UK Govt Coronavirus Response: Sceptics Thread

[sancho panza]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13061793/Why-2023-worst-year-cancer.html

Why 2023 was the 'worst year' for cancer: Record 30,000 patients were made to wait at least a month to start NHS treatment, 'alarming' data reveals

• Over 30,000 people waited more than a month for cancer treatment
• This is the highest annual figure since current records began in 2009

Cancer patients face a 'desperate situation' after the number waiting more than a month to start treatment hit a record high last year, charities warn.

Over 30,000 people waited more than a month after being told they needed the likes of surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy, 'alarming' new data from NHS England reveals.

This is the highest annual figure since current records began in 2009 and more than three-times as many people as just five year ago.

But the number of people waiting more than 12 hours in A&E departments from a decision to admit them to actually being admitted hit 54,308 in January, up sharply from 44,045 in December.

This is the second highest figure on record, just below the record 54,573 in December 2022.

NHS England said A&E and ambulance services experienced their busiest ever January.

[wherebee]

Telegraph omits to include Australia in their graph of lockdowns - I wonder why, seeing as we were the most locked down place on the planet.

 

[sancho panza]

https://dailysceptic.org/2024/02/08/the-covid-booster-cancer-time-bomb/

The Covid Booster Cancer Time Bomb

I have previously reported on my concern about the rise in stable cancer relapses that I have witnessed in my melanoma clinic. 

None of these patients of mine presented with the classic prodrome of relapse that I had always noticed previously, such as severe depression due to bereavement, divorce or bankruptcy. Indeed the only thing I found they had in common was to have had a recent booster mRNA covid vaccine. I phoned around my colleagues not only in the U.K. but also in Australia to check their experience. In no case did they deny such a link. Indeed, they were equally alarmed at the association between booster vaccines and relapse that they too were witnessing, as well an increase in new cancers, particularly in those below 50 years old. In addition to melanoma these colleagues were also very concerned about a sudden big increase in young patients with colorectal cancer.

Rather than instigating a proper inquiry to investigate this when we raised these concerns, the medical authorities told us all that what we were witnessing was a coincidence, that we had to prove it and above all, not to upset our patients.

Recently the American Cancer Society (ACS) has warned of a surge in new cancer cases in the U.S. this last year of over two million, with many of these cases occurring in younger patients. Indeed, the Chief Scientific Officer of the ACS, William Dahat, announced in addition that cancers were presenting with more aggressive disease and larger tumours at the time of diagnosis, especially in younger patients. Of further interest it noted a difference in the microbiome (the community of micro-organisms such as fungi, bacteria and viruses that exist in a given environment) between patients under 50 compared with those over 50.

This surge mirrors a report from Phinance Technologies of late last year which analysed in detail data from the U.K. Office for National Statistics (ONS) showing that disability and deaths in 2021 and 2022 had increased dramatically in all age groups, but especially in the 15-44 age group. 

The Lancet also published an article before Christmas reporting excess deaths post Covid pandemic to be up by 11-15% over that expected for under-25s and for 25-49 year olds. This is in fact the pattern found in many countries that have published the data. Germany for example has reported excess deaths rising from 7% in 2020 to 24% in 2023.

What makes this all the more surprising is that negative deaths should be the norm after a pandemic as you cannot die twice!

The link between Covid vaccines, myocarditis and early death particularly in the young, highlighted by Peter McCullough and colleagues as well as by Aseem Malhotra here in the U.K., is incontestable. Now we have a confirmatory report from the CDC in the U.S., data that the authorities refused to act on so as not to alarm vaccinated patients! 

Although it is obvious that these excess deaths are real and are continuing to rise, all we get from our Chief Medical Officer, Sir Chris Whitty, are risible attempts to explain away the increase, such as that it is a result of patients not getting their statins in lockdown (hey, patients under 55 do not get statins routinely!) The situation is no better in the U.S., where Harvard researchers have put the blame on sleep disturbance.

The first obvious candidate is lockdown itself when the National Health Service became the National Covid Service and all screening was cancelled or delayed, resulting in a temporary drop in cancer detection and late presentation. Many negative lifestyle factors almost certainly increased as a result of lockdown, such as a lack of exercise and too much food, especially takeaways.

What very few of these reviews consider is that this rise in excess deaths could be a result of the booster vaccine programme, even though it clearly follows the vaccine rollout programme by starting in 2021 and increasing in 2022 and 2023.

With regards to the link to cancer, there are numerous reports in the literature of cancers arising within days of the vaccines being administered, especially in the case of lymphomas and leukaemias. There are several reports of PET scan mapped tumours exploding at the site and draining area of Covid injections, with the advice to inject Covid vaccines away from known cancers. Outside my clinical observations, several friends have developed cancer after a totally unnecessary Covid booster taken only to facilitate travel.

For a possible association between a booster vaccine and the appearance of cancer we need a plausible scientific causal explanation. Unfortunately for those who still insist that these cases are mere coincidences, there are several compelling ones to choose from.

Firstly, it has been reported that T cell responses are suppressed after the boosters (though not after the first two injections) and that this is especially marked in some cancer patients. 

Secondly, the antibody repertoire switches after the first booster from a protective IgG1 and IgG3 dominant B cell response to a tolerising IgG4 one, made worse by further boosters, as reported in a recent Science Immunology paper. As many cancers are controlled by effective T cell led immunity, the sudden perturbation of this control would clearly explain the development of B cell leukaemia and lymphomas, melanoma renal cell cancers and colorectal ones, all tumours which can respond to immunotherapy. 

Another report by Loacker et al. in Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine shows that mRNA vaccines increase PD-L1 on granulocytes and monocytes, which means they effect the very opposite of what the immunotherapy agents do against these tumours, and which in turn explains why many of these tumours appear to be resistant to this otherwise effective therapy. Taken together, the effect on the immune response of these boosters can easily explain the relapses and so-called turbo-charged cancers appearing.

Other reports document the presence of DNA plasmids and SV40 (a known cancer-inducing gene) sequences, as well as the ability of mRNA to bind to important suppressor genes. Although this is controversial and has been challenged, it has led to the realisation of significant batch-to-batch variation that could enhance the cancer process yet probably not manifest itself for a few years. The very possibility that we could be sitting on a vaccine-inducing cancer time bomb means that we must never again get involved into a mass vaccine programme for another possible Disease X. 

But unless the Government wakes up to this now, we will be at the mercy of the World Health Organisation doing the very same thing when it decides to overreact to the Disease X virus in order to take back control and destroy our lives all over again.

Angus Dalgleish is an expert in immunology and Professor of Oncology at St George’s Hospital Medical School, London. This article was first published in TCW Defending Freedom.

[dnb24]

@sancho panza

 

a good video with detail on sudden death syndrome and myocarditis

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5BhC0BCYQwo&pp=ygUQZHIgam9obiBjYW1wYmVsbA%3D%3D

[sancho panza]

2.9 million views on Twitter.Truth getting out there as Vaxx injured confronts Rishi SUnak.Rishi balmes medical advice.

Wont be long before everyone knows and they will hang that weirdo out to dry for lockdowns/vaxx injuries.Poor bloke.

hattip david cartland twitter feed

Edited February 14 by sancho panza

[sancho panza]

Moving interview from the guy kevin maguire called an 'anti vaxxer' despite him having taken 3 coof jabs.

Dr JC.

 

[sancho panza]

Via clare Craig X feed.

 

Decl: I was one of the 8.8%.Politely declined on the basis of what I'd seen.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 26 by sancho panza

[Talking Monkey]

12 hours ago, sancho panza said:

Via clare Craig X feed.

 

Decl: I was one of the 8.8%.Politely declined on the basis of what I'd seen.

 

 

 

 

If I'm reading that correctly 43% of frontline staff have had 4 shots of the covid vax, with nearly 70% having had 3. That must be way higher than the general population 

[Chewing Grass]

26 minutes ago, Talking Monkey said:

If I'm reading that correctly 43% of frontline staff have had 4 shots of the covid vax, with nearly 70% having had 3. That must be way higher than the general population 

Plus Dose 1 and Dose 2 were close together so the refusers will have had or seen a significant adverse reaction that they will know about working in a medical environment.

Was talking to somebody I grew up with at a funeral last week, he like myself had a significant adverse reaction to 1 so never went back for 2.

I have also noticed (as a keep cyclist) looking at Strava segment times, random example below (yes I'm fit) that many segments have not seen good top 10 times since 2021.

I'm sure others can corroborate similar if they look, these are normal club/keen riders not Olympic track cyclists, it is a definite thing.

Edited February 26 by Chewing Grass

[sancho panza]

2 hours ago, Talking Monkey said:

If I'm reading that correctly 43% of frontline staff have had 4 shots of the covid vax, with nearly 70% having had 3. That must be way higher than the general population 

no idea.There are laods of stories knocking around the ambulance service with regard to adverse reactions on staff.

You cant give them away these days.

NHS staff inlcudes a lot of people who arent pt facing

2 hours ago, Chewing Grass said:

Plus Dose 1 and Dose 2 were close together so the refusers will have had or seen a significant adverse reaction that they will know about working in a medical environment.

Was talking to somebody I grew up with at a funeral last week, he like myself had a significant adverse reaction to 1 so never went back for 2.

I have also noticed (as a keep cyclist) looking at Strava segment times, random example below (yes I'm fit) that many segments have not seen good top 10 times since 2021.

I'm sure others can corroborate similar if they look, these are normal club/keen riders not Olympic track cyclists, it is a definite thing.

I ehard Toru de France times had suffered too.

that looks pretty stark

[sancho panza]

Thar she blows................................

25 MPs call for an ivestigation into the MHRA ref cvoid vaccines.

Interesitng example of how few yellow cards get filed per adverse event

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/27/mhra-covid-vaccine-side-effects-mps-all-party-parliamentary/

Medicines regulator failed to flag Covid vaccine side effects and must be investigated, say MPs

All-party group believe MHRA were aware of heart and clotting issues in February 2021 but did not highlight the problems for several months

The medical regulator failed to sound the alarm over Covid vaccine side effects and should be investigated, MPs have said. 

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is responsible for approving drugs and devices and monitors side effects caused by treatments.

But the all-party parliamentary group (APPG) on pandemic response and recovery, an influential group of MPs, has raised “serious patient safety concerns”. It has claimed that “far from protecting patients” the regulator operates in a way that “puts them at serious risk”.

Some 25 MPs across four parties have written to the health select committee asking for an urgent investigation. In reply, Steve Brine, the health committee chairman, has said an inquiry into patient safety is “very likely”. 

In a letter to Mr Brine, the APPG said that there was reason to believe that the MHRA had been aware of post-vaccination heart and clotting issues as early as February 2021, but did not highlight the problems for several months.

Denmark and several other European countries suspended the AstraZeneca vaccine over clotting fears in March 2021, but the MHRA only published safety advice on April 7, by which time 24 million people had been vaccinated.

 

The watchdog also saw a “signal” for the heart problems myocarditis and pericarditis in February 2021, but did not include the conditions in safety updates until June 2021, MPs said.

“In effect, the MHRA licences medical products as safe knowing it lacks the processes to properly monitor adverse events,” the APPG wrote.

“In the case of Covid-19 vaccines, given the comparatively novel technology and record manufacturing speed, could the MHRA have even properly scrutinised the licensing data or known the short term safety?

“Historically trust and confidence in vaccines and vaccine safety has been high in the UK, but it seems that the experience of the Covid-19 vaccines has undermined this and by association trust in the regulator and the pharmaceutical industry.

“Now more than ever a wide-reaching and in-depth review is needed.”

Underestimates complexities

The group also warned that the MHRA Yellow Card reporting system – which encourages patients and doctors to flag-up medicine side effects – “grossly” underestimates complexities, and in some instances picks up just one in 180 cases of harm.

An analysis by Stockport NHS Foundation Trust found that in the North West of England, 1,058 people had been admitted to hospital with stomach bleeds caused by anticoagulant medication over five years, yet just six Yellow Card reports were made during the period.

Side effects from drugs account for one in every 16 hospital admissions in Britain, and cost the NHS more than £2 billion each year.

But trials are often too small to pick up adverse reactions, particularly when they are driven by rare genetic mutations, meaning it is vital to continue monitoring drugs in the community.

The MHRA recently said it would investigate why blood thinners were causing dangerous side effects in between two and five per cent of patients.

The APPG said it was also concerned that MHRA regulation of medicine was funded by the pharmaceutical industry and said the body had shifted from focusing on scrutiny to trying to help drugs get approved.

‘Watchdog to the enabler’

Dame June Raine, the chief executive of the MHRA, who announced she would be stepping down last week, has previously said the agency was transitioning from “watchdog to the enabler,” a phrase which MPs said warranted its own investigation.

Graham Stringer MP, co-chair of the APPG on pandemic response and recovery, said:

“The MHRA oversees a failing system that is slow to act, causing harm to patients and beset with conflicts of interest.

“We cannot allow it to continue. That’s why we have written to the health select committee calling for an urgent investigation into the MHRA.”

The APPG said that concerns raised directly with the MHRA had been met with “an habitually dismissive and evasive response”.

Dame June  said: “We have made significant steps to put patients at the heart of all our work.

“These include incorporating patient views and lived experience into our safety reviews; involving patients in the early stages of planning medicines development and building a new responsive reporting system for patients to tell us about any adverse incidents. We have also led on legislative changes to strengthen surveillance for medical devices and medicines, meaning patient safety is embedded firmly into law.

“Our progress so far in making changes based on meaningful patient involvement gives us a solid base to build upon as we continue on this important journey.”

“We are committed to enabling innovation that brings transformative medical products safely to patients.’’

[sancho panza]

#what have they got to hide

 

https://dailysceptic.org/2024/03/07/ukhsa-provides-mortality-data-to-big-pharma-but-not-to-the-general-public-for-commercial-sensitivity-reasons/

UKHSA Provides Mortality Data to Big Pharma But Not to the General Public for ‘Commercial Sensitivity Reasons’

She went on to become the Chief Executive of the U.K. Health Security Agency (UKHSA) in 2021. This combined Public Health England and England’s NHS Test and Trace.

On Monday, Harries appeared before the Health and Social Care Committee where she was asked about the data around excess deaths.

She confirmed (around 17:15) that whilst the agency doesn’t routinely share record level mortality datasets that include vaccination dates, doses and co-morbidities, it has released anonymised, aggregate data to vaccine manufacturers. Apparently, this is for their own vaccines, to support obligations to report as part of safety surveillance.

However, Harries goes on to imply that Parliament and the public may not be able to have access to the same data provided to the vaccine manufacturers, for commercial sensitivity reasons.

We have released anonymised aggregate data to manufacturers. This is for their own vaccines to support their obligations to report to MHRA as part of the routine safety surveillance. But these data are commercially sensitive.

It’s good to know that data paid for by the taxpayer cannot be shared with the taxpayer. Data about and concerning taxpayers cannot be viewed by taxpayers, even though it is anonymised. But it has already been given to Big Pharma.

More confirmation as to whom these organisations really work for. Hint – not you.

[sancho panza]

[sancho panza]

[sancho panza]

https://dailysceptic.org/2024/03/15/doctors-sound-alarm-over-global-surge-in-cancers-among-young-people-since-pandemic-with-no-obvious-cause/

Doctors Sound Alarm Over Global Surge in Cancers Among Young People Since Pandemic With No Obvious Cause

Doctors across the world are sounding the alarm over a surging epidemic of young people being diagnosed with cancers since the pandemic, with no obvious explanation for what lies behind it. The Mail has the story.

Nearly every continent is experiencing an increase of various types of cancer in people under 50 years old, which is particularly problematic as the disease tends to be caught in later stages in this population because most doctors aren’t trained to look for it in young people.

The disparities of rates and types of the disease are puzzling scientists and have prompted some to kick off multi-decade research projects that will involve hundreds of thousands of people from around the world. 

Globally, Australia has seen the highest number of early-onset cancer diagnoses in the world, with a rate of 135 per 100,000 people. 

Nearby New Zealand has the second highest rate, at 119 cases in people under 50 per 100,000 people. 

But while breast cancer is the top disease in Australia, colon cancer ranks first in its neighbor.

In Asia, Japan and South Korea may be close in proximity and similar economically, but they have different rates of early-onset colon cancer, which is increasing at a faster rate in South Korea.

The United States falls in sixth place, with 87 cases per 100,000 people under 50 years old and the U.K. takes the 28th spot, with 70.5 cases per 100,000 people. 

Cancers increasing the fastest include throat and prostate cancers. Early-onset cancers with the highest mortality include beast, tracheal (windpipe), lung, stomach and colon. 

Experts have longed speculated the increasing obesity rates and earlier cancer screenings may be behind the rise, as well as high-fat diets, alcohol consumption and tobacco use.

However, because lifestyles, habits and diets vary so widely from country-to-country, they now believe these factors do not entirely account for the surge.

Daniel Huang, a hepatologist at the National University of Singapore, told Nature: “Many have hypothesised that things like obesity and alcohol consumption might explain some of our findings. But it looks like you need a deeper dive into the data.”

More recent researchers have begun to focus on a genetic component to early-onset cancer. Some have found younger people develop more aggressive tumors than older patients, which are better at suppressing a person’s immune system. 

Pathologist Shuji Ogino at Harvard Medical School and his colleagues have also discovered a weakened immune response in people with early-onset tumors. 

Still, however, the differences are subtle, Ogino said, and a clear reason cannot be determined. 

According to the news article in Nature, the rates of some cancers in some countries were increasing before 2020. For example: “In the United States, where data on cancer incidence is particularly rigorous, uterine cancer has increased by 2% each year since the mid-1990s among adults younger than 50. Early-onset breast cancer increased by 3.8% per year between 2016 and 2019.”

However, recent trends indicate a surge since the pandemic that researchers think is set to continue for a number of years:

Statistics from around the world are now clear: the rates of more than a dozen cancers are increasing among adults under the age of 50. This rise varies from country to country and cancer to cancer, but models based on global data predict that the number of early-onset cancer cases will increase by around 30% between 2019 and 2030

The chart showing this predicted surge in overall cancer rates is shown below.

Worth reading in full.

[sancho panza]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/01/long-hospital-waits-blamed-for-250-deaths-each-week/

More than 250 patients ‘die unnecessarily each week because of long A&E waits’

Study of NHS figures suggest people are not getting hospital beds quickly enough and there has been little improvement since the Covid era

More than 250 NHS patients a week are thought to have died needlessly because of lengthy waits in A&E, a study suggests.

Calculations by the Royal College of Emergency Medicine (RCEM) suggest that many critical patients are being left waiting too long for a hospital bed, despite government pledges to improve performance.

Freedom of information requests submitted by the RCEM found that 65 per cent of people left in A&E for 12 hours or more were waiting for a bed, equating to more than one million patients over a year.

Previous research has calculated that there is one excess death for every 72 patients who spent eight to 12 hours in an A&E department.

The RCEM said it suggested that an average of 268 extra deaths had occurred each week in 2023 on average because of the delays, totalling nearly 14,000 excess deaths. About 5,000 people die in hospitals in England each week.

The estimate is only 17 fewer than in 2022, when Covid restrictions were still in place early in the year, and the Government pledged to raise NHS activity levels to 130 per cent.