Please support the potent leadership work of The Wellness Company (TWC) see TWC.heath where TWC is seeking to revolutionize healthcare with telemedicine, supplements e.g. spike detox product
He is telling the truth, which means most people run and hide. I salute him. He is correct in everything he says. Running and hiding from the truth does not destroy the truth. It's still there shining in the light.
What the uTube clip of Andrew Bridgend speech does not show is the BBC scrolling pure vax propaganda across the screen whilst he spoke eg vax are safe, MMR safe etc
I have made a formal complaint to the BBC as a result.
It won’t do any good BUT it says to me the BBC and their controllers know they have a problem.
It’s ironic at the same time as this speech was delivered the Canadian Health data re contaminants was emerging .
I saw that and took a screen shot to send to friends. Never EVER seen stuff like this in my life (and I'm 62 !). It's getting to the point now that the BBC really is the British Bullshit Corporation 🤬 (any other suggestions welcome to cheer me up today 😉! - another one I saw this week was Bill's Broadcasting Corporation 😏)
A politician working for the people and raising concerns. That is wonderful to see. We have so many politicans that say very little or do little to challenge the agenda. Maintaining the status quo and not making waves seems to everyday business.
Whilst at the FedEx Curacao, someone was having two huge boxes delivered from the Wellness Company. The good word is out! The Wellness Company delivers to Curacao, in the Caribbean!
I posted this to Dr. John Campbell earlier, that I kept flashing on some dim sense of something cinematic while watching Andrew Bridgen speak to that empty parliament, something in his demeanor, how his soul shone out, but I couldn't quite catch the fleeting sense I had. Then I realized that he reminded me in all ways of Sam Gamgee in Lord of the Rings, loyal, determined, gentle, filled with a below the surface strength. LOTR The Two Towers - The Tales That Really Mattered...
Can you recommend any UK employment legal advisers who could help a vax injured former contractor fired for misconduct for having provided some websites raising safety concerns during a private conversation with a NHS nurse?
Just a little story that made me happy - apparently, the public gallery in the Houses of Parliament, was absolutely jam packed. Some people couldn't get in. There is a thick perspex, almost soundproof glass to 'protect' the parliament. However, when Andrew started speaking, a HUGE roar went up from the gallery. This continued and they were, at one point, told to quieten down !! One of those present was the great MATT LE TISSIER (ex professional footballer in the UK ). He gave small speech outside the parliament afterwards.
At the end of Andrew's speech, another huge roar of support went up and the 'few' MPs present, looked up , in what is described as shock /puzzlement ?? Do they not have ANY idea at all at what Joe Public are thinking .
Andrew is a hero 💪💪💪💪
PS I must add on (apologies I didn't know until this minute : Dr Mike Yeadon was also present in the gallery. He adds " we were repeatedly asked to shush and make less noise. " Also there were many who wanted to gain access but were told they couldn't get in. 😒
Thank you Dr. Alexander for posting those after excess death speeches made across the street from Parliament. For those interested, that statue in the background is of Gandhi. It's nice to see Mark Sexton speaking again in public. Thanks to all who came and supported MP Andrew Bridgen today. Wish I could have been there last Friday.
We've experienced more excess deaths since July 2021 than the whole of 2020. Unlike the pandemic, however, these deaths are not disproportionately of the old. In other words, the excessive deaths are striking down people in the prime of life. But no one seems to care. I fear history will not judge this House kindly. We're still in a country supposedly committed to free and frank exchange of views. It appears that no one cares that no one cares.
Well, I care, Mr. Deputy Speaker. And I credit those members here in attendance today who also care. And I'd also like to thank the honorable member for Lincoln for his support and I'm sorry that he couldn't attend today's debate.
It's taken a lot of effort and more than 20 rejections to be allowed to raise this topic, but at last we're here to discuss the number of people dying. Nothing could be more serious.
Numerous countries are currently gripped in a period of unexpected mortality. And no one wants to talk about it. It's quite normal for death numbers to fluctuate up and down by chance alone, but what we're seeing here is a pattern repeated across countries, and the rise does not let up.
1:16
MP PHILIP DAVIES: Will you give way?
MP ANDREW BRIDGEN: I'll give way to the honorable gentleman.
MP PHILIP DAVIES: I'm very grateful, and can I commend him for his, the tenacious way he's, he's battled on this particular issue. I, I certainly admire him for that. I just want to, where we found the media was in all of this? Because of course during the covid pandemic, every day the media, particularly the BBC, couldn't wait to tell us how many people had died in that particular day without any context of those figures whatsoever. But they seem to have gone strangely quiet over these excess deaths now.
MP ANDREW BRIDGEN: I thank the gentleman for his intervention. He's absolutely right, the media have let the British public down badly. There will be a full press pack going out to all media outlets following my speech with all the evidence to back up all the claims I'll make in that speech, but I don't doubt there'll be no mention of it in the mainstream media.
You might think that a debate about excess deaths is going to be full of numbers. This speech does not have that many numbers because most of the important numbers have been kept hidden. All the data is being oddly presented in a distorted way and concerned people seeking to highlight important findings and ask questions have found themselves inexplicably under attack.
Before debating excess deaths, it's important to understand how excess death is determined, to understand if there is an excess by definition you need to estimate how many deaths it would have been expected. The Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development used 2015 to 2019 as a baseline, and the government's Office of Health Disparities and Improvement [Office for Health Improvement and Disparities] uses 2015 to 2019 baseline, modeled to allow for aging, and I've used that data here.
Unforgivably, the Office of National Statistics have included deaths in 2021 as part of their baseline calculation for expected deaths, as if there was anything normal
about the deaths in 2021. By exaggerating the number of deaths expected, the number of excess can be minimized. Why would ONS want to do that?
There's just too much that we don't know and it's not good enough, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
The ONS published promptly each week the number of deaths that were registered, and while this is commendable, it's not the data point that really matters. There's a total failure to collect, never mind publish, data on deaths that are referred for investigation to the coroner. Why does this matter? A referral means that it can be many months, and given the backlog, many years, before a death is formally registered. Needing to investigate the cause of a death is fair enough. Failing to record when the death happened is not. Because of this problem we actually have no idea how many people actually died in 2021. Even now.
The problem is greatest for for the younger age groups where there's a higher proportion of deaths that are investigated. This data failure is unacceptable. It must change. There's nothing in a coroner's report that can bring anyone back from the dead, and those deaths should be reported.
The youngest age groups are important not only because they should have their whole lives ahead of them. If there is a new cause of excess mortality across the board, it would not be noticed so much in the older cohorts because the extra deaths would be drowned out amongst the expected deaths.
However, in the youngest cohorts that is not the case. There were only 2 extra deaths a day in the second half of 2021 among the 15 to 19 year-old males, but potentially even more if those referred to the coroner were fully included.
In a judicial review of the decision to vaccinate yet younger children the ONS refused in court to give anonymized details about these deaths. They admitted that the data they were withholding was statistically significant. And I quote, they said, the ONS recognizes that more work could be undertaken to examine the mortality rates of young people in 2021 and intends to do so once more reliable data are available.
How many more extra deaths in 15 to 19 year-olds will it take to trigger such work? Surely the ONS should be desperately keen to investigate deaths in young men. Why else have an independent body charged with examining mortality data? Surely the ONS has a responsibility to collect data from the coroners to produce timely information.
Let's move on to old people because most deaths in the old are registered promptly and we do have a better feel for how many older people are dying.
Deaths from dementia and Alzheimers show what we ought to expect. There was a period of high mortality coinciding with covid and lockdowns, but ever since there have been fewer deaths than expected. After a period of high mortality we expect, and historically have seen, a period of low mortality because those who have suddenly died cannot die again. Those whose deaths were slightly premature because of covid and lockdowns, died earlier than they otherwise would have. This principle should hold true for every cause of death in every age group. But that's not what we're seeing.
Even for the over 85 year-olds, according to the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities, there were 8,000 excess deaths, 4% above the expected levels, for the 12 months starting in July 2020. That includes all of the autumn 2020 wave of covid, when we had tiering, the second lockdown, and it includes all of the first covid winter.
However, for the year starting July 2022, there have been over 18,000 excess deaths in this age group, 9% above expected levels. More than twice as many in a period when there should have been a deficit. And when deaths from diseases previously associated with old age were actually fewer than expected.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have raised my concerns around NG163 and the use of midazolam and morphine which may have caused and may still be causing premature deaths in the vulnerable. But that is, sadly, a debate for another day.
There were just over 14,000 excess deaths in the under 65 year-olds before vaccination from April 2020 to the end of March 2021. Ever since that time there's been over 21,000 excess deaths, ignoring the registration delay problem, the majority, 58% of these deaths, were not attributed to covid.
We turned society upside down before vaccination for fear of excess deaths from covid, today we have substantially more excess deaths, and in younger people, and there's complete and eerie silence, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
The evidence is unequivocal. There was a clear step-wise increase in mortality following the vaccine roll out. There was a reprieve in the winter of 2021-22
because there were fewer than expected respiratory deaths, but otherwise the excess has been incessantly at this high level.
8:18
Ambulance data for England provides another clue. Ambulance calls for life-threatening emergencies were running at a steady 2,000 calls per day until the vaccine roll out. From then it rose to 2,500 daily, and calls have stayed at this level since.
The surveillance systems designed to spot a safety problem have all flashed red, but no one's looking.
Claims for personal independence payments for people who have developed a disability and cannot work rocketed with the vaccine roll out, and it's continued to rise ever since. The same was seen in the USA, also started with the vaccine roll out, not with covid. A study to determine the vaccination status of a sample of such claimants would be relatively quick and inexpensive to perform, yet nobody seems interested in ascertaining this vital information. Officials have chosen to turn a blind eye to this disturbing, irrefutable and frightening data, much like Nelson did, and for far less honorable reasons. He would be ashamed of us, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Furthermore, data that has been used to sing the praises of the vaccines is deeply flawed. Only one covid-related death was prevented in each of the initial major trials that led to authorization of the vaccines, and that is taking their data entirely at face value, whereas a growing number of inconsistencies and anomalies suggest we ought not to do this.
Extrapolating from that means that between 15,000 and 20,000 people had to be injected to prevent a single death from covid. To prevent a single covid hospitalization, over 1,500 people needed to be injected. The trial data showed that one in 800 injected people had a serious adverse event, meaning that they were hospitalized or had a life-changing or life-threatening condition. The risk of this was twice as high as the chance of preventing a covid hospitalization. We are harming one in 800 people to supposedly save one in 20,000. This is madness.
The strongest claims have too often been based on modeling carried out on the basis of flawed assumptions. Where observational studies have been carried out, researchers will correct for age and co-morbidities to make the vaccines look better. However, Mr. Deputy Speaker, they never correct for socioeconomic or ethnic differences that would make vaccines look worse. This matters. For example, claims of higher mortality in less vaccinated regions in the United States took no account of the fact that this was the case before the vaccines were rolled out. That is why studies that claim to show the vaccines prevented covid deaths also showed a marked effect of them preventing non-covid deaths. The prevention of non-covid deaths is always a statistical illusion and claims of preventing covid deaths should not be assumed when that illusion has not been corrected for. And when it is corrected for, the claims of efficacy for the vaccines vanish with it.
Covid disproportionately killed people from ethnic minorities and lower socioeconomic groups.
During the 2020, during the pandemic, the deaths among the most deprived were up by 23% compared to 17% for the least deprived. However, since 2022 the pattern has reversed, with 5% excess mortality amongst the most deprived, compared to 7% among the least deprived. These deaths are being caused by something different.
In 2020, the excess was highest in the oldest cohorts, and there were fewer than expected deaths amongst younger age groups. But since 2022 the 50 to 64-year-old cohort has had the highest excess mortality. Even the youngest age groups are now seeing substantial excess, with a 9% excess in the under-50s since 2022 compared to 5% now in the over-75 group.
Despite London being a younger region, the excess in London is only 3%, whereas it is higher in every more heavily vaccinated region of the UK. And it should be noted, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that London is famously the least vaccinated region in the UK by some margin. Studies comparing regions on a larger scale show the same thing. There are studies from the Netherlands, Germany and the whole world each showing that the highest mortality after vaccination was seen in the most heavily vaccinated regions.
So we need to ask, what are people dying of? Since 2022, there has been 11% excess in ischemic heart disease deaths and a 16% excess in heart failure deaths. In meantime, cancer deaths are only 1% above expected levels, which is further evidence this is not simply some other factor that affects deaths across the board, such as a failing to account for an aging population or a failing NHS. In fact, the excess itself has a seasonality with a peak in the winter months. The fact it returns to baseline levels in summer is a further indication that this is not due to some statistical error or an aging population alone.
Dr. Clare Craig from the HART group* first highlighted a stepwise increase in cardiac arrest calls after the vaccine roll out in May 2021 and HART have repeatedly raised concerns about the increase in cardiac deaths. And they have every reason to be concerned. Four participants in the vaccine group of the Pfizer trial died from cardiac arrest compared with only one in the placebo group. Overall there were 21 deaths in the vaccine group up to March 2021 compared with 17 in the placebo group. And there are serious anomalies about the reporting of the deaths within this trial, with the deaths in the vaccine group taking much longer to report than those in the placebo group. And that's highly suggestive, Mr. Deputy Speaker, of a significant bias in what was supposed to be a blinded trial.
An Israeli study clearly showed an increase in cardiac hospital attendances among 18 to 39 year-olds that correlated with vaccination, not with covid. There have now been several post-mortem studies demonstrating a causal link between vaccination and coronary artery disease leading to death up to four months after the last dose. And we need to remember that the safety trial was cut short to only two months, so there's no evidence of any vaccine safety beyond that point.
The decision to unblind the trials after two months and vaccinate the placebo group is nothing less than a public health scandal. Everyone involved failed in their duty to do the truth. But no one cares, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
The one place that can help us understand exactly what caused this is Australia. Australia had almost no covid when vaccines were first introduced, making them the perfect control group. The state of South Australia had only 1,000 cases of covid across its whole population by December 2021 before omicron arrived. What was the impact of vaccination there? For 15 to 44 year-olds, there was historically 1,300 emergency cardiac presentations a month. With vaccine roll out in the under-50s this rocketed to 2,172 cases in November 2021 in this age group alone, a 67% more than usual. Overall there were 17,900 South Australians who had a cardiac emergency in 2021 compared to only 13,250 in 2018, a 35% increase. It is clearly the vaccine that must be the number one suspect in this, and it cannot be dismissed as just a coincidence. Australian mortality overall has increased from early 2021, and the increase is due to cardiac deaths.
These excess deaths are not due to an aging population because there are fewer deaths in the diseases of old age. These deaths are not an effect of covid because they've happened in places where covid have not reached. And they are not due to low statin prescriptions or under-treated hypertension, as Chris Whitty** would suggest, because prescriptions did not change, and any effect would have taken many years and been very small. The prime suspect must be something that was introduced to the population as a whole, something novel. The prime hypothesis must be the experimental covid-19 vaccines.
The ONS published a dataset of deaths by vaccinated and unvaccinated. At first glance, it appears to show that the vaccines are safe and effective. However, there were several huge problems with how they presented that data. One was that for the first three-week period after injection, the ONS claimed there were only a tiny number of deaths, the number the ONS would normally predict to occur in a single week. Where were the deaths from the usual causes? When this was raised, the ONS claimed that the sickest people did not get vaccinated and therefore the people were taking the vaccination were self-selecting for those least likely to die. Not only is this not the case in the real world, with even hospices heavily vaccinating their residents, but the ONS’s own data show that the proportion of sickest people was equal in the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. This inevitably raises serious questions about the ONS’s data presentation.
There were so many problems with the methodology used by the ONS that the statistics regulator agreed that the ONS data could not be used to assess vaccine efficacy or safety. That tells you something about the ONS.
Consequently, HART asked the UK Health Security Agency to provide the data they had on people who had died and therefore needed to be removed from their vaccination dataset. This request has been repeatedly refused, with excuses given including the false claim that anonymizing this data would be the equivalent of creating it, even though there is case law that anonymization is not considered creation of new data. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I believe that if this data was released, it would be damning.
Some claim that so many lives have been saved by mass vaccination that any amount of harm, suffering, and death caused by the vaccines is a price worth paying. They're delusional, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The claim of 20 million lives saved is based on now discredited models which assume that covid waves do not peak without intervention. There have been numerous waves globally that now demonstrate that is not the case. And it was also based on there having been more than half a million lives saved in the UK. That's more than the worst-case scenario predicted at the beginning of the pandemic. For the claim to have been true, the rate at which covid killed people would have had to have taken off dramatically at the beginning of 2021 in the absence of vaccination. That is ludicrous and it bears no relationship to the truth.
In the real world, Australia, New Zealand and South Korea have a mortality rate of 400 deaths per million up to the summer 2022 after they were first hit with omicron. So how does that compare? With the Wuhan strain, France and Europe as a whole had a mortality rate of under 400 deaths per million up to the summer of 2020. Australia, New Zealand and South Korea were all heavily vaccinated before infection, so tell me: where, where was the benefit?
The UK had just over 800 deaths per million up to the summer of 2020, so twice as much, but we know omicron is half as deadly as the Wuhan variant. The death rates per million are the same before and after vaccination, so where was the benefits of vaccination?
The regulators have failed in their duty to protect the public. They've allowed these novel products to skip crucial safety testing by letting them be described as vaccines. They've failed to insist on safety testing being done in the years since the first temporary emergency authorization. Even now, no one can tell you how much spike protein is produced on vaccination and for how long, yet another example of where there is no data for me to share with the House.
And when it comes to properly recording deaths due to vaccination, the system's broken. Not a single doctor registered a death from a rare brain clot before a doctor in Scandinavia forced the issue and the MHRA*** acknowledged the problem. Only then did these deaths start to be certified by doctors in the UK. It turns out the doctors were waiting for permission from the regulator, and the regulator was waiting to be alerted by the doctors. This is a lethal circularity.
Furthermore, coroners have written regulation 28 reports highlighting deaths from vaccination to prevent further deaths, yet the MHRA said in a response to a FOI [freedom of information request] that it had not received any of them. The system we have in place is clearly not functioning to protect the public.
The regulators also missed the fact that the Pfizer trial, in the Pfizer trial, the vaccine was made for the trial participants in a highly controlled environment, in stark contrast to the manufacturing process used for the public roll out, which was based on a completely different technology. And just only, just over 200 participants were given the same product that was given to the public, but not only was the data from these people never compared to those in the trial for efficacy and safety, but the MHRA have admitted that they dropped the requirement to provide the data. That means that there was never a trial on the Pfizer product that was actually rolled out to the public, and that product has never been compared to the product that was actually trialed.****
The vaccine mass production processes use vats of Escherichia coli and present a risk of contamination with DNA from the bacteria, as well as bacterial cell walls, which can cause dangerous reactions. This is not theoretical, Mr. Deputy Speaker, this is now sound evidence that has been replicated by several labs across the world. And the mRNA vaccines were contaminated by DNA, which far exceeded the usual permissible levels. Given that this DNA is enclosed in lipid nanoparticle delivery system, it is arguable that even the permissible levels would have been far too high, these lipid nanoparticles are known to enter every organ of the body. As well as this potentially causing some of the acute adverse reactions seen, there is a serious risk of this foreign bacterial DNA inserting itself into human DNA. And will anybody investigate? No they won't.
MP DANNY KRUGER: Will you give way?
MP ANDREW BRIDGEN: I'll give way on that point.
22:33
MP DANNY KRUGER: Conscious that time is tight, I, I, I recognize that the honorable gentleman is making a very, very powerful case. Does he agree with me, that the government should be looking at this properly and should commission a review into the excess deaths, partly so we can assure our constituents that the case he's making is not in fact valid, and that the vaccines have no cause behind these excess deaths?
MP ANDREW BRIDGEN: I thank the honorable gentleman for his support on this topic, and of course that is what exactly any responsible government should do.
I wrote to the Prime Minister on the 7th August 2023 with all the evidence of this, but sadly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I still await a response.
What will it take to stop these products? Their complete failure to stop infections was not enough, and we all know plenty of vaccinated people who have caught and spread covid. The mutation of the virus to a weaker variant, omicron, that, that, that wasn't enough. The increasing evidence of the serious harms to those of us who were vaccinated, that's not enough. And now the cardiac deaths and the deaths of young people are apparently not enough, either.
It's high time that these experimental vaccines were suspended and a full investigation into the harms they've caused initiated. History will be a harsh judge if we don't start using evidence-based medicine. We need to return to basic science, basic ethics immediately, which means listening to all voices and investigating all concerns.
In conclusion, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the experimental covid-19 vaccines are not safe and they're not effective. Despite there only being limited interest in the Chamber from colleagues, and I am very grateful to those who have attended, we can see from the public gallery, there is considerable public interest, I would implore all members of the House, present and those not, support calls for a three-hour debate on this important issue.
And Mr. Deputy Speaker, this might be the first debate on excess deaths in our Parliament, indeed, it might be the first debate on excess deaths in the world, but very sadly I promise you, it won't be the last.
** Professor Chris Whitty is Chief Medical Officer (CMO) for England, the UK government’s Chief Medical Adviser and head of the public health profession.
He is telling the truth, which means most people run and hide. I salute him. He is correct in everything he says. Running and hiding from the truth does not destroy the truth. It's still there shining in the light.
What the uTube clip of Andrew Bridgend speech does not show is the BBC scrolling pure vax propaganda across the screen whilst he spoke eg vax are safe, MMR safe etc
I have made a formal complaint to the BBC as a result.
It won’t do any good BUT it says to me the BBC and their controllers know they have a problem.
It’s ironic at the same time as this speech was delivered the Canadian Health data re contaminants was emerging .
The BBC is a truly complicit organisation.
I saw that and took a screen shot to send to friends. Never EVER seen stuff like this in my life (and I'm 62 !). It's getting to the point now that the BBC really is the British Bullshit Corporation 🤬 (any other suggestions welcome to cheer me up today 😉! - another one I saw this week was Bill's Broadcasting Corporation 😏)
A politician working for the people and raising concerns. That is wonderful to see. We have so many politicans that say very little or do little to challenge the agenda. Maintaining the status quo and not making waves seems to everyday business.
The people are tired of the games.
Thank you. Agreed 150% UK Parliament Member Andrew Bridgen, is truly a massive GIANT of GIANT HERO'S.
Whilst at the FedEx Curacao, someone was having two huge boxes delivered from the Wellness Company. The good word is out! The Wellness Company delivers to Curacao, in the Caribbean!
I posted this to Dr. John Campbell earlier, that I kept flashing on some dim sense of something cinematic while watching Andrew Bridgen speak to that empty parliament, something in his demeanor, how his soul shone out, but I couldn't quite catch the fleeting sense I had. Then I realized that he reminded me in all ways of Sam Gamgee in Lord of the Rings, loyal, determined, gentle, filled with a below the surface strength. LOTR The Two Towers - The Tales That Really Mattered...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6C8SX0mWP0&t=2s
Also, tweet from Steve Kirsch via Ethical Skeptic----
I just got off the phone with attorney Warner Mendenhall. He confirmed I wrote is accurate and the litigation floodgates are now open.
Here is a list of 90 lawyers that you can contact if you want to sue the vaccine manufacturers:
https://kirschsubstack.com/p/the-vaccines-are-adulterated-the
Sue these [expletive deleted] into the next universe!
Can you recommend any UK employment legal advisers who could help a vax injured former contractor fired for misconduct for having provided some websites raising safety concerns during a private conversation with a NHS nurse?
Just a little story that made me happy - apparently, the public gallery in the Houses of Parliament, was absolutely jam packed. Some people couldn't get in. There is a thick perspex, almost soundproof glass to 'protect' the parliament. However, when Andrew started speaking, a HUGE roar went up from the gallery. This continued and they were, at one point, told to quieten down !! One of those present was the great MATT LE TISSIER (ex professional footballer in the UK ). He gave small speech outside the parliament afterwards.
At the end of Andrew's speech, another huge roar of support went up and the 'few' MPs present, looked up , in what is described as shock /puzzlement ?? Do they not have ANY idea at all at what Joe Public are thinking .
Andrew is a hero 💪💪💪💪
PS I must add on (apologies I didn't know until this minute : Dr Mike Yeadon was also present in the gallery. He adds " we were repeatedly asked to shush and make less noise. " Also there were many who wanted to gain access but were told they couldn't get in. 😒
Dr Mike, Matt and Andrew - three great MEN 🥰
Thank you Dr. Alexander for posting those after excess death speeches made across the street from Parliament. For those interested, that statue in the background is of Gandhi. It's nice to see Mark Sexton speaking again in public. Thanks to all who came and supported MP Andrew Bridgen today. Wish I could have been there last Friday.
For those who don't do video--
VIDEO - UK MP Andrew Bridgen - Parliament debate on Excess deaths (first debate on excess deaths in the world) (Oct.20, 2023)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88QqjfZNdJI&t=1s
TRANSCRIPT
0:05
MP ANDREW BRIDGEN: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
We've experienced more excess deaths since July 2021 than the whole of 2020. Unlike the pandemic, however, these deaths are not disproportionately of the old. In other words, the excessive deaths are striking down people in the prime of life. But no one seems to care. I fear history will not judge this House kindly. We're still in a country supposedly committed to free and frank exchange of views. It appears that no one cares that no one cares.
Well, I care, Mr. Deputy Speaker. And I credit those members here in attendance today who also care. And I'd also like to thank the honorable member for Lincoln for his support and I'm sorry that he couldn't attend today's debate.
It's taken a lot of effort and more than 20 rejections to be allowed to raise this topic, but at last we're here to discuss the number of people dying. Nothing could be more serious.
Numerous countries are currently gripped in a period of unexpected mortality. And no one wants to talk about it. It's quite normal for death numbers to fluctuate up and down by chance alone, but what we're seeing here is a pattern repeated across countries, and the rise does not let up.
1:16
MP PHILIP DAVIES: Will you give way?
MP ANDREW BRIDGEN: I'll give way to the honorable gentleman.
MP PHILIP DAVIES: I'm very grateful, and can I commend him for his, the tenacious way he's, he's battled on this particular issue. I, I certainly admire him for that. I just want to, where we found the media was in all of this? Because of course during the covid pandemic, every day the media, particularly the BBC, couldn't wait to tell us how many people had died in that particular day without any context of those figures whatsoever. But they seem to have gone strangely quiet over these excess deaths now.
MP ANDREW BRIDGEN: I thank the gentleman for his intervention. He's absolutely right, the media have let the British public down badly. There will be a full press pack going out to all media outlets following my speech with all the evidence to back up all the claims I'll make in that speech, but I don't doubt there'll be no mention of it in the mainstream media.
You might think that a debate about excess deaths is going to be full of numbers. This speech does not have that many numbers because most of the important numbers have been kept hidden. All the data is being oddly presented in a distorted way and concerned people seeking to highlight important findings and ask questions have found themselves inexplicably under attack.
Before debating excess deaths, it's important to understand how excess death is determined, to understand if there is an excess by definition you need to estimate how many deaths it would have been expected. The Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development used 2015 to 2019 as a baseline, and the government's Office of Health Disparities and Improvement [Office for Health Improvement and Disparities] uses 2015 to 2019 baseline, modeled to allow for aging, and I've used that data here.
Unforgivably, the Office of National Statistics have included deaths in 2021 as part of their baseline calculation for expected deaths, as if there was anything normal
about the deaths in 2021. By exaggerating the number of deaths expected, the number of excess can be minimized. Why would ONS want to do that?
There's just too much that we don't know and it's not good enough, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
The ONS published promptly each week the number of deaths that were registered, and while this is commendable, it's not the data point that really matters. There's a total failure to collect, never mind publish, data on deaths that are referred for investigation to the coroner. Why does this matter? A referral means that it can be many months, and given the backlog, many years, before a death is formally registered. Needing to investigate the cause of a death is fair enough. Failing to record when the death happened is not. Because of this problem we actually have no idea how many people actually died in 2021. Even now.
...continued...
...continued...
The problem is greatest for for the younger age groups where there's a higher proportion of deaths that are investigated. This data failure is unacceptable. It must change. There's nothing in a coroner's report that can bring anyone back from the dead, and those deaths should be reported.
The youngest age groups are important not only because they should have their whole lives ahead of them. If there is a new cause of excess mortality across the board, it would not be noticed so much in the older cohorts because the extra deaths would be drowned out amongst the expected deaths.
However, in the youngest cohorts that is not the case. There were only 2 extra deaths a day in the second half of 2021 among the 15 to 19 year-old males, but potentially even more if those referred to the coroner were fully included.
In a judicial review of the decision to vaccinate yet younger children the ONS refused in court to give anonymized details about these deaths. They admitted that the data they were withholding was statistically significant. And I quote, they said, the ONS recognizes that more work could be undertaken to examine the mortality rates of young people in 2021 and intends to do so once more reliable data are available.
How many more extra deaths in 15 to 19 year-olds will it take to trigger such work? Surely the ONS should be desperately keen to investigate deaths in young men. Why else have an independent body charged with examining mortality data? Surely the ONS has a responsibility to collect data from the coroners to produce timely information.
Let's move on to old people because most deaths in the old are registered promptly and we do have a better feel for how many older people are dying.
Deaths from dementia and Alzheimers show what we ought to expect. There was a period of high mortality coinciding with covid and lockdowns, but ever since there have been fewer deaths than expected. After a period of high mortality we expect, and historically have seen, a period of low mortality because those who have suddenly died cannot die again. Those whose deaths were slightly premature because of covid and lockdowns, died earlier than they otherwise would have. This principle should hold true for every cause of death in every age group. But that's not what we're seeing.
Even for the over 85 year-olds, according to the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities, there were 8,000 excess deaths, 4% above the expected levels, for the 12 months starting in July 2020. That includes all of the autumn 2020 wave of covid, when we had tiering, the second lockdown, and it includes all of the first covid winter.
However, for the year starting July 2022, there have been over 18,000 excess deaths in this age group, 9% above expected levels. More than twice as many in a period when there should have been a deficit. And when deaths from diseases previously associated with old age were actually fewer than expected.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have raised my concerns around NG163 and the use of midazolam and morphine which may have caused and may still be causing premature deaths in the vulnerable. But that is, sadly, a debate for another day.
There were just over 14,000 excess deaths in the under 65 year-olds before vaccination from April 2020 to the end of March 2021. Ever since that time there's been over 21,000 excess deaths, ignoring the registration delay problem, the majority, 58% of these deaths, were not attributed to covid.
We turned society upside down before vaccination for fear of excess deaths from covid, today we have substantially more excess deaths, and in younger people, and there's complete and eerie silence, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
The evidence is unequivocal. There was a clear step-wise increase in mortality following the vaccine roll out. There was a reprieve in the winter of 2021-22
because there were fewer than expected respiratory deaths, but otherwise the excess has been incessantly at this high level.
8:18
Ambulance data for England provides another clue. Ambulance calls for life-threatening emergencies were running at a steady 2,000 calls per day until the vaccine roll out. From then it rose to 2,500 daily, and calls have stayed at this level since.
The surveillance systems designed to spot a safety problem have all flashed red, but no one's looking.
Claims for personal independence payments for people who have developed a disability and cannot work rocketed with the vaccine roll out, and it's continued to rise ever since. The same was seen in the USA, also started with the vaccine roll out, not with covid. A study to determine the vaccination status of a sample of such claimants would be relatively quick and inexpensive to perform, yet nobody seems interested in ascertaining this vital information. Officials have chosen to turn a blind eye to this disturbing, irrefutable and frightening data, much like Nelson did, and for far less honorable reasons. He would be ashamed of us, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
...continued...
...continued...
Furthermore, data that has been used to sing the praises of the vaccines is deeply flawed. Only one covid-related death was prevented in each of the initial major trials that led to authorization of the vaccines, and that is taking their data entirely at face value, whereas a growing number of inconsistencies and anomalies suggest we ought not to do this.
Extrapolating from that means that between 15,000 and 20,000 people had to be injected to prevent a single death from covid. To prevent a single covid hospitalization, over 1,500 people needed to be injected. The trial data showed that one in 800 injected people had a serious adverse event, meaning that they were hospitalized or had a life-changing or life-threatening condition. The risk of this was twice as high as the chance of preventing a covid hospitalization. We are harming one in 800 people to supposedly save one in 20,000. This is madness.
The strongest claims have too often been based on modeling carried out on the basis of flawed assumptions. Where observational studies have been carried out, researchers will correct for age and co-morbidities to make the vaccines look better. However, Mr. Deputy Speaker, they never correct for socioeconomic or ethnic differences that would make vaccines look worse. This matters. For example, claims of higher mortality in less vaccinated regions in the United States took no account of the fact that this was the case before the vaccines were rolled out. That is why studies that claim to show the vaccines prevented covid deaths also showed a marked effect of them preventing non-covid deaths. The prevention of non-covid deaths is always a statistical illusion and claims of preventing covid deaths should not be assumed when that illusion has not been corrected for. And when it is corrected for, the claims of efficacy for the vaccines vanish with it.
Covid disproportionately killed people from ethnic minorities and lower socioeconomic groups.
During the 2020, during the pandemic, the deaths among the most deprived were up by 23% compared to 17% for the least deprived. However, since 2022 the pattern has reversed, with 5% excess mortality amongst the most deprived, compared to 7% among the least deprived. These deaths are being caused by something different.
In 2020, the excess was highest in the oldest cohorts, and there were fewer than expected deaths amongst younger age groups. But since 2022 the 50 to 64-year-old cohort has had the highest excess mortality. Even the youngest age groups are now seeing substantial excess, with a 9% excess in the under-50s since 2022 compared to 5% now in the over-75 group.
Despite London being a younger region, the excess in London is only 3%, whereas it is higher in every more heavily vaccinated region of the UK. And it should be noted, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that London is famously the least vaccinated region in the UK by some margin. Studies comparing regions on a larger scale show the same thing. There are studies from the Netherlands, Germany and the whole world each showing that the highest mortality after vaccination was seen in the most heavily vaccinated regions.
So we need to ask, what are people dying of? Since 2022, there has been 11% excess in ischemic heart disease deaths and a 16% excess in heart failure deaths. In meantime, cancer deaths are only 1% above expected levels, which is further evidence this is not simply some other factor that affects deaths across the board, such as a failing to account for an aging population or a failing NHS. In fact, the excess itself has a seasonality with a peak in the winter months. The fact it returns to baseline levels in summer is a further indication that this is not due to some statistical error or an aging population alone.
Dr. Clare Craig from the HART group* first highlighted a stepwise increase in cardiac arrest calls after the vaccine roll out in May 2021 and HART have repeatedly raised concerns about the increase in cardiac deaths. And they have every reason to be concerned. Four participants in the vaccine group of the Pfizer trial died from cardiac arrest compared with only one in the placebo group. Overall there were 21 deaths in the vaccine group up to March 2021 compared with 17 in the placebo group. And there are serious anomalies about the reporting of the deaths within this trial, with the deaths in the vaccine group taking much longer to report than those in the placebo group. And that's highly suggestive, Mr. Deputy Speaker, of a significant bias in what was supposed to be a blinded trial.
An Israeli study clearly showed an increase in cardiac hospital attendances among 18 to 39 year-olds that correlated with vaccination, not with covid. There have now been several post-mortem studies demonstrating a causal link between vaccination and coronary artery disease leading to death up to four months after the last dose. And we need to remember that the safety trial was cut short to only two months, so there's no evidence of any vaccine safety beyond that point.
The decision to unblind the trials after two months and vaccinate the placebo group is nothing less than a public health scandal. Everyone involved failed in their duty to do the truth. But no one cares, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
The one place that can help us understand exactly what caused this is Australia. Australia had almost no covid when vaccines were first introduced, making them the perfect control group. The state of South Australia had only 1,000 cases of covid across its whole population by December 2021 before omicron arrived. What was the impact of vaccination there? For 15 to 44 year-olds, there was historically 1,300 emergency cardiac presentations a month. With vaccine roll out in the under-50s this rocketed to 2,172 cases in November 2021 in this age group alone, a 67% more than usual. Overall there were 17,900 South Australians who had a cardiac emergency in 2021 compared to only 13,250 in 2018, a 35% increase. It is clearly the vaccine that must be the number one suspect in this, and it cannot be dismissed as just a coincidence. Australian mortality overall has increased from early 2021, and the increase is due to cardiac deaths.
These excess deaths are not due to an aging population because there are fewer deaths in the diseases of old age. These deaths are not an effect of covid because they've happened in places where covid have not reached. And they are not due to low statin prescriptions or under-treated hypertension, as Chris Whitty** would suggest, because prescriptions did not change, and any effect would have taken many years and been very small. The prime suspect must be something that was introduced to the population as a whole, something novel. The prime hypothesis must be the experimental covid-19 vaccines.
The ONS published a dataset of deaths by vaccinated and unvaccinated. At first glance, it appears to show that the vaccines are safe and effective. However, there were several huge problems with how they presented that data. One was that for the first three-week period after injection, the ONS claimed there were only a tiny number of deaths, the number the ONS would normally predict to occur in a single week. Where were the deaths from the usual causes? When this was raised, the ONS claimed that the sickest people did not get vaccinated and therefore the people were taking the vaccination were self-selecting for those least likely to die. Not only is this not the case in the real world, with even hospices heavily vaccinating their residents, but the ONS’s own data show that the proportion of sickest people was equal in the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. This inevitably raises serious questions about the ONS’s data presentation.
There were so many problems with the methodology used by the ONS that the statistics regulator agreed that the ONS data could not be used to assess vaccine efficacy or safety. That tells you something about the ONS.
...continued...
...continued...
Consequently, HART asked the UK Health Security Agency to provide the data they had on people who had died and therefore needed to be removed from their vaccination dataset. This request has been repeatedly refused, with excuses given including the false claim that anonymizing this data would be the equivalent of creating it, even though there is case law that anonymization is not considered creation of new data. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I believe that if this data was released, it would be damning.
Some claim that so many lives have been saved by mass vaccination that any amount of harm, suffering, and death caused by the vaccines is a price worth paying. They're delusional, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The claim of 20 million lives saved is based on now discredited models which assume that covid waves do not peak without intervention. There have been numerous waves globally that now demonstrate that is not the case. And it was also based on there having been more than half a million lives saved in the UK. That's more than the worst-case scenario predicted at the beginning of the pandemic. For the claim to have been true, the rate at which covid killed people would have had to have taken off dramatically at the beginning of 2021 in the absence of vaccination. That is ludicrous and it bears no relationship to the truth.
In the real world, Australia, New Zealand and South Korea have a mortality rate of 400 deaths per million up to the summer 2022 after they were first hit with omicron. So how does that compare? With the Wuhan strain, France and Europe as a whole had a mortality rate of under 400 deaths per million up to the summer of 2020. Australia, New Zealand and South Korea were all heavily vaccinated before infection, so tell me: where, where was the benefit?
The UK had just over 800 deaths per million up to the summer of 2020, so twice as much, but we know omicron is half as deadly as the Wuhan variant. The death rates per million are the same before and after vaccination, so where was the benefits of vaccination?
The regulators have failed in their duty to protect the public. They've allowed these novel products to skip crucial safety testing by letting them be described as vaccines. They've failed to insist on safety testing being done in the years since the first temporary emergency authorization. Even now, no one can tell you how much spike protein is produced on vaccination and for how long, yet another example of where there is no data for me to share with the House.
And when it comes to properly recording deaths due to vaccination, the system's broken. Not a single doctor registered a death from a rare brain clot before a doctor in Scandinavia forced the issue and the MHRA*** acknowledged the problem. Only then did these deaths start to be certified by doctors in the UK. It turns out the doctors were waiting for permission from the regulator, and the regulator was waiting to be alerted by the doctors. This is a lethal circularity.
Furthermore, coroners have written regulation 28 reports highlighting deaths from vaccination to prevent further deaths, yet the MHRA said in a response to a FOI [freedom of information request] that it had not received any of them. The system we have in place is clearly not functioning to protect the public.
The regulators also missed the fact that the Pfizer trial, in the Pfizer trial, the vaccine was made for the trial participants in a highly controlled environment, in stark contrast to the manufacturing process used for the public roll out, which was based on a completely different technology. And just only, just over 200 participants were given the same product that was given to the public, but not only was the data from these people never compared to those in the trial for efficacy and safety, but the MHRA have admitted that they dropped the requirement to provide the data. That means that there was never a trial on the Pfizer product that was actually rolled out to the public, and that product has never been compared to the product that was actually trialed.****
The vaccine mass production processes use vats of Escherichia coli and present a risk of contamination with DNA from the bacteria, as well as bacterial cell walls, which can cause dangerous reactions. This is not theoretical, Mr. Deputy Speaker, this is now sound evidence that has been replicated by several labs across the world. And the mRNA vaccines were contaminated by DNA, which far exceeded the usual permissible levels. Given that this DNA is enclosed in lipid nanoparticle delivery system, it is arguable that even the permissible levels would have been far too high, these lipid nanoparticles are known to enter every organ of the body. As well as this potentially causing some of the acute adverse reactions seen, there is a serious risk of this foreign bacterial DNA inserting itself into human DNA. And will anybody investigate? No they won't.
MP DANNY KRUGER: Will you give way?
MP ANDREW BRIDGEN: I'll give way on that point.
22:33
MP DANNY KRUGER: Conscious that time is tight, I, I, I recognize that the honorable gentleman is making a very, very powerful case. Does he agree with me, that the government should be looking at this properly and should commission a review into the excess deaths, partly so we can assure our constituents that the case he's making is not in fact valid, and that the vaccines have no cause behind these excess deaths?
MP ANDREW BRIDGEN: I thank the honorable gentleman for his support on this topic, and of course that is what exactly any responsible government should do.
I wrote to the Prime Minister on the 7th August 2023 with all the evidence of this, but sadly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I still await a response.
What will it take to stop these products? Their complete failure to stop infections was not enough, and we all know plenty of vaccinated people who have caught and spread covid. The mutation of the virus to a weaker variant, omicron, that, that, that wasn't enough. The increasing evidence of the serious harms to those of us who were vaccinated, that's not enough. And now the cardiac deaths and the deaths of young people are apparently not enough, either.
It's high time that these experimental vaccines were suspended and a full investigation into the harms they've caused initiated. History will be a harsh judge if we don't start using evidence-based medicine. We need to return to basic science, basic ethics immediately, which means listening to all voices and investigating all concerns.
In conclusion, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the experimental covid-19 vaccines are not safe and they're not effective. Despite there only being limited interest in the Chamber from colleagues, and I am very grateful to those who have attended, we can see from the public gallery, there is considerable public interest, I would implore all members of the House, present and those not, support calls for a three-hour debate on this important issue.
And Mr. Deputy Speaker, this might be the first debate on excess deaths in our Parliament, indeed, it might be the first debate on excess deaths in the world, but very sadly I promise you, it won't be the last.
[loud cheering from the public gallery]
24:29
[END OF SPEECH]
...continued...
# # #
TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES
Andrew Bridgen
https://members.parliament.uk/member/4133/contact
https://www.reclaimparty.co.uk/andrew-bridgen
https://twitter.com/ABridgen
* Health Advisory & Recovery Team
https://www.hartgroup.org
** Professor Chris Whitty is Chief Medical Officer (CMO) for England, the UK government’s Chief Medical Adviser and head of the public health profession.
https://www.gov.uk/government/people/christopher-whitty
*** Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (for the UK)
**** See Andrew Bridgen's speech of September 12, 2023
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CxFfaUDIWGt/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA%3D%3D
Transcript: https://transcriberb.dreamwidth.org/99774.html
Could someone explain why graphene is so destructive in these poison vaxs? I've heard every other aspect of these poisons explained, except for this!
Shiva4president.com and Reggie Middleton for Secretary if the Treasury.https://youtu.be/aQNu83dBk5Y?si=7wyjNTvNlpThK5A3