COVID-19

https://www.bhf.org.uk/informations...s-and-covid-19-vaccines-should-you-be-worried

That doesn't look like silence to me.

The BHF echoes the conclusions of the CDC in the US, and other studies around the world. Vaccinated people are reported to exhibit cardiovascular conditions at a very low rate (myocarditis or pericarditis in males over 30, for example, is recorded in 0.1% of people within 21 days of receiving any number of COVID vaccination doses). In males over 30 who contract COVID19, that figure jumps to 1.1%. i.e you're 11x more likely to have heart conditions after having COVID, than after having a vaccination.* For the 100,000 excess CVD deaths reported, if all 100,000 were vaccinated, that would mean 10 of those excess deaths could be associated with vaccination, and that's without any causative link established.

Contracting COVID19 has been shown to significantly increase the rate of cardiovascular disease for a year or more after infection. Whilst your graph suggestively draws on a start date for vaccination programs, it's utterly useless for analysis without the rate of vaccination included. For example, a large increase in UK excess mortality in those graphs is reported for Q2 2020 (long before vaccines were available) and for Q1 2021. But by the end of Q1 2021 only 40% of the UK population had even received a single dose of a vaccine. Were they linked, you'd expect the increase to continue well into Q2 and Q3 of 2021, when UK vaccination rates increased from 40% to 75+%.

Bizarrely, the graph actually shows a decrease in cumulative deaths in that period? A decrease in a cumulative measure can only occur if less deaths are occurring than normal, i.e. excess deaths are negative. So in a period where UK vaccination rates jumped from 40 to 75%, fewer people died than would be expected under normal circumstances? So should we conclude that Covid vaccines actually protect you from becoming an excess death statistic? Or perhaps that the two aren't correlated at all.

A look at the Norway data shows excess deaths dropped below the average of the previous 8 years immediately after vaccination started, fantastic! Or perhaps excess deaths is a horrendous measure to be using when trying to infer conclusions about individual causes of death. Given for example, lockdowns result in less risky behaviour (traffic deaths dropped dramatically), masking/social distancing led to an exceptionally mild flu season around the world,

If we want to trust this data to draw conclusions, it's equally, if not much better explained by considering the well-known long-term impact COVID19 has on the body, including the heart. A large number of people who survive their initial COVID19 infection are left with heart damage, which would lead to CVD mortality in the months/years following their infection. We'll be seeing this elevated rate of CVD deaths for years to come, as that permanent heart damage translates to CVD incidents. Excess death may well stay high as well as the impact of Covid19 on the hearts, lungs, kidneys, brains, of those infected translate to early mortality, and the impact of disrupted healthcare for issues such as cancer screening and treatment are felt.

If there is good evidence that vaccination can lead to signficant long-term heart damage, this isn't it.


*The 1.1% figure excludes cardiovascular events which occur during the active COVID19 infection, this is only reporting after-effects of vaccination vs after-effects of Covid.

 

“Truth is like a lion; you don’t have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself.” (St Augustine)

So, "Well done!" to the people of Canada for helping the lion escape its cage. In March this year hearings began in the Canadian National Citizens Inquiry (NCI), a completely independent, self-funded, citizen conceived and organised inquiry into the Canadian government's and Canadian medical authority's pandemic response. Hearings before a panel of citizen Commisioners were held in 8 major cities across Canada. The eight hearings, each lasting 3 days, heard testimony from expert witnesses and lay people, all delivered under oath. The hearings were held in public, streamed in real-time, and recordings of entire hearings and individual testimonies have been, or are in process of being, made publicly available on Youtube and Rumble. The hearings have now finished; the findings of the Inquiry are due to be published by the end of the year.
Every aspect of the Inquiry, from its nation-wide organisation to its technological provision*, have been the work of volunteers, who have contributed time and effort at no little personal expense to making this unique Inquiry happen. It started as a heart-warming endeavour and its delivery has been a fantastic achievement.
Two links, the first to the NCI's official website:
https://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca
and the second to just one example of witness testimony, in this case retired journalist/broadcaster Rodney Palmer:
https://rumble.com/v2fs7u2-rodney-palmer-full-interview-day-1-toronto-national-citizens-inquiry.html

* inevitably at times lacking, therefore, the smoothness of operation of e.g. televised Parliamentary proceedings or the on-line output of a major broadcaster.

 

The first cracks are beginning to appear in the walls of the Citadels of Silence and Deceit:

In Australia, the Queensland Supreme Court has ruled that the state's imposition of vaccine mandates on the police and ambulance services was illegal, an infringement of the service members' rights under the Human Rights Act. This ruling is predicted to open the floodgates to a torrent of further legal cases.

In the US, the state of Texas is suing Pfizer -- for fraud, thus by-passing the indemnity granted to Pfizer and other manufacturers against being held responsible for injury caused by Covid "vaccines".

And here in the UK, the All Party Parliamentary Group on Pandemic Response and Recovery has called for a Select Committee investigation into our Medicines and Health Care Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the body charged with protecting us from harmful medications, medical devices, etc. In the APPG's words "We feel compelled to conclude that the MHRA has indeed become an enabler for the pharmaceutical industry, with patient safety no longer being its primary concern."
Coincidentally, the CEO of the organisation, Dame June Raine, has announced that she will step down when a successor has been chosen ............

Also here in the UK, the Prime MInister was confronted on a GBNews Q&A programme aired on February 12th, by two of our countrymen proven to have suffered serious injury following Covid "vaccination". This is the Prime MInister who, less than two weeks earlier, had declared "unequivocally" in the House of Commons that "the Covid vaccines are safe".

(Ironically, linking the two latter developments, the APPG pointed out in their report that the MHRA's own Blue Guide, which lays down inter alia what pharmaceutical companies advertising their products are and aren't allowed to say, forbids any description of any medication as "safe", on the grounds that all have side effects which can prove damaging. Despite which we were sold the so-called "vaccines" as being "Safe and Effective", and this after emergency use authorisation (i.e. not fully tested for safety) by the body whose own rules forbid such a description! Why is Rishi Sunak not facing the serious charge of having misled the House of Commons?)