Tag: causes of death

FDA to tighten vaccine rules after memo ties COVID-19 shot to child deaths

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is set to implement stricter vaccine approval guidelines after a memo claimed at least 10 children died “after and because of” receiving a COVID-19 shot.

The guidelines, obtained by The New York Times, could also impact vaccinations for other illnesses and viruses, including the FDA’s standards for annual flu shots and if Americans should receive multiple vaccines at a time. The memo also states that shots for pregnant women could be limited, and manufacturers will be required to conduct larger studies before seeking approval for vaccines.

Vinay Prasad, a top vaccine regulator at FDA, said pneumonia vaccine manufacturers must show that their treatments reduce the infection instead of merely developing antibodies to fight it. The new restrictions would also require drug manufacturers to run larger studies that would slow the process of developing vaccines, according to The Washington Post, which also reviewed the memo.

Keep reading

Shocking FDA Memo Admits COVID Vaccines Linked to Child Deaths

In a bombshell revelation that vindicates long-standing concerns from vaccine skeptics, a top FDA official has admitted that COVID-19 shots are tied to the deaths of at least 10 children.

The admission comes from an internal memo obtained by The New York Times, highlighting the dangers of myocarditis, a serious heart inflammation, caused by the vaccines.

“This is a profound revelation,” Dr. Prasad wrote the memo to staff members, per The Times. “For the first time, the U.S. F.D.A. will acknowledge that Covid-19 vaccines have killed American children.”

Vinay Prasad, the FDA’s Chief Medical and Scientific Officer and a vocal critic of overreaching COVID mandates, authored the memo.

Prasad described the findings as “a profound revelation” and called for sweeping changes to vaccine approval processes. This includes mandatory randomized controlled studies for every subgroup, ensuring no more rushed authorizations like those seen during the pandemic.

Prasad, an oncologist by training, has long questioned the blanket promotion of vaccines and masks, and his role in the FDA under the current administration marks a shift toward greater scrutiny.

The memo doesn’t detail the ages, underlying health conditions, or specific vaccine brands involved in these tragic cases. However, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s vaccine advisory committee is set to discuss the review in an upcoming meeting, which could lead to further revelations.

FDA Commissioner Marty Makary backed up the memo’s claims during an appearance on Fox News, stating plainly: “There were, it appears, 10 deaths of children from the COVID shots.”

Makary emphasized that the data stems from the Biden administration era, adding that while the vaccines may have benefited high-risk elderly individuals, pushing annual shots on young people “is not based on science.”

This development aligns with actions from Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime advocate for vaccine safety who has already restricted COVID vaccines to those 65 and older or with qualifying health conditions.

This reverses the all-out push under previous administrations, including mandates that forced millions, including children, into getting the shots despite emerging risks.

Keep reading

The Covid Inquiry Has Failed to Ask the Most Basic Question: Why Were People Dying?

The explosion of mainstream media headlines following the release of the Hallett Inquiry module two report has concentrated on the conclusion that 23,000 deaths occurred as a result of governmental delays in enforcing lockdowns. While I admire the precision (not 22,000, not 24,000) the 23,000 figure is, as the inquiry states, an estimate based on modelling.

Whose modelling? If that of Neil Ferguson, who had previously been alarmist to the point of hysteria over a foot and mouth outbreak, then the model is fit for the dustbin. Garbage in, garbage out. But Baroness Hallett may not be so wrong – indeed the 23,000 may be an underestimate, but not for the reasons she has wrongly adduced.

SARS-CoV-2 was a novel virus. We now know, but not at the time, that it was accidentally released in China, but the exact mechanisms leading to that need not bother us. What mattered was that it appeared to be both very infectious and potentially fatal. However the fatality numbers are missing something (ignoring whether the figures were of deaths from Covid or deaths with Covid but from something else). Why was it fatal, leading to the acute syndrome of respiratory and other organ failure we now know as COVID-19?

I have read the lengthy report published on November 20th. It is a remarkable catalogue of governmental goings-on, but there is a glaring omission: there is nothing about medicine. There is science, epidemiology, statistics, models, but the fundamental question should have been: what is happening when people get suddenly sick, and how do we treat them if they do? If an infection does not kill people it is usually unimportant: we don’t go berserk over the common cold. If it does we need to know why and fix it. This is not an investigation for epidemiologists, scientists, statisticians, public health doctors, politicians and others who have no experience of managing acute medical emergencies. It is for clinicians – front-line doctors who see an illness, do investigations and arrange treatment.

Where were they? And why has this report completely failed to ask the question – where were the clinical experts?

Keep reading

NHS Doctors Were Paid to Knowingly Implant Deadly Heart Device

Two of the UK’s leading transplant centres continued fitting a heart device that they knew was deadlier than its rival product. Medtronic’s HeartWare HVAD was a pump surgically implanted for end-stage heart failure – and it was well documented that its mortality rate was significantly higher than other options. But top cardiologists at both hospitals were found to be paid consultants for Medtronic, the hospitals were aware of their involvement, and the NHS had already raised concerns. Were leading doctors deliberately implanting deadly devices? 

The Staggering HVAD Mortality Rate

Patients with a weakened heart can be offered a Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) if they are deemed unsuitable for a transplant, or stuck waiting for one. For many people, the LVAD helping to pump blood around the body is their only chance of survival outside of a transplant.  

LVADs have saved lives for decades and the two top competitors were Medtronic, who produced the HVAD device, and Abbott, who made the Heartmate III. In 2018, an audit was conducted by NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) to compare the pumps’ performance, and shocking results were published in 2019: 

  • Medtronic: 54 of 119 patients (45%) died within two years 
  • Abbott: 15 of 97 patients (15%) died within the same period 
  • The number of strokes and instances of people requiring a new pump was also significantly higher for Medtronic 

They Knew – and Kept Implanting

The Freeman Hospital in Newcastle and Harefield in London continued using the pump for years, deciding to question the data rather than prioritise patient safety. Other hospitals, such as the Royal Papworth Hospital in Cambridge, made the call before the NHS analysis was even shared – they had picked up on the pattern themselves and stopped using the Medtronic device in February 2018, considering the Heartmate III to be superior. 

The Newcastle and London hospitals, however, continued to solely use the Medtronic device until 2021 when the manufacturer withdrew it from sale “in the interest of patient safety”. In the three years between the 2018 audit and 2021 withdrawal, 50% of patients with the Medtronic device died, compared to 19% of recipients of the Abbott device. 

Were They Paid to Implant It?

Until recently, the head of Freeman’s cardiothoracic department was Prof Stephan Schueler, also known as “king of the castle” by former colleagues. Public records later revealed that he had a decade-long relationship with the Medtronic manufacturer. Patients were not made aware of his financial relationship with the company, despite disclosure being a requirement of the General Medical Council (GMC) – the doctor’s regulator. 

The Freeman Hospital stated publicly that it was “aware” of the NHS data published in 2019, but felt its scientific reliability was lacking. 

At Harefield Hospital, André Simon was the director of heart and lung transplantation and ventricular assist devices. He had a similarly long-standing relationship with Medtronic, dating back to 2014. The hospital said it was “aware” of his work for Medtronic, and that it had been declared in multiple papers. They also confirmed that he was one of a number of senior people “involved” in deciding which devices are used and that there was “collective support” for the continued use of the Medtronic device until 2021.  

Dr John Dunning, who replaced André Simon at Harefield, said they continued to use the Medtronic device as “it was the preference” of his predecessor.  

Keep reading

UK wins fight to hide data linking Covid vaccines to deaths

Under a recent ruling by the UK Information Commissioner’s Office, the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) will not be required to release data that may show a link between Covid-19 vaccines and excess deaths. The decision follows a two-year legal battle initiated by the nonprofit group UsForThem, which had filed a freedom of information request for access to the data.

The agency argued that releasing the information could cause “distress” to families of the deceased and be used to promote “misinformation” about the vaccines. Critics say this reasoning serves more as a shield for institutional self-preservation than public interest.

Legal director Ben Kingsley of UsForThem called the UKHSA’s decision “a desperation that this data should not, in any form, see the light of day.” The watchdog group TrialSite News wrote that by relying on emotional harm rather than scientific concerns, the government “inadvertently strengthened the very narrative it likely hoped to avoid.”

Among those speaking out are vaccine-injured individuals like Danielle Baker, a former hospice nurse who was left permanently disabled after receiving a Covid-19 shot.

Keep reading

“You Can’t Handle the Truth”: UK Health Watchdog Reportedly Refuses To Release Data On Vaccine Deaths

The United Kingdom’s public health service is reportedly refusing to release data on the potential relationship between the COVID vaccine and excess deaths.

The reason?

It would upset people to know the truth.

The question is whether British citizens have become so passive and yielding that they will support their government, keeping them from learning the facts about vaccines and allowing them to reach their own conclusions.

The UK has long embraced speech controls and censorship to protect citizens from unacceptable views or what one criminal defendant was told were “toxic ideologies.”

Social media companies assisted governments in censoring opposing scientific views during the pandemic, including those regarding the potential dangers of the vaccines.

Over the years, dissenting faculty members have been forced out of scientific and academic organizations for challenging preferred conclusions on subjects ranging from transgender transitions to COVID-19 protections to climate change. Some were barred from speaking at universities or blacklisted for their opposing views.

Many of the exiled experts were ultimately proven correct in challenging the efficacy of surgical masks or the need to shut down our schools and businesses. Scientists moved like a herd of lemmings on the origin of the virus, crushing those who suggested that the most likely explanation is a lab leak (a position that federal agencies would later embrace).

Scientists have worked with the government in suppressing dissenting views. For example, The Wall Street Journal released a report on how the Biden administration suppressed dissenting views supporting the lab leak theory, as dissenting scientists were blacklisted and targeted.

When experts within the Biden Administration found that the lab theory was the most likely explanation for COVID-19, they were told not to share their data publicly and were warned about being “off the reservation.”

Universities and associations joined the crackdown. Scientists questioning the efficacy of those blue surgical masks and the six-foot rule were suppressed. So were those arguing that we should, as in Europe, keep schools open. These experts were also later vindicated, but few were rehired or reestablished in universities or associations.

It was all done in the name of protecting the public from opposing views or data.

The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) shows that little has changed. 

According to the Telegraph, the agency declared that releasing the data would lead to the “distress or anger” of bereaved relatives if a link were to be discovered.

It also suggested that the data might stress or undermine the mental health of the families and friends of people who died.

The story has received little attention in the media, which previously joined efforts to suppress opposing views during the pandemic.

Keep reading

Cover-up revealed in death of airman at F.E. Warren Air Force Base

Security Forces Airman Brandon Lovan was killed while on duty at F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyoming, on July 20, 2025. Preliminary reports from airmen stationed at the base attributed Lovan’s death to an uncommanded discharge from an Air Force-issued M18 pistol. In response to these reports, Global Strike Command and the entire Air Force conducted inspections of all M18 pistols in service.

On Oct. 31, 2025, the 90th Missile Wing Public Affairs published a court-martial summary following the investigation into Lovan’s death. Airman 1st Class Sarbjot Badesha and Airman 1st Class Matthew Rodriguez both pleaded guilty to making false official statements relating to Lovan’s death. Airman 1st Class Marcus White-Allen mishandled his M18, killing Lovan, and conspired with the others to cover up the incident.

During their guilty pleas, both Airmen admitted they saw White-Allen pull his duty weapon from his holster and point it at Lovan’s chest in a joking manner. Each stated they then heard the firearm go off and saw Lovan fallen on the ground. According to their pleas, in the immediate aftermath of the incident, White-Allen told Badesha, “Here’s the story. Tell them that I slammed my duty belt on the desk, and it went off.”

Additionally, White-Allen told Rodriguez to tell the responding emergency personnel, White-Allen’s “holster went off.” Neither Airman reported that information to investigators during their initial witness interviews on Jul. 20, 2025. The false statements from both Airmen hindered law enforcement efforts, leading investigators to initially believe Lovan’s death was a result of an accidental discharge from White-Allen’s M18.

Keep reading

Covid response killed more children than covid, UK Covid Inquiry hears

Professor Steve Turner, President of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (“RCPCH”), provided evidence to the UK Covid-19 Inquiry on 8 October 2025, on behalf of the paediatric workforce.

His testimony focused on the impact of the pandemic on children, young people and their health services, highlighting that the de-prioritisation of children’s healthcare services persisted for too long and that the indirect effects on their health and wellbeing were not adequately recognised. 

Speaking of the most vulnerable children who had serious health issues and should have been at risk of falling victim to covid, as the official narrative had claimed, Prof. Turner explained that it was known very early on that this was not the case.

“When we started, we thought this [covid] could be really nasty, and there were three categories into which people of all ages were placed in terms of risk. But very, very, very, very quickly, our patients and their parents told us that if … children who have gone through heroic surgery, have life-threatening problems, are ventilated at night, when they get covid and the rest of the family gets covid, it was the parents and the carers who were [sick].

“Children who had kidney transplants, whose immune system was suppressed – we were really worried about them.  But the virus bounced off them.  So, we knew very, very quickly that this virus, for whatever reason, was not doing harm for the vast majority of children in whom we thought it would,” he said.

When asked what the Government and its advisors had not done well in responding to covid, Prof. Turner said: “There was not enough consideration given to the innumerable harmful indirect harm that was done to them as a consequence of the provisions made around covid.”

At the end of April 2020, RCPCH undertook a snapshot survey of more than 4,000 paediatricians across the UK and Ireland through its British Paediatric Surveillance Unit.  32% of emergency department paediatricians responded to say they had witnessed delayed presentations for, for example, new diabetes and cancer diagnoses and sepsis due to restrictions in place in response to covid.  In other words, children were not being taken to the hospital as soon as they should have been. 

At the time of the survey, 9 children had died from sepsis and new cancer diagnoses.  Delayed presentations were considered to be a significant contributing factor in these deaths.  These 9 deaths were higher than the number of childhood covid deaths reported over the same period in England.

It was expected that a few months later, say in June 2020, a follow-up impact assessment would be conducted. Prof. Turner suggested that questions such as, “What have we learnt for children, what have we done to children, what harm are we doing to children and what should we do to address this?” should have been asked at this point.  “I see very little evidence of that ever happening,” he said.

“The evidence is that, come the second lockdown at Christmas 2020, the same thing was done.  Even though we knew that children, mercifully, were spared from the harm that came from covid.  Even my most sick patients, when they and their families got covid, it was the parents who were unwell – these vulnerable children were remarkably unaffected,” he added.

While the virus “bounced off” children, children suffered psychological harm from the measures imposed in response to covid.

Keep reading

The Truth About Excess Deaths Since COVID Vaxx Is Mind-Blowing!

Jimmy Dore and guest Dr. John Campbell discuss the rise in excess deaths following the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines, arguing that mortality rates have remained unusually high even after the pandemic should have subsided.

Dr. Campbell explains that “excess deaths” refers to deaths occurring above the expected baseline, which is typically calculated from prior years’ averages, and notes that data transparency has declined in the U.K. since 2023.

The two suggest a possible temporal link between vaccine distribution and the increase in deaths, while acknowledging that definitive proof is lacking due to limited research funding and institutional resistance.

Both imply that governments and pharmaceutical companies have little incentive to investigate the issue, leaving independent researchers struggling to uncover the truth.

Explanation of Excess Deaths

Dr. Campbell defines excess deaths as the number of deaths observed in a given period that exceed the expected baseline, calculated from historical averages (e.g., 2015–2019 data). This baseline accounts for predictable mortality rates by age groups (e.g., so many deaths per 1,000 people aged 60–70 annually) and is generally stable, except during major events like wars or pandemics (citing historical spikes from the bubonic plague).

  • Pre-2020 Baseline: Used 5–10 years of data to establish “normal” annual deaths.
  • Post-2020 Observations: In the UK, early studies (via the Office for Health Care Improvement and Disparities, which ceased detailed reporting around 2023) showed deaths far exceeding this baseline in 2021 and 2022 across countries like the UK and US.
  • Counterintuitive Trend: After 2020’s high COVID deaths (which killed many vulnerable elderly), excess mortality should have dropped due to a “harvesting effect” (fewer at-risk people left). Instead, it rose sharply in 2021–2022, correlating temporally with vaccine rollout.

Keep reading

The #1 Killer in Hospitals Isn’t a Disease — It’s a Word

Hospitals murdered COVID patients. The more they killed, the more money they made.

When the hospitals tested for COVID, they got paid more.

When they admitted patients for COVID, they got paid more.

When they put people on Remdesivir, they got paid more.

And when they put loved ones on the ventilator, they got paid more.

Meanwhile, family requests for ivermectin were denied, while their loved ones were placed on this death protocol instead.

If you think this started with COVID, think again. Hospitals are still a death sentence for loved ones.

Before the unexpected happens, learn how this death trap works to keep your loved ones safe.

COVID pulled the curtain back for millions of people.

On a mass scale, we learned that hospitals across the country followed standardized federal protocols—not individualized care.

Things like Remdesivir and ventilators were pushed on dying patients.

Ivermectin and other affordable therapies were banned.

Even when doctors knew their patients would die, many refused to try alternatives.

And families were left in the dark.

Keep reading