Vital Information about the Covid 19-Vaccine
Dr Vernon Coleman MB ChB DSc FRSA
A man and a woman get into a car. The woman sits in the driving seat. The man in the passenger seat. The woman is taking her driving test and the man beside her is the examiner. The woman is a terrible driver and no one thinks she will pass the test.
Before she starts the car the woman unfastens her handbag, removes her purse and takes out £1,000 in nice new banknotes. She then turns to the driving examiner.
`I know you and your wife both need a nice holiday,’ she says, handing over the money. `This has nothing to do with the driving test I’m about to take but I’d like you have this.’
`Well, thank you, very much,’ says the driving examiner. `Now, let’s see how you get on with your driving test, shall we?’
You might think a trifle unlikely.
But listen to this.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has a chunky sized investment in the drug company Pfizer which is making the new vaccine which has just been approved for covid-19 in the UK.
The MHRA in the UK is the first regulator in the world to approve the vaccine. It’s fair to say that other countries are possibly a bit puzzled. I don’t think anyone envies Britain for having the fastest regulator in the world. In the US, Dr Fauci, originally said the UK regulators had rushed their approval. But, predictably, he later apologised for saying that. What a surprise that was to us all.
But in 2017 the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation entered into what I can only call a financial arrangement with the MHRA – the bit of the UK government which regulates medicines and makes sure that they are safe. (MHRA stands for the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency).
Bill and Melinda’s Foundation handed over £980,000 to the MHRA.
So bear with me if I go over this again.
First, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation makes a big investment in Pfizer.
Second, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hands over £980,000 and the MHRA smiles sweetly and says thank you very much.
Third, the MHRA is the first agency in the world to approve the new Pfizer vaccine. It is, I suspect, the fastest ever approval of a vaccine.
Even if this tripartite relationship is entirely innocent it should never have happened. What is yet another Government agency doing accepting money from Gates? It was Gates who said that if they were very good at vaccinating people they could reduce the population considerably.
Well, to be honest with you, Pfizer’s record isn’t anything you would want to boast about. If you worked there you’d keep quiet about it I think and say you worked for the tax people or robbed banks for living.
So, for example, in the UK, Pfizer was fined £84.2 million for overcharging the NHS by 2,600% and in the US Pfizer was hit with a $2.3 billion fine for mis-promoting medicines and paying kickbacks to doctors. At the time I think the $2.3 billion fine was one of the biggest fines for fraud in American history. It might still be for all I know.
The MHRA should be closed down immediately.
And how did my imaginary driving test student get on?
Oh, to everyone’s surprise she passed her test. She hit a bus, ran over two old ladies and collided with a lamppost when she tried to park. But she passed.
And so this is Britain today.
I have been writing about doctors and drug companies for half a century. My first book on drugs and drug companies was called `The Medicine Men’ and it was published in 1975. I can honestly say I have never come across anything quite so disgraceful, so blatant as the MHRA, Bill Gates and Pfizer link.
And no one cares.
Have you heard about this on the BBC?
Have MPs been shouting about it?
Have the papers run this story on their front pages?
I despair. I really do.
Meanwhile, the confusion goes on and on.
Matt Hancock’s chum and co-author, who is now in charge of vaccinations in the UK or is it just England or maybe just Stratford-upon-Avon, suggested that people who don’t have the covid-19 vaccination might not be allowed to enter cinemas or watch football matches.
I wasn’t surprised. They were always going to say that.
And then senior ministers seemed to change their mind and overrule him. But I rather bet that people who have the vaccine will be given some sort of certificate. After all the EU has been planning a vaccination passport since 2018.
The American government has a clinical trial under way which is testing messages to see which ones are most likely to persuade people that they should have the vaccination.
If you want to get your freedom back,’ then accept the vaccine.’
`If you want to keep your job,’ then accept the vaccine.’
That sort of thing. All devised by psychologists to manipulate, blackmail and coerce. And all for a vaccine which experts around the world agree is for an infection which is no more lethal than the ordinary, annual flu.
You can see why the trickery is necessary.
Almost every survey I have seen suggests that most people don’t want the vaccine. Even many health professionals don’t want it.
My friend Dr Colin Barron reported that even a great chunk of GPs said they wouldn’t have the vaccine – and they’re making over £12 a jab for giving it.
Of course, if governments everywhere wanted to persuade people to have the vaccine they could be a little more open about the advantages and disadvantages: the benefits and the risks.
It is normal in medicine for doctors to tell patients about all the side effects which may be associated with the treatment they are having.
Indeed, it isn’t just normal, it’s compulsory.
If you go into hospital to have an operation they’ll list all the possible things that can go wrong.
If you are given medication then they’ll tell you about the hazards. Or they should. It’s called informed consent.
There is only one exception: vaccines.
There is no such thing as `informed consent’ about vaccines because doctors aren’t allowed to question vaccines and vaccination in public.
Since anyone who questions the safety or efficacy of vaccines is automatically defined as an anti-vaxxer they can hardly expect doctors to tell patients about the risks. If they did then every doctor would automatically be an anti-vaxxer and be demonised.
You don’t have to be spreading rumours about vaccines to be classified as a dangerous anti-vaxxer.
Some are asking if the first dose of the vaccine will be merely a placebo – to encourage everyone to believe the vaccine is safe. I’m not surprised people are asking that.
After all, lots of dirty things happen in the world of vaccines. Back in 2009, Time magazine reported that Germany had been accused of offering a flu vaccine made by one company, and believed to have fewer side effects, to politicians, civil servants and soldiers and another, potentially riskier vaccine to everyone else.
The riskier vaccine was called Pandemrix. And I dealt with that in my book `Covid 19: The Greatest Hoax of the Century’ – which was banned almost everywhere but which is now available free as a pdf on my website www.vernoncoleman.com and is also free on the Light Paper website – thelightpaper.co.uk
Any doctor who questions the efficacy of a vaccine is officially an anti-vaxxer. If the alleged virus has never been isolated and identified how have they managed to make a vaccine? Why is the vaccine said to be better than natural immunity? Why will people need more than one dose? Why will they need it every year? It’s illegal to ask the questions so there are no answers.
The social media channels such as ScrewYouTube don’t differentiate between loonies suggesting that vaccines will make your hands drop off and turn you bright blue and experienced physicians asking for more information about vaccines.
Everyone asking for information about vaccines is officially an anti-vaxxer – and will be silenced.
The British Army is now concentrating on removing material from the internet if it questions vaccines and vaccination.
I doubt if the soldiers doing this work are qualified doctors – they aren’t expected to judge between serious, professional questions and wild accusations.
They just take down everything.
ScrewYouTube does the same, of course.
Any video which questions vaccine safety, reports acknowledged vaccine problems or criticises drug companies which make vaccines will be deleted.
No questions asked. No chance to defend.
Simple, rapid execution.
The authorities seem to me to have created a problem, the alleged covid-19 epidemic, and they have created a solution – a vaccine.
And yet the list of questions which need to be asked grows longer every day.
I predicted some time ago that there could be infertility problems with the vaccine, and on 3rd December Richie Allen broadcast details of government guidelines which suggested a huge – but not entirely unexpected – cover up.
Richie revealed that although health care professions are warned that it is unknown whether the vaccine has an impact on infertility this warning was not included in the information for those having the vaccine. Maybe there will be an infertility problem and it won’t be apparent for another five or ten years when a few thousand nurses and doctors find they can’t get pregnant. Bill Gates has a certain amount of history in this area.
Medical journal articles have suggested that there are a lot of questions still unanswered.
It’s difficult to know precisely what has been tested, of course, because there is a great deal of secrecy about the trials.
A vaccine should stop serious illness developing and it should interfere with the transmission of a disease and it should be safe.
Do any of the covid-19 vaccines do all or any of these?
The mysteries seem endless.
Will the vaccine really be safe for 80-year-olds? Has it been tested on 80-year-olds? Back in March 2020 I warned that one of the aims of this whole hoax was to get rid of old people. Is this what is going to happen now? Back in March I also warned that another aim was to introduce mandatory vaccinations.
It is said that 100% of those who had two doses of Moderna’s mRNA vaccine had what are called systemic adverse events. Not nice.
And 50% of those who had the Pfizer vaccine were said to be ill.
The Astra Zeneca trial was similar.
And The Lancet reported that there was a possibility that people who had one of the vaccines might have an increased risk of developing an HIV infection.
When testing new drugs, companies usually test against a placebo. Half the patients in a trial get the new drug and half get a sugar pill.
But in their trial it seems that Astra Zeneca tested their new covid-19 vaccine against a meningitis vaccine which is known to produce significant adverse effects.
Why would they do this?
Well, at the risks of upsetting the 77th Brigade, could it be because this would enable them to argue that their vaccine was safer than the placebo?
Is that entirely fair? I doubt if I am the only doctor to think it isn’t.
Even the Financial Times seemed upset by Astra Zeneca. In an article headlined, `Doubts raised over Astra Zeneca Oxford Vaccine Data’ the FT reported that there had been a mistake in the dosage given and that all the people testing the vaccine had been under 55 years of age.
By questioning the vaccine has the FT has become an anti-vaxxer newspaper? Will their website will now be taken down?
The questions keep on coming I’m afraid.
The head of `Operation Warp Speed’ in the USA, who is helping to get vaccines ready for use, is apparently a former GSK executive which seems to me to be a tad incestuous. Mind you, the Chief Scientific Officer in the UK is a former GSK executive.
What else can’t I tell you?
Well, it seems that a little quiet scepticism might not be entirely unfair. At least 66 fully tested and approved vaccines in the US have, over the years, been discontinued – largely for safety reasons. And billions of dollars have been paid in compensation to patients injured by vaccines – or paid to their relatives when patients died or were very severely injured. The UK Government has its standard, miserly £120,000 fee for vaccine damaged patients. And that is paid by taxpayers not drug companies.
What steps is the MHRA taking to ensure that any side effects are properly and speedily recorded?
Why did the drug companies insist on being given indemnity if their vaccines cause no problems? No other companies are indemnified if they produce dangerous products. Well, Bill Gates insisted on indemnity being given. The UK Government has, I think, finally agreed to give its standard £120,000 vaccine damage fee to anyone with severe side effects. But try living on £120,000 if you’re paralysed for life.
Still, there is one bright thought I can share with you.
The vaccine companies want their products to be given emergency approval. This will enable the vaccines to be brought out quickly – by accepting a lower standard of effectiveness and safety.
But when a vaccine is brought out using Emergency Use Authorisation the States in America are banned I believe from mandating the vaccine. They can’t force people to take it.
And a full licence, which would allow mandatory vaccines, will or should take years to acquire.
So here’s a thought: will it be legal for individual companies, schools and so on to insist that people have the vaccination?
And although the drug companies and doctors have been given legal immunity – they can’t be sued if their product is dangerous – does that immunity stretch to company bosses and teachers demanding that you have a vaccine?
One thing is for certain: if someone tries to force you to have a vaccine then it would be wise to insist that the boss signs and dates a letter confirming that he or she is forcing you to be vaccinated and that he or she takes responsibility for any health problems which ensue.
I wonder how many bosses would risk that.
Finally, don’t try bribing your driving instructor.
You could probably go to prison for that.
Only governments and billionaires can get away with that sort of behaviour scot free.
Copyright Vernon Coleman December 4th 2020
For the background to vaccines and vaccination, Vernon Coleman’s book `Anyone who tells you vaccines are safe and effective is lying – here’s the proof’ is available on Amazon as a paperback and an eBook.
And if you want to know more about climate change then I recommend Zina Cohen’s succinct book on the subject – entitled `Greta’s Homework’. It’s available on Amazon as a paperback and an eBook.