Flying under the radar, the BBC has been accused of orchestrating an alliance of legacy media outlets and social media sites to suppress competition from alternative media. This is entitled “The Trusted News Initiative”.
An antitrust lawsuit filed on January 10th 2023 in the US has obtained documents which they say indicate that the BBC joined with the Washington Post, Reuters, AP, Meta, Google, Twitter, and others in order to protect their business models from competition. Whilst publicly talking about suppressing misinformation, documents indicate that the real intention was to exclude other information platforms, whether their reports were true or not. You can view Tucker Carlson interviewing Robert Kennedy Jnr. about the lawsuit here.
There appears to be little doubt that vital information about Covid vaccine safety was withheld from the public as a result.
Covid Vaccination Increases the Risk of Pulmonary Embolism in Persons Over 65
Meanwhile, published studies continue to pour in which reveal the horrifying extent and prevalence of Covid vaccine injury. For two years, we have been told that Covid vaccines are especially essential for older age cohorts. A study published January 9th, 2023, in the journal Vaccine entitled “Surveillance of COVID-19 vaccine safety among elderly persons aged 65 years and older” reports that Covid vaccination increases the risk of pulmonary embolism in the age group by 50%. A pulmonary embolism occurs when a clump of material, most often a blood clot, gets stuck in an artery in the lungs, blocking the flow of blood.
A study published in Vaccine on 22 September 2022 “Serious adverse events of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in randomized trials in adults” by Dr. Joseph Fraiman and others, is gaining increased traction. The authors completed secondary analysis of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA phase III clinical trials and found they were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 (95 % CI −0.4 to 20.6 and −3.6 to 33.8), respectively.
The study concluded:
“The excess risk of serious adverse events found in our study points to the need for formal harm-benefit analyses, particularly those that are stratified according to risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes. These analyses will require public release of participant level datasets.”
The continued refusal to release the datasets from the Pfizer and Moderna trials is raising eyebrows very high indeed. Even the BBC has been forced to consider the evidence that the vaccines are raising all cause deaths to record levels in the UK. Watch this interview with Dr. Aseem Malhotra, which took place yesterday. It is a first for mainstream media exposure.
An article in Frontiers of Immunology published 12th January 2023, “mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 induce comparably low long-term IgG Fc galactosylation and sialylation levels but increasing long-term IgG4 responses compared to an adenovirus-based vaccine” reveals some concerning news. The initially obscure conclusion reached by the study states:
“Repeated immunization of naïve individuals with the mRNA vaccines increased the proportion of the IgG4 subclass over time which might influence the long-term Ab effector functions. Taken together, these data shed light on these novel vaccine formats and might have potential implications for their long-term efficacy.”
Translating this into everyday English, the study found that mRNA vaccines cause a worrying drop off in immune responses to Covid infection that increases over time, leaving vaccine recipients more vulnerable to repeated infection. Crucially the long term outcomes of this are unclear. Igor Chudov discusses the possible implications for our immune tolerance here.
Eminent cardiologist Dr. Malhotra is asking that the mRNA vaccination programme be withdrawn based on the published evidence. Our government and the health service remain silent and apparently unrepentant. For two years, many science writers, doctors, and other professionals asking questions have been labelled conspiracy theorists. The mounting evidence is by now unequivocally pointing to a conspiracy—a very concerning alliance of media, government, medical professionals, and pharmaceutical companies determined to remain silent in the face of overwhelming evidence of harm to the public.
