If they hadn’t downgraded from HCID they would have been legally obliged to make available safe and effective Covid treatments such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.
This way they could pretend that the only salvation from the “deadly virus” (which we know it wasn’t) was their nefarious ulterior motive of mass vaccination.
They also changed the death certification system to make it easy to falsely attribute non-Covid deaths to Covid, to further ramp up the fearmongering.
From Report 9, published by Ferguson on 16th March 2020:
"Infection was assumed to be seeded in each country at an exponentially growing rate (with a doubling time of 5 days) from early January 2020, with the rate of seeding being calibrated to give local epidemics which reproduced the observed cumulative number of deaths in GB or the US seen by 14th March 2020."
So it looks like Ferguson had tested his modelling against deaths up to March 14th and decided that his model was a realistic projection of future deaths minus interventions. Ferguson's modelling therefore took precedence over all decisions made as to whether Covid-19 was a HCID, including those which Ferguson signed off on. Report 9 is what changed between March 13th and 14th.
When Report 9 was published on March 16th, Boris Johnson announced advisory measures to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2. On March 23rd, he announced a mandatory nationwide lockdown. So perhaps we should be asking what changed between March 16th and March 23rd?
As it was admitted from the beginning that Covid-19 wasn’t a serious threat to most people, how did we end up with the INSANE plan to vaccinate the entire global population?!
Why did the scientific and medical establishment go along with this plan, largely without question?
I questioned the vaccine response, see my BMJ rapid response published on 25 March 2020:
If children, young adults and others can mount their own effective immune response to SARS-CoV2, is it ethical to impede their ability to access natural immunity by interfering with the natural progression of the virus?
According to the WHO, "Illness due to COVID-19 infection is generally mild, especially for children and young adults."[1]
Is the focus on future fast-tracked vaccine products blocking full consideration of the opportunity for natural herd immunity? Who is Neil Ferguson to say "The only exit strategy [in the] long term for this is really vaccination or other forms of innovative technology that allows us to control transmission".[2]
In regards to young people's and others' right to natural immunity, it's also vital to consider the startling admission by Heidi Larson, Director of The Vaccine Confidence Project, during the recent WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit, i.e. "...We've shifted the human population...to dependency on vaccine-induced immunity...We're in a very fragile state now. We have developed a world that is dependent on vaccinations".[3]
This is a very alarming statement by Professor Larson, particularly with the prospect of other epidemics emerging in the future. We have to learn to deal with epidemics and illnesses as they emerge, it's not feasible to vaccinate the global population against every threat.
In a recent article raising concern about making decisions about this pandemic without reliable data, John Ioannidis notes that "School closures may also diminish the chances of developing herd immunity in an age group that is spared serious disease".[4] The UK's chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, raised the prospect of developing natural herd immunity[5], but this idea was subsequently howled down by Matt Hancock, the UK secretary of state for health and social care[6], and others such as Willem van Schaik, a professor of microbiology and infection, as reported by the Science Media Centre.[7]
Again, is it ethical to deny children, young people and others their opportunity for natural immunity, and to plan to make them dependent on vaccine-induce immunity, to in effect make them dependent on the vaccine industry?
This is even more serious to consider in light of emerging vaccine product failures, e.g. pertussis and mumps.
The international community must be assured that independent and objective thinkers are carefully considering the way ahead on this matter.
References:
1. WHO Q&A on coronaviruses (COVID-19) - Should I worry about COVID-19. 9 March 2020.
2. Elisabeth Mahase. Covid-19: UK starts social distancing after new model points to 260 000 potential deaths. BMJ2020;368:m1089
3. Heidi Larson. Vaccine safety in the next decade. Why we need new modes of trust building? WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit, 2-3 December 2019.
4. John P.A. Ioannidis. A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data. STAT, 17 March 2020.
5. Coronavirus: 60% of UK population need to become infected so country can build 'herd immunity', government's chief scientist says. Independent, 13 March 2020.
6. The UK backs away from "herd immunity" coronavirus proposal amid blowback. Vox, 15 March 2020.
7. Expert comments about herd immunity. Science Media Centre, 13 March 2020.
Competing interests: No competing interests
25 March 2020
Elizabeth M Hart
Independent citizen investigating the over-use of vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy, Adelaide, Australia
It wasn’t disclosed in Report 9 that Neil Ferguson is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, arguably the biggest vaccine pusher in the world.
This fact came to light after my BMJ rapid response asking “Who are the members of SAGE? There must be transparency and accountability for coronavirus policy” was published in November 2020: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4235/rr-1
In their Imperial College Report 9, Neil Ferguson et al said: “The global impact of COVID-19 has been profound, and the public health threat it represents is the most serious seen in a respiratory virus since the 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic.”
On what basis did Ferguson et al compare COVID-19 with the 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic?
I raised this matter with Neil Ferguson in August 2021, see my email:
See also my email to Neil Ferguson dated 23 March 2021, in which I said:
“According to an article in the Independent on 13 March 2020, there were plans to develop natural herd immunity, see: Coronavirus: 60% of UK population need to become infected so country can build 'herd immunity', government's chief scientist says.
But this all seemed to change after your report was published, dated 16 March 2020, resulting in a massive impact around the world with the implementation of lockdowns and other restrictions hindering free movement and association, with devastating consequences for society and the economy.”
Why has there been such a disproportionate and ill-targeted response to the coronavirus, grossly disrupting global economies and societies?
Much remains unknown about the SARS-CoV-2 virus, including the immune response. Why is there a mad rush for coronavirus vaccine products? This is a massive global experiment underway.
I fear we are heading towards disaster with this 'warp speed' vaccination plan.
What about the ethical considerations of implementing vaccine products which could seriously impact on people's natural defences against this virus and others?
Is it ethical to deny people their opportunity for a natural response to this virus, and to plan to make them dependent on what might be very questionable 'vaccine-induced immunity' of unknown duration and adverse effects? Is the aim to make people dependent on the vaccine industry?
This could be a 'crime against humanity' in the making.
Consider this admission by Heidi Larson, Director of The Vaccine Confidence Project, during the WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit late last year, i.e.
"We've shifted the human population...to dependency on vaccine-induced immunity...We're in a very fragile state now. We have developed a world that is dependent on vaccinations".
This is a very alarming statement by Professor Larson, particularly with the prospect of other epidemics emerging in the future. We have to learn to deal with epidemics and illnesses as they emerge, it's not feasible to lockdown the world and plan to vaccinate the global population against every threat. Where has this bizarre and increasingly dystopian response come from?
Prime Minister, there has been a 'vaccine' mindset on this from the beginning, at the cost of considering effective treatments for the vulnerable and sick, and simple preventatives such as vitamin D.
Why has the response to this virus been so ill-targeted and disproportionate?
We need an investigation into conflicts of interest in this area of public health policy, including the influence of the World Health Organisation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Gavi Vaccine Alliance, and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).
The international community must be assured that independent and objective thinkers are carefully considering the way ahead.
Please see my referenced rapid responses on The BMJ:
- Is it ethical to impede access to natural immunity? The case of SARS-CoV2. 25 March 2020. - Looking at Sweden, COVID-19 and vitamin D... 13 July 2020.
- Is it ethical to vaccinate children to protect the elderly? 5 August 2020.
- Why do we need a vaccine for Covid-19? 1 September 2020.
- SARS-CoV-2 virus - disproportionate and ill-targeted response. 5 October 2020. - Covid-19 - "much to gain, by taking vitamin D supplements..." 5 October 2020.
Sincerely
Elizabeth Hart
Independent person investigating the over-use of vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy
As a whimsical suggestion: perhaps that was the time when it became known to the UK government that the US had been funding coronavirus gain of function research in a lab in Wuhan. Our leaders put 2 and 2 together and got 5 (which is better than usual).
Has anyone returned to Neil Ferguson or any member of SAGE to ask how came to make that decision one day and then contradict it the next? I think it is such an important question that bears demanding a thorough response.
Lives lost, lives ruined, governments have turned into police states, economies trashed and people have been forcibly injected with an experimental drug with, as it turns out, kills. Where is their God forsaken greater good?
May 25, 2023·edited May 25, 2023Liked by Martin Neil
I asked this question myself at the time, no answers were given then, no answers are given now. There is nothing about this whole debacle that doesn't smell like a rat. We are living in the biggest worldwide scam in history, which I hope will end with all those responsible going to jail for the rest of their greedy, amoral lives.
The pre-planning has by now been shown so purswaisingly that noone at their fully five could avoid it.
The same goes with the mantras save and efficient and saving lives. As to the illegal banning of effective treatments already existing. From there to mass vaccination, all sorts of changes in certifications and the non civilized lock downs t he road was short. Pretty well pre planned with a signature of advanced military thinking, directed against a frightened, isolated and by all orders helpless population. Pretty ugly, what comes next?
Someone here in the Netherlands said that government nudging propaganda material was recorded as early as januari 2020. Its hearsay, apparently reported by the actors. But…. So many things that sounded like a conspiracy theory came true. 3 years ago i laughed when someone used the phrase MSM. Naive with hindsight.
Thank you Martin. I wonder what a FOIR for the correspondence and legal advice taken in coming to the decision to downgrade the infection to an HCID would elicit? I remember discussing with Clare Craig, and she thought it might have been connected to the implicit requirement of an autopsy for any HCID victims, but all remains speculation for now.
And if COVID-19 is not such a "high consequence disease", WHY ADMINISTER AN EXPERIMENTAL VACCINE? I live in a "blue" area of the US and there were really no "lockdowns" worth mentioning- things were quite active from May 2020 onwards. And COVID deaths were also LOW after May 2020 in this highly populated area- the only exception was for a few weeks during the "holiday gathering season" in December 2020/January 2021.
But then about 75% took the experimental vaccine, likely due to the sales pitch, peer pressure, and of course the mandates. And then what happened? The following "holiday gathering season" of 2021-2022 (a.k.a. the "Omicron winter") we had even MORE deaths per day from COVID (AFTER 75% vaccination) than in the previous "holiday gathering season" with 0% vaccination- and that's not even getting into all-cause mortality.
I’ve been out on the golf course all afternoon since my earlier comment. I referenced Reiner Fuellmich who I believe correctly identified the agenda behind the Coronavirus “plandemic” and its (my words) “nefarious ulterior motive of mass vaccination” via his Grand Jury Crimes Against Humanity model proceedings which completed about a year ago.
All his evidence is recorded online but the only (quite long) summary of the proceedings that I am aware of is mine, recorded online via the good offices of Joel Smalley. It’s a slightly confusing story as there was a hiatus of several months in the middle, so my summary is in two parts, and sadly Reiner has since split from the Corona Investigative Committee. For details see https://metatron.substack.com/p/reiner-fuellmichs-grand-jury-court. For an overview, scroll down to Reiner’s closing arguments.
This is the smoking gun that proves that the Coronavirus response was a pre-planned, globally coordinated “plandemic” [© Reiner Fuellmich]. Basically the same ploy was used all round the world.
An excellent short article in The Conservative Woman in October 2021 exposed the skulduggery on the downgrading from High Consequence Infection Disease status at the time of the initial “three weeks to flatten the curve” lockdown: https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/we-both-know-this-has-never-been-about-saving-lives-boris/.
If they hadn’t downgraded from HCID they would have been legally obliged to make available safe and effective Covid treatments such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.
Having downgraded, they made sure that safe and effective Covid treatments were not available by banning them, for example see https://www.gov.uk/government/news/chloroquine-and-hydroxychloroquine-not-licensed-for-coronavirus-covid-19-treatment.
This way they could pretend that the only salvation from the “deadly virus” (which we know it wasn’t) was their nefarious ulterior motive of mass vaccination.
They also changed the death certification system to make it easy to falsely attribute non-Covid deaths to Covid, to further ramp up the fearmongering.
From Report 9, published by Ferguson on 16th March 2020:
"Infection was assumed to be seeded in each country at an exponentially growing rate (with a doubling time of 5 days) from early January 2020, with the rate of seeding being calibrated to give local epidemics which reproduced the observed cumulative number of deaths in GB or the US seen by 14th March 2020."
So it looks like Ferguson had tested his modelling against deaths up to March 14th and decided that his model was a realistic projection of future deaths minus interventions. Ferguson's modelling therefore took precedence over all decisions made as to whether Covid-19 was a HCID, including those which Ferguson signed off on. Report 9 is what changed between March 13th and 14th.
When Report 9 was published on March 16th, Boris Johnson announced advisory measures to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2. On March 23rd, he announced a mandatory nationwide lockdown. So perhaps we should be asking what changed between March 16th and March 23rd?
As it was admitted from the beginning that Covid-19 wasn’t a serious threat to most people, how did we end up with the INSANE plan to vaccinate the entire global population?!
Why did the scientific and medical establishment go along with this plan, largely without question?
I questioned the vaccine response, see my BMJ rapid response published on 25 March 2020:
Is it ethical to impede access to natural immunity? The case of SARS-CoV2: https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m1089/rr-6
Dear Editor
If children, young adults and others can mount their own effective immune response to SARS-CoV2, is it ethical to impede their ability to access natural immunity by interfering with the natural progression of the virus?
According to the WHO, "Illness due to COVID-19 infection is generally mild, especially for children and young adults."[1]
Is the focus on future fast-tracked vaccine products blocking full consideration of the opportunity for natural herd immunity? Who is Neil Ferguson to say "The only exit strategy [in the] long term for this is really vaccination or other forms of innovative technology that allows us to control transmission".[2]
In regards to young people's and others' right to natural immunity, it's also vital to consider the startling admission by Heidi Larson, Director of The Vaccine Confidence Project, during the recent WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit, i.e. "...We've shifted the human population...to dependency on vaccine-induced immunity...We're in a very fragile state now. We have developed a world that is dependent on vaccinations".[3]
This is a very alarming statement by Professor Larson, particularly with the prospect of other epidemics emerging in the future. We have to learn to deal with epidemics and illnesses as they emerge, it's not feasible to vaccinate the global population against every threat.
In a recent article raising concern about making decisions about this pandemic without reliable data, John Ioannidis notes that "School closures may also diminish the chances of developing herd immunity in an age group that is spared serious disease".[4] The UK's chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, raised the prospect of developing natural herd immunity[5], but this idea was subsequently howled down by Matt Hancock, the UK secretary of state for health and social care[6], and others such as Willem van Schaik, a professor of microbiology and infection, as reported by the Science Media Centre.[7]
Again, is it ethical to deny children, young people and others their opportunity for natural immunity, and to plan to make them dependent on vaccine-induce immunity, to in effect make them dependent on the vaccine industry?
This is even more serious to consider in light of emerging vaccine product failures, e.g. pertussis and mumps.
The international community must be assured that independent and objective thinkers are carefully considering the way ahead on this matter.
References:
1. WHO Q&A on coronaviruses (COVID-19) - Should I worry about COVID-19. 9 March 2020.
2. Elisabeth Mahase. Covid-19: UK starts social distancing after new model points to 260 000 potential deaths. BMJ2020;368:m1089
3. Heidi Larson. Vaccine safety in the next decade. Why we need new modes of trust building? WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit, 2-3 December 2019.
4. John P.A. Ioannidis. A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data. STAT, 17 March 2020.
5. Coronavirus: 60% of UK population need to become infected so country can build 'herd immunity', government's chief scientist says. Independent, 13 March 2020.
6. The UK backs away from "herd immunity" coronavirus proposal amid blowback. Vox, 15 March 2020.
7. Expert comments about herd immunity. Science Media Centre, 13 March 2020.
Competing interests: No competing interests
25 March 2020
Elizabeth M Hart
Independent citizen investigating the over-use of vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy, Adelaide, Australia
Neil Ferguson et al’s Report 9 recommended suppression of the virus “until a vaccine becomes available”. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf
It wasn’t disclosed in Report 9 that Neil Ferguson is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, arguably the biggest vaccine pusher in the world.
This fact came to light after my BMJ rapid response asking “Who are the members of SAGE? There must be transparency and accountability for coronavirus policy” was published in November 2020: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4235/rr-1
See articles subsequently published on The BMJ:
- Conflicts of interest among the UK government’s covid-19 advisers, 9 December 2020: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4716
- Covid-19: SAGE members’ interests published by government 10 months into pandemic, 17 December 2020: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4911
In their Imperial College Report 9, Neil Ferguson et al said: “The global impact of COVID-19 has been profound, and the public health threat it represents is the most serious seen in a respiratory virus since the 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic.”
On what basis did Ferguson et al compare COVID-19 with the 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic?
I raised this matter with Neil Ferguson in August 2021, see my email:
Neil Ferguson and Andrew Pollard sharing a taxi...?: https://vaccinationispolitical.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/neil-ferguson-and-andrew-pollard-sharing-a-taxi...-1.pdf
See also my email to Neil Ferguson dated 23 March 2021, in which I said:
“According to an article in the Independent on 13 March 2020, there were plans to develop natural herd immunity, see: Coronavirus: 60% of UK population need to become infected so country can build 'herd immunity', government's chief scientist says.
But this all seemed to change after your report was published, dated 16 March 2020, resulting in a massive impact around the world with the implementation of lockdowns and other restrictions hindering free movement and association, with devastating consequences for society and the economy.”
See my email - Neil Ferguson: "...not at all certain that suppression will succeed long term..." https://vaccinationispolitical.files.wordpress.com/2021/03/neil-ferguson-not-at-all-certain-that-suppression-will-succeed-long-term.pdf
Further to my previous responses, also see below my email forwarded to Boris Johnson in November 2020: https://vaccinationispolitical.files.wordpress.com/2020/11/coronavirus-vax-heading-towards-disaster-with-this-warp-speed-response.pdf
For the attention of:
The Rt Hon Boris Johnson, MP,
The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
Dear Prime Minister
Why has there been such a disproportionate and ill-targeted response to the coronavirus, grossly disrupting global economies and societies?
Much remains unknown about the SARS-CoV-2 virus, including the immune response. Why is there a mad rush for coronavirus vaccine products? This is a massive global experiment underway.
I fear we are heading towards disaster with this 'warp speed' vaccination plan.
What about the ethical considerations of implementing vaccine products which could seriously impact on people's natural defences against this virus and others?
Is it ethical to deny people their opportunity for a natural response to this virus, and to plan to make them dependent on what might be very questionable 'vaccine-induced immunity' of unknown duration and adverse effects? Is the aim to make people dependent on the vaccine industry?
This could be a 'crime against humanity' in the making.
Consider this admission by Heidi Larson, Director of The Vaccine Confidence Project, during the WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit late last year, i.e.
"We've shifted the human population...to dependency on vaccine-induced immunity...We're in a very fragile state now. We have developed a world that is dependent on vaccinations".
This is a very alarming statement by Professor Larson, particularly with the prospect of other epidemics emerging in the future. We have to learn to deal with epidemics and illnesses as they emerge, it's not feasible to lockdown the world and plan to vaccinate the global population against every threat. Where has this bizarre and increasingly dystopian response come from?
Prime Minister, there has been a 'vaccine' mindset on this from the beginning, at the cost of considering effective treatments for the vulnerable and sick, and simple preventatives such as vitamin D.
Why has the response to this virus been so ill-targeted and disproportionate?
We need an investigation into conflicts of interest in this area of public health policy, including the influence of the World Health Organisation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Gavi Vaccine Alliance, and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).
The international community must be assured that independent and objective thinkers are carefully considering the way ahead.
Please see my referenced rapid responses on The BMJ:
- Is it ethical to impede access to natural immunity? The case of SARS-CoV2. 25 March 2020. - Looking at Sweden, COVID-19 and vitamin D... 13 July 2020.
- Is it ethical to vaccinate children to protect the elderly? 5 August 2020.
- Why do we need a vaccine for Covid-19? 1 September 2020.
- SARS-CoV-2 virus - disproportionate and ill-targeted response. 5 October 2020. - Covid-19 - "much to gain, by taking vitamin D supplements..." 5 October 2020.
Sincerely
Elizabeth Hart
Independent person investigating the over-use of vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy
As a whimsical suggestion: perhaps that was the time when it became known to the UK government that the US had been funding coronavirus gain of function research in a lab in Wuhan. Our leaders put 2 and 2 together and got 5 (which is better than usual).
Has anyone returned to Neil Ferguson or any member of SAGE to ask how came to make that decision one day and then contradict it the next? I think it is such an important question that bears demanding a thorough response.
Lives lost, lives ruined, governments have turned into police states, economies trashed and people have been forcibly injected with an experimental drug with, as it turns out, kills. Where is their God forsaken greater good?
I asked this question myself at the time, no answers were given then, no answers are given now. There is nothing about this whole debacle that doesn't smell like a rat. We are living in the biggest worldwide scam in history, which I hope will end with all those responsible going to jail for the rest of their greedy, amoral lives.
The pre-planning has by now been shown so purswaisingly that noone at their fully five could avoid it.
The same goes with the mantras save and efficient and saving lives. As to the illegal banning of effective treatments already existing. From there to mass vaccination, all sorts of changes in certifications and the non civilized lock downs t he road was short. Pretty well pre planned with a signature of advanced military thinking, directed against a frightened, isolated and by all orders helpless population. Pretty ugly, what comes next?
Someone here in the Netherlands said that government nudging propaganda material was recorded as early as januari 2020. Its hearsay, apparently reported by the actors. But…. So many things that sounded like a conspiracy theory came true. 3 years ago i laughed when someone used the phrase MSM. Naive with hindsight.
Thank you Martin. I wonder what a FOIR for the correspondence and legal advice taken in coming to the decision to downgrade the infection to an HCID would elicit? I remember discussing with Clare Craig, and she thought it might have been connected to the implicit requirement of an autopsy for any HCID victims, but all remains speculation for now.
And if COVID-19 is not such a "high consequence disease", WHY ADMINISTER AN EXPERIMENTAL VACCINE? I live in a "blue" area of the US and there were really no "lockdowns" worth mentioning- things were quite active from May 2020 onwards. And COVID deaths were also LOW after May 2020 in this highly populated area- the only exception was for a few weeks during the "holiday gathering season" in December 2020/January 2021.
But then about 75% took the experimental vaccine, likely due to the sales pitch, peer pressure, and of course the mandates. And then what happened? The following "holiday gathering season" of 2021-2022 (a.k.a. the "Omicron winter") we had even MORE deaths per day from COVID (AFTER 75% vaccination) than in the previous "holiday gathering season" with 0% vaccination- and that's not even getting into all-cause mortality.
We knew this a long time ago but thankyou for the reminder.
I’ve been out on the golf course all afternoon since my earlier comment. I referenced Reiner Fuellmich who I believe correctly identified the agenda behind the Coronavirus “plandemic” and its (my words) “nefarious ulterior motive of mass vaccination” via his Grand Jury Crimes Against Humanity model proceedings which completed about a year ago.
All his evidence is recorded online but the only (quite long) summary of the proceedings that I am aware of is mine, recorded online via the good offices of Joel Smalley. It’s a slightly confusing story as there was a hiatus of several months in the middle, so my summary is in two parts, and sadly Reiner has since split from the Corona Investigative Committee. For details see https://metatron.substack.com/p/reiner-fuellmichs-grand-jury-court. For an overview, scroll down to Reiner’s closing arguments.
We Always Knew
That Their FEELINGS
Would Be What Killed Them.
It Went Like This:
FEEL Scared And Unprotected
FEEL Safe And Effective
FEEL Dead. Service Disconnected.
That’s … The That … On That.
.