviation of the population over some time interval (same for the mean). For most bell-shaped distributions, the Z-score is approximately a Gaussian or standard normal distribution, with 0 mean and unit standard deviation.
      The ‘population’ growth (i.e. the number of deaths) since 2017 does not change things too much.
      The Z-score converts the ‘population’ statistic to (approximately) a standard Normal statistic, and those are ‘easy’ to work with.

      The ‘mean(P)’ and the StdDev(P) would both be calculated over the years before Covid – giving estimates of the ‘real’ mean and StdDev.
      One might do look at morbidity per million population, so that population size is explicitly removed.

      BTW I have taken the CDC Mortality and Morbidity Weekly reports (which go back to 2014) and looked at Z-scores for various categories of mortality – the category for mortality caused by heart problems has Z-score values of over 100 which only begins to be seen in the middle of 2022 – the rest of the Z-scores back to 2014 are flat. Something bad happened in mid-2022 and is continuing today.

      Reply
      1. Sasha

        If jabs are at least partially responsible for increased mortality, as some researchers claim, why mid-2022? Shouldn’t it have started happening earlier?

        Reply
        1. Tom Morgan

          Sasha,
          (I may have screwed up answering you earlier, so apologies)
          The short answer is I have no idea. All I know is when I grab the numbers from the CDC for the USA and do the calculations (on a per million population basis) for the Z-score, it crosses the value 10 on the way up in July 2022. It peaks at a value of 109 in Mid-December 2022.
          I should mention that the raw values from 2019 (pre-Covid) were 500-700 per week. By Nov. 2022 the number was 2500 to 3500 per week.
          something happened, and the Z-score shows it clearly.
          Tom

          Reply
      2. Joris

        Hi Tom,
        Yes, the Z-score is independent of population, but that’s not the reason it is used. Besides, the real point is that the sensitivity to a fractional change (a “signal”) is larger in a larger population — because the Z-score is more sensitive to such changes. If mortality increases by 5% (e.g.) in a large population, you’ll be able to see this better than if the same 5% increase affects a small population. The increase in Z-score for such an event will be sqrt(F) larger, where F is the ratio of the two populations.

        Think of it this way: if in country A 100 people die every day and in country B 1 million people die every day, then a 1% increase will be impossible to spot in country A because naturally daily death counts will fluctuate by similar amounts just due to natural randomness. In country B, however, a 1% increase corresponds to 10,000 additional deaths, which is far harder to hide in random fluctuations. In a country with a billion people that same 1% increase would correspond to 10 million additional deaths. In larger populations the random variations average out and consequently the death rates (or any rates, really) tend to be more stable when expressed in fractions of the total population. That’s why signals like the ones discussed in the above blog post are most readily seen in the aggregated European/American data rather than in the data of low-population countries/states.

        Conclusion: Z-scores are useful, but be careful in comparing Z-scores between countries with wildly varying populations, since the significance of any signal will vary wildly depending on the total population.

        As a side-note — I found it fascinating to see that the Bataclan attacks can actually be seen clearly in the Euromomo data (of France). The casualties there were so significant that they made a real impact on the Z-scores of France in that week. Note that if the same number of casualties had occurred in Luxembourg or Liechtenstein, the Z-scores had been even far more extreme, because in comparison to the typical mortality, it would have been even more significant. Just to clarify that the population size does matter when evaluating the impact of any event on the Z-scores. The difference, of course, is that in the case of the Bataclan attacks we’re talking about an absolute number of casualties, but in the current discussion we were talking about a fractional increase in a population-wide statistic. That affects things differently, but the bottom line remains the same: population size does matter for the interpretation of Z-scores.

        ps: Your formula is correct, but subtracting the mean doesn’t change anything, really. That just shifts the distribution to be centred on zero.

        Reply
        1. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick Post author

          My interpretation is that a high z-score in a population with a large population is less likely to be a chance finding. In that, it takes a lot more deaths to move the z-score in a big population. However, the entire point (as far as EuroMOMO figues are concerned) is to look for significant changes in mortality that can then be compared against signfiicant changes in mortality in another country. Ergo, it is difficul to discount the the fact that Luxembrourg showed nothing above a Z-score of 5 during the pandemic. Whereas Germany most certainly did. Your reasoning, to me, seems to run counter to the entire point of using the Z-score.

          As you have said, if the Bataclan attacks had happened in Luxembourg we would have seen a far greater impact on the Z-score? i do not think that any form of statistical modelling is perfect, but the Z-score is about as good as we have got.

          Reply
          1. Joris

            > My interpretation is that a high z-score in a population with a large
            > population is less likely to be a chance finding. In that, it takes a lot more
            > deaths to move the z-score in a big population.

            This is wrong because the Z-score is *by definition* identical to the likelihood of being a chance finding. That means a high z-score is just as likely to be a chance finding in a large population as in a small population. Be definition. That’s what makes this a useful statistical tool.

            It would take a lot more deaths to move the z-score in a big population, but the fractional increase in mortality doesn’t need to be higher: indeed, in order to get the same z-score, your fractional increase in mortality would need to be lower in a populous country than in a country with a lower population.

            As such, the z-score is *not* particularly useful to compare between countries: it’s useful to check the significance within any given country, but not to compare between countries — for that you’d need different tools, or you need to rescale by the square root of the number of inhabitants (well, the square root of the typical number of deaths, really).

            Ergo: it is not at all difficult to discount the numbers for Luxembourg. Statistically speaking you don’t expect to have any sensitivity to the things you see in the German graph. The exact same thing plays out in the UK: pretty much all the signals you see in England would be invisible in Wales simply because the population is much smaller and hence the noise is much larger. Similarly, even though you see the signals in Germany very well, if you were to look at the graphs for the constituent German states, you’d end up looking at z-scores that are far lower.

            What you’re doing is you’re comparing a picture with a 1-sec exposure to one with a 2-hour exposure and claiming that we’re not seeing the same number of stars in the 1-sec exposure so there must be fewer bright stars in that patch of sky. That’s not right — that picture simply has fewer photons in it, giving every signal a lower signal-to-noise ratio, i.e. Z-score. So naturally you’re going to find fewer things in there. But if you average 7200 of those pictures together, you’ll find exactly what the 2-hour exposure gave you.

          2. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick Post author

            But there is not more noise in Luxembourg’s figures. There is a constant up and down. But it never goes above 5. As you said yourself the deaths at betancourt would have shown as a far greater spike in Luxembourg because of the smaller population. A smaller population should show more dramatic spikes. Not less dramatic spikes.

          3. Joris

            That’s right! There is not more noise in the *z-scores* of Luxembourg because the Z-scores normalise out the noise. However, in the actual numbers, there is a lot more noise. And that’s why a fractional change in the actual numbers would be washed out. The normalisation by the noise pushes things down much more in the case of Luxembourg because the noise (by which you normalise) is higher.

            As for the Bataclan example — perhaps I should not have done that. The Bataclan example shows what would happen for a constant number of casualties: a number that does not change based on population. What you’ve discussed in your post, however, is a fractional change in deaths: a number that does change with population size.

            And that’s an important difference. Because the number of deaths scales linearly with the total population of your country, but the noise in those numbers (you know, the value by which you normalise in order to get the z-score) only increases with the square root of the population because noise follows a random walk. That means for events that cause a fractional increase in cases, the total number of cases grows more strongly with population size than does the noise. Consequently the Z-score (which normalises by the noise) brings out these effects more clearly in a large population than in a small population.

            Another example: if you want to estimate how many kids have a flu right now, then you could try to tell that based on a single class of, say, 20 kids. Perhaps you have one, perhaps you have none. In some classes you might even get 2. So your estimate of the current prevalence of flu would be anywhere between 0 and 10%. Would that be a significant number? Probably not, because given your uncertainty, it could even be 0%. However, if you take all the classes across the country, you’re going to end up with a very solid number: a very precise percentage of how many kids currently have a flu — e.g. 5.2%. The uncertainty vanishes. Does that mean that the total number of kids with flu that you counted is robust? Not at all. You may have miscounted or missed some kids, counted some double. The actual number you counted could be several tens or hundreds too many or too few, but none of that would affect your percentage. — This is not a perfect parallel to the thing we were discussing, but it’s again an example to clarify that in large populations signals become far more clear because the random error grows more slowly than the thing you’re counting.

        2. Tom Morgan

          Joris,
          Thanks for your insights into Z-scores – I’m still trying to figure this stuff out. But suppose the Z-score is calculated on a per million population… Then for small populations the StdDev would probably be larger, and the Z-score smaller, and it should be independent of the total population size.
          The CDC publishes mortality on a weekly basis. The number of deaths per million population in each week is very stable from year to year, and so I believe the Z-scores are meaningful. But the USA has 330 million population which leads to the stability of the statistics.
          Tom

          Reply
    2. shirley3349

      There is another reason why Luxembourg has considerably more passing traffic than its situation and size would suggest.
      The country is bordered by France, Belgium and Germany. Everywhere a fairly main road crosses the border, there is a collection on petrol stations on the Luxembourg side and few if any on the other. Fuel was, and probably still is, far cheaper in Luxembourg.
      When we drove through Martelange on the Belgian border in summer 2018, there were nine petrol stations on the east side of the road next to one another; for the road and the verge were in Belgium but the pumps and payment offices were in Luxembourg. As we were heading to Zeebrugge to catch the ferry to Hull, we took the opportunity to fill up.
      Trade was brisk on a fairly quiet road. Multiply that with the many other crossings and I wonder how this affected the spread of the epidemic two years later,

      Reply
      1. AhNotepad

        Trade was brisk on a fairly quiet road. Multiply that with the many other crossings and I wonder how this affected the spread of the epidemic two years later,

        Depends on what is defined as “the epidemic”. If there is any associated pathogen around, supposedly some sort of corona virus, and you only know you’ve got it if you are tested, with a test whose accuracy is about as well defined as the efficacy and effectiveness of a chemical recipe injected to mitigate the problems of the pathogen, then probably no effect at all. If there was any effect, then why are all other diseases not rife around the continent?

        (This should be read at the speed of science (owned by the WEF)).

        Reply
  53. Gary Haines

    I would like your view on the ‘no virus’ theory. It seems pretty persuasive to me. Large sums of money have been offered to anyone who can prove the existence of viruses, but so far without any takers.
    If people on average are more likely to die in winter anyway, then maybe epidemics are just a convenient explanation for something that no one seems to understand.
    You yourself claimed to have walked maskless through this raging contagion with no I’ll effects (as did a number of us).
    In your country, wasn’t there a significant correlation between the excessive number of nursing home deaths and the government’s purchases of Midazolam?

    Reply
    1. Shaun Clark

      No virus? Yep, it’s something of a 100 year-old fairy-tale. An Enron-esque fraud writ large. The ‘entity’ (culprit) is/was a genetic ‘viron’ PCR ID’d enabled gene fragment spliced into a plasmid wot dun it. Malicious Sino intent or no, stoking up bad-boy viral-alarmism is just more of a circle-jerk kabuki playbook by the ‘Intelligence’ Community /Pharma game-boys/Banksters/Hedgefunders fucking everyone over. Again. Anyway, all lifeforms have plasmids. Plasmids are easy to manipulate. Shuffling RNA/DNA is their ‘thing’. As such its basically then a bacterial issue and not a so-called viral one. A target ‘agent’ is Pseudomonas aeruginosa. A common, encapsulated, gram-negative, aerobic–facultatively anaerobic rod-shaped bacterium that can (if encouraged) cause disease in plants and animals, including humans. It gets about, and it can be ‘facilitated’ within organisms by exosomes. Ae accounts for 10% of all hospital infections, and critically it releases its bacterial toxin into the endoplasmic reticulum (the key DHL courier-like protein handling ‘organisation’ (in the cell) only AFTER a furin cleavage site has been triggered. Seemingly, this has been documented by researchers in Spain. Maybe!

      Reply
      1. Paul Fruitbat

        May I suggest the possibility that, while viruses do exist, the harm done by some of them has been greatly overestimated? In some cases, completely invented; in others, just exaggerated.

        It seems likely that many or most of the cases of paralysis and death blamed on polio were in fact caused by other things – mostly industrial toxins.

        As for AIDS, it’s a very obscure area – unsurprisingly as so much money and effort has gone into making it obscure – but I find it significant that Kary Mullis seems to have believed that AIDS was mostly caused by drugs and lifestyle, and that (possibly) the virus labelled “HIV” has nothing to do with it.

        At the other extreme, the first virus ever identified and studied, tobacco mosaic virus, seems certainly to exist and to do the harm to tobacco plants that has been documented.

        Reply
        1. Shaun Clark

          A naturally occurring (infectious) plasmid perfectly explains a so-called tobacco mosaic virus. Any virus entity/unit as ‘they’ have led us to as to what they are, is just their composed narrative. Plasmids perfectly fit the concept of ‘viron’ infections. Virology, as a given, is a house-of-cards built on a bed of (in silico) sand. Virology then is hocus pocus, and its bedrock is nothing but a religious witch burning faith.

          Reply
    2. Jerome savage

      Dr K responded to me on that in previous blog as follows – referenced Stefan Lanka a virus non believer.
      “have heard of him. Viruses/virology seems a very complicated area to me. A case can be made that there are no such thing as viruses. Personally, I don’t believe it. We have cases in the UK where young people with haemophilia, who were given transfusions of factor VIII ended up with hepatitis C and HIV, and many of them died. [At that time blood donors were not screened for these two ‘viruses’] Many of them died, of diseases that are defined as Hep C and HIV. So, whatever got passed to them, caused disease.
      So ‘something’ clearly passed, via blood products, from one person to another. Then, in many cases, killed them. So there is clearly a very small, difficult to detect, agent that can transmit disease from one person to another.
      PUT THIS OUT & GOT THIS
      Response from Harry the scot. & (FE)
      “Interesting, I am always ready to acknowledge that anyone who I think is informed about one corner of the field is not always 100% correct on all areas of the field including Dr Kendrick. I think this is how most people end up falling down rabbit holes bLIEving everything their favorite authority tells them. I personally side with Dr Lanka, Dr Kendrick is talking about people getting viruses by something bring injected into them like what happened with those that caught AIDS, it was a poison in the hepatitis C vaccine that caused AIDS, another genocidal attack. I don’t believe the virusis are passed from one to another, when families all catch the same virus I don’t think people consider the home environment or the time of year, and if people’s immune systems are low as the temperature drops then they are more likley to get ill with flu virisis but not contaminated from another person. I have also read that the virus once entering our cells is completely isolated or dead, making it impossible to exit, become airborne and enter someone else’s blood stream. Also this new phenomenon “Discredited claims” they are usually labelled against those that challenge the official narrative  and I would have to ask who is doing the discretiting, what is their motive, and where Is the proof that the person has been discredited.
      Making people believe that viruses are contagious keeps people in fear and more likely to conform and follow authority in order to keep them ‘safe’. “

      Reply
      1. shirley3349

        My memory of nursing in the 1980s may be faulty, but I think cases of the disease known then as AIDS, which I nursed several sufferers from in hospital, were known several years before a vaccine was available for hepatitis C.
        During my career, hepatitis C was identified as a distinct entity, previously lumped in with other things as hepatitis non-A, non-B, but I cannot remember anyone then being vaccinated against it. I could be wrong but I am fairly sure the account quoted above places the effect before the cause.
        The common factor could be people sharing needles to inject what passed as narcotic drugs, mixtures which contained whatever the seller had available and the buyer could afford.
        I think there is now too strong a tendency to look for a previously undescribed virus to label as the cause of a possible new disease, and a converse tendency to discount other toxins in the environment, which might place the blame on human negligence and cost-cutting to the detriment of the general welfare.

        Reply
        1. Jerome savage

          Thank you Shirley. There are so many different views on the fable of the virus and I’m having a debate with an acquaintance, he refers to his experience of herpes simplex 1 as proof of the virus entity as well as shingles.
          Can I ask you to elaborate on ; “the account quoted above places the effect before the cause” please as I find myself trying to put this in some sort of context.
          Another 2 acquaintances are adamant that viruses don’t exist.
          Am tempted to summarise my beliefs as follows –
          1. Whatever causes virus associated disease is not contagious- not transmittable
          2. Something causes various illnesses – the cause is attributed to something that is neatly packaged as a virus.

          Reply
          1. shirley3349

            I was referring to your quote of 1st Feb: “it was a poison in the hepatitis C vaccine that caused AIDS, another genocidal attack.” From memory, AIDs predated the hepatitis C jab by at least a decade in the UK, probably more in the USA. They also tested vaccines for rather longer in those days.

            Nowadays, I tend to regard viruses as hypothetical entities which seem to answer some questions but fail to answer many others.

            I have never suffered from cold sores on my lips, despite my mother getting them every time she caught a cold.

            However, I once got three weeks, compulsory, sick leave for contracting a herpetic whitlow on my right index finger. The (cheap, plastic,) glove split while I was trying to clean the unbelievably filthy mouth of an elderly, dying woman. The sore was painful at the time and for months after healing, and the sensation in this finger is still abnormal after nearly 40 years. I have always regarded this injury as the result of direct viral contagion whilst I was removing a film of dried secretions from the woman’s soft palate. I have not found a good reason to change this opinion yet.

          2. Leila

            Shirley, I wonder about viruses these days and how contagious they are. Like you mentioned with cold sores, I had one after giving birth for a number of months – haven’t had one since I was a kid so no idea where it sprung from, maybe due to being run down after. Anyway, cold sores are supposedly hugely contagious but my baby was on me the whole time and I kissed her regularly. My husband too. Neither of them developed a cold sore.
            Your story regarding your finger is interesting. It seems we really know very little about viruses when we dig a little deeper

        1. Shaun Clark

          OK. Prove to me that our immune system fights viruses. That is, viruses in the received sense that we are led to believe are viruses. If Red Indians did not exist, why did we evolve weapons to fight them. The answer is because there are no such people as ‘Red Indians’ – they were something else. ‘Viruses’ too are something else. Virology is a fraud.

          Reply
        2. Eggs ‘n beer

          We didn’t. We evolved an immune system that fights everything. Bacteria, fungi, chemicals, toxins; and even turns rogue on occasion and fights foods and our own body. So if viruses exist, it’ll fight them. If they don’t exist, it’ll fight whatever is causing the symptoms. Initially my worry about the Wu-flu was that, being an artificial creation that our immune systems wouldn’t know what to do. But then I realised that it’s been adapting to new things for ever, in the last century it’s dealt with all the petroleum chemicals we’ve developed, all the other rubbish we’ve thrown at it from artificial foods to asbestos and pharmaceuticals. Every new particle is analysed by sensors in your skin, nose, throat, eyes, lungs, blood, mucus – everywhere – and a response developed. That’s why it’s important not to sterilise your skin, wear masks or isolate because you’ll restrict your immune system’s ability to produce a tailor made answer to Covid. What you must do is ensure that you supply your T cells with the fuel they need, which is vitamin D.

          The huge mystery of masks is why Orr’s experiment showed a 200% to 300% increase in patient infections when surgical masks were worn by surgeons during operations. Actually, I suppose a bigger mystery is why it’s been totally ignored. Surely not all surgeons are in the pockets of mask makers?

          Reply
          1. shirley3349

            Not all operations are nice aseptic procedures. The stench from some is indescribable. Masks are to prevent the less experienced staff from vomiting over the “sterile” field and the instruments

        3. shirley3349

          Answer to Jerome 2 above.

          My G P was quite certain of his diagnosis; he grimaced and kept his hands well clear of my finger. No treatment in those days apart from keeping the finger clean and covered. Paracetamol for the pain, which was pretty ineffective.

          Initially, the glove had split but my skin was unbroken, and I did then wash my hands very carefully as you can imagine. A sore developed on the finger pad over following days which wept serous fluid until it healed, taking the top layer of skin from the entire fingertip first. There was no pus, so the sore had not formed a head which discharged after a couple of days, as a bacterial infection (such as a boil) normally did. After three weeks, it had healed enough for me to be allowed back to work without putting patients at risk. The pain still persisted even when there was no sign of the injury, especially when pressure was applied to the finger tip. This was somewhat a handicap for a few months. Fortunately, I am left-handed.

          Now, If I press both my index fingertips with my thumbs, the sensation is twice as strong in the right (injured) than in the left, verging on the unpleasant.

          Note: Regarding the useless gloves I had to use for a dirty procure.
          A few years later, on another ward, where we were now admitting the occasional AIDS/HIV patient, the sister had to fight tooth and nail to get stronger, non-sterile, latex gloves supplied to nursing staff, as this virus was supposed to be transmitted by the patients’ bodily fluids. These gloves were said to be too expensive. She won in the end, but the whole incident reflected the prevailing low value placed on the welfare of staff in physical contact with patients. Even if the risk turns out to be low, decent equipment provides welcome reassurance when dealing with unknown situations. Though some things have improved slightly, the attitude to staff by management does not seem to have done.

          Reply
          1. shirley3349

            A correction to one of my earlier entries:

            There is currently no available vaccine for Hepatitis C. Several have been developed and abandoned during trials over the past 30 years and a few are currently in development.

            The main problem seems to be, that the virus mutates so rapidly that the vaccine is out of date before it can be manufactured on a large scale.

            I’m sure that I was told by a relative about 20 years ago, that a vaccine was in use, but as she worked in a specialised clinic she may have been referring to one of these trials. We are no longer in touch, so I cannot check what exactly I have mis-remembered.

            The current official version seems to be that the drug treatments are improving and hold out the prospect of a cure. Whether this is true or just Big Pharma hype, I have no idea.

    3. Geoff

      Anyone who’s suffered from Herpes zoster (e.g. shingles) and gets relief from appropriate antiviral meds would tend to question the idea that viruses do not exist.

      But of course, I could be wrong.

      Reply
      1. Shaun Clark

        I’ve had shingles 5 times. I’ve never been on so-called antiviral meds, but aren’t antiviral meds just happen-chance, and useful elsewhere?

        Reply
        1. Geoff

          I have family members who get them on occasion and they seem to attenuate the duration of the (rather severe pain) quite effectively. But who knows if they’re killing viruses, inhibiting their reproduction or just interfering with the pain perception? I dunno, but would guess the former. Just a guess.

          Reply
      2. David Baileygettingmoresceptical

        That is the same logic as saying that Ivermectin was developed to fight intestinal worms so it couldn’t be any use to fight COVID.

        Just because a medicine was developed to fight A, doesn’t mean it can’t be useful to fight B.

        For example, Drs Mark and Sam Bailey (no relation) point out that polio may have been caused by pesticides such as lead arsenate (!!) used at about the time of the polio outbreaks. We had a cornfield behind our house when I was 6, and I have always wondered if they are right and I was poisoned rather than infected.

        As the lead arsenate was phased out, the polio vaccinations were taking off – so maybe the end of that disease wasn’t such a triumph for big pharma?

        Reply
  54. Eggs ‘n beer

    Forgiveness. Before you forgive there should be repentance. You don’t forgive your neighbour for lobbing snails he’s collected from his vegetable patch over the fence onto your brassicas unless he sincerely apologises. And stops doing it. If he’s not sorry, no forgiveness.

    Another issue is redemption. How can the wrong against you be righted? If your neighbour is truly sorry he will offer to come round and rid your veggie patch of arthropods. You then know that repentance is sincere, he has redeemed himself and you can both go off for a beer (and hopefully a good laugh).

    Personally I will find it difficult to accept that any apologies from perennially lying sociopaths are sincere. Nor can I see how they can redeem themselves. Giving up their total wealth, including their houses, pensions, gongs etc. to a fund for the vaccine damaged isn’t going to happen, yet that’s the only sort of meaningful redemption that they could perform. Setting aside taxpayers’ money for compensation isn’t a form of redemption – that’s just stealing more from the unjabbed to pay for other peoples’ injuries the sociopaths have themselves inflicted. Just an insult.

    So if you want to forgive without repentance and/or redemption, you’re a better person than me. Forget? Never!

    re doctors and nurses. They didn’t have to speak out. All they had to do was – nothing. Almost along the lines of Dr K’s “Don’t do something, just stand there!”. Don’t accept the jab, and don’t give it. I don’t know whether my GP got the jab. They were certainly supposed to. They are a family friend, so we aren’t asking. But they refused to give it and extended the ban to the whole practice.

    Reply
  55. nutranamics

    Thanks I agree sadly the graphs didn’t show where can we see them’

    Sent from my iPhone

    <

    div dir=”ltr”>

    <

    blockquote type=”cite”>

    Reply
  56. An Italian Australian at the Tropics

    And yet the solution to all this would be very easy.

    In WA, when they locked down everything for the non vaccinated, it took only 18 days to reopen the bottle shops to everyone: the customers were harassing the staff, the staff stopped going to work, the businesses (big companies) started to lose money…

    Just don’t comply, it’s that easy.

    Reply
  57. Martin Back

    In 2019 the WHO published their handbook “Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza”

    Click to access 9789241516839-eng.pdf

    It was pretty sensible advice, trying to find a balance between reducing the load on hospitals while minimizing the harm to lifestyles and economies.

    Unfortunately, this compendium of experience, drawn up by professionals who were not under the pressure of an ongoing pandemic and therefore could apply their minds calmly and rationally, was in important respects totally ignored. Did the officials concerned panic, or were there darker motives?

    QUOTE
    The most effective strategy to mitigate the impact of a pandemic is to reduce contacts between infected and uninfected persons, thereby reducing the spread of infection, the peak demand for hospital beds, and the total number of infections, hospitalizations and deaths. However, social distancing measures (e.g. contact tracing, isolation, quarantine, school and workplace measures and closures, and avoiding crowding) can be highly disruptive, and the cost of these measures must be weighed against their potential impact [my bold]. Early assessments of the severity and likely impact of the pandemic strain will help public health authorities to determine the strength of intervention. In all influenza epidemics and pandemics, recommending that those who are ill isolate themselves at home should reduce transmission. Facilitating this should be a particular priority. In more severe pandemics, measures to increase social distancing in schools, workplaces and public areas would further reduce transmission.”

    Experimental studies suggest that hand hygiene can reduce virus on the hands. However, there is insufficient scientific evidence from RCTs to support the efficacy of hand hygiene alone to reduce influenza transmission in influenza epidemics and pandemics. Hand hygiene is an important intervention to reduce the risk of other common infectious diseases; therefore, it should be recommended at all times [emphasis in original], regardless of the lack of efficacy against confirmed influenza reported in a number of RCTs. There is also a lack of evidence for the effectiveness of improved respiratory etiquette and the use of face masks in community settings during influenza epidemics and pandemics. Nevertheless, these NPIs may be conditionally recommended for ill persons because of other considerations (e.g. the high cost of face masks), and they are generally feasible and acceptable. It is likely that these personal interventions could be effective if implemented in combination.

    There is sufficient evidence on the lack of effectiveness of entry and exit screening to justify not recommending these measures in influenza pandemics and epidemics. There is weak evidence, mainly from simulation studies, that travel restrictions may only delay the introduction of infections for a short period, and this measure may affect mitigation programmes, be disruptive of supply chains or be unacceptable to communities for various reasons. There is no evidence on the effectiveness of travel advice; however, given the potential benefits. it is recommended that health authorities provide advice for travellers. Border closures may be considered only by small island nations in severe pandemics and epidemics, but must be weighed against potentially serious economic consequences.

    This document will serve as a core component of WHO’s influenza prevention and control programme in community settings. The successful implementation of this guideline depends on the inclusion of NPIs as a robust strategic plan at at national and local levels, as well as the appropriate application of its recommendations.
    END QUOTE

    And in Table 1. Recommendations on the use of NPIs by severity level
    we find
    Not recommended in any circumstances
    UV light
    Modifying humidity
    Contact tracing
    Quarantine of exposed individuals
    Entry and exit screening
    Border closure

    Reply
  58. Steve

    Martin. In 2019, the WHO still had some semblance of independence and scientific underpinnings.
    Today, 2023, that has all gone. The WHO today is the tool of the establishment and is controlled by the big pharma funders, ie. Gates et al.
    In its current abominable incarnation the WHO will have power to dictate to the world what a pandemic is and what actions ‘must’ be taken to combat it. All governments will now use the excuse that they are ‘only following orders’ of the WHO – nothing to do with us mate – to shirk any responsibilities.
    BTW – Gates has pencilled in 2025 for the next pandemic, fact.

    Reply
  59. Nigella P

    Thank you Dr K for that summary. I believed you when you first rang alarm bells as my gut told me something very off was happening.

    Like you, I no longer feel angry but I do feel very sad. I know more people who died in the last 3 years from taking their own lives than I do who died from Covid-19. I also know that my own two children had their A levels and degrees ruined by the measures taken to ‘protect us’ in the pandemic. I had to silence myself or be ostracized if I dared to question the narrative of terror being fed to us by media and governments. I was more afraid of the zealots than I ever was of Covid itself.

    I knew people who I’d previously respected and thought full of common sense have groceries delivered to their garage and then wipe each item down with bleach solution before allowing them into their homes. Out walking, people would step out into the empty roads, so as not to come anywhere close to others or cringe into the walls with heads turned away. I couldn’t believe that people would actually fear being in the same room, park bench, garden as another in case of the contagion that they might themselves bring or catch. Friends who sat uncomforted at funerals of loved ones that they had only been able to sit with in hospital if they were incredibly lucky. More often they said farewells on FaceTime. I saw for the first time in my life how easy it was for a totalitarian state to come about and how powerful a motivator fear was.

    Even now when it is patently obvious to even blind moles that pretty much every measure taken was pointless, some people still cling to the narrative that without those measures it would have been worse.

    I sincerely hope that it was an experiment never to be repeated.

    Reply
  60. David Bailey

    I start with the assumption – shared by most here I think – that this disaster was brought on intentionally.

    My suspicion is still that there was no such thing as a COVID virus. I know I presented this before and it didn’t get many followers.

    1) The guy who got the Nobel prize for inventing the PCR process, Kary Mullis, explicitly warned that PCR should never be developed into a screening or diagnostic test. As far as I can make out, this was because non-sterile samples – e.g. nasal swabs – would increase the chance of a false positive enormously, as would the use of unrealistic numbers of amplification cycles. Some reports indicate that 45 cycles were used in places. This represents an amplification of 2^45 = 35,184,372,088,832.

    2) The disease spread round the world unrealistically rapidly, and the supposed early symptoms of this new disease were all typical symptoms of common winter diseases. The virus was supposedly sequenced in China at a very early stage, and it isn’t clear how many scientists had access to proven virus samples, as opposed to a genetic sequence on a computer. I wonder how many of them independently sequenced viruses actually obtained from COVID patients.

    3) I am guessing that people who ended up in hospital with respiratory problems were not tested for anything else if they tested positive in a PCR test. That may have lead to many deaths since they weren’t treated for whatever they were really dying of.

    4) The weakest part of my theory, is of course that there were supposed to be some specific COVID symptoms seen in those who became seriously ill – vascular damage in lungs – indeed Malcolm saw these first hand. However, I do wonder if a lot of people were treated for COVID who should never have been treated at all because they were inevitably dying of something else. Long before COVID, I knew two people who were close to death, and then caught a respiratory infection that finished them off. Is it conceivable that people like that would show extra symptoms arising from their hopeless medical condition but that in saner times doctors would withdraw treatment before this point?

    Maybe the whole exercise was designed to sell as many COVID vaccine shots as possible. This may have been done for the benefit of Big Pharma, or it might have been done for the sake of the damage it might cause.

    Reply
    1. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick Post author

      You make good points. Kary Mullis said PCR should not be used a screening test because, if you set it forty cycles, or so, you can get a positive test on virtually anyone. [And it was never designed to be a screenign test anyway].

      The results from early PCR testing are completley unreliable. Even the CDC almost admitted this when they reduced the cycles down to 26? if memory serves. Also, if you get the ‘fragment’ RNA sequence slightly wrong, or stop it at the wrong amino acid, or whatever, you could multipyly up all sorts of bit of other virues, or RNA/DNA fragments and get a positive result from a banana.

      In addition, the fact that poeple cliamed to have fully sequenced the virus within less than a month of it appearing…. then developing a fully accurate PCR test in locksteop. This was an amazing and almost unbelievable coincidence. I think I shall stick to unbelievable.

      So yes, I think a hell of a lot of people diagnosed as having Covid, did not. There are actaully no signs or symptoms specific to Covid. Influenza can also cause vascular damage to the lungs, ground glass appearance etc. etc. Influenza virues can also increase the risk of CVD. Increase the risk of blood clots etc. etc.

      Having said all of this. I do think a new virus appeared – from somewhere. I think a lot of people saw a way to get very rich, very quick, following its appearance. They knew they would get richer, quicker, if they hyped up how deadly Covid was. Our scientifically ignorant politicians saw a way to look strong, caring and leadery, and had no way of countering propaganda they could not understand – becuase they are total scientific ignoramusus. The rest, as they say, is history.

      An almost perfect storm of greed, fear, and stupidity gripped the world. Foxy Loxy feasted.

      Reply
      1. David Bailey

        I’d just like to add a couple of points supporting my theory.

        1) A simulation exercise was run about 2 months before COVID hit!

        https://www.weforum.org/press/2019/10/live-simulation-exercise-to-prepare-public-and-private-leaders-for-pandemic-response

        A lot of people were determined to make money out of this, even before the disease existed outside a lab!

        2) Clearly the Wuhan lab was expected to produce something deadly but what it did produce was not powerful enough for their plans. A fake virus that is spread by useless PCR tests is only a small step from a run-of-the-mill coronavirus whose properties need to be exaggerated.

        Echoing what a lot of others have said about Dr Hope-Simpson’s experiments etc., I also begin to wonder if uncontrolled spread of infection EVER happens in well nourished human populations.

        Reply
      2. thecovidpilot

        Am I wrong to think that covid can be distinguished clinically from flu without sticking a swab up my nose? I’m still trying to nail down evidence for our beliefs.

        Are there any reports of mild influenza causing endovasculitis? What is the relative incidence of anosmia for mild covid/flu? Any reports of multiple pound weight loss after influenza (I lost 7 lbs in 2 days and only gained back 2 lbs)?

        Does ARDS from flu differ from covid ARDS? Is silent hypoxia (hypoxia w/out dyspnea) a feature of flu like it is for moderate covid? How prevalent is consolidation in lungs for mild flu v mild covid? Are ground glass opacities present consistently in mild flu lungs like they are consistently in mild covid lungs?

        Are there any problems with this New Orleans ER doc’s statement of diagnostic framework?

        “Diagnostic

        CXR- bilateral interstitial pneumonia (anecdotally starts most often in the RLL so bilateral on CXR is not required). The hypoxia does not correlate with the CXR findings. Their lungs do not sound bad. Keep your stethoscope in your pocket and evaluate with your eyes and pulse ox.

        Labs- WBC low, Lymphocytes low, platelets lower then their normal, Procalcitonin normal in 95% CRP and Ferritin elevated most often. CPK, D-Dimer, LDH, Alk Phos/AST/ALT commonly elevated.
        Notice D-Dimer- I would be very careful about CT PE these patients for their hypoxia. The patients receiving IV contrast are going into renal failure and on the vent sooner.

        Basically, if you have a bilateral pneumonia with normal to low WBC, lymphopenia, normal procalcitonin, elevated CRP and ferritin- you have covid-19 and do not need a nasal swab to tell you that.”

        Click to access this_is_real_experience_from_er_doc_from_new_orleans.pdf

        Reply
    2. AhNotepad

      David, I think that suggestion is scurrilous, do you really expect a company such as Pfizer which is found guilty of crimes on almost a regular basis, to be capable of concentrating only on profits? Yeah, I suppose you’re right.

      Reply
    3. Eggs ‘n beer

      David, the whole issue of viruses can lead to many trips down rabbit holes. One attribute of viruses which prominent experts frequently state is the ability to mutate to more infectious versions. The way they portray this is that it’s a deliberate action of the virus. Along with “this virus will find you and infect you.”

      Viruses are sentient beings, or even a single networked sentient being infesting billions of people simultaneously.

      Another rabbit hole is, what happened to the original Wu-flu? This incredibly infectious deadly strain? Ok, mutations occurred (let’s assume through random changes rather than malicious intent on the part of the virus) but why does that seem to eliminate the original? Suddenly Delta is all anyone is worried about, then “Poof!” that disappears off the radar and it’s Omicron, now it’s alpha-numeric soups ….

      When viruses mutate, the blueprints evaporate.

      You mention symptoms and tests. I tested RAT positive with a slight fever/chill and a splitting headache which lasted for two days. But no respiratory or throat symptoms at all. As in not the slightest sniffle or shortness of breath. So it’s either a brand new E&B mutation, or a false positive. My son and I both tested PCR nasopharyngeal positive when we had no symptoms. Fit as a fiddle, both of us. Unfortunately we needed a negative result to enter Japan with only 36 hours before the plane left, so we tanked up on ivermectin and zinc, learnt how to nasal rise with saline, gargled saturated salt water, went to the testing station and repeated the rinsing and gargling in the airport toilets before rushing into the testing station to get a negative result.

      Symptoms and tests, Covid is all things to all men.

      So, is Covid just a ‘flu? Does it really matter, after all a new ‘flu type killed about 40m in 1918/19 when the world’s population was less than 2bn, i.e. a quarter of today’s population? And one aspect of the Spanish flu is that younger people were most susceptible, not the elderly and co-morbid. And obesity wasn’t an issue back then. So less than 7m deaths (with, not of) in people mostly at the end of their lives in three years is insignificant. And definitely not pandemic.

      Charles Mackay’s 1841 “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds”, now known as mass psychosis: proven.

      cui bono? Pharmaceuticals, of course. But even more shameful imo are those who gleefully rode the fictitious creation because of the sensation of power over the minions who so gratefully granted it to them. Despicable doesn’t come close.

      Reply
      1. gettingmoresceptical

        Oh viruses seem to spawn all sorts of mysteries. Dr Hope-Simpson tried in vain to demonstrate that this disease was communicable. Ultimately his healthy volunteers accepted being sprayed with nasal/oral samples taken from those ill with the disease. Non became ill!

        Reply
      2. David Bailey

        Gettingmoresceptical is me – David Bailey. I am having some trouble logging in here because the system thinks I have another account – hence the confusion.

        There is also a theory promoted by Dr Sam Bailey (no relation!) that claims that viruses have never been unambiguously proven to exist or to be infectious. It would seem that improper controls have been used in key experiments, so that
        the connection between virus particles and disease is muddied.

        https://drsambailey.com/what-is-a-virus/

        Dr Bailey clearly thinks this problem may exist for a whole range of types of virus.

        Reply
        1. Eggs ‘n beer

          Thanks for the link. I even watched one of her videos. However, as far a clarification goes, all I can see now is lots more rabbit holes, the most pertinent of one is that, while there are many beautiful, colour enhanced EM still photos of covid purporting to being ejected from cells, why don’t we have one of covid inside a cell? If it is truly replicating intracellularly, slice the cell so we can see the process.

          Reply
    4. shirley3349

      David, you might be interested in a paper published online back in November 2022 by a team from the Francis Crick Institute in London, one of the centres of what one might consider orthodox virology.

      https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-022-04183-1
      (NB. highlight this link and then right click on the highlighted text to access the Go to link and then left click on that)

      The article is highly technical for a lay-person, but it does specify the source of the samples, the methods of culture, the preparation for imaging by an electron microscope and shows some colour-enhanced images of the results.

      The team’s main discovery seems to be that the virions are not spherical, but cylinders with a slightly flattened, circular cross-section and a height less than the diameter, much less, in the case of the Wuhan strain. The walls of the cylinder are slightly bowed out. Think of the shape of an ice hockey puck, or better, an old-fashioned peppermint cream. The spike proteins are clearly visible, and seem to be readily detachable.

      The writers were biologists studying the virions as biological entities. They were not directly concerned with them as pathogens. Their samples were certified as coming from patients suffering either from the Wuhan strain, or from the Alpha, Beta and Delta variants. They took these samples on trust from what they considered reputable sources, which are listed. They processed 3 of each and then calculated the average dimensions from the images.

      If this article is not an elaborate fake, I think we are dealing here with something which physically exists and is not an artifact of the methods used, or merely a metaphor for an unknown process.

      Far more research would be needed to prove these things are the causes of the diseases they appear to be associated with.

      Reply
  61. bruce g charlton

    It is a big problem that clear cut dishonesty in science is neither exposed nor punished – and this has been going on for several decades.

    Another example from Oxford University was Sir Leslie Iverson FRS who was found to have plagiarized (i.e. copied from another author’s website) several passages included in a published book by Iverson.

    Here is what happened – nothing:

    https://sethroberts.net/2010/11/06/plagiarism-by-british-drug-tsar/

    https://sethroberts.net/2010/12/04/leslie-iversen-plagiarism-update/

    Real science was always based on the scientists being honest – as honest as they could be, about all things – great and small. Those who were found to have been dishonest must therefore be exposed and excluded.

    For example, on my elective in 1980 I knew a Harvard Professor of Psychiatry who was, a few years later, made to resign for copying passages into a review article.

    https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1988/11/29/med-school-professor-resigns-after-admitting/

    But in more recent years there have been many similar cases of proven plagiarism among Harvard professors, some famous, about which no action was taken.

    Without this kind of discipline for dishonesty – you do not get real science; but only a fake charade of science. As with the recent global (non*-) pandemic.

    *Covid was only able to be called a “pandemic” because the WHO definition of the term had been changed a few months earlier in include epidemics with low incidence of mortality; just as they changed the definition of “vaccine” a short while before that was launched. More blatant fraululence is hard to imagine.

    Reply
    1. Paul Fruitbat

      There is a cultural problem. In business and politics, and many other spheres of life, dishonesty is not only tacitly accepted by often richly rewarded. No one complains, except on rare occasions when an underling gets uppity and his superiors agree to punish him.

      Science throve while it was essentially an amateur vocation. Its practitioners worked because they were curious about nature, wanted to do good, or for other mostly benevolent or at least unharmful motives.

      In a way, science has lost its purity and fallen sick because of its own success. So great were the rewards of applied science that the rich – and those who wanted to become rich – soon realised that they could fulfil their ambitions by funding it. Then it became institutionalised, and today provides a living to many millions who call themselves professional scientists.

      That, however, means that they have mortgaged their honesty and integrity. Faced with the possibility of being fired, not being able to get another job, or even being driven completely out of the scientific community, far too many knuckle under – often disguising their abject surrender even from themselves.

      Nietzsche opined that a professional philosopher was a contradiction in terms, because a philosopher is a person who seeks knowledge and wisdom for their own sake. As soon as he accepts payment for his work, it ceases to be free and unconstrained, and his philosophy loses much or all of its worth.

      It’s not irrelevant that science used to be called “natural philosophy”.

      Reply
      1. Mark Gobell

        “Nietzsche opined that a professional philosopher was a contradiction in terms”

        Witness Jordan Peterson’s recent kosher conversion after signing his life away with the Daily Wire …

        Reply
      2. Geoff

        “Nietzsche opined that a professional philosopher was a contradiction in terms, because a philosopher is a person who seeks knowledge and wisdom for their own sake.”

        That seems to be both a recurrent and a consistent theme among the ancient Greek and Roman philosophers, satirists, and playwrights as well. When they took time out from condemning and mocking corruption, that is! Funny thing is that the politicians of the time condemned the corruption of the times as well… as long as it wasn’t their own!

        Enjoy!

        PS: Love yer comments, and speaking of Nietsche, Kant has this to say,

        “Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why so great a proportion of men, long after nature has released them from alien guidance (natura-liter maiorennes), nonetheless gladly remain in lifelong immaturity, and why it is so easy for others to establish themselves as their guardians. It is so easy to be immature.”

        – Immanuel Kant, What Is Enlightenment? (1784)

        Reply
        1. Steve

          All together now:
          “Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
          Who was very rarely stable
          Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
          Who could think you under the table

          There’s nothing Nietzche couldn’t teach ya
          ‘Bout the raising of the wrist
          Socrates, himself, was permanently pissed”
          Bruce’s Philosophers Song – Monty Python.

          Reply
  62. Q. Wayle

    I wonder how many in those spikes of death were from the vaccines, themselves, by causing inflamed endothelia, and subsequent strokes and sudden cardiac death. Didn’t transfats from partially hydrogenated fats do similar things?

    And what about the serum vitamin D levels across Europe. In London, supposedly 83% of the people tested were deficient in vitamin D.

    Lastly, they cannot quarantine us if we protest EN MASSE, and refuse their Draconian edicts.

    Reply
  63. Dominic-John

    Probably best to factor in the 45k+ UK care home midazolam murders in March/April 2020 to fake the early Scamdemic. They show up on the graph as the blip.

    Reply
  64. Gary Ogden

    Thank you, Dr. Kendrick. My view precisely about the lady with the giant, great white shark teeth. In the U.S. we have The Science; NZ has The Truth. Bulgaria is another good example, like Luxembourg. Thailand also-no ‘Rona deaths until they rolled out the jab.

    Reply
  65. Martin Back

    When you read the Great Barrington Declaration now, you have to shake your head at how accurate its predictions were and what a pity it was that it got ignored.

    “Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.”

    And this was 4 October 2020, before the vaccine became available, and AFAIK before doubts were raised as to the vaccine’s safety and efficacy. But we knew who was most at risk from Covid, and if the Barrington advice had been followed, they would have received the protection the vaccine offered, and the rest of us would have been spared the adverse effects, not to mention the disruption to the economy, businesses, and education.

    “The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. “
    https://gbdeclaration.org/#read

    Dr. Martin Kulldorff, Dr. Sunetra Gupta, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, and the many thousands of other signatories, must be praised for their initiative, and the lockdowners and mass vaccinators grilled as to why this sensible advice, given by eminent experts, was ignored.

    Reply
    1. Eggs ‘n beer

      Ah, but the Great Barrington declaration was taken extremely seriously, by Fauci, Nichols, Birx, Hancock, etc. Extremely seriously. They didn’t ignore it at all. No sirreee.

      Reply
  66. WoojinMD

    You showed us a graph of composite mortality of European countries with a large spike when the pandemic first hit. Then you showed two european countries with no spike at all. Does that mean there are countries that have massive spikes to offset the lack of an increased mortality signal in countries like Germany?

    Reply
    1. Steve

      As the good Doctor suggested: If you delay reporting your mortalities, say, by a month then lump them in with the next month’s figures you will get an apparent spike. Not saying this is the reason BUT it did happen in the UK and was used by the ‘authorities’. Lies, damn lies and political interpretations of data.

      Reply
  67. Jimmy Christian

    Once again the voice of reason. Thank you Malcolm Kendrick.

    In addition to the example of Jacinda Ardern, there were a number of dictatorial premiers a few kilometers west of her nation. Victoria’s Daniel Andrews engaged in more lockdowns than any, along with some ridiculous policies such as this. One had to wear a mask, outside in the fresh air, even when all alone, throughout the state. Thus, a hiker in the mountains, or a person walking his or her dog, had to wear a mask. As if singletons would catch Covid, or give it, to a kangaroo or to a cockatoo. The only exception permitting a Victorian from doffing his or her mask was if undertaking vigorous exercise or puffing, specifically jogging, running, or cycling. It meant that the police could ticket you if you were walking without a mask, but increase your pace and you were allowed to continue. Only if you were outside on your own property — perhaps in your home or in your garden, were you allowed to not wear a mask outside other than this exercise-permitted exception, and only for an hour a day could you even do this.

    Thus, for several months, we Vics were held hostage to a policy that had no basis in science. To be oh-so-slightly-fair (but no more) to Dan Andrews, he was being advised by his chief health officer, and was perhaps not as bothered by the mask idea as the CHO. This was evidenced by him being caught on camera as he exited his car, walking alone outside towards the place where he was due to give a press conference (also a site where he could speak maskless, ironically and oddly enough) but in the 100 meter walking journey he was supposed to wear his mask outdoors. He was thus fined by the police, and to his credit paid up immediately.

    Fast forward a few months, until 95 of the population was double-jabbed. All restrictions ended, including even masks on public transport. Yes, infections went up, a few surges here and there. But one question that no one ever asked throughout this whole pandemic was: “How are they?” All we heard about was numbers of cases, numbers of deaths, and then later numbers in hospital, and in ICUs etc. It took independent stats watchers to filter the encouraging data, like numbers of people getting better/recoveries, numbers of active cases and so on. And no one actually mentioned whether those who “tested positive” were ill.

    The cry was constantly: “Get tested!” Ignoring the fact that a diagnostic that fails to inform therapy is pretty useless medicine. When the therapy is “Go home and isolate in a room by yourself for a fortnight” that isn’t treatment. It doesn’t help the patient. “Stay home and get tested!” Well, you couldn’t do both until the RATs came out, but it was all about tests, tests, tests. Not once did anyone recommend viable treatments that people could consider — eg simple OTC remedies that have worked for common colds for yonks. This in spite of OC43, HKU, and other coronaviruses of similar ilk to Sars-COV2 being common cold pathogens. Yes, Covid was a nasty cold for some, a really nasty one for others, and for some it wasn’t nearly as bad as a regular cold.

    Australia was praised in many ways, but the lockdowns and draconian restrictions were absurd, and of course everyone pays the price economically and socially. Now, with about 50% of the population having had Covid, we’re pretty much normal again, but I can never forgive the establishment for its myopic behavior. Or the Victorian Premier and his minions.

    Reply
    1. Eggs ‘n beer

      And yet, Dan Andrews was voted back in as premier in November 2022! You’re a really masochistic bunch down there ….. no wonder there’s so much migration to Queensland.

      Reply
      1. Steve

        And the Tories will probably get voted back in, in 2024 !
        No amount of corruption, lies and incompetence will deter the British public – ‘do it to me one more time’.
        And, no I don’t want Starmer and the woodentops either, …

        Reply
    2. Martin Back

      The most absurd video I remember was three masked policemen running down a long, empty beach in pursuit of a lone surfer not wearing a mask.

      Among politicians, it became a dick-measuring contest.
      – My lockdown is stricter than yours, neener-neener.
      – Ah, but I have a bigger percentage vaccinated, so yah-boo-sucks.

      Reply
    3. Baillsruth

      I was talking to some young motheres today here in South East Queensland with children aged 2. These child are socially delayed due to ……….wait for it…….the lockdowns. So very, very sad. And I am not talking about school children.

      Reply
      1. Eggs ‘n beer

        Ok, I’ll bite. Why is their social delay blamed on lockdowns? In what way are they socially delayed? My grandchildren, 2 and 4, are well advanced. My friend’s grandchildren, 3 and 3, have kindy sorted out already. One says the other kids are so dumb because they can’t write their names and has been labelled ’bossy’ on day one, and the other (different kindy) said “no, I didn’t learn anything. I think the teachers were making sure everyone was distracted so they didn’t miss their mummies.” At a social gathering of 23 pre-kindy kids, it wasn’t obvious that the levels of social abilities were any less than similar groups three years ago.

        SEQ really didn’t suffer much compared to other states or NZ. And most of the restrictions were lifted in August 2021, 18 months ago. So, just asking ….

        Reply
        1. Baillsruth

          Can’t say. My 3 years & 7 month old grandson seems fine. But the 2 girls ages 2 seems very shy and that was one mothers explanation.

          Reply
          1. Eggs ‘n beer

            Thanks B. This isn’t a judgement on these particular mothers, perhaps their expectations that the two year olds should be bright and bubbly 18 months after the lockdown finished are justified. Or perhaps the kids are just naturally shy. Make the most of it, I say! Wait for the worm to turn ….

            But I do find there is a tendency to blame everything on the latest disaster rather than taking personal responsibility for issues. Even before the final lockdown was lifted the rules had been relaxed allowing up to ten people in a house. And, I think, twenty in open spaces. Along with the one person per two or four square metres rules. If the mothers were aware of the rules, it’s unlikely that two year olds should have been affected by lockdowns AT ALL, as they don’t need social contact until after six months or so, Mummy and Daddy will do fine up until then – and afterwards too.

            Face masks? Well, if you were worried about the effects on your kids social development because of them or other people wearing masks, lead by example and don’t wear one, or let your kid wear one. If you’re worried, then you’re anxious. Anxiety is a mental illness, which is a medical condition, and there is an automatic exemption from mask wearing for people with medical conditions. You don’t need a certificate from your doctor, either. If (when) questioned you politely state that you have a medical condition and that’s it. Anybody who asks you anything else is liable to six months in jail for attempting to breach medical privacy laws. This even worked in hospitals. Nobody ever questioned us beyond asking us to wear masks.

            Hand wash? Never used that either. The option of being able to wash your hands in soap and water was a mandatory requirement (again, including hospitals) which we always availed ourselves of.

            Peer pressure? Non-existent. The only peers we had were those people who were doing likewise. We pity sheep, and try to train them rather than be influenced by them.

            It always struck me how easy it was to legally sidestep the regulations.

  68. Mark Gobell

    They’re starting to come now – the ‘debunkings’ of the Pfizer undercover video sting, in which executive Jordon Trishton Walker, “Director of Research and Development – Strategic Operations and mRNA Scientific Planning”, tells his ‘date’ that Pfizer is looking to mutate the virus “so we could create preemptively developed new vaccines, right”.

    FDA Adviser Inadvertently Confirms Pfizer is Doing Gain-of-Function Research
    https://dailysceptic.org/2023/02/01/fda-adviser-inadvertently-confirms-pfizer-is-undertaking-gain-of-function-research/

    An Honest Voice at Last
    https://dailysceptic.org/2023/02/01/an-honest-voice-at-last/

    Reply
  69. John Wilson

    The signal I get from the EuroMOMO graphs is that the covid vaccines are killing enormous numbers of people across Europe. This is at least in the tens of thousands of deaths.

    Consider the graph for the mortality of the 75-84 age range.

    During 2017, 2018 and 2019 the graph is only occasionally above the redline (5 standard deviations). Most of the time it is around the average level.

    In 2022 the graph is above the red line for most of the time. In only one month does it touch the average level.

    There has to be an underlying reason for this level of increased mortality across 27 countries.

    Some of the mechanisms by which the covid jabs harm the human body are now well understood. The spike proteins generated by the vaccines are expressed on multiple organs in the body. They are known to cause heart disease, liver damage, menstrual problems and much more.

    In my view the harm that the covid jabs are doing to vital organs is the only plausible explanation for the enormous increase in mortality, in this age group and others, in 2022.

    Reply
  70. MarciaT

    Mark – and everyone: An interesting take on the entire Jordan Walker/Pfizer fiasco was offered by Bret Weinstein on the most recent Dark Horse podcast – namely that Walker, who hardly acted like a director of anything, never mind R & D – is a perfect example of someone hired to fulfill the demands of DIE (which is an entirely appropriate acronym in more than one respect) for Diversity, Inclusivity, and Equity. Thoughts?

    Reply
  71. johnsymes

    Difficult to know how things might shake out in the future if a really virulent and infectious disease zoonotic infection arises. Reading all these posts, you would think the entire world realizes the lockdowns were an error, but of course, the vast majority do not read these sorts of posts. The faces of the politicians, industrial lobbyists etc may change, but the same powerful interests will likely prevail. There is no lobby group more powerful than the rich and powerful.
    I personally think that politicians etc probably realize that the total knockdowns are a disaster, but they might suggest some sort of limited lockdown, a la GBD style, and this time they might be right. There are legal precedents for sanctioning individuals who are recklessly endangering others with transmitting infection (eg deliberately transmitting HIV). There is such alienation and mistrust now that we will never be able to have an agreed approach to a serious infection.

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      A virulent disease is already here. It is caused by a vack-seen containing the wherewith all to cause the host to develop spiked proteins. This was known to be toxic years ago when an animal study resulted in all the victims dying. Stopping psychopaths pretending to care about us would be a good start.

      Reply
  72. Richard Morris

    Thank you Dr Kendrick.

    We are alarmed by the indocrination of Chinese people, and our news outlets regularly remind us of the perils of totalitarian regimes that deny freedom to their citzens.
    It should send shivers down our spines that our own governments do the same but in a far more effective and subtles ways.

    Keep up the good work Dr Kendrick.

    Reply
  73. Lucy

    Here’s the problem, even if there was no lockdown, people would have just stopped going places. Before the schools were shut down here, parents stopped sending their children. I think the USA should have just let it happen naturally, then people would stop thinking the government did it. Covid 19 is not a joke. It’s causing heart attacks, strokes, lung damage. That shouldn’t be surprising. AFter the 1918 swine flu, Woodrow Willson had a stroke. My cardiologist said that any viral illness will cause heart attacks. I think there’s something else going on besides the traditional risk factors. The heart attacks were prior to any vaccination, so don’t give me that it was the vaccine. During EVERY other pandemic, say the yellow fever epidemic in colonial America, people just shut down businesses on their own. Nature should have been allowed to take its course. The respect for nature is at an all-time low. My state is reintroducing wolves. The deer are ruining the trees. Of course, the people think it’s the big bad government that is putting back the wolves. If they didn’t, the trees and rivers will not do their thing. I guess everyone is a short term thinker these days.

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      Lucy, if it’s not the vack-seen wot done it, please explain why so many normally fit athletes are collapsing AND DYING on the foield during sports events.As for your cardiologist, I’m so healthy I don’t have one, and I’ve no idea even if I have a GP now. They change so fast, and I have not seen anyone for years. 1918 swine flu? You have an error there, but in any case, what had Wilson’s stroke to do with it? Nobody knows the deaths figure for the 1918 whatever it was, as they keep increasing the number as the decades pass.

      Reply
    2. Jerome savage

      “Covid 19 is nor a joke” it was a racket Lucy, a giant racket to generate giant profits. Around here, there was nothing unusual except for an increase in suicides (many of them young according to a paramedic I got to know), missed cancer and heart appointments and constant stress and anxiety and family splits as some wised up to the BS and others swallowed hook line & sinker.

      Reply
  74. Steve

    As an aside – think Covid Passports:
    For those with concerns on digital IDs and possible restrictions that these could entail.

    The Government is holding a “Consultation on draft legislation to support identity verification”, this runs from 4 January 2023 to 1 March 2023. The data sharing powers will apply across England, Scotland and Wales, and eventually NI.

    Interested parties (anyone) can contribute via the online survey [1]. (about 10 questions)
    The consultation itself [2] is is worth reading before completing the survey.

    Digital IDs will affect EVERYONE. The consultation covers public services: Passports, Driving Licences, Benefits, Pensions, Land Registry, Local Government, etc. (Health Services not explicitly mentioned)
    It’s happening already … The EU is planning to require everyone to provide Finger Prints and Photo ID to enter. The Tories are planning to mandate ID checks for voting. Covid Passports are required by some.
    Like Smart Meters, access to services can be easily denied once digitised.

    To note:

    “This consultation sets out proposed data sharing legislation that would make it easier for citizens to PROVE who they are online when accessing government services … The proposed legislation will also unlock the full benefits of a new government identity verification system, known as GOV.UK One Login.”
    “The Government Digital Service (GDS), part of the Cabinet Office, is developing, in collaboration with OTHER government departments, a digital identity verification service which will allow people to create and reuse digital identities to access public services.”
    “The Government … will create a new Public Service Delivery (PSD) objective to allow SHARING personal information in order to deliver identity verification services to individuals and households … The data sharing would provide those specified public authorities with the ability to share data for the purposes of identity verification for the benefit of individuals and households.”

    Examples of attributes to be collected include:

    – user’s full name;
    – date of birth;
    – home address;
    – email address;
    – photographic images;
    – identifiers such as passport number or driving licence number;
    – attributes held by government departments necessary for verifying the identity of an individual;
    – the outcome of identity checks previously performed on a user; and
    – transactional data, for example, income

    “The outcome of these checks are RETAINED by the identity verification service and can be reused

    … a single way for citizens to prove their identity and access central government services online.”

    Also note:
    ” while this consultation deals with data sharing within the public sector, Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) proposals are focused on enabling digital identity use in the WIDER economy … The Cabinet Office is collaborating with DCMS to ensure our policy and legislative proposals are complimentary.”

    [1] https://surveys.domains.gov.uk/s/C0ZD81/

    [2] https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/draft-legislation-to-help-more-people-prove-their-identity-online/consultation-on-draft-legislation-to-support-identity-verification#:~:text=The%20Digital%20Identity%20Call%20for,citizens%20are%20protected%20from%20fraud.

    Reply
  75. David Bailey

    I wonder if anyone knows if there is evidence indicating how soon (if ever) the damage from receiving a COVID-19 jab starts to wear off?

    I mean is everyone who has taken the jab going to remain at greater risk of CVD and cancer for the rest of their lives?

    Reply
    1. Eggs ‘n beer

      Probably too soon to tell. But 16 months after one Pfizer jab my daughter’s POTS is much improved, but not gone. However, that might just be the acute phase – chronic issues could, as you suggest, lie dormant for years. I haven’t found a convincing argument yet as to how long spike proteins continue to be made.

      I shall watch for Life Insurance companies raising premiums for the toxicated, easy to do in Oz where we have a national vaccine register and you can prove you’re not jabbed.

      Reply
    2. Eggs ‘n beer

      Lol! Just after posting I read this from Project Veritas’ “interview” of Jordon Walker, a Pfizer R & D director:

      “Walker also hopes we don’t discover that “somehow this mRNA lingers in the body and like — because it has to be affecting something hormonal to impact menstrual cycles,” adding “I hope we don’t discover something really bad down the line…If something were to happen downstream and it was, like, really bad? I mean, the scale of that scandal would be enormous.””

      It looks like even the creators can’t answer your question. Not that he’s worried about the answer one little bit. All the sociopath is concerned about is that we don’t discover that they already know that it lingers, (whoops!) and that the scandal would be enormous if anything worse transpires.

      Reply
  76. Peter Whitehead

    Thanks for your new article. I really love the no nonsense attitude. Please keep them coming when the mood comes upon you. They improve my mood considerably!

    Reply
  77. Carole

    I have just come across this fascinating discussion about our constitutional law and thought it might be of interest to many on here. Sorry it’s not totally in line with this blog but it is of importance for all of those feeling we have no control of the direction we are being taken in.

    Reply
    1. Martin Back

      The government doesn’t have carte blanche to do what it wants. There must be some sort of responsibility and accountability. Perhaps Brits should consider bombarding the following personnel and asking them what they are doing about all the “died suddenlies”. Contact addresses are in the pdf.

      LIST OF MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITIES

      Click to access 2022-12-15_-_List_of_Ministerial_Responsibilities_final_for_publication.docx.pdf

      DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE
      Address: Department of Health and Social Care, 39 Victoria Street, London, SW1H 0EU
      Telephone: 0207 210 4850
      Website: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care
      Email: https://contactus.dhsc.gov.uk/
      The aim of the Department of Health and Social Care is to improve the health and well-being of people in England by supporting and advising our ministers: we help them shape and deliver policy that delivers the government’s objectives; setting direction: we anticipate the future and lead debate ensuring we protect and improve global and domestic health; accountability: we make sure the department and our arm’s-length bodies deliver on our agreed plans and commitments; acting as guardians of the health and care framework: we make sure the legislative, financial, administrative and policy frameworks are fit for purpose and work together; troubleshooting: in the last resort, the public and Parliament expect us to take the action needed to resolve crucial and complex issues; and COVID-19: leading the department’s response to the pandemic.

      Secretary of State for Health and Social Care
      Minister of State (Minister for Health and Secondary Care)
      Minister of State (Minister for Social Care)
      Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Minister for Primary Care
      and Public Health)
      Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Minister for Women’s Health
      and Mental Health)
      Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Minister for the Lords)

      Agencies of the Department of Health and Social Care
      Food Standards Agency
      Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
      United Kingdom Heath Security Agency

      Reply
      1. Steve

        “The government doesn’t have carte blanche to do what it wants.”
        Declare a Pandemic then use emergency powers to do whatever you like. Simples.
        Don’t fall in the trap of believing we are still in some sort of democracy, all the evidence points to an actual oligarchic regime.
        And, have you ever, in the last three years, tried writing to your MP. A totally pointless exercise !

        Reply
        1. Jeremy May

          Yes, I did Steve. I received a reply which had been mass produced by the mandarins at central orrifice!

          It was a labour politician but it would have made no difference which party he was from.

          Reply
        2. Jimmy Christian

          In spite of the lockdowns, at least I’m glad I don’t live in the UK. Yes, I did write to my MP, who was (and still is) in the minority/opposition. Not to mention the shadow health secretary, expressing my aggravation at all the policies the Victorian government had foisted on us (rather than consulting with us and doing what the electorate actually wanted, which is what democracy SHOULD be about, not thinking that they know best). My MP and the shadow secretary both wrote back personally, no form letter, in total agreement. Later I saw my MP tearing strips off the premier in Parliament. Needless to say he got my vote in the re-election. Unfortunately the annoying encumbent remains for another four years. At least he’s promised no more Covid measures — if he tried, I suspect there would be a revolution.

          Reply
    2. Tish

      Thank you Carole. How important. A ‘must listen to all’ one as the final part shouldn’t be missed. Americans should find it of interest too.

      Reply
    3. never2lat8

      Carole

      I have just posted some information from a researcher called Sasha Latypova that she has posted on her substack. Not sure it will appear.

      To put it bluntly – in the US and I’m sure it will be the same in the UK.
      All rules and laws passed by our government will be superseded by none elected bodies like the WHO and HHS (specifically for the USA) when a medical emergency is declared.

      Expect more medical emergencies and pandemics when its time to ‘push’ the population in the desired direction.

      Reply
    4. Neil

      It’s interesting how people pick up different points from this debate. I thought that the 1688 Bill of Rights was the central piece of legislation … it’s detailed, it’s on the UK government website and it *can’t be repealed* because the entire constitutional monarchy depends on it.

      Bizarre … do our demands for medical freedom now depend on sorting out what the law really is and *enough people* proving that the government has been exceeding its powers for the past 20-30 years …? Moreover, as the speaker says, many lawyers seem unaware of the situation.

      Reply
    5. MarciaT

      Carole – not sure why you thought this wasn’t totally in-line with this blog . I very strongly believe that if we don’t start working on all the legal problems this whole covid mess has created, we’re being just like those docs who don’t look for the cause of a disease but simply prescribe a drug that will “cover it up.” Thanks so much for posting this – absolutely brilliant discussion!!

      Reply
      1. AhNotepad

        Many things the UK government is doing are at best unconstitutional, and range through unlawful to actual criminal. They passed a statute recently to permit crimes by various go=vernment agencies, including the justice department permitting them to commit crimes. For much more constitutional stuff try https://www.ukcolumn.org/search, and look for “constitution”. You will not have any free time for many months.

        Reply
  78. Jerome savage

    No retribution, no accountability according to the playwright cj hopkins
    “The point is, the PSYOP that we have all been subjected to for going on the last three years is not going to be exposed, ever. The damage control and memory-holing will continue, and the misdirections and limited hangouts will continue, and the whitewashing of corporations like Twitter and the corporate media and “papers of record” will continue, and the Covid-PSYOP will be erased from history, like the WMDs-PSYOP was erased from history … and people will get used to their “vaccinations,” like they got used to taking off their shoes at the airport.”
    https://off-guardian.org/2023/01/31/how-to-memory-hole-a-psyop/

    Reply
  79. never2lat8

    Although below leans towards the US, what has just happened (the covid saga!) I think has much of it roots there.

    After a few attempts to explain why I believe things happened the way they did, I will point readers to this researcher who I feel does it best.

    https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/the-role-of-the-us-dod-and-their

    I have been reading most of Sasha’s research and she sites actual documents in her
    conclusions and findings. I don’t believe this is some type of ‘conspiracy rabbit hole’
    she is trying to take people down.

    Also search out Katherine Watts substack posts. All can be read without payment.

    Reply
  80. Leila

    Thank you for mentioning our great leader Jacinda Ardern. It was quite surreal living under her regime for the last few years, and seeing how many people around me adored her, including family members. My ex-boss put up a post on her Facebook after Jacinda resigned, saying how Jacinda deserves the best. I’m thinking you know this lady basically kicked me out of my job for no reason while I was pregnant and the main income earner. We had no idea what we were going to do, and she destroyed so many livelihoods yet somehow she deserves the best. Mindblowing. There’s also a book about her called, “Leading with Empathy” The world is a joke

    Reply
      1. Andrew H

        Steve – I saw a few years ago that you are taking L-citrulline (NOT the malate version).
        Please could you tell me where you get yours from? I found some capsules on Amazon – but a more regular and better value source would be helpful.

        Reply
        1. Geoff

          Glad to read that yer trying to find a better source. Amazon is an abomination and should be boycotted like all the other large corporations and banks.

          Reply
      2. geoff

        Methinks the gentleman of whom you speak would have been honored to try and defend his people against the monsters which we have long, and still are now, facing. Liars all of them, and lying’s the least of their crimes.

        I suppose it began with a sense… that what the average child is taught about major historical events is a pack of lies.

        -Gerard Menuchin, Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil p12 (2016)

        “… this entire myth, so prevalent then and even now about Hitler, and about the Japanese, is a tissue of fallacies from beginning to end. Every plank in this nightmare evidence is either completely untrue or not entirely the truth.
        If people should learn this intellectual fraud about Hitler’s Germany, then they will begin to ask questions, and searching questions…”

        Murray Rothbard, Revisionism for Our Time
        Mr. Rothbard was an American historian of the very highest caliber.
        http://mises.org/daily/2592

        Reply
      3. Mark Gobell

        Steve wrote : “In the UK they receive knighthoods and other honours. Hitler would be so proud of these genocidal maniacs.”

        If you are ever able to free yourself from the brainwashing, expand your reading list and do some proper research, you might end up in a very different place Steve.

        For any future arguments you make which have to rely on an actual “genocidal maniac”, you will find yourself on much firmer ground with Stalin, Pol Pot, et al.

        “History is a set of lies, agreed upon.”
        Napoleon Bonaparte

        Reply
  81. stevessf

    Great article, especially since it supports everything I’ve been saying about politicians using the Covid virus as their personal sword of Damocles to control and consciously promote panic among a quivering and paranoid population while they enhance their personal control of the masses, and in particular, our serpent of a fatuous California governor, the shallow hypocrite, Gavin Newsom.

    Reply
  82. Paul Fruitbat

    Interesting:

    “Scientists have discovered microplastics in vascular tissue for the first time – suggesting they can pass to human tissue through blood vessels”.
    https://www.hull.ac.uk/work-with-us/more/media-centre/news/2023/scientists-discover-microplastics-in-human-veins

    Seems to me that the only way such things can turn up in veins is if they were in arteries first.

    And since Dr Kendrick is looking for causes of damage to arterial walls… Why worry about natural compounds when there are apparently nice hard, sharp, rigid artificial materials in there too.

    Anyone remember “The Graduate” (1967)? Especially the scene where an older, wiser man who has made his pile advises the young man about his future? “One word: plastics”. Thanks a ton for that advice!

    Reply
    1. Steve

      Microplastics have been in the food chain for quite a while now. It’s in the food we eat and the water we drink, as such our bodies are slowly being contaminated.
      Worse still, there is no way to remove microplastics and they last for ever ! The human body will have to learn to evolve its way out of this mess.

      Reply
      1. Paul Fruitbat

        Evolution doesn’t work nearly fast enough for that particular job. Think what would be involved. Basically, as well as the incredibly complex systems and safety systems and recovery systems that Dr Kendrick has described in “The Clot Thickens”, the body now has to cope with hard, indestructible pieces of plastic knocking around (I use that verb advisedly) in our arteries. Including the corners and joints, which as he points out are the most vulnerable points.

        What kind of species is it that commits such a gross and irretrievable assault on every one of its members, present and to come, without ever even thinking about consequences?

        No doubt defenders of the industry will claim, “Oh no one could have anticipated this!”

        Which is exactly my point.

        Reply
          1. Eggs 'n beer

            Toxic metals are very different to plastics. Because of their toxicity they very rarely occur in plants – cadmium can be absorbed by cabbages (and presumably other brassicas) but obviously you have to live in an area where the soil is high in cadmium …. unlucky. Aluminium, mercury, never. Plastics, being made from oil and coal, which were plant or animal in origin, should be much more amenable to bacterial adaptation in the body. There are plenty of bacteria already in action on hydrocarbons which is why nature cleans up so quickly after oil spills (what did happen to the end of the oceans after the Gulf of Mexico oil catastrophe?). There’s even a bug evolved to devour the Titanic, adapted despite the cold and dark to eat rust.

        1. Eggs 'n beer

          Plastics aren’t indestructible. They’re organic molecules consisting mainly of carbon=carbon, carbon=nitrogen, carbon=oxygen and carbon=hydrogen bonds with minor and trace amounts of other elements. Bacteria have already evolved to break down plastics, including polythene, polyurethane, polyethylene terephthalate (PET). Then you have enzymes, which create microplastics. It’s not humans per se that will evolve, but the trillions of other living or quasi-living things that make us. They, having very short reproductive cycles, will adapt rapidly to any new source of food.

          Reply
          1. shirley3349

            Waste plastic could be a very plentiful source of energy. But the problem is how to clean up the emissions so that they don’t pollute the atmosphere with the real nasties, not just CO2 and water vapour. Many solutions have been suggested, but most are too energy intensive in themselves to be economic. But the problem is going to have to be grasped before we are inundated by it.

            For no-one is going back to queueing at the grocer’s to get very ordinary biscuits taken from large, square-sided, metal tins, then wrapped in thick, brown, paper bags, as during my (young) childhood in the early 1950’s. I remember my Mum proudly showing off her first polythene bag to me and my brother, and us feeling it in wonder! The modern, feeble, brown paper bags, which collapse under the weight of only 4 potatoes, are just not good enough.

          2. AhNotepad

            0.04% is a tiny amount, but the supposed lower amounts in the sort of recent past may well be because the direct meaurements were used and no allowance was made for the outgassing from the ice core measurements See https://youtu.be/qNSPiMmuIvI. Tom Nelson’s channel has many interesting interviews.

          3. Martin Back

            Some things can do a lot of damage in small doses. For instance, ricin can kill you at 0.002% of your body weight, one twentieth of the CO2 concentration.

          4. Eggs 'n beer

            True. But ricin is toxic. Microplastics are largely chemically inert. And if you have a healthy gut, not going to get into your bloodstream. This is sounding like Covid panic-mongering revisited.

          5. An Italian Australian at the Tropics

            I agree.

            It’s like a magician pointing your attention to a hand doing nothing, while doing the trick with the other hand.

            I’m more worried about the plasticizers in food containers, clothes, furniture’s fabric, toys and so on than microplastic.

      1. Steve

        David. Slightly misleading statement IMO. I quote from this paper the first para of the conclusions.
        “7. Conclusion
        All the Earth’s ecosystems are currently contaminated with microplastics. However, due to the lack of uniformity and simplicity in sampling methods, little is known about their temporal and geographical distribution in the environments needed to assess organism exposure.”
        The paper is stating that the problem is one of standardisation of measurement methods and attributes NOT anything to do with the existence, or not, of microplastics.
        Thanks.

        Reply
        1. gettingmoresceptical

          Well, one of the issues it mentioned was possible contamination from the ropes (presumably containing plastic) used to tow experimental containers.

          Clearly a phenomenon like that could overwhelm any signal coming from pollution.

          Reply
      2. shirley3349

        Comment on my recent post.
        Of course CO2 and water vapour are not nasty. Can readers not spot irony when it’s not conveyed in person? Coupling CO2 with water vapour should have made matters clear, I would have thought, and I was CONTRASTING them with the “real nasties” not saying they were in any way equivalent.

        Reply
  83. Eli_M

    It’s not all about excess deaths. Are you suggesting that people with Long Covid are making their symptoms up? Those people don’t think so, neither do all the people who have M.E. who have been disbelieved and gaslit for years, and don’t want a double dose. Are you suggesting that the people I know who had Covid and immediately developed asthma, which they didn’t have previously, would have got asthma anyway? That an elderly relative on their 2nd Covid infection – no additional ventilation installed in care or open windows in winter – who died a week after having it, wasn’t affected by Covid? Or doesn’t it matter, because they were old and could have died of any infection? There’s research showing micro-clotting and other changes post-Covid. There’s research showing that proper ventilation and masking reduces transmission of this and other viruses (as does people’s own experience). If I’ve understood correctly, you seem to be saying, as do many of the commenters, that people who don’t want to catch Covid or other serious infectious diseases should have no right to choose. Some commenters are actually angry and offended by other people choosing to wear masks, or choosing not to walk beside them when they are maskless! People saying ‘no worse than flu’ – flu is bad. Flu also disables and kills. Especially if you have certain other health conditions already, Yes, it’s all been awful, the disease and the restrictions, and it’s still awful. Infectious disease IS awful and that’s the point.

    I agree that the most ridiculous part of lockdown was being told not to go into the garden or sit on a park bench drinking tea three feet from a friend. That fits in to the whole ignoring-it’s-airborne narrative which continues to further infect, disable and kill, and prevent CEV people leading a more normal life. Additionally the pandemic was used as a vehicle to further destroy the NHS and waste money on unusable PPE and otherwise allow legal fraud.

    Reply
    1. Sasha

      There’s a Cochrane Review out on uselessness of masks. Look it up. Jessica Rose, Peter McCullough, Hadley Rees and others write about it on Substack

      Reply
      1. David L

        The Health & Safety Executive have a take on it as well now. “Masks and respirators secured by loops over the ears cannot provide adequate protection…” in an update from last April.

        Reply
    2. Jerome savage

      I’ll just go for the low hanging fruit first.
      Seventy something studies knock the mask masquerade. Ivor cummins covers it well.

      “Case Closed on Masks – Final Proof is in – and its Over! –

      Reply
    3. Shaun Clark

      Eli_M, I’m unjabbed, but eventually caught Delta-Covid (Nov/Dec 21) from a poorly g’kid. Covid for me (now 72) was no big deal really except for terrible back pain (shingles-like but no spots/scabs/rash). Anyway, I play golf (a lot), and I can confirm that many other golfers are suffering from long-covid asthma-like issues. All are vaxxed. Some also seem to be suffering from early confusion/dementia-like issues.

      Reply
      1. Doug from Canada

        Hey Shaun,

        Me too, no big deal. Last year had it for 4 days, just Phlegm in the back of my throat. Didn’t even take bed rest. Had to look after my wife who gave it to me. She was double poisoned (for work) and was down on the couch for 10 days. Her co-workers half her age (20’s) were out twice as long, all of them boosted.

        My sister, 4 jabs, has had C19 multiple times, very badly, or so I’m told. We don’t talk anymore. I was disowned for being a (left?, right? wing) nut job. She’s now losing vision in one eye. Just started all of a sudden. Big mystery! Will it stop? For her sake I hope so.

        Brother in-law, week after booster last year, had seizure for 10 – 20 minutes. Now has multiple things in his brain. Can die at any moment. Can’t drive anymore. Life completely upended.

        Two of my wife’s cousins dropped dead from massive heart attacks. Two others , not related but within the same circle of people, dropped dead. All mid 50’s, all jabbed.

        My ex manager from work found her best friend dead at home last spring, dissected aorta, 57. My ex manager had a pulmonary embolism last fall. Now has a multi foot clot from knee into abdomen, 55. Both boosted. Lived together, probably went together for the shot. Bad batch? Probably.

        My mothers cousin, 4 shots, hospitalized for a week with uncontrollable heart rate – blood pressure.

        This is just in my immediate circle, and it’s an admittedly small circle. Prior to 2022 I knew of one person passing from MI. My high school friends father who, a week after open heart surgery, was doing push-up to prove he was ok. He wasn’t.

        Everyone in my family is jabbed. I couldn’t stop them. I tried so hard that I got disowned. And now I sit here waiting for the next event.

        This was evil beyond description and I find myself equally enraged and saddened every day. It’s been only, what, a year and a half? What will next year bring?

        Reply
        1. Shaun Clark

          Wow Doug, that sounds like a terrible run! I’m very, very sorry to hear of it. Fortunately, I am a member of a very small golf club (actually the second oldest in Essex, UK), and we play a loooot of golf (mostly 9 holes comps.), and all year ’round. We are all a bit mad, but very fortunate as we are in a high point of Epping Forest which is mainly composed of alluvial gravels (some peat, some clay), and the course drains incredibly well (we are also a bit of a drinking club with a golf problem to boot). Our greens also are a bit famous hereabouts. My take on it is that we all have good Vitamin D levels as a result, and as such not too much in the way of many direct covid issues (9-hole golf in our busy neck of the woods, really, really works). I think UK Ramblers may also have such good fortune. However, the stories I hear of GC members friends and rellies (far-and-wide) is not good. Some stories are very tragic. Of course I am unvaxxed, and so some members keep their personal stories much to themselves as a direct result. It can get a wee bit emotionally fraught! No one likes to think that they (maybe) have been had. Take care fella!!

          Reply
    4. thecovidpilot

      “Infectious disease IS awful and that’s the point.”

      The response to Infectious disease has been far more awful than the disease, and that’s rather the point. The response failed to mitigate disease effects and actually exacerbated the effects of the disease. The response also has increased mortality all on its own by quite a lot.

      Reply
  84. Roy Bonney

    re: your comments on the differences in death rates in the euroMOMO models, can I suggest an explanations…

    Queueing Theory

    Consider something familiar to most people in Britain the Queue.

    Imaging if you will the British population as a large queue,
    people enter the queue when they are born and leave it when they die.

    In a stable situation the number of people entering the queue will be the same as the number of people leaving the queue i.e. the number of births equals the number of deaths.

    If however the number of people leaving the queue is less than those arriving then the queue will increase in size, (most people have experienced this at a busy time in a supermarket.)

    Equally, if the time people spend in a queue increases (for some reason) then the number leaving it will reduce for a period of time (Note this is an important point!).

    Over at least the last 50 year the medical profession has done a wonderful job, at curing people and by implication extending the time they spend in the queue of life i.e. instead of dying in midlife they now live to an old age.

    This has resulted in the queue becoming bigger (more people living and for longer) than was the case previously and thus the number leaving it is smaller (less people dying) than one would expect.

    The problem is for this situation of lower deaths rates to continue medical interventions will have to keep continuously keep improving, you have to keep more and more people in the queue for longer.

    Unfortunately, this cannot go one forever, once improvements in medical care stop “improving”, or even slowing down, then people will start to leave the queue at an increasing rate, that is the death rate will start to increase.

    This is unfortunately inevitable!

    Otherwise improvement would have to continue and eventually people would have to be alive for longer and longer, ultimately people would have to live for ever!

    If you look at the data on the ONS website for population size and deaths data for the last 50 years, you will see this is what has been happening.

    If you plot the distribution of the percentage deaths occurring by age group in the population overtime, you can clearly see the age at which people die has shifted to the older ages, people are living longer, but a limit is being reached in these distributions.
    (Left as an exercise to the reader, it took me a couple of hours to do.)

    The idea that is currently being discussed is that Covid is responsible for the increasing death rate is quite likely not to be whole truth and what is responsible is we are seeing is the size and distribution of the population and their deaths, are reaching a limit, which inevitably means there will be an increase in the death rate to a new higher level than has been for the last few decades.

    Reply
      1. Roy Bonney

        Yes that is true, I agree it doesn’t just materialise in one year.

        The analysis I did was based on the data of averages of 10 year groups from 1968 to 2017, to try and understand the more general trends in the population dynamics, which clearly support the conclusions from using a queueing model approach as described, that it is inevitable we will start to see an increase in the death rate, if not now then very soon simply due to the dynamics of the system.

        I specifically excluded data from the last few years to avoid the clutter in the data due to Covid.

        What I think possible happened was we were at the start of the trend of this increasing death rate five or so years ago, and the deaths due to Covid just confused the issue. What I think is happening now is the system is starting to stabilise again now at the higher deaths rates and the trend is starting to emerge again.
        We will see, over the next couple of years,

        I just think it is unhelpful just to blame it on Covid and exclude other possibilities.

        I am quite surprised someone hasn’t yet blamed the excess death rates on Brexit, no doubt that will happen at some point.

        Reply
  85. Shaun Clark

    Viruses? People have often invested their life’s work in them, or in support of them. I have had folk supposedly in the know screaming at me that they are real, but no evidence is ever forthcoming. I have looked, and looked, but unfortunately for them it all just comes down to blind faith. I think it is all more straightforward than it is made out to be, albeit intriguing. Further, I do believe the whole viral edifice will soon crumble.

    Reply
    1. Tom Morgan

      Shaun,
      I’m curious as to what type of evidence For viruses (viri?) you would accept. And what is the types of evidence people offer, that you do not accept.
      Tom

      Reply
      1. John

        Definitely not “viri” which translates as “of a man”. Virus is not seen in the plural (as it is a mass noun) and is likely to be one of those weird second declension neuter nouns like pelagus. Rant over.

        Reply
      2. Paul Fruitbat

        Convincing evidence. To be fair, that’s rather hard to find, because the critters are so unbelievably tiny. It’s hard enough proving that they exist – proving what they get up to is much, much harder.

        Just imagine: a sub-microscopic thing that is balanced right on the razor edge between alive and not alive. It comes alive only when it gets inside the right type of living cell; and then all it does is to force the cell to make more of the virus.

        How can you study the behaviour of something that has no behaviour until it is right inside the most complex system we know of – which is also a vital part of our own bodies? You can take cells out of the human body and try to keep them working in vitro; good luck maintaining all their normal functioning that way. How do you preserve the effects of hormones and exosomes when you have isolated the cells from them?

        Dr Briggs has another fine article today: https://www.wmbriggs.com/post/45228/ He is the man who tells us over and over and over that models say nothing except what they are told to say (and the same is true of ChatGTP).

        Most of virology involves a lot of modelling. I have just reread a passage in “Diabetes Unpacked” (highly recommended!) that drills home this message:

        “The Framingham Heart Study continues to this day and now covers six generations. Since the original work, various guidelines, tools and risk calculators have been spawned. All are designed around a central and singular theme: to lower the ‘bad cholesterol’. Here lies the problem – it was decided in advance that cholesterol was the centre of the heart disease universe. With this dogma prevailing, everything else was forced to revolve around it”.

        Virology suffers from similar problems. When you begin work in the certainty that virus exist and cause certain phenomena, your conclusions are highly likely to conclude that it is so.

        Reply
        1. Martin Back

          This is what ChatGPT had to say:

          What proof do we have that viruses exist?

          The existence of viruses has been widely accepted in the scientific community based on various lines of evidence, including:

          1. Direct visualization: Advancements in microscopy techniques have allowed us to observe viruses directly, and see their characteristic shapes and sizes.

          2. Infectious nature: The ability of viruses to cause disease and spread from one host to another provides clear evidence of their existence.

          3. Genetic material: The discovery of viral RNA or DNA inside infected cells provides evidence that viruses are a separate entity from the cells they infect.

          4. Antibody response: The presence of specific antibodies in an infected individual’s blood, produced in response to a viral infection, provides further evidence of the existence of viruses.

          5. Isolation and cultivation: The successful isolation and cultivation of viruses in the laboratory provides strong evidence for their existence, and has been crucial for the study of virology.

          These lines of evidence, when taken together, provide strong support for the existence of viruses, and have led to their widespread recognition as a distinct group of biological entities.

          Is it possible that viruses do not exist?

          While the existence of viruses is widely accepted in the scientific community based on the evidence described above, it is always possible that new evidence could emerge that challenges current understanding. However, as of now, the overwhelming evidence for the existence of viruses makes it highly unlikely that they do not exist. Furthermore, the study of viruses and their interactions with hosts has led to a deeper understanding of many important biological processes, and has had a major impact on the fields of medicine, genetics, and biotechnology.

          Reply
        2. gettingmoresceptical

          Here is a book written by a man and wife team, Mark and Sam Bailey (no relation of mine).

          My understanding of this is that the traditional four Koch requirements used to prove that an organism (bacterium) causes a disease

          Reply
      3. Shaun Clark

        Virus evidence? Whoa, that’s a biggie for a blog. 🤪 As if I could be so succinct, and prescient? Well, ‘they’ invented the world of viruses and it’s for them to prove to me that it’s sound evidenced-based science. I guess when you are in the dark there is a tendency to grab hold of anything (even a Biden or a Boris). To me it’s become something of a three-tiered wedding cake of nonsense, and my gut feel is that it’s going to end in tears. However, I’m coming to understand that this WHOLE viral shit-show is something of an opportunistic fogged-up, snake-oiled, mirage, and yes, that puts me out on limb somewhat with the bed-wetting (and the bed-crapping) shills, but all of my deep-dive research is seemingly dragging me (screaming!) that way – to the way where madness lies all about me. It’s taken me some time to get to arrive at where I’m at, but I have eight g’kids and that very much compels me to examine it all as well. I once said a big NO to call-up to Viet Nam (after migrating to Australia on my own aged 17, and yes, Australia was in it a wee bit too), and years later I called the revolution in Iran up against massive career and political push-back, besides a whole bunch of other mendacious stuff which actually got me little thanks. Anyway, I’ve now arrived here, to this viral/vaccine mash-up following some sound scientific approaches (like many here I am genuinely interested in such stuff), and I have not been ‘smoking’ along with the Icke’s, Brand’s, and Peter’s of this ever-wackier world. As such, I’m comfortable with being ridiculed about it publicly, but when I sit down with folk to discuss I’m hit with a deluge of apologist dogma, and some times phlegm. Hey ho. I’m very comfortable in being proved wrong. I’m not a contrarian but I do welcome it! Moreover, all of this is also beginning to smell of a very Enron-esque monied-up pile-in. Whereby, one element just feeds back to t’other, and so it just flips from Peter-to-Paul going ’round and ’round whilst shaving off a wee bit of cream for the back-scratching in-crowd. The world has been here before in many outlandish forms, but coincidentally none REALLY knew/knows as to what they are really dabbling in. Maybe that’s the aim, or even the secret? It’s all just a something of a synthetic merry-go-round to me, and I’m just not getting on it. Medicinally, it’s statin-esque in its play-book audacity.

        Reply
    2. Paul Fruitbat

      Philosophers of knowledge (epistemology) like to distinguish between what we can know directly and what we can only infer. If you ever spend some time thinking it over, you will see that the vast majority of what we think we know is in fact the result of inferences – often long chains of inferences, each depending on others.

      Virology involves a remarkable amount of inference and, I suppose, virtually no direct knowledge. Of course, the same can be said about nuclear physics and mathematics.

      Martin Back cites ChatGTP, in spite of my link to Dr Briggs’s explanation that, like other models, ChatGTP tells you only what you told it to tell you. (Which suits politicians fine, but scientists less so).

      For instance, Martin quotes ChatGTP as saying:

      “The ability of viruses to cause disease and spread from one host to another provides clear evidence of their existence”.

      That, of course, is exactly back to front. How can we know that virus cause disease and spread from one host to another, if we do not know that they exist? The same could be said of the “noxious influences” that most doctors thought responsible for disease before the germ theory came along.

      The great difficulty with virus is that Koch’s Postulates cannot be applied to them.

      Reply
      1. Paul Fruitbat

        Apologies for writing “ChatGTP” instead of “ChatGPT”. As it’s gibberish to me, I have difficulty remembering the right order.

        Reply
    3. Martin Back

      It doesn’t matter whether viruses exist or not. Clearly, there is something that looks and behaves exactly like viruses are assumed to do, and we might as well call it a virus.

      If someone comes up with a better, more useful, version of what that something is, we’ll change, but until then, viruses are “real”.

      I put real in inverted commas because the philosophers tell us we can’t know what reality is, we can only interpret it through our senses. Science doesn’t reveal the truth about reality, it creates an internally consistent story to explain what our senses tell us.

      Reply
      1. Eggs 'n beer

        Not quite. “It doesn’t matter whether viruses exist or not.” Agreed.

        “Clearly, there is something that looks and behaves exactly like viruses are assumed to do, and we might as well call it a virus.”

        That’s a circular argument. I would say that something is, or some things are, producing symptoms.

        Some people are saying that the symptoms are produced by what they call a virus, possibly because they are so used to symptoms being produced by bacteria that if they can’t find a bacteria responsible for the symptoms, it must be another ‘thing’. They have found minute ‘things’ associated with the symptoms, which they therefore call a virus. I say that correlation does not equal causation (like cholesterol in arterial walls).

        Persisting with the assumption that viruses are real until proven otherwise is an impediment to objective thinking.

        With Covid, we have an incredibly contagious virus that cannot be caught by someone lying between two other people racked with the symptoms of the virus for several nights in a row (his wife and young daughter), or sharing a car for thirty hours straight with four other feverish people coughing their guts up (floods in Queensland) who all tested +ve when they reached civilisation (or at least a testing station).

        Somehow those situations don’t sound like a virus.

        Reply
        1. Paul Fruitbat

          The “testing positive” part is highly deceptive, and I think we ought to start by rejecting it utterly.

          If you are ill, that is a fact. Getting a “positive test” means nothing with regards to your health or your ability to infect others. PCR is simply not a diagnostic test, as explained by its inventor Kary Mullis.

          Few things have made me so sad for the past 3 years as hearing of people who conclude that they are sick because they “got a positive test”. This is a classic example of a “proxy result”, because it is wrongly assumed that a “positive test” means “being sick with Covid” – whereas it doesn’t.

          Reply
          1. Eggs 'n beer

            I quite agree. But, the four who tested +ve were definitely sick! Heavy coughs, fevers, sore throats. And the fifth bloke, who tested -ve, was not sick, despite sharing the same ordinary sedan with the others for thirty hours with the windows up the whole time (torrential rain). Nor did he become sick subsequently. Funnily enough, the only smoker was the non-sick guy. The rest were all very fit, thin, young …..

            Contrast with my son and I testing +ve with no symptoms from a test required for entry to Japan. It’s a total joke.

  86. Martin Back

    Given that the authorities are promoting boosters with the same formulation as the original Wuhan spike protein although the virus itself has long ago mutated away from the Wuhan version, this makes me wonder–

    The only source of Wuhan-type spike protein these days is what our own bodies manufacture, if we’ve been vaccinated with the mRNA vaccine.

    So we are being vaccinated to protect us from the results of our previous vaccinations!

    This sounds bizarre. Can it be?

    Reply
  87. Roy Bonney

    Addendum to my comments above about the cluttering of data due to Covid.

    And continuing the theme of excess deaths I came across this “official” data set recently released…

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/singleyearofageandaverageageofdeathofpeoplewhosedeathwasduetoorinvolvedcovid19

    Released: 20 January 2023

    Sheet 1: Number of deaths by single year of age, cause, and month of death registration, deaths registered in March 2020 to December 2022, England and Wales

    If you rearrange the data in this spreadsheet to group all causes deaths, and form sums for comparison to previous years, you get these figures…

    2015 602,782
    2016 597,206
    2017 607,172
    2018 616,018
    2019 604,704

    2020 689,628
    2021 586,334
    2022 577,177

    The all causes deaths in 2021 and 2022 were lower than the five years preceding Covid in 2020.
    Is this just a bounce back correction for the excess deaths in 2020?

    Are there really excess deaths now, this data suggests not?
    OK so what is going on, can someone explain this to me?

    The number of deaths data up to / including 2020 can be downloaded from…
    (note you have to add the male and female death totals to get the above figures)

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies/adhocs/14367deathsandpopulationestimatesfortheuk1961to2020bysingleyearofage

    Can some download the above data and check my figures please.

    Reply
  88. Roy Bonney

    Addendum to my comments above about the cluttering of data due to Covid.

    And continuing the theme of excess deaths I came across this “official” data set recently released…

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/singleyearofageandaverageageofdeathofpeoplewhosedeathwasduetoorinvolvedcovid19

    Released: 20 January 2023

    Sheet 1: Number of deaths by single year of age, cause, and month of death registration, deaths registered in March 2020 to December 2022, England and Wales

    If you rearrange the data in this spreadsheet to group all causes deaths, and form sums for comparison to previous year, you get these figures…

    the corrected data for England and Wales is…

    2015 529,655
    2016 525,048
    2017 533,253
    2018 541,589
    2019 530,841

    2020 607,922
    2021 586,334
    2022 577,177

    The all causes deaths in 2021 and 2022 were higher than the five years preceding Covid in 2020.

    The number of deaths data up to / including 2020 can be downloaded from…
    (note you have to add the male and female deaths to get the above figures)

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies/adhocs/14367deathsandpopulationestimatesfortheuk1961to2020bysingleyearofage

    Can some download the data and check my figures please.

    Reply
    1. Martin Back

      Assuming your revised numbers are correct, there is a disturbing continuation of the ‘excess deaths’ trend. After a big jump in deaths has cleared out the dry tinder, there should be a period of below-normal deaths as the death rate reverts to normal. This is not happening. The excess deaths are declining, but rather slowly.

      Just eyeballing the chart, average deaths 2015 – 2019, about 530,000.
      Average deaths 2020 – 2022, about 585,000, and projecting the trend, only returning to the old normal in five years’ time, i.e. 2027.

      Reply
      1. Roy Bonney

        Interesting dataset, thanks for referencing it, yes your right there is a consistent difference of around a 1000 or so from my figures which were also from an ONS dataset. It is interesting the confidence interval is just under a 1000 as well (in sheet 10).

        I must admit I do find the ONS website annoying for its lack of structure and any sensible organisation particularly in the filenames and what is actually in the file. Why they cannot just keep it consistent with simple filenames and single meaningful table in each file beats me.

        And yes I agree the fact the trend from the data that after the peak is slow to decline is a worry. Unfortunately I studied maths not medicine so what is happening and why is a bit beyond my understanding, one reason why I follow Dr K.

        Just on passing I came across a great quote which sums up this blog and why I follow it…

        “Truth always rests with the minority,
        and the minority is always stronger than the majority,
        because the minority is generally formed by those who really have an opinion.”

        Søren Kierkegaard, 1850

        Reply
        1. Paul Fruitbat

          Wikiquote gives this version:

          “The truth is always in the minority, and the minority is always stronger than the majority, because as a rule the minority is made up of those who actually have an opinion, while the strength of the majority is illusory, formed of that crowd which has no opinion — and which therefore the next moment (when it becomes clear that the minority is the stronger) adopts the latter’s opinion, which now is in the majority, i.e. becomes rubbish by having the whole retinue and numerousness on its side, while the truth is again in a new minority”.

          The Journals of Søren Kierkegaard, 1850

          Reply
  89. Paul Fruitbat

    Another excellent and highly relevant post by Dr Briggs.

    “How Naughty Researchers Learn To Imply Cause, Though Unproved, Has Been Discovered”
    https://www.wmbriggs.com/post/45288/

    Briggs cites what appears to be a fine paper studying the frequency in scientific papers of words which, while strictly not implying causality, in fact persuade many readers that causality does exist.

    Such techniques are familiar to us all, as they were extensively used in promoting false narratives about Covid, the “vaccines”, etc.

    Reply
  90. Tish

    My cousin tells me that her 4 year old granddaughter set her toys out into two rows for a picket line with a banner saying

    TEDDY HAS RIGHTS AND SO DO I

    Reply
    1. Tish

      I wonder if what I posted above has something to do with parental protection against grooming of infants and abuse of them. Such a shame that even little children can’t automatically trust adults.
      Way off topic though, I admit.

      Reply
      1. AhNotepad

        Off topic? Maybe. Important? Definitely. While the government is trying to stop children from accessing porn on the internet, though it’s more likrly an attempt to restrict adults, they are promoting trans-story time in schools and libraries. Why do they need cross dressers to read the stories? Would not a normally dressed person be just as good?

        Reply
        1. Eggs'n beer

          Why is anyone reading to them? Why aren’t they learning to read? Then they can select and read their own books.

          As for Tish’s granddaughter, good for her! Producing a banner like that at 4 is brilliant. It’s excellent that she realises she has rights, such as the right to be fed, clothed, an early bedtime and protected from sexual perverts ….

          Reply
        2. Tish

          Yes, and the so-called online safety bill may also be a ploy to get people to acquiesce to more digital identity so that there is total control of us all.

          Reply
          1. Eggs 'n beer

            When I visited the office of my local member where there was a JP who could swear my Blue Card application I commented drily that my application to molest was now complete. For a brief moment there was a look of confusion on her face, then a wry smile developed and she nodded slowly. “That’s about right”.

            It’s a joke. Almost anyone can get one. Two chunks of the population are exempt, teachers and the police. There’s a case at the remand stage in Qld of a teacher who sexually assaulted many boys in his ‘care’, and of course he didn’t need to go through the police checks (the Blue Card only lasts two years). After the first complaint against him Education Queensland did nothing. Well, not quite nothing. They asked him about it, and accepted his explanation (whatever it was) and he was allowed to continue life as normal, for another five years until his arrest this January.

        3. John

          On drag queens reading stories: I assume they must be paid, so it’s a waste of public money (and who funds their police check?) – there are teachers and teaching assistants already being paid to teach/assist in schools who could dress up as pirates, princesses, mermaids or whatever. Saves paying out extra money and I don’t see how the kids would tell the difference – or care.

          Reply
          1. An Italian Australian at the Tropics

            If you think that the problem of degenerates reading stories to kids is the wasted money, you are part of the problem.

          2. Mark Gobell

            degenerate :

            – having lost the physical, mental, or moral qualities considered normal and desirable; showing evidence of decline.

            – lacking some usual or expected property or quality.

            – an immoral or corrupt person.

            – decline or deteriorate physically, mentally, or morally.

            Perfectly appropriate adjective imo …

          3. John

            Drag aka cross-dressing is an ancient performance art. In modern times, think panto, Mrs Brown, Dame Edna Everage (and many, many Doris Day etc impersonators in clubs); longer ago every female part in 16th or 17th century play was taken by a male in drag. Even longer ago, in Morris dancing, the Betty is a bloke in drag. Dressing up to perform doesn’t make a person degenerate – but what’s the point for little kids in a school? Take ’em to a panto or a Morris dance if you want them to see a bloke dressed as a woman, or, if they just need entertaining, let the paid school staff do dress-up. Better still, as someone said, teach ’em to read.

          4. Steve

            Yes, we are inundated with these types of stories: trans rights, drag Queens, Chinese balloons, the royals. It’s convenient distraction tactics, chaff, to keep us looking in one place while the bigger issues happen elsewhere.
            Covid related restrictions haven’t gone away and digital restrictions keep increasing. The NHS is still being run into the ground by this government (aka Hunt) and unmanaged immigration and climate policy is ruining the country economically.
            But, hey ! Look over here not over there …

  91. Paul Fruitbat

    ‘The US Meat Supply May Soon be Widely Contaminated with mRNA Proteins From Biotech “Vaccines”’.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-meat-supply-may-soon-widely-contaminated-mrna-proteins-from-biotech-vaccines/5804980

    I find the Global Search does a great deal of good work and research. Sometimes, though, their enthusiasm seems to run away with them.

    Any informed opinions about whether:

    1. There are any known plans (in the USA or in the UK) to inflict mRNA “vaccines” on livestock?

    2. Whether, if one eats meat from an animal so “vaccinated”, the mRNA would survive digestion?

    3. And would ready-formed spike protein survive digestion?

    As far as I know, human digestion does a pretty thorough job: hydrochloric acid doesn’t fool around. I have always believed that proteins are broken down into their constituent amino acids, in which case we should have little to worry about. Same goes for foreign mRNA; surely we must have evolved the capacity to destroy any ingested DNA or RNA.

    Facts or opinions welcome!

    Reply
    1. Steve

      Apparently, antibiotics used on animals survive the slaughtering and processing of meats. I believe, as such the EU outlawed/restricted meats from places such as North America where profit overrules hygiene and animal welfare. The Tory government has been looking into relaxing these controls as a brexit benefit for the UK population. As part of these benefits they also want to remove the requirement on meats to show place of origin !
      So, if antibiotics can survive I assume, with no evidence, that mRNA can also survive to arrive on our tables.
      However, with the addition of ground up insects to flour and other foodstuffs being allowed in the EU contaminated meats should not be our only concern.
      If you eat meat, then the best advice is to buy it fresh from a local butcher who sources from local farms. Supermarkets and all processed foods are very suspect. Remember, 1984 was just a book and Soylent Green was just a film, but times change.

      Reply
    2. cavenewt

      WRT #1… You can be darn sure they’re working like mad to come up with any number of mRNA products for livestock. Especially here in the US. I don’t have the reference in front of me, but I did read recently there are definite plans to do this. Also, Tennessee just passed a law outlawing it in that state.

      Reply
    1. Eggs 'n beer

      And right on cue the Australian government announced that the fifth round (third booster) of the jabs is now available.

      Reply
    2. Charlie

      Why eliminating the FDA and CDC would probably make the public safer
      a false sense of safety is more dangerous than knowing you’re at risk

      https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/why-eliminating-the-fda-and-cdc-would

      Building on the idea that the mRNA integrity in the covid vaccines had dropped to a shockingly low 55% in commercial batches and that the regulators had responded to this by simply lowering standards to make that a passing grade while accepting a set of implausible looking western blots as “evidence” that all was OK with wildly low fidelity copies of CG enriched protein coding instructions
      The upshot is this:

      the vaccine vials are riddled with contaminants and these are not just any contaminants. it’s not just something toxic, it’s something outright pathogenic. and that is astonishingly, shockingly bad.

      this vaccine is actually full of self replicating dsDNA that codes for antibiotic resistant spike gene. (and a CG enriched one at that)
      =========================================================
      This one is old about covid but apply to almost all new medical research, now dominated by big pharma:

      https://ashmedai.substack.com/p/17-reasons-why-it-is-irrational-to

      Reply
  92. Tish

    Our high streets are set to change, thanks to Covid. They are part of the great health reset. No need to go to hospital – just go into one of the big new NHS health hubs where you can order and have your scans and tests. Your mental health will be dealt with along with everything else. Even surgery can take place there and babies can be born. Won’t that be nice!

    What does the crystal ball say about it though?
    It predicts that we shall be driven or “educated” to become a nation of hypochondriacs. Imagine the BBC’s oh so factual comments about the latest health catastrophe to be avoided. Imagine the adverts for tests and scans, etc.— Buy one get one free, 3 for the price of 2, or Save on this test bundle for only £X (presumably we shall be paying in one way or another). There will be reminders by text that we are due for another test, scan or overhaul.

    Money rules, eh? Naughty doctors haven’t been ordering enough tests methinks.

    Listen to Debi Evans from around 22.10 minutes:

    https://www.ukcolumn.org/video/uk-column-news-15th-february-2023

    Reply
    1. Paul Fruitbat

      “I can always rely on them to raise my chronically low blood pressure”.

      Potassium, my man. Potassium, long walks, meditation, and love.

      Also reading Dr Kendrick’s supremely cool, logical, disciplined prose.

      Reply
      1. cavenewt

        Thanks for your concern. Exaggerating a little bit for effect, although I’ve always been at the extreme low end of what I assume to be normal, since nobody’s ever raised a red flag (except for my high school biology class which declared me officially dead when they couldn’t find any blood pressure at all). It’s been that way my whole life, 69 years and counting, so I’m not worried. It’s not the potassium.

        Also, not a man 😉

        Reply
        1. Paul Fruitbat

          A thousand apologies, cavenewt. I hope your low blood pressure turns out to be more of an asset than a problem long-term. An NHS nurse warned me the other day that my pressure is high, which is why I was fixated on potassium and the other possible ameliorations.

          In his book about his amazing walk across Antarctica with Ranulph Fiennes, Dr Mike Stroud stated that when they had finished and were medically examined, they were both declared to have zero percent body fat – which meant that they must be dead. In fact, of course, they were alive and extremely healthy – as you have to be to drag a bloody great sled clear across Antarctica while subsisting mostly on butter. (Stroud did add that for a while he couldn’t walk across central London without stopping two or three times for maximum-size cheeseburgers).

          When I wrote “my man”, it wasn’t without any particular implication. “My person” doesn’t have the same pleasant (to my ears) ring! 😎

          Reply
          1. cavenewt

            No offense meant, none taken.

            Got to look up that Antarctica story. I’m unfamiliar with that one. Thx.

          2. Paul Fruitbat

            Alas and dammit! I must take more care. Of course I meant, “it wasn’t WITH any particular implication”. Sorry.

  93. Michael

    Dr. Kendrick, you should refer to the Dr. Roger Seheult video (see e.g., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZI7dwldSR0) who just recently just looked at both Euro and American excess death data. He does not discuss lockdowns, but does discuss vaccine effectiveness using excess death data. He probably comes to a different conclusion than you. Personally, I don’t think any country has really attempted a real lockdown – maybe China and NZ came close once or twice. (I also think that lockdowns don’t work.) I look at your graphs and see something different – the peak differences look unremarkable, but the volumes under the Covid winter seasons certainly look significantly larger to my eye. Unlike you, I also have no problem with the fact that overall Covid illnesses would crowd out flu illnesses during the same season.

    Reply
    1. thecovidpilot

      I recommend looking at the mortality models of Ethical Skeptic, who tends to be very accurate, then compare with Seheult. ES eliminates covid deaths and non-natural cause deaths and accounts for pull forward deaths.

      Reply
  94. Steve

    Covid and NHS Corruption/Incompetence:
    “The NHS paid billions (~£2Bn) during the pandemic for private hospital beds that should have prevented the backlog but managers never bothered to use them. This is a scandal, says Dr. David Livermore.”
    “The NHS couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery.”, Dr. Richard Packard
    https://dailysceptic.org/2023/02/22/the-nhs-paid-billions-for-private-hospital-beds-that-should-have-prevented-the-backlog-but-managers-never-bothered-to-use/

    Reply
    1. Steve

      Talking of corrupt/incompetent health organisations:
      “What is the WHO up to? What are “International Health Regulations”, what is the Pandemic Treaty, and whom does it affect?” [1]
      Loss of sovereignty through Mandatory Health proclamations, made against ‘potential’ emergencies as well as actual, and mandatory medical treatments as well as global health certificates for all, paid out of the UK budget.
      The USA will possibly tell the WHO to take a hike but will the UK ?
      Who represents the UK at the table in Geneva ? Chris Whitty !!!
      [1] https://www.ukcolumn.org/video/the-man-with-his-finger-on-the-whos-pulse-james-roguski

      Reply
    1. Paul Fruitbat

      Yeah, even when they eventually – with utmost reluctance – admit to something like that, it’s always “rare”.

      Compared to what? Honesty in officials?

      Reply
    2. cavenewt

      Good example of a clickbait headline. Guillain-Barré is not a ‘rare brain condition’. It affects *peripheral* nerves. True, it can be fatal. But the word “brain” is designed to scare people.

      Reply
  95. Jerome savage

    NPHET – National Public Health Emergency Team
    The UK’s equivalent, I cannot remembe its name r- but this was /is the irish version and from its lofty tower pontificated & dictated to the Irish people as per elsewhere- but perhaps with some excess gusto. One of the team members, Dr Martin Cormican has had a change of heart with regard to the lockdowns, implying they were unnecessarily cruel. Fair enough, we get that but then goes on to suggest that the very beneficial vaxines, so he suggests, should hav been mandatory. That’s not good, in fact it’s shocking. One commentator suggests the government looks forward to passing on responsibility to the WHO – under the pandemic treaty. Others suggest it marks a huge step towards admitting the obvious – thus avoiding total loss of credibility. The mass jab crusade is still a thing, it appears.
    Did his university get funding from gates. Well yes –
    https://connachttribune.ie/nuig-research-centre-secures-funding-from-bill-and-melinda-gates-foundation/

    EXTRACT FROM CORMICANS ESSAY -(LATE OCTOBER 2023)
    “I have also heard accounts of health and social care workers imposing inhumane
    restrictions on people in the name of infection prevention and control. In many cases I expect the
    problems were related to very understandable fear for themselves, their families or for other clients.
    Even in ordinary times, I have come across instances of healthcare workers unable or unwilling to
    attend to patients with infection because of their fear. We need to do more to prepare healthcare
    workers psychologically for dealing with this kind of stress. We need better systems to support them
    through the crisis when it happens.
    One of the expressions I came to dislike intensely during the pandemic response was “we have to follow the science”. This maxim is both misleading and amoral.

    I predictably and consistently made a material impact on reducing the spread of SARSCoV-2.
    That measure was reducing social mixing, in particular social mixing indoors. In every country and every time that effective measures to reduce social mixing indoors were ratchetted up the incidence of infection with SARS-CoV-2 declined. On that basis, forceful measures to reduce social mixing to a drastic degree was often represented as “following the science” But did we adequately
    consider the short-term and long-term unintended consequences for health and wellbeing of prohibitions that disrupted established patterns of social and economic activity for a very long period
    of time?

    Although access to healthcare and antiviral agents helped to reduce morbidity and mortality the outstanding measure that predictably and consistently made a huge reduction on the morbidity associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection was vaccination. For those at most risk of severe disease the evidence of benefit in proportion to risk from vaccination was overwhelming both in the premarketing
    studies and in the post marketing experience. The studies showed very clearly that those most vulnerable to severe disease who declined vaccination were vastly more likely to require hospital
    and ICU care when they acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection. After the vaccine became available and was administered, those in Ireland who did not accept vaccination posed a disproportionate demand on
    healthcare services, notably on ICU services. Although the evidence of benefit in proportion to risk was overwhelming accepting vaccination was never a legal obligation Although Ireland did not opt of mandatory vaccination, Ireland and the EU did impose measures that had significant consequences for those who declined vaccination. These included a requirement of vaccination to facilitate international travel and to access certain services. Initially the rationale was that vaccination reduced the risk of spreading infection to other when travelling or accessing services.
    There is evidence that vaccination did reduce risk of spread of infection to some degree in the period soon after vaccination. However, later in the course of the vaccination programme, it became
    apparent that the sustained benefit of vaccination was primarily in preventing morbidity and mortality. At what point did the continuation of vaccination requirements for international travel and
    access to services function primarily as a sanction on those who declined vaccination rather than as an evidence based barrier to spread? Would it have been more straightforward and more honest to opt for mandatory vaccination? Why was it that our society was so unwilling to adopt an overt requirement to accept a safe effective vaccine when the evidence was compelling but we were ready to impose requirements for other measures that had profound impact on health and wellbeing and child development? Some measures imposed had much less evidence of benefit over risk than we had for vaccination.
    By the time it was seriously considered the pragmatic argument against mandatory vaccination in Ireland by was that it was not needed. By that time, the vast majority of those at greatest risk were already vaccinated and most of those who were not vaccinated had a degree of acquired immunity because of primary infection.
    legal obligation to accept vaccination should be considered a legitimate public policy option in circumstances where declining to accept vaccination has profound adverse consequences for society as a whole. We should consider if it is possible to develop a social consensus and a legal framework around this not just for the next pandemic but also for other circumstances where the choice of a
    small proportion of people to decline vaccination imposes great burdens and costs on other citizens.
    http://www.researchgate.net/publication/365273684_ISCM_COVID_The_Marianne_Dashwood_Test_20102022_M_Cormican

    Reply
  96. Jerome savage

    Insurance Analyst Finds a 7% Increase In Aggregate Mortality for Each C19 Dose Received

    Josh Stirling: “The more doses … you have in a [US] region … the bigger increase in mortality …”

    “If you’re over the age of 50, and you took all 5 doses, that’d be a 35% increase.”
    USA Charts indicate greater problems in heavily vaccinated populations.

    Reply
  97. Eric

    Off topic to vaccination, but maybe something for another blog about yet another drug to lower LDL? And miraculously, although the LDL hypothesis should be long dead, this drug results in a 20% risk reduction.

    Reply
    1. David Bailey

      The NYT is behind a paywall, but I am guessing that the 20% figure is relative, not absolute. I’d also guess the article does not explain the difference!

      Reply
    2. cavenewt

      “Risk reduction”. Investigate the actual numbers. I can almost guarantee you this is incredibly inflated.

      This is aside from the question of how trustworthy the raw data might be.

      Reply
      1. Shaun Clark

        I like my cholesterol. It does me just fine. Most of you lot as well I would imagine. Examine the science, don’t follow it.

        Reply
    3. Paul Fruitbat

      “Can”…

      And even that qualified statement comes from a newspaper that is not the original source.

      Reply
  98. Tish

    To dip a toe into the brighter side of life:

    SOMETIMES

    Sometimes things don’t go, after all,
    from bad to worse. Some years, muscatel
    faces down frost; green thrives; the crops don’t fail.
    Sometimes a man aims high, and all goes well.

    A people sometimes will step back from war;
    elect an honest man; decide they care
    enough that they can’t leave some stranger poor.
    Some men become what they were born for.

    Sometimes our best efforts do not go
    amiss; sometimes we do as we were meant to.
    The sun will sometimes melt a field of sorrow
    that seemed hard frozen: may it happen for you.

    Sheenagh Pugh

    Reply
  99. Shaun Clark

    CoV? Microshafted…
    This is, in part, a well-trodden ring-fenced monitized Gates-ian con… First-up, mangle a humanised (DoD/DARPA/Baric/NIH) fitted-up (HIV-ed gain-of-function) rouge bat-coronavirus plasmid (aka a follow-the-science zombie ‘virus’), to effect a (…mild) ‘novel’ universal/common poisoning. Then (ding!), out-of-the-blue formulate a jacked-up Baric/Fauci ‘Norton’ cure (95% don’t ya know!) utilising a sneaky sleight-of-hand Trojan ‘software’ horse (delivered via a polyUracil-ised RNA) to slip (hopefully) unnoticed into a cell unimpeded, then er, um (psssst!.. proactively), miraculously market a unique (patented) ‘Tomorrow’s World’ deep-frozen junked-up WHO-mandated mRNA ‘vaccine’ gene-therapy-jag all wrapped up in a (highly synthetic) bow-tied nano-lipid (PEG), in an attempt to neutralise the original bastardised ‘novel’ chimeric plasmid. Job done. Money in Bank, John. Then blame your (illegal?) subcontractor (or an Anteater), for the whole sordid mess.

    Reply
  100. Shaun Clark

    My take on it is that virology, as we are led to ‘understand’ it is but zombie science underwritten by orchestrated errant nonsense, and as such exhibits itself, simplistically, as but a runaway hostage to fortune… A pained multi-layered tautological white-coated charade of over ambition and dogma drenched in ego and lucre. Call me what you like, but prove me wrong if you can.

    Reply
  101. Shaun Clark

    If you’re playing a poker game and you look around the table and can’t tell who the sucker is, it’s you.

    ~ Paul Newman, 1951

    Reply
  102. Steve

    I read this and had to snigger to myself:
    “Certain cough medicines sold behind the counter at pharmacies are being withdrawn over safety concerns.
    Health experts say there is a very rare chance that some people could experience an allergic reaction linked to an ingredient called pholcodine.”
    “The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency described removing the products from sale as a precautionary measure.”
    “Pholcodine has been used as a cough suppressant since the 1950s, but evidence now suggests there is a very small risk or chance – less than one in 10,000 – that some users may have a bad allergic reaction”
    https://www.bbc.com/news/health-64951267

    Dare I mention the MHRA and the Covid Gene Jab ?

    Reply
    1. Jerome savage

      One in 800 serious adverse event with the experimental concoction. Same say its much more & long term trial period is yet to finish.

      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 )

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