Conspiracies are Fact not Theory

The media often talk about “conspiracy theorists.” That, of course, is a clever piece of deceit. Conspiracies are real, and the conspiracy practitioners are close to running our world.

The conspirators’ plan has followed a simple but well-worn path. First, they revised the definition of a pandemic so that any ordinary annual flu could be described as a dangerous pandemic. Second, they created a serious problem (an allegedly deadly infection) so that they could offer their chosen solution – a toxic, experimental, inadequately tested vaccine which they tried desperately to make compulsory – with the aid of the lies told by obedient, compliant politicians, journalists, media doctors, celebrities and YouTube influencers, all of whom were taking full advantage of the fact that anyone telling the truth would be demonised, silenced and destroyed. Vaccine manufacturers and promoters joined forces with Bill Gates’s World Health Organisation to spread confusion, lies and fear, and to offer profitable, immediately accessible solutions. People were told that terrible things would happen to them if they were not vaccinated.

The human immune system (a vital protection against infections and cancer) is being deliberately targeted and destroyed by the barrage of vaccines.

When I, and other doctors, tried to suggest that people should take vitamin D supplements during the pointless lockdowns, which were an integral part of the covid-19 fraud, we were silenced. YouTube, an unforgiveably wicked promotional platform operating for the conspirators, took down videos in which I and other doctors explained why vitamin D supplements were vital. A study done in Spain in 2020 showed that for covid-19 positive patients who were admitted to hospital with pneumonia, the risk of being admitted to an intensive care unit and connected to a ventilator was reduced by a factor of 25 if their vitamin D levels were raised. (Ventilators were lethal and were wildly overused.) Many of those who were not given vitamin D simply died unnecessarily.

Doctors who failed to prescribe vitamin D in such circumstances should lose their licences, be sued for malpractice and arrested and charged with manslaughter. In reality, of course, nothing will happen to them.

Censorship and truth suppression is not new, of course. From a personal point of view, it’s difficult to know precisely when the censorship and the oppression really began, and it’s always been difficult to know who was behind it. But there has been no doubt in my mind that it has, for a long time, been very real. The story of how I have been censored, suppressed, vilified, lied about, libelled, oppressed, demonised, threatened and very nearly killed illustrates the way the truth has been suppressed.

In the 1970s and 1980s, I wrote and campaigned a good deal about animal experiments (of which I always heartily disapproved on scientific grounds as well as on humanitarian grounds) and the police in general, and special branch in particular, started taking a close interest in my work from that time on.

Whenever I went to speak at an anti-vivisection rally, I would have my own police video cameraman. He would follow me round and film me and everyone I spoke to.

Robin Webb was the Animal Liberation Front’s official press officer and he had his own police cameraman too. When we met and talked, our two devoted cameramen would stand beside us filming us both. I photographed a bunch of policemen who were following me once and wrote and illustrated (with photographs) an article about them for the Sunday People newspaper, where I was a columnist. One of the photographs was captioned ‘The Hand of Plod’.

On one occasion, I was prevented from travelling to a demonstration by a police sergeant who threatened to arrest me simply for driving on the road. I sued the Chief Constable. The judge didn’t like me suing a policeman.

The son of a dear friend of mine worked for Special Branch and told me (via his father) that although they followed all my activities closely, they did not regard me as dangerous in a physical sense. “Following my activities closely” meant that they tapped my telephone, sucked messages off my fax machine and every time I moved house, someone arranged for one or two telecom vans to sit parked outside my gate for days at a time. Whenever I asked what they were doing, the men inside the van replied that they were just making sure that my telephone line worked well. And this without my ever making a complaint about a dodgy line.

Another MI5 operative confirmed what I had been told.

Keep reading

Covid “vaccines” did not save lives – simple mathematics proves it

Politicians repeatedly claim that covid vaccinations have saved millions of lives.

Millions is a big number, so it should be measurable.

But how do you prove what you know intuitively?

There is now a nice, short, simple publication that does this with official data and set theory (i.e. intuitive primary school mathematics).  See: Sorli AS (2025). The Discrepancy Between the Number of Saved Lives with COVID-19 Vaccination and Statistics of Our World DataJ Clin Trials. S32:001. 

Sandbox games at the end of the day, but someone has to stoop to that level.

Take a data source that was accepted by [the covid promoters or believers] and used by the believers themselves: Our World Data.

At Our World Data, look at how many people are dying around the world. If you want to refute believers, you have to argue in their belief construct, that is, that there was a pandemic and that the pandemic, not the measures, killed the people.

This looks quite constant at around 56-57 million by 2020. The data is so clear that you don’t need statistics. You only need statistics if you don’t have any data. Real data can be seen in the raw data.

2020 is definitely higher with +6.3 million more deaths, so that was something measurable. Whether it is the virus or the measures cannot be determined purely from the numbers. Many people in poor countries may have starved to death during lockdowns. But that is not what this publication is about.

If it had been a pandemic, deaths would have had to decrease at some point. It certainly won’t be anymore [i.e. an increase in deaths] because more and more people are immune. The death process would therefore have to be at most the same in 2021.

… in 2020 there was no covid-19 vaccination, and in 2021 there was a covid-19 vaccination. The living circumstances on the planet were similar in 2020 and 2021. In 2020 and in 2021, we had covid-19 pandemics. The main difference in living circumstances of the global population was covid-19 vaccination in 2021. Our World Data confirms that covid-19 vaccination increased the “global mortality” in 2020, which was 6.30 million, by an additional 6.08 million in 2021, which means 96.5%, see Figure 1 below. The claim that vaccination reduced global mortality in 2020 by 63% in 2021 is a huge error of 159.5%.Sorli AS (2025). The Discrepancy Between the Number of Saved Lives with COVID-19 Vaccination and Statistics of Our World DataJ Clin Trials. S32:001. 

But there is clearly a difference of 6 million people!

Keep reading

Trump Administration Seeks Pause Of Lawsuit Challenging Vaccine Recommendations

Trump administration lawyers on April 23 said they are still considering whether to appeal a ruling that blocked the rollback of guidance on some vaccines.

The lawyers said in a filing that pausing the litigation over the guidance pending the resolution of any appeal that is filed would “promote judicial economy and avoid burdens on government agencies that may be rendered unnecessary by a decision on any appeal.”

For instance, if an appeal is filed, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit may dismiss some or all of the claims by plaintiffs in the case, which would eliminate the need for the government to produce records sought by plaintiffs, the lawyers told U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in a motion to stay proceedings pending resolution of any appeal.

“At a minimum, a First Circuit decision on any appeal could narrow the issues in dispute and provide guidance on how to resolve any remaining issues,” the motion stated. “If Defendants continue producing administrative records and the parties start briefing cross-motions for summary judgment before Defendants’ time to appeal has run and before the First Circuit has an opportunity to weigh in on any appeal, there is a significant potential for wasted time and resources.”

Murphy in March stayed the updates made to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention vaccine guidance under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., resulting in the guidance reverting to what had been in place in mid-2025.

Murphy concluded that Kennedy and other officials did not follow proper procedure in updating the guidance and appointing new members to the CDC’s vaccine advisory committee.

That stay would remain in effect even if Murphy approves the requested motion, administration lawyers said.

The lawyers did not say why no appeal has been lodged against Murphy’s decision. They asked him to stay proceedings in the case until whichever comes later: May 15 or the resolution of any appeal the defendants may file.

The deadline to appeal Murphy’s preliminary injunction is May 15.

Shortly after the injunction was issued, the Department of Health and Human Services said it would prevail in an appeal. The department has declined to answer questions about why an appeal has not yet been lodged.

Unless officially announced by us, any assertions about what we are doing next is baseless speculation,” a department spokesperson told The Epoch Times in March.

Keep reading

Leaked FDA Memo Shows Feds Masked Sudden Cardiac Deaths in Our Children Says Senator Ron Johnson

Senator Ron Johnson raised concerns during an exchange with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. regarding a memo he said originated from a senior official within the Food and Drug Administration, describing findings tied to child deaths following COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations.

Johnson said the memo was “apparently from CBER director, Doctor Prasad,” and referenced its contents as part of an FDA review.

He stated the document described an internal analysis involving “96 autopsies of child death following the covid mRNA injection.”

According to Johnson, the memo included language he described as significant in acknowledging outcomes tied to the vaccines.

“In that memo, Doctor Persad writes, this is a profound revelation,” Johnson said.

He continued, “For the first time, the US FDA will acknowledge that covid 19 vaccines killed American children, healthy young children who face tremendously low risk of death.”

Johnson added that these children were “coerced at the behest of the Biden administration via school and work mandates to receive a vaccine that could result in death.”

Johnson said the memo raised questions about the impact of pandemic-era mandates. “In many cases, such mandates were harmful,” he said.

Keep reading

Elon Musk Reveals COVID Vaccine Injury After Former Pfizer Official Admits Shots Likely Killed Tens of Thousands in Germany

In an X post that went viral Sunday, Elon Musk said he “felt like I was dying” and almost went to the hospital after taking his second COVID-19 vaccine.

Musk was responding to an X post about how Dr. Helmut Sterz, Pfizer’s former chief toxicologist, admitted last month during a German COVID-19 Inquiry that an estimated 60,000 people have died in Germany from Pfizer’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, Comirnaty.

According to Sterz, the Paul Ehrlich Institute, Germany’s regulatory and research institute for vaccines and biomedicines, has received 2,133 reports of death following Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.

He said, “These spontaneous reports likely have a high number of unreported cases due to underreporting. The true number is therefore much higher.”

“In the U.S., it is assumed that there is an underreporting factor of 30 by which the registered cases would have to be multiplied. For Germany, this would correspond to 60,000 deaths from the vaccination,” Sterz said.

Sterz told the German commissioners that Pfizer’s post-marketing report mentioned 1,200 suspected deaths within just two months of the shot’s approval.

“At that point, Comirnaty should have been withdrawn from the market,” Sterz said.

Pfizer skipped key safety studies due to ‘time constraints’

Sterz also testified that “due to time constraints,” Pfizer didn’t conduct vital safety checks on its COVID-19 vaccine before rolling it out to the public. For instance, the vaccine maker skipped carcinogenicity studies that would have examined whether the shots had cancer-causing properties.

Pfizer also failed to study the vaccine’s impact on pregnancy.

Sterz called for a new and independent scientific review of the COVID-19 vaccines’ long-term effects. “We need proper independent safety studies to understand what really happened. Without full transparency, people will not trust the conclusions,” he said, according to GB News.

He said the high number of negative side effects associated with the vaccines warrants pausing them, and other vaccines that use similar technology, until independent studies show they are safe.

Keep reading

MHRA study on covid vaccine injuries: The numbers buried inside it deserved rather more attention

One in seven. That is the proportion of people in the MHRA’s own actively recruited surveillance cohort who reported a medically serious adverse reaction following covid vaccination. Over half reported at least one reaction of any kind. The data were collected between 2020 and 2022. They were not published until September 2025, and only then because Cheryl Grainger, through a Freedom of Information  (“FoI”) request and subsequent Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) appeal, forced it out.

The paper that eventually appeared, in the journal Drug Safety, was not written as a safety paper. It was written as a description of the digital platform used to collect the data – a methods paper published five months after Dame June Raine left as chief executive, nearly three years after the data were locked. The actual adverse reaction rates are reported but not analysed. The one stratification that could determine whether those rates are real was not performed.

The numbers buried inside it deserved rather more attention.

What the Data Show

The Yellow Card Vaccine Monitor (“YCVM”) was the MHRA’s premium data source. It was one of four pillars of its covid vaccine safety surveillance strategy. Unlike the passive Yellow Card scheme, where people report voluntarily and sporadically, the YCVM actively recruited people and followed them up at set intervals. The MHRA itself described it as a tool to “rapidly detect, confirm, characterise and quantify new risks.”

Of the 30,281 individuals who reported receiving a vaccination, 15,764 (52.1%) reported at least one adverse reaction. 4,134 (13.7%) reported a reaction classified as medically serious under the MedDRA system. This is a regulatory classification that includes events deemed medically significant by an internal MHRA panel and is broader than the lay meaning of “serious,” but not a trivial threshold. It encompasses hospitalisation, disability, life-threatening outcomes and death, but also other events judged clinically important.

However, the 13.7% might include people who volunteered for the monitor becausethey had been injured. The MHRA did not exclude people signing up afterthey had their vaccine.

The key question is how representative this cohort was. Any voluntary cohort, even an actively recruited one, may over-represent people who experienced problems. Other active surveillance systems internationally have reported lower rates, though none has been free of similar methodological limitations. The true rate is unknown – which is precisely the problem.

The YCVM was meant to be designed to quantify risk in a way passive surveillance could not because of reporting bias. However, the key simple analysis to enable interpretation was not done. The question is not whether 13.7% is the true rate of serious harm. The question is why the MHRA did not do the work to find out what the true rate is.

The Cohort It Did Not Analyse

The paper reports 35.6% registered before vaccination and 47.5% after. A further group registered on the same day, but the paper does not quantify it. Even allowing for this, the categories as presented account for only 83.1% of the cohort, leaving 16.9%, over 5,000 people, unclassified. The paper does not explain the gap.

The pre-vaccination and same-day registrants are the key group. They signed up before or at the point of vaccination, not in response to a bad reaction. Their data is substantially less vulnerable to post-event selection bias, which is the main challenge to the headline figures. The criticism that people with bad reactions were more motivated to register does not apply to them. They were already in the system.

The obvious analytical step is to separate these registrants and compare their Adverse Drug Reaction (“ADR”) rates to those who registered afterwards. If the prospective cohort shows substantially lower rates, the selection bias interpretation is supported and you would want to say so. If the rates are similar, the overall figures are validated and you would want to say that too. If the rates are lower, then that is the rate that is of interest and should be published. In any case, the comparison is critical and should have been presented.

The MHRA did not present the comparison. In a 21-page paper with 13 tables, this stratification – the single most important analysis for interpreting the headline findings – does not appear. I have submitted an FoI request for this data.

Keep reading

Possible Link Between RSV Vaccine During Pregnancy and Health Problems: Study

Pfizer’s vaccine against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) may be associated with certain health problems in pregnant women, including hypertensive disorders, researchers said in a study published on April 21.

Ashley Michnick, a research scientist at Harvard Medical School, and researchers with Pfizer and other entities analyzed data from five systems, including CVS Health and Kaiser Permanente Northwest.

They analyzed pregnancies that occurred from Sept. 22, 2023, through Aug. 9, 2024, and found that pregnant mothers received Pfizer’s vaccine between 32 and 36 weeks of gestation. The number of included pregnancies was 13,619.

Compared with pregnant women who received a different vaccine, such as an influenza shot, during the same gestational weeks during the study period, the women who received the RSV vaccine were more likely to have pregnancy-associated hypertensive disorders, such as inpatient gestational hypertension.

The risk was also higher when the RSV vaccine recipients were compared with women who had given birth in previous years, or a historical comparator group.

The researchers also recorded an elevated risk for premature rupture of membranes among RSV vaccine recipients.

Keep reading

A Reckoning Is Underway At The FDA

For months, a quiet battle has been unfolding inside the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

It began with an analysis of child deaths after Covid vaccination, followed by strategic leaks to major media outlets, and has now erupted into the open with a memo from the regulator’s own vaccine chief.

In September, it was reported that FDA officials had privately investigated 25 paediatric deaths following Covid vaccination — the first systematic review of such cases since the rollout began.

The findings were meant to be presented to the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). But the presentation never came. The meeting passed without a word. Something had happened behind closed doors.

Now we know what.

On 13 November 2025, STAT published an extraordinary insider account describing a tense internal meeting in which FDA scientist Dr Tracy Beth Høeg presented evidence of young people who had died after Covid vaccination.

According to STAT, her findings triggered pushback from career FDA regulators who feared the implications of acknowledging fatal cases.

Now, comes the explosive memo from FDA vaccine chief Dr Vinay Prasad, confirming — for the first time — that US regulators have formally attributed at least 10 of these children’s deaths to Covid vaccination.

Prasad called it “a profound revelation” with far-reaching implications for American vaccine policy, adding that the true number is “certainly an underestimate.”

Here, I’ll take you through the memo, the leaks, the internal rebellion at FDA, and what this means — not just for Covid vaccines, but for all vaccine approvals going forward.

This story marks a turning point in US vaccine regulation.

Keep reading

Canadian gov’t admits it kept data on COVID jab deaths from public over ‘privacy’ concerns

The Canadian federal government has tacitly admitted that key death data relating to the mRNA-based COVID injections were withheld from public reporting, citing supposed privacy concerns.

The Public Health Agency of Canada is defending its decision to withhold the data relating to how those who received the COVID shots and died as a result were tracked.

The revelations come from Conservative MP Dean Allison’s Order Paper Question Q-849. The health agency said it did not publish weekly COVID death counts, as connected to one’s jab status. The agency claimed the numbers were low and posed “privacy” risks.

Because of this, Canadians were denied key information which could have better informed them on the risks associated with the COVID shots, which were heavily promoted at all levels of government.

The Public Health Agency said it tracked COVID jab outcomes from the start, in December of 2020, when the shots were officially approved. This means that the raw data of those who died or were injured following the COVID shots should exist.

Canada’s public health officials claimed that the December 2020 date provided a “consistent starting point” for tracking jabs.

Despite this, the agency instead chose to showcase statistical modelling, through the federal COVID-19 Epidemiology and Surveillance Division, when comparing non-vaccinated people to those who had taken the jabs.

The agency claimed that it followed the World Health Organization and U.S. public health authorities’ guidance models, instead of utilizing and sharing Canada-specific data.

Canada’s government continues to purchase the COVID shots, although its own data show that most Canadians are refusing a COVID booster injection.

Canada’s Public Health Agency (PHAC) recently took over the nation’s vaccine injury compensation program, changing the name from the Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) to the Vaccine Impact Assistance Program (VIAP). The agency had admitted the COVID shots have caused harm to no less than 10,000 people.

Keep reading

FOIA Data Reveal Adverse Event Patterns in New RNA Dog Vaccine

Details from a FOIA request to the USDA have revealed severe adverse events following injection of the Nobivac NXT canine flu H3N2 vaccine, the first self-amplifying RNA (saRNA) vaccine widely used in the US for pets. The aftermarket reports received by The HighWire show the first 1,012 pages of 1,888 total pages of adverse events from September 2024 through July 2025. There were 296 cases involving the Nobivac RNA vaccine as a suspect product: 152 were adverse reactions, and 76 were listed as cases of lack of efficacy, meaning the dogs developed respiratory illness or cough after receiving the vaccine.

The dataset shows that there were four canine deaths and one feline death following vaccine administration, but two of the dog cases had significant confounding factors. The other two cases involve dogs that collapsed shortly after receiving the vaccination. In addition, three dogs were euthanized following the vaccine.

-41 cases involved neurological issues

-30 cases of anaphylaxis or hypersensitivity

-52 cases involved vomiting

-19 cases had an injection-site mass/lump/panniculitis/fibrosis/surgery

-26 cases of diarrhea

-5 cases of collapse/shock-type presentations

-4 cases of bloody diarrhea

A 4-year-old golden retriever collapsed 10 minutes after the vaccination, before going into complete cardiac arrest and dying. Merck added anaphylaxis to the report later. A 7-year-old Yorkshire Terrier collapsed 70 minutes after receiving the vaccine, and life-saving care was attempted, but the dog passed away. Diphenhydramine and dexamethasone sodium phosphate were given to the terrier because of previous unspecified vaccine reactions. In addition to the Nobivac flu shot, the 7.33-pound terrier received the Nobivac Canine 1-DAPPvL4 and Nobivac Intra-Trac3 vaccines.

An 8-year-old Shih Tzu was lethargic and vomiting shortly after receiving the vaccination. She was diagnosed with renal failure six days later and euthanized. The event narrative explains that she had received several vaccinations before, including non-Nobivac flu vaccines, but had never received the Nobivac NXT canine influenza vaccine, which is the first approved saRNA vaccine in the country. Merck evaluated this case and said the vaccine was unlikely to be the cause.

saRNA vaccines have limited long-term safety data, much as mRNA vaccines did before they were rolled out to the general public in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. These vaccines are marketed as “innovative, adjuvant-free, non-live vaccines” by Merck.

The first vaccine of its kind was approved by the USDA in 2024 and received limited coverage, but Nicolas Hulscher, MPH of the McCullough Foundation, criticized the lack of safety testing and the manufacturer’s level of transparency.

“It appears that Merck is attempting to camouflage the fact that this product is self-amplifying,” Hulscher wrote. “The primary product description only indicates that it uses ‘revolutionary RNA particle technology.’ However, the novel platform works by RNA particles targeting dendritic cells, where they self-replicate and result in sustained antigen production.“

Keep reading