Topics: A few quotations – The domination of politics over science – False assurances – The creation of fear – Public health deception – Vaccine injuries and deaths – Regulatory capture – Autopsies – Blood clots – Vaccine contamination – Cancer – Pregnancy – US House Select Subcommittee's report – Genetic disruption and systemic damage – Vaccine dangers in general – Covid vaccines were never needed anyway – Books.

A few quotations

Dr Byram W Bridle: “As someone who develops vaccines, I can tell you that it is difficult to make a vaccine that will perform as poorly as the current COVID-19 vaccines”.

Prof Angus Dalgleish: “In late 2021 it was becoming manifestly evident too that the vaccines were anything but safe and effective”.

Dr Eyal Shahar, Professor Emeritus of Public Health: "It may very well be that adverse consequences of repeated Covid boosters will vastly exceed temporary small benefits (if any). 'Safe and effective' they are not."

Dr Aseem Malhotra: "It cannot be said that the consent to receive these agents was fully informed, as is required ethically and legally”.

Prof Retsev Levi: “This is clearly the most failing medical product in the history of medical products, both in terms of efficacy and safety”.

Prof Masanori Fukushima: “It is an unprecedented vaccine disaster”.

The domination of politics over science

A paper in the Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice noted, “Rather than politics following the science, science was enlisted to follow the politics”.

A clear example of this is provided by Germany where the Robert Koch Institute is required to give expert advice on public health. However, being dependent on government funding, its experts were forced to recommend to the public what the government wanted. Documentary evidence, provided very reluctantly as a result of court orders following failure to comply with the law on freedom of information, shows that its experts were told to help spread misinformation.

The institute’s experts knew there was no evidence that the vaccines reduce disease transmission, but they failed to inform the public. Instead, they said that everyone should get jabbed “to protect grandma” and reach herd immunity, even though both are impossible if the vaccines don’t reduce transmission.

The experts knew that even N95 masks were ineffective outside hospital settings, but mandated them anyway. They recommended not closing schools, but the government did this anyway. The experts said Covid should not be compared to flu, being less dangerous; the average age of death of Covid patients was 83 years, slightly higher than the overall average age of death in 2019.

The situation was similar in many other countries, including Australia, Canada, US and UK. Governments spread misinformation, while seeking to silence experts who dissented. Professor of Health Policy and Global Health, Claudia Chaufan, noted how the US Food and Drug Administration used the “full weight of institutional authority and epitomized a growing phenomenon during the Covid era: the use of ridicule, institutional power, and epistemic gatekeeping to police dissent”.

Professor of Medicine at Stanford, John Ioannidis, stated in September 2021, “There was a clash between two schools of thought, authoritarian public health versus science – and science lost”.

False assurances

On 3 December 2020 Deputy Chief Medical Officer for England, Professor Jonathan Van-Tam, was officially quoted as saying: “We are extremely confident in the effectiveness and safety of our immunisation programmes. We will not be rolling out a COVID-19 vaccine unless it has met robust standards of safety, effectiveness and quality”.

The NHS has stated: “The most common side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine are mild and get better within a week”. “More serious side effects, such as a severe allergic reaction (anaphylaxis), are very rare”, and “There have been rare cases of inflammation of the heart (myocarditis) reported after COVID-19 vaccination. Most people who had this recovered following rest and simple treatments”.

However, evidence to justify such assurances was not provided. In September 2022 Robert M Kaplan (Emeritus Distinguished Professor at the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health) and Sander Greenland (Emeritus Professor of Epidemiology and Statistics at UCLA) wrote “Why We Question the Safety Profile of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines”, saying: “COVID-19 vaccines are now among the most widely disseminated medicines in the history of the world. They have cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars, ... There is no legitimate reason why scientists and the public should not have access to the evidence that justified that purchase. Yet evidence is being withheld …”.

The creation of fear

Covid-19 is similar to influenza in its effects. Prof John Ioannidis pointed out that by the end of 2020 in under-70s the infection fatality rate was 0.05%, or 1 in 2000, less than that for flu at 1 in 1000. Despite this, an international policy arose, as described by Yale epidemiologist Dr Harvey Risch, of greatly exaggerating the danger and creating hysteria.

Age-standardised mortality did not rise after the arrival of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in 2020 (but it did rise significantly following use of experimental vaccines in 2021, as mentioned below).

In the UK, the Scientific Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviours (SPI-B) was involved in deceiving the public. The minutes of the SPI-B meeting on 22 March 2020 stated: “The perceived level of

personal threat needs to be increased … using hard-hitting emotional messaging”.

In February 2023 it was noted that authorities “relentlessly pumped out panic-laden, often knowingly false propaganda during the past three years, in order to provoke fear and despair, while deliberately silencing and censoring all attempts at promoting a more balanced and healthy view.”

A study in May 2021 described how the government weaponised fear against the public. Scientists, including psychologist Gavin Morgan, on a government committee (SPI-B) that had encouraged the public's fear later admitted that its work was unethical.

The situation was similar elsewhere. Prof Stefan Homburg describes the German government’s deception. In 2023 official statistics showed hospital occupancy in Germany fell to an all-time low in 2020; Covid came but influenza disappeared, and there were no more severe respiratory illnesses than usual in 2020 and 2021. Age-standardised mortality was not higher in 2020 than usual; mortality increased only from 2021. People who died from or with Covid were on average 83 years old, against 82 years old for others. The idea of a pandemic arose exclusively from new types of mass testing, the results of which led the public to believe, wrongly, that there were more sick people and deaths than usual.

Politicians reacted in panic, closing schools, shops, churches and businesses for months, isolating the elderly and leaving them to die alone. They marginalised anyone who questioned the justification for these measures. They had public TV announce that children were virus carriers like rats. Almost every known critic of the measures was criminalised, suspended, dismissed or subjected to a house search. The Chief Justice cynically declared that citizens' fundamental rights had not been taken away, but could no longer be exercised. The media uncritically followed the narrative and smeared Prof Püschel, who was the first to perform autopsies, as a racist, and Prof Bhakdi as an anti-Semite, and anyone who questioned the measures as a conspiracy theorist and enemy of the state. Politicians kept the scaremongering going for years.

In February 2020 textbooks and WHO guidelines advised against measures such as lockdowns and school closures. At the time the RKI [Germany's main public health institute] said that masks would not help and that Covid was usually mild. Without the PCR tests the "pandemic" would not have been noticed. What led to the U-turn in March 2020? One must ask whether the measures were really intended to prevent infection, which they clearly did not, or rather served the purpose of breaking down vaccine hesitancy. Why did the politicians not only allow an experimental vaccine, but in fact forced people to take the substance through several types of mandates? Why were there emergency approvals without an emergency? Why have countless vaccine injuries had no consequences?

In an article Dr Chris Martenson says, “The data wasn’t there to justify lockdowns, but they really wanted lockdowns, so there it is: these measures in Germany were 100% political”. In order to sustain the lockdown narrative, officials expanded testing to healthy individuals, artificially inflating case counts through high-cycle PCR tests prone to false positives.

Public health deception

Dr David Bell is a clinical and public health physician who had a co-ordinating role in the WHO on malaria. In February 2023 he wrote that Dr. Anthony Fauci (a leading figure in US public health who strongly promoted use of Covid vaccines) and others had written a medical paper in which they “provide evidence that much of what those in authority have told the public regarding Covid vaccines was contrary to what they knew to be true”.

Fauci et al acknowledge the lack of effectiveness of vaccines for influenza and Covid: “It is not surprising that none of the predominantly mucosal respiratory viruses have ever been effectively controlled by vaccines”. Covid vaccines were never expected to significantly reduce infection or transmission. Dr Bell comments: “Predictions of high and sustained vaccine efficacy, and vaccination paving the ‘way out of the pandemic’, were not expected to come true. These claims were a ploy to encourage adherence to a plan that would dramatically enrich certain corporate and public health figures”.

Dr Bell adds: “The public health community misled the public to promote injections with a new class of pharmaceutical. They had no long-term safety data, the vaccines targeted a virus they knew posed little harm to the vast majority of those to whom they were speaking, while many already had more effective natural immunity. The long-term outcomes of this deception are yet to play themselves out, and will include a loss of trust in public health and the practice of medicine”.

Vaccine injuries and deaths

In August 2025 a preprint study with 380 references showed how coronavirus infections may amplify the adverse effects of prior mRNA vaccination for years, creating a sustained global health crisis marked by chronic illness, sudden deaths, and persistent excess mortality.

It states that, in eight countries, for which graphs are shown, major case and death surges began only after 75% of the population was fully vaccinated, during the mild Omicron era. “Large studies consistently show that mRNA shot protection fades within months, then flips into negative efficacy, where more doses mean higher infection risk. An analysis of 145 countries found vaccination programs linked with up to 291% more cases and 205% more deaths than projected without them. These patterns point to mass mRNA vaccination as a key driver of post-rollout COVID-19 waves”.

The claim that millions of lives were saved by Covid vaccines is based on modelling scenarios with no connection to actual mortality. Similarly, in November 2025 the slanted UK Covid Inquiry under Baroness Hallett claimed that it had been established that locking down a week earlier would have saved 23,000 lives. However, in January 2026 Prof Sir David Spiegelhalter said (BBC Radio 4) that the number is a modelling estimate (dependent on assumptions) and not a fact. He pointed out that no-one in the inquiry understands statistical modelling and that, despite costing hundreds of millions of pounds and taking vast amounts of time, it’s pretty bad that they don’t have internal statistical advice which could stop them making such a massive mistake.

In the UK, nearly 3,000 deaths and 500,000 injuries, 75 per cent of which are considered serious, were reported to the MHRA as resulting from Covid vaccines. The European Medicines Agency's EudraVigilance scheme recorded for Pfizer's Covid vaccines alone the number of adverse events reported up to 3.8.25 exceeded 1,270,000. In Germany by November 2021 deaths associated with Covid vaccines were already 54-fold as great as for all other vaccines combined for 21 years. US data in the VAERS system show relatively few deaths reported for all other vaccines but a huge increase in early 2021 in such deaths for Covid vaccines for which deaths per million doses were 30-fold as great.

Deaths reported to the US's official VAERS system increased hugely since the arrival of Covid vaccines in 2021, as this graph shows up to 5 December 2025. In 2021, 525 deaths were reported for all other vaccines combined (which was atypically high), but for the Covid vaccine alone 22,397 deaths. Willingness to take Covid vaccines has fallen as more people became aware of the risk.

Actual deaths and adverse events are much higher than those reported through these schemes since many people are unaware of them, and reporting is optional. The degree of under-reporting is estimated to be substantial. Dr Josh Guetzkow states that it is large, and that for some adverse events it is massive.

A study in Germany in August 2022 found that in 2020 the number of deaths was close to that expected, with only about 4,000 excess deaths. “By contrast, in 2021, the observed number of deaths was two empirical standard deviations above the expected number, and even more than four times the empirical standard deviation in 2022. The cumulated number of excess deaths in 2021, and 2022 is about 100,000 deaths. The high excess mortality in 2021, and 2022 was almost entirely due to an increase in deaths in the age groups between 15 and 79”. Moreover, “A similar mortality pattern was observed for stillbirths with an increase of about 9.4% in the second quarter and 19.6% in the fourth quarter of the year 2021”.

In July 2022 Dr Eyal Shahar, a professor emeritus of public health in epidemiology and biostatistics, studied evidence in Israel and stated that the vaccine mortality rate, like that in New Zealand, is not safe. He added that, “At a minimum, the estimated fatality rate should be part of informed consent. Unfortunately, informed consent has not been on the agenda of officials since Covid vaccines entered the market through emergency use authorization”.

André Redert, PhD compared in July 2022 mortality rate and vaccine uptake between municipalities in the Netherlands, and said: “Our results add to other recent findings of zero mRna-vaccine effectiveness on all-cause mortality”. Instead he found a statistically significant positive correlation between vaccine uptake and mortality. Thorsteinn Siglaugsson wrote: “Those results are truly worrying. And what is perhaps even more worrying is the general censorship when it comes to publishing or discussing them”.

A study in the Journal of Research and Applied Medicine in September 2023, of 17 countries, found “no evidence in all-cause mortality (ACM) by time data of any beneficial effect of COVID-19 vaccines”. Indeed, “There is no association in time between COVID-19 vaccination and any proportionate reduction in ACM. The opposite occurs. All 17 countries have transitions to regimes of high ACM, which occur when the COVID-19 vaccines are deployed and administered”.

In July 2025 Prof Norman Fenton and Prof Martin Neil gave reasons for their “overall estimate that, between Dec 2020 and Oct 2023, approximately 16,000 people in the UK died directly from covid vaccines”. Foe those who died indirectly from the vaccines, following serious adverse reactions, the estimate is 35,000. The total is 51,000 vaccine-related deaths.

In an interview in July 2025 Dr Peter A. McCullough, a former professor of medicine and editor of two medical journals, stated that a reasonable conclusion is that vaccination resulted in far more (4.7 fold greater) deaths than resulted from the infection it was supposed to prevent.

Almost all countries refuse to publish mortality data on those vaccinated and those unvaccinated. It is not difficult to guess the reason but the secrecy is shameful. However in Japan, 21 million official records have been obtained, providing compelling evidence that the vaccines did not save lives but rather the reverse. Analysis led by Prof Yasufumi Murakami revealed, at a press conference in July 2025, a massive death peak occurring 90–120 days after mRNA injection, with more doses leading to earlier deaths.

Regulatory capture

It is understandably and widely believed that unsafe medical products would not be allowed by public health regulators, whose purpose is to check their effectiveness and safety in advance of permitting their use. However, this overlooks regulatory capture (or agency capture), a form of corruption whereby a special interest gains strong influence over a regulator and gets it to prioritise the special interest over the general interests of the public.

In May 2021 a study, “Covid-19: How independent were the US and British vaccine advisory committees?”, stated: “British and American officials have emphasised the independence of the experts who authorise vaccines and those who issue advice on them. But an investigation by The BMJ has found that some of these experts have significant industry ties that government agencies do not always disclose”.

While the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) is not as independent as it claims, “Transparency problems increase with the UK's MHRA, which authorises vaccines after seeking advice from the Commission on Human Medicines, an independent expert scientific advisory body to government ministers. The commission does not make its advice public, publishes a scant record of meeting minutes, and has not disclosed its members' declarations of financial interest since 2018”.

In June 2022 the British Medical Journal published an investigation, “From FDA to MHRA: are drug regulators for hire?”, pointing out that regulatory agencies receive large proportions of their budgets funded by the industry they are sworn to regulate. The MHRA received 86% of its budget from industry. Regulators in the US, the EU, Australia and Japan depended on industry for between 65% and 96% of their funding.

For decades academics have raised questions about the influence funding has on regulatory decisions, especially in the wake of a string of drug and device scandals — including opioids, Alzheimer's drugs, influenza antivirals, pelvic mesh, joint prostheses, breast and contraceptive implants, cardiac stents, and pacemakers.

The BMJ quoted sociologist Donald Light who spent decades studying drug regulation: “It’s the opposite of having a trustworthy organisation independently and rigorously assessing medicines. They’re not rigorous, they’re not independent, they are selective, and they withhold data. Doctors and patients must appreciate how deeply and extensively drug regulators can't be trusted so long as they are captured by industry funding”.

The Health Advisory and Recovery Team (HART) noted in October 2022 that the UK medical regulator, MHRA, did not carry out the toxicity, biodistribution and pharmacokinetics studies that are required of new drugs because of political pressure to approve them. Moreover, nearly two years had since passed but the MHRA had still not set a deadline for the pharmaceutical companies to provide the required data. Authorisations were based on only 2 months of safety data, with no more being collected thereafter.

Dame June Raine, heading the MHRA, said in March 2022 that the Covid pandemic had catalysed the transformation of the regulator from a watchdog to an enabler. This is not far short of admitting that it is more inclined towards the interests of manufacturers (from which it gets most of its funding) than those of patients. A report by HART in April 2024 shows that MHRA has been very reluctant to acknowledge vaccine harms such as blood clots and myocarditis.

In September 2024 virologist Dr Robert Redfield (director of the CDC, 2018-2021) acknowledged that in the US all three of the principal health agencies [FDA, NIH and CDC] suffer from agency capture. “Across a century-plus of cozy courtship, the federal regulators have nearly married the regulated, especially in health care. Today, private industry uses its political influence to control decision-making at regulatory agencies, law enforcement entities, and legislatures”.

Many national regulators are co-ordinated by the International Coalition of Medicines Regulatory Authorities (ICMRA). Its COVID-19 working group, established in 2020 under the chairmanship of an MHRA manager, included representatives from US-FDA, EMA, Health Canada, Swiss-medic, HPRA Ireland, AEMPS Spain, ANSM France, PEI Germany, MHLW/PMDA Japan, TGA Australia, ANVISA Brazil, HSA Singapore, WHO, Saudi-FDA.

The MHRA’s Chief Executive, Dr Ian Hudson, was ICMRA’s chairman before he became in 2019 a Senior Adviser to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation which funded and promoted Covid vaccines.

In the US, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued new recommendations (in August 2025) that infants as young as 6 months should receive COVID-19 mRNA booster injections. The main donors to the AAP’s “Friends of Children Fund” are Merck, Moderna, Pfizer and Sanofi: four companies make virtually every vaccine on the “recommended” childhood vaccine schedule.

Autopsies

In August 2021 it was noted in the US that there were already 13,068 death reports following Covid vaccination, but not a single autopsy had been done. In September 2023 it was clear that Australia’s drug regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration, does not know or refuses to say how many of the adverse events reported are actually caused by the Covid vaccines, despite having received over 139,000 adverse event reports for them.

Dr Pierre Kory notes that regulatory agencies across the world reversed, for the Covid vaccines, the long-standing practice of considering any death or injury reportedly associated with a novel therapy to be considered caused by the therapy until proven otherwise. Also, with rare exceptions, coroners across the world systematically avoided “staining for the spike protein” in autopsies. Thus there is widespread suppression of evidence for the toxicity and lethality of the mRNA vaccines and the resulting spike protein.

However, in Germany Dr Peter Schirmacher, Chief Pathologist at the University of Heidelberg, found that in cases of autopsies of people who had died within two weeks of vaccination 30-40% of them died from the vaccine.

The largest peer-reviewed study (as of Nov 2024) of autopsy findings after Covid-19 vaccine found that, of 325 deaths studied, 240 (nearly 80%) were independently adjudicated as directly due to or significantly contributed to by the vaccination.

Blood clots

A study in the journal Vaccines in 2022 of the incidence of cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) following Covid vaccination stated that, “CVTs were commonly reported in patients aged 18–44 and 45–64 years” and “More than 90% of the patients were in serious condition, and 33% did not recover or died”.

In 2021 embalmers in the US started routinely finding extraordinary, long, fibrous, rubbery blood clots in many of their subjects. In April 2024, “While the evidence continues to mount, public health institutions aren’t saying anything about it”. All the Covid vaccines were responsible, some more than others, according to a study in the journal Hepatology.

A US embalmer, Richard Hirschman, who has embalmed thousands of bodies, began finding these strange clots only after the COVID-19 mRNA injection rollout in 2021, and finds them in 30%-50% of bodies. A worldwide survey in 2024 found most embalmers have seen these clots in corpses. Similar clots have been removed from living patients during surgery.

A US survey reported in August 2025 that, “83% of 301 embalmers say they are still finding these clots, present in roughly 27.5% of bodies”.

An undertaker in the UK said: “I am seeing it constantly in vaccinated deceased now”, but he found the authorities, including coroners, uninterested.

Images of long blood clots (sources: first image, second image).

Vaccine contamination

In September 2024 52 scientists and academics, many at the top of their fields, signed a letter about Covid vaccine contamination. Noting that the thalidomide tragedy resulted in over 10,000 victims globally, they pointed out the huge number of people treated with Covid vaccines, and pointed to the high level of contamination that presents a substantial risk.

A study in December 2024 found DNA contamination in Covid mRNA vaccines exceeding regulatory limits by over 300%. It corroborated the work of many others. The cumulative evidence supported the call in December 2023 by Florida Surgeon General to halt the injections in view of the contamination.

A study published in September 2025 noted that Pfizer changed its manufacturing process after getting approval and used DNA plasmids, so the vaccine released to market differed from that used in clinical trials. The new study used two methods to measure the DNA load in 16 unique vaccine lots. Using fluorometry, all the Moderna and Pfizer lots tested were found to have a DNA load that hugely exceeded regulatory limits.

Cancer

The NHS neither mentions cancer as a side effect, nor the lack of safety testing of the vaccines for cancer. Pfizer said genotoxicity, carcinogenicity and biodistribution studies were “not considered necessary”. Moreover, the vaccine used in trials differed from the mass-produced product which was contaminated with endotoxins (from the cell walls of bacteria used in production) and DNA.

In January 2023 oncologist Prof Angus Dalgleish in the UK stated: “Ever since I raised the alarm that the boosters are preceding relapses of stable cancers and the occurrences of new B cell-based cancers such as lymphomas I have been contacted daily by doctors from far and wide who are seeing the same but not being listened to”.

Similarly, in February 2022 pathologist Dr Ryan Cole in the US said that oncologists reported “seeing the weirdest cancers, and cancers that we have been able to keep in check and treat, taking off like wildfire”.

There are more than a hundred peer-reviewed papers indicating how the vaccines may induce, accelerate, or reactivate cancer through 17 distinct pathways.

Kevin McKernan, a genomics expert, showed that the vaccine vials were contaminated with DNA and reported that his work has been replicated in Germany, Japan, France and South Carolina. He worked with Professor Ulrike Kämmerer to show that cells in a laboratory surrounded by vaccine not only had DNA integration, but showed tiny mutations where the DNA has been passed on to daughter cells. McKernan said: “After the regulators had admitted to being deceived they asked the opinion of the party that deceived them 'how bad was the deception?' They shockingly believed the answer they were given”.

In November 2022 Prof Angus Dalgleish wrote to the BMJ's Editor in Chief: “Covid no longer needs a vaccine programme given the average age of death of Covid in the U.K. is 82 and from all other causes is 81 and falling. ... However, there is now another reason to halt all vaccine programmes. As a practising oncologist I am seeing people with stable disease rapidly progress after being forced to have a booster, usually so they can travel”.

In February 2024 a study found in the UK “a large increase in morbidity (disabilities) and mortality due to malignant neoplasms that started in 2021 and accelerated substantially in 2022. The increase in disability claims mirrors the increase in excess deaths in 2022, and both are highly statistically significant”.

Starting at the end of 2021 Prof Angus Dalgleish noted that cancer patients who had been cured were relapsing after years of being disease-free. Many other doctors from all around the world contacted him to say they were seeing similar relapses. Others reported new aggressive cancers in younger patients, and specialists were seeing so many of these advanced cancers that they became known as turbo cancers. These cases were occurring in covid-vaccinated patients but any doctors who expressed concerns were told to keep quiet.

He mentions a review article by two experienced doctors in August 2025 that noted the rapid increase in cancers that tend to present at an advanced stage, progress rapidly, and occur in younger patients. Dalgleish explains that the spike protein used in the vaccine can create ideal conditions for cancers to grow and spread, and moreover that mRNA technology can directly induce and promote cancer formation. “Not only does the mRNA persist but it can integrate into the host genome causing genomic instability and activation of oncogenes”.

Dalgleish recommends a focus on detoxifying the millions of people who have been poisoned by these experimental therapies. He adds that it is shocking that the NHS has yet to face its responsibility toward vaccine victims.

Pregnancy

Dr Sara Brenner, one of the most senior experts in the FDA (which promoted Covid vaccine use) has since revealed that she declined to be vaccinated. “Knowing what I knew ... there were many things that were not right” she says. She explained that her decision was driven by a lack of safety data, particularly around the biodistribution of the vaccine's lipid nanoparticles (LNPs).

Her concerns echo those raised in 2021 by Canadian immunologist, Dr Byram Bridle, who first exposed internal documents from Japan’s regulatory agency showing that LNPs didn’t remain at the injection site, but travelled throughout the body and accumulated in organs including the ovaries, liver, spleen and bone marrow. At the time his warnings were aggressively dismissed, but a 2022 study in JAMA Pediatrics detected vaccine-derived mRNA in the breast milk of vaccinated mothers for at least 48 hours, the very scenario Dr Brenner had feared.

Pfizer’s partial trial of its mRNA vaccine in pregnancy showed no benefit in terms of reduced COVID infections. Vaccinated mothers had major adverse events happen to their babies at a rate 4.2X higher than those unvaccinated. Since the trial enrolled fewer women (only 683) than planned (4,000), the effect size reached only the 90% level of significance. Pfizer took three years to make the full results available but issued no press release.

A preprint paper in June 2025, based on medical records from 26% of the Israeli population (including over 200,000 pregnancies) found evidence for “a substantially higher-than-expected number of eventual fetal losses associated with COVID-19 vaccination during gestational weeks 8-13”.

The potential influence of COVID-19 vaccines on reproductive health was not assessed in preauthorisation trials. In June 2025 a peer-reviewed study found that the rate of conceptions leading to live birth nine months later for women who received the COVID-19 vaccine was substantially lower than for unvaccinated women. Data on 1.3 million women in the Czech Republic indicated that successful conceptions were about 50% greater among unvaccinated women. “This information should have been obtained prior to any public use of the COVID vaccine”.

In December 2024 a study in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research described evidence of vaccine shedding: menstrual abnormalities strongly associated with proximity to COVID-19 vaccinated individuals. The vaccines were used without having been tested for shedding.

In 2024 two medical scientists noted that the MHRA had been holding data for 3 years about the 2000 pregnant women who were vaccinated in the first half of 2021 and whom it was supposed to have been monitoring, but it refused to release the data.

US House Select Subcommittee's report

After a two-year investigation, in December 2024 the bipartisan United States House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic produced its final, and apparently unanimous, report, announced in a press release. Among the conclusions are the following.

COVID-19 most likely emerged from a laboratory in China. Ecohealth Alliance Inc., under the leadership of Dr Peter Daszak, violated the terms of its National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant and facilitated dangerous gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China. Dr. Daszak also provided false statements to Congress.

The “6 feet apart” social distancing recommendation — which shut down schools and small businesses across the country — was arbitrary and not based on science. Dr. Anthony Fauci testified that the guidance sort of just appeared.

There was no conclusive evidence that masks effectively protected the public. Prolonged lockdowns caused immeasurable harm to not only the economy, but also to mental and physical health, with a particularly negative effect on younger people.

Public health officials often spread misinformation through conflicting messaging, kneejerk reactions, and a lack of transparency. In the most egregious examples of pervasive misinformation campaigns, off-label drug use and the lab leak theory were unjustly demonized.

The FDA rushed approval of the COVID-19 vaccine in order to meet the government’s arbitrary mandate timeline. Two leading FDA scientists warned their colleagues about the dangers of rushing the vaccine approval process and the likelihood of adverse events. They were ignored.

Vaccine mandates were not supported by science and caused more harm than good. Public health officials engaged in a coordinated effort to ignore natural immunity when developing vaccine guidance and mandates. Contrary to what was promised, the COVID-19 vaccine did not stop the spread or transmission of the virus.

The healthcare system was severely damaged by the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients experienced a decreased quality-of-care, longer wait times, shorter medical appointments, and missed diagnoses. Unemployment rates surged to levels not seen since the Great Depression.

The 'science' never justified prolonged school closures. Children were unlikely to contribute to the spread of COVID-19 or suffer severe illness or mortality. Standardized test scores show that children lost decades worth of academic progress as a result of school closures

The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) engaged in a multi-year campaign of delay, confusion, and non-responsiveness in an attempt to obstruct the Select Subcommittee's investigation and hide evidence that could incriminate or embarrass senior public health officials.

Genetic disruption and systemic damage

A study in July 2020 found that thousands of critical genes regulating immunity and cancer suppression are dysregulated after mRNA injection, while spike DNA and mRNA fragments have been detected in the body years after injection, suggesting genomic integration.

In early 2022, governments began rolling out fourth and fifth Covid-19 booster doses, permitting top-ups every three to six months. Officials at the European Medicines Agency warned there was insufficient evidence to justify repeated boosters given every few months. They cautioned that frequent dosing could overload the immune system and lead to immune fatigue. Now a study has validated the early concerns, finding that repeated mRNA vaccination shifted the immune system toward producing antibodies known to dampen the immune mechanisms required for efficient viral clearance.

A study in 2025 found, using high-resolution RNA sequencing of blood samples and differential gene expression analysis, that COVID-19 “vaccines” severely disrupted the expression of thousands of genes, inducing mitochondrial failure, immune system reprogramming, and oncogenic activation that persisted for months to years after injection. Vaccine-injured individuals showed massive gene dysregulation compared to healthy controls.

Vaccine dangers in general

Many people believe that vaccines are, by their nature, automatically beneficial. In fact they vary considerably as regards safety and effectiveness, with many being so harmful that they were withdrawn (like Pandremix flu vaccine and AstraZeneca’s Covid vaccine).

Significantly, Dr Stanley Plotkin whose book, Vaccines, is regarded as the standard reference on the subject, co-authored in July 2024 a paper admitting that “prelicensure clinical trials have limited sample sizes, follow-up durations, and population heterogeneity”. Also that “there are not resources earmarked for postauthorization safety studies”. In other words, vaccines are both inadequately tested before use and inadequately monitored thereafter.

Contrary to longstanding assurances that vaccines are probably the most thoroughly safety tested products, the authors state that, in 179 (76%) of 234 cases of various vaccines and health outcomes, there was inadequate evidence to prove or disprove a causal connection. They say that “progress in vaccine-safety science has understandably been slow”.

In September 2025 a US lawyer, Aaron Siri, with a decade of experience of many lawsuits against health agencies, wrote that common claims about vaccines are often contrary to the evidence, and that, “There is what medical and health authorities tell the world, and then there is what they admit under oath in a lawsuit”.

Siri notes in his book that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) held information on the vaccination status and health of millions of Americans but refused to make the data freely available. Those wanting research done turned instead in 2017 to the head of infectious disease at a leading medical institution, Henry Ford Health. He agreed that their experts would, using the institution’s own extensive data, compare the health outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated children. This large study compared the health of 18,468 children born between 2000 and 2016. The full story is told in a film, An Inconvenient Study.

The statistically significant results in 2020 were astonishing. Vaccinated children had, for example, 4.29 times the rate of asthma, 5.96 times the rate of autoimmune disease, 5.53 times the rate of neurodevelopmental disorder, and 4.47 times the rate of speech disorder. There were also many cases of ADHD and learning disability among those vaccinated, but none among those unvaccinated. This was so embarrassing that publication was blocked, and it was only in 2025 that the results of this large study were revealed in testimony to the US Senate.

By age 10, 57% of vaccinated children had a chronic illness compared to only 17% of the unvaccinated.

Covid vaccines were never needed anyway

That the vaccines were and are unnecessary was evident before they were produced, since safe and effective medicines, such as ivermectin, had already been discovered. While their use for Covid was new, many medicines are similarly used “off-label” when new uses for them have been found.

Ivermectin has been very widely used for other diseases - with several thousand million doses since 1987 - and its discovery led to a Nobel Prize in 2015. Dr Satoshi Omura, one of the two Nobel Laureates, and colleagues conducted a comprehensive review of its clinical activity against COVID-19, concluding that the preponderance of the evidence demonstrated major reductions in mortality and morbidity. A study in August 2021 that mentioned this also noted that during mass ivermectin treatments in Peru, excess deaths fell by a mean of 74% over 30 days in its ten states with the most extensive treatments.

Prof Eli Schwartz said in August 2021 that researchers found positive results with ivermectin at a cost of under $1 a day. “We tried to publish it” but “No one even wanted to hear about it”. He added, “This drug will not bring any big economic profits”, and so Big Pharma doesn’t want to deal with it.

Opposition to the use of ivermectin has been fierce and unethical, as described by Dr Pierre Kory, a critical-care physician. In his book The War On Ivermectin (2023) he explained that some US hospitals successfully used the medicine while others did not use it owing to their dependence on government grants which came with strings attached. Kory noted that, “As of this writing, there are ninety-five studies from 1,023 scientists including 134,554 patients from twenty-seven countries that show ivermectin’s efficacy” (updated details here).

In June 2021 it was reported that in India, Tamil Nadu rejected ivermectin and new cases of Covid more than tripled, from 10,986 to 36,184. In Delhi, which ignored the WHO's advice and used ivermectin, cases declined by 97% (28,395 to 956), and in Uttar Pradesh by 95% (37,944 to 2,014).

A study in the July/August 2021 issue of American Journal of Therapeutics used the most rigorous statistical standards, applied by world-leading researchers biostatistician Mr Andrew Bryant and medical doctor and researcher Dr Tess Lawrie who also stated: “Contrary to the mainstream media reports, the evidence is that Ivermectin is clearly proven to work against covid. In fact, there is more evidence on ivermectin than on any other treatment option for covid, and far more safety data than any of the novel therapies”.

It is difficult to see any motive for refusing to use medicines like ivermectin to prevent or treat Covid other than protection of the vaccines from the threat of a better, safer and cheaper alternative. In getting their way the vaccines’ manufacturers are assisted by the public health regulators over which they have strong influence.

In early 2023 the General Medical Council (GMC) suspended Dr Sarah Myhill from practising medicine for advocating vitamin C, vitamin D, iodine and ivermectin to treat COVID-19. She supplied the court with 35 pages of evidence, fully referenced, to justify these remedies. The GMC declined to look at her evidence and refused her permission to cross-examine their "expert witnesses". The GMC lost its case, but its repeated attempts to suspend her are significant.

Dr Rachel Nicoll explains that the official narrative for COVID-19 depended on no effective treatments being available. "The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency’s (MHRA) Temporary Authorisation of the COVID-19 vaccines was predicated upon there being no treatment for Covid". To admit that effective treatments were available "would jeopardise the validity of the MHRA Temporary Authorisation by making the vaccine rollout and any attempt at compulsion unethical and possibly unlawful".

As in the US, where emergency authorisation of experimental Covid vaccines also depended on denying the existence of effective treatments, patients' welfare seems not to be the primary concern of medical authorities.

Books

The Accountability Deficit: How ministers and officials evaded accountability, misled the public and violated democracy during the pandemic, by Molly Kingsley, Arabella Skinner and Ben Kingsley (2023). Ethics, good governance, truth, integrity and transparency were grossly compromised during the pandemic period; these factors and a deficit of accountability created the conditions for an economic, social, medical, ethical and child safeguarding disaster.

Canary In a Covid World: How Propaganda and Censorship Changed Our (My) World, by Dr Jay Bhattacharya, Dr Ryan Cole, Dr George Fareed, Dr Norman Fenton, Dr Pierre Kory, Dr Joseph Ladapo, Dt Aseem Malhotra, Dr Paul Marik, Ptof Bruce Pardy, Prof Denis Rancourt, Dr Harvey Risch, Dr Jessica Rose, Dr Naomi Wolf et al. (2024). A collection of essays by 34 contributors.

The Children’s Inquiry: How the state and society failed the young during the Covid-19 pandemic, by Liz Cole and Molly Kingsley (2022). “A devastating analysis of a country’s failure to prioritise its children and young people during a global disaster.” – Professor Lucy Easthope.

Covid: Why most of what you know is wrong, by Sebastian Rushworth (2021). A Swedish doctor examines some of the most central questions about the Covid-19 pandemic. He points out that the measures taken to fight Covid, such as the lockdowns, the huge fear campaigns and the school closures, will result in far more years of life lost than will be lost to the virus directly.

The Covid Consensus: The Global Assault on Democracy and the Poor — A Critique from the Left, by Toby Green and Thomas Fazi (2023). The Covid Consensus provides an internationalist-left perspective on the world’s Covid-19 response. “A meticulously referenced, shocking catalogue of Western hypocrisy and the destruction wrought by global lockdowns on the poorest nations … [A] depressing tale of hubris, mindless groupthink and cynical power grabs by bureaucrats and governments” – The Australian.

Covid through our Eyes: An Australian Story of Mistakes, Mistreatment and Misinformation. Edited by Prof Robert Clancy and Dr Melissa McCann (2025). Eminent scientists, analysts and medicos debunk the Covid doctrine which maximised multi-national drug company profits, at the expense of life and health. Careful yet scathing contributors demonstrate that Australian governments and health agencies — pressured by the USA and WHO — defied precautions to approve dangerous genetic vaccines; and with criminal penalties banned dissent and treatments that would have saved lives.

Fighting Goliath: Exposing the flawed science and statistics behind the COVID-19 event, by Prof Norman Fenton and Prof Martin Neil (2024). The official Covid-19 narrative was based on flawed and manipulated data and science. “A compelling chronicle of Fenton & Neil’s intellectually honest, scientifically rigorous, and relentless pursuit of truth during a time of government-directed data distortion and pandemic propaganda” – Jessica Hockett, PhD.

Forbidden Facts: Government Deceit & Suppression About Brain Damage from Childhood Vaccines, by Gavin de Becker (2025). This story of true crime, written by an internationally recognized criminologist, includes bogus research, bribes, compromised experts, paid conspirators, destruction of evidence, and massive publicity campaigns to discredit people and truths that don’t fit official wishes. “Gavin de Becker has put his formidable investigative skills into this highly readable exposé of the U.S. government’s history of hiding the harms of various substances” – Dr Peter A. McCullough. A “treasure trove of information that has been widely censored for decades” – Dr Christiane Northrup.

Spiked: A shot in the dark: 2 (The Covid Autopsy), by Dr Clare E. H. Craig BM BCh FRCPath (2025). A pathologist steps back from the chaos of the covid messaging to conduct a meticulous post-mortem of a global response. Drawing on official data, clinical trials, and historical lessons, Spiked examines how a single medical intervention became untouchable – elevated above scrutiny, even as ethical cornerstones like informed consent and bodily autonomy were quietly sidelined.

Toxic Shot: Facing the Dangers of the COVID “Vaccines”, by Dr Byram Bridle, Dr Harvey Risch, Dr David Wiseman, Dr Steven J. Hatfill, Dr Jessica Rose, Dr Matt Bain, Dr Jane Orient, Dr James A. Thorp et al. (2024). Rushed to market after clinical trials with no oversight, the terrifying fact is that these unsafe injections have sown death and disability. From 2021–2023, the United States alone suffered 600,000 unexplained excess deaths not associated with COVID-19, while official data reveals over two million Americans became newly disabled over the same period. These shocking figures are mirrored by similar trends abroad.

Vaccines, Amen: The Religion of Vaccines, by Aaron Siri (2025). If you want to learn the truth about vaccines and the secret world of vaccinology, this book injects a heavy dose of reality and reveals the power structure and facts regarding vaccines as they have never before been laid out.

Vaccines: Mythology, Ideology, and Reality, by John Leake and Dr Peter A. McCullough (2025). “A sweeping historical investigation that presents objective and competent guidance” —Jeffrey Tucker. “John Leake and Peter McCullough, MD, separate fact from fiction in their telling of the 120-year history of the modern vaccine era” – Robert Clancy, emeritus professor of immunology.

Vaccines: Truth, Lies, and Controversy, by Peter C. Gøtzsche (2021). There is substantial misinformation about vaccines on the Internet, particularly from those who reject all vaccines, but also from official sources .... Some vaccines are so beneficial — and have saved millions of lives — that we should all get them; some are so poor that many healthcare professionals do not use them for themselves or their families; and some are in-between.

The War on Ivermectin: The Medicine That Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic

by Dr Pierre Kory and Jenna McCarthy (2023). A “tale of corruption, censorship, and criminal intent” – Tess Lawrie, MBBCh, PhD, director of The Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy.

Zero Accountability in a Failed System: How Big Pharma Weaponizes Vaccines, Public Health, and the Law, by Dr Sherri Tenpenny (2025). The collusion between Big Pharma and government agencies, ensuring profit takes precedence over human lives. How rushed, experimental vaccines have left millions permanently injured, and why victims are locked out of justice.

— OOO —