June-July 2023
State-sponsored Self-harm
CO Editor's Introduction
The following speech, one of the bravest and most important delivered in Westminster in modern times, was made to an empty House of Commons. The 'void', captured in footage and screenshots that filled the internet, spoke volumes about the perilous state of British democracy, turning the Mother of Parliaments into a global laughing stock.
Left to address an all but empty Chamber, Mr Bridgen laid out the government's own statistics on the matter as the Uniparty — the bi-partisan collective who turned the same revered Chamber into a Covidic Star Chamber — ran for their lives as the sound of his incriminating figures echoed around their empty benches.
Though surely one of the most despicable sights ever witnessed in the long history of Westminster, the democratic value of that great institution nonetheless provided some solace; insofar as political rats can run but they cannot (at least for now) hide from Hansard. Therein, their wicked handiwork is now preserved for posterity thanks to Mr Bridgen's refusal to be intimidated: either by his initial suspension and now expulsion from the Conservative-subset of the Uniparty, or by the vile smear campaign simultaneously launched against him.
The smears began last December after his first Commons speech on behalf of both the 60,000+ citizens who should still be with us but who, tragically, constitute post-injection excess deaths thus far (all but a very small percentage recorded as non-Covid deaths), and the far greater number of severely or permanently disabled. For this dutiful and compassionate act his mental health was questioned and it was falsely put about that he was "suicidal."
Thanks be to God he was not deterred. But such are the vicious lengths to which the compromised Western political class will go to avoid a simple, open, honest debate on the greatest crisis since the war. To that deceitful end, YouTube duly censored the video of Mr Bridgen's speech and the corporate press has buried it. Thus, Big Tech and Big Media continue to conspire with Big Brother to maintain the suffocating global Matrix of deception at the service of total control of life and death.
Like Mr Bridgen, retired nursing teacher Dr John Campbell originally promoted the experimental injections and received his AstraZeneca jab (— to his great regret Mr Bridgen himself was double-jabbed with AZ). However, through the countless scientific studies he scrutinised and explained to his vast internet audience throughout the 'pandemic', and which he still does despite YouTube warnings and occasional bans, he gradually saw through the Covid propaganda and changed his view to accord with the evidence. Dr Campbell was therefore in an excellent position to rate Mr Bridgen's speech, which he adjudged as “incredibly well thought out" and "well researched." As a proud Englishman, however, he observed the Commons debacle with disgust, stating:
"As soon as he started to speak, everyone from the Houses of Parliament left. It was like a walkout protest. It was just a national disgrace. There were two Conservative MPs left apart from Mr Bridgen, on the front bench, who had to be there. There was no-one from Labour. No-one from the Liberal Democrats. Zero MPs from the Scottish Nationalists. Just a complete disgrace. I can only assume they were under orders not to attend because it really was quite incredible. You can just see the empty benches for yourself.
"They didn’t bother sending in a regular government minister but only a 'cardboard cutout' who could read. Suffice it say that he didn’t answer any of Mr Bridgen’s specific questions. Such as whether the MHRA's 86% funding by Pharma has any bearing on the matter? Or that JCVI [Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation] have £1 billion invested in Pharma. Any specific mathematical evidences produced by Mr Bridgen were also ignored.
"It’s great that we’ve still got this parliamentary democracy in the UK because clearly Mr Bridgen can say things that I’m not at liberty to say [i.e., without being deplatformed by YouTube]. I think every word of that was worth listening to, and demands a response.
"And of course things applicable in the UK will be applicable in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and wherever there’s been a similar public health ‘initiative’."
The following is the Hansard transcription, with our added bracketed clarifications, bold emphasis, and italics to indicate the speaker's emphases throughout.
____________________________________
17 March 2023
Andrew Bridgen
(North West Leicestershire) (Ind)
On 13 December last year, I was kindly granted an Adjournment debate on the potential harms that emergency use experimental mRNA covid-19 vaccines cause. It is fair to say that, that night, my life changed. During that speech, in the evidenced data that I presented to the House, which no one has effectively rebutted, I highlighted to the Minister the scale of harms that the experimental vaccines have caused and continue to cause. In giving that speech to an almost empty Chamber, on this most important of issues—quite literally life and death—two things happened to me immediately. First, I was cancelled by the mainstream media. Despite sending a data sheet in the wake of the debate, scientifically evidencing every point that I made, not one media organisation wanted to talk about the issue of serious harms or deaths occurring as a result of the mRNA vaccines.
I fully expect that the media will show the same level of disinterest in today’s debate. It is what we have come to expect from a media more interested in navel gazing at the pontifications of Britain’s foremost football pundit [Gary Lineker] instead of the horror and tragedy of excess deaths taking place before their very eyes. Some three months on from that speech, and a scattering of reports are now appearing in the mainstream media. Sadly, the number of people affected in the UK, and across the world, cannot be ignored or hidden indefinitely.
Interjection by Sir Christopher Chope (Mr Bridgen's sole Conservative supporter in the Chamber).
Does my honourable Friend accept that there is a bit of light on the horizon in that, this week alone, the Daily Express has had four full pages on the subject?
My honourable Friend is a stalwart supporter of those who have been vaccine-harmed, and I do hope that we can see some light at the end of the tunnel. Hopefully, this speech today will bring more light into the darkness.
In truth, I care little about being cancelled by the media, because, in the wake of that speech, something far more important has happened. I was contacted by thousands of people offering their support, and received many hundreds and hundreds of emails from all around the globe recounting to me their own stories of the harms caused in the wake of their, or their loved ones’, covid vaccination.
I have been contacted by parents in my own and surrounding constituencies, thanking me for questioning why we’re giving these experimental vaccinations to healthy children and young people who patently do not need them and gain no protection from them. I was contacted by far too many relatives who had lost loved ones suddenly after having the Moderna, Pfizer or AstraZeneca experimental gene therapy treatments shot into their arms. Many of them asked in their emails why this vitally important issue was not being taken more seriously by many of my honourable and right honourable colleagues. That, Mr Deputy Speaker, is a question for my colleagues to answer.
A lot more questioned why, as evidence continues to emerge, almost on a daily basis, the Fourth Estate was so remiss in its coverage. That, Mr Deputy Speaker, is a question for the lobby to answer. But every one of those who contacted me, asked me to keep up the fight, to continue to raise awareness of vaccine harms and vaccine deaths. Mr Deputy Speaker, that is the question I am here to answer today.
Despite the media silence, there is huge, enormous and growing interest in this topic. So today, I once again ask the Minister why more is not being done, both in the United Kingdom and globally, to investigate and publicise the clear and well-documented adverse effects of Covid-19 vaccines—vaccines, Mr Deputy Speaker, that have made big pharma, billions. But also vaccines that have resulted in completely unprecedented levels of yellow card reports. Mr Deputy Speaker, the Government’s own data in this respect is damning. It is interesting that only this week, the MHRA, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency have announced that it will no longer be publicly reporting the yellow card updates on the reported harms of these experimental treatments. Can the Minister explain the reasoning behind this decision, especially given that the number of yellow card reports of adverse events are far higher for the experimental Covid-19 vaccine than the total yellow card reports of all conventional vaccines administered for the last 50 years?
Mr Deputy Speaker, if you will grant me a little leeway, I will start by looking at data from the US state of Florida, and the reported level of vaccine harms there. Prior to the Covid pandemic, there were never more than 2,500 incidents per year of harms reported to the state’s surgeon general as a direct result of vaccination. In 2021, that number shot up to over 41,000 cases—a surge of more than 1,600%. Of course, some will understandably point out that the increase in cases was inevitable, as more vaccines were being administered. The answer to that, Mr Deputy Speaker, is that in the state of Florida, there was a 400% increase in vaccine administration in 2021, not 1,600%. In the state of Florida and in the rest of the world, 1,600 doesn’t go into 400; it never has, and it never will.
The real-world data from Florida shows that the mRNA vaccines are resulting in vaccine harms disproportionate to the number of vaccines being administered when compared to all previous vaccinations. And this backs up the clear warning signal from our own yellow card system in the UK. Data held by the US Government’s National Library of Medicine was used for research by Dr Joseph Fraiman which details the frequency of serious adverse events following vaccination with both Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines. For clarity, Mr Deputy Speaker, a serious adverse event is defined as anything that results in: death; is life-threatening at the time of the event; results in in-patient hospitalisation or prolongation of existing hospitalisation; persistent or significant disability or incapacity; a congenital anomaly or birth defect; or, something considered as medically important based on medical judgment.
Using that definition, the study confirms that there are 10.1 serious adverse events for every 10,000 Pfizer vaccinations administered. Mr Deputy Speaker, that means that one in every 990 people vaccinated with the Pfizer booster will have a serious adverse event. The risk with the Moderna vaccine is even greater: there are 15.1 serious adverse events for every 10,000 Moderna jabs. That means one in 662 people vaccinated with the Moderna booster will have a serious adverse event. Combining the data for Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines or boosters, we can see that there are an average of 1,250 serious adverse events for every 1 million vaccine boosters administered—in other words, an average one in 800 chance of a serious adverse event every time someone is boosted.
So let’s move on now to the UK Government data. On the 25th of January this year, the Department of Health and Social Care published data from a presentation given by the UK Health Security Agency to the JCVI: the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation. The data published split the population into groups by age, and further divided those age groups into those considered healthy and [those considered] at risk. The numbers needed to vaccinate, or the NNV, for each of these subgroups were calculated to, firstly, prevent a single hospitalisation, and secondly, a single serious hospitalisation requiring oxygen or intubation—effectively, intensive care.
The figures are stark, Mr Deputy Speaker. What I’m quoting from is the government’s own published data. To prevent just one healthy adult aged between 50 and 59 from being hospitalised due to Covid, the Government’s own data states that 43,600 people had to be given an autumn booster jab. With a serious adverse event rate of one in 800, that means that in the healthy 50 to 59-year-old group, as a result of using the mRNA boosters, 55 people would die or be put into hospital with side effects to prevent one single Covid case presenting in hospital. The same data shows that, for the healthy younger people, the number needed to be boosted, to prevent a single hospital admission with Covid-19, is far higher. 92,500 booster jabs were required to be administered to prevent one hospitalisation due to Covid in the healthy 40 to 49 age group, which would simultaneously have put 116 people at probability of death or serious adverse reaction into hospital from the jab. The healthy 30 to 39 age group required 210,400 booster jabs to prevent a single Covid hospitalisation, so 263 of this group will have been into hospital or, sadly, died as a result of the booster side effects just to keep one Covid case out of hospital.
But the data gets worse because hospitalisation does not necessarily mean a serious medical intervention such as intubation or oxygen. To prevent severe hospitalisation from Covid-19, the numbers needed to be boosted become astronomical. I would suggest this is the real benchmark for comparison with the risks of death or serious adverse events from the boosters themselves.
The Government’s own data shows that, in healthy adults aged 50 to 59, it was necessary to give 256,400 booster jabs to prevent just one severe hospitalisation, putting 321 people into hospital with a serious side-effect from the booster, which includes, obviously, risk of death. For [healthy] 40 to 49-year-olds, that number increases to 932,500 who need to be boosted to keep one Covid patient out of an ITU [intensive therapy unit], putting potentially 1,165 people into hospital with serious harms, death or disability. And for the healthy 30 to 39-year-olds, no one knows the answer to the number needed to be boosted to prevent a serious hospitalisation because the Government’s own data says that there has never been such a case of this age group being put into intensive care due to the current variant of Covid-19. But many, indeed on average one in 800 of them, of this group that’s been boosted, will have died, or been disabled or seriously harmed by the booster itself.
Let me focus, now, on the most vulnerable group for which the Government data is available, the over-70s with comorbidities—the most vulnerable group in our society. According to the Government’s own data, it would be necessary to administer 800 vaccine boosters to prevent just one hospitalisation for a patient over the age of 70 in this highest risk group. Mr Deputy Speaker, that means that all the most vulnerable group in our society are doing by being boosted is swapping one risk from Covid of hospitalisation for exactly the same risk from the booster itself. But of course, in the process Big Pharma is making huge profits.
Mr Deputy Speaker, we have looked at the health implications of the vaccine programme. Now I want to look at some of the cost implications of the booster programme in the UK. Total funding of the Covid-19 vaccination programme in the UK up to the end of March this year is budgeted at £8.3 billion. In February 2022, the GPonline website, championing general practice professionals, published that GPs and community pharmacies were being paid £24 per dose for administering vaccines. That figure increased to £34 per dose at dedicated vaccination centres. These costs of course do not include the cost of the experimental vaccines themselves. For ease of calculation, I will count those at £20 per dose across the board. I will be generous and use the lower of the two figures for administering the vaccine, giving a total cost of £44 per dose, but even then, we see, from the Government’s own data, using boosters it cost over £1.9 million to prevent just one hospitalisation among healthy 50 to 59-year-olds and over £11 million to prevent one serious hospitalisation due to Covid-19 in this age group. The cost to the taxpayer of preventing a hospitalisation of one healthy 40 to 49-year-old is over £4 million, using boosters; and for healthy 30 to 39-year-olds the cost of preventing just one hospitalisation is over £9 million, Mr Deputy Speaker. Of course, to prevent serious hospitalisation, in all these groups, the cost is far, far higher.
It is of course worth noting that, in setting up the vaccine programme, the Government indemnified vaccine manufacturers, which gave them total cover against all future claims of the adverse effects of their products. Given what I have already explained about the incidence of serious side effects, that cost may well be extremely significant to the taxpayer, on top of the obvious human tragedy, and loss, that is self-evidently happening.
The data is clear: for all healthy people and all those considered at risk, under 70, the probability of being seriously harmed by Covid is seriously outweighed by the risks associated with the experimental vaccines and boosters. Even for the most vulnerable group—the over-70s, with health problems—the risks are absolutely identical. The Government data comments not only on the efficacy and effectiveness of the autumn booster campaign, which I’ve quoted from—we’ve already had that—but looks forward to this year’s booster campaign. Not unsurprisingly, it predicts the same level of efficacy from the same boosters put into the same arms. Surely, in light of the data, we’re not going to continue with this absolute madness. Mr Deputy Speaker, if we were to perpetuate this, what we would actually be doing is engaging in very expensive state-sponsored self-harm—on a national level.
Mr Deputy Speaker, in the winter of 2020, the experimental mRNA vaccines were announced to the British public as being “safe and effective”. That narrative was repeated by the vaccines Minister in her response to my speech in this place on 13 December. It is interesting that, today, the NHS website describes the experimental vaccines as: “safe and important”, and it describes serious side effects as being “very rare”. But the truth, as we know, is somewhat different. One in 800 is not rare, especially when the public is expected to take multiple doses, exposing themselves again and again to the same risk.
Mr Deputy Speaker, the Government need to be honest about this, just like they need to be honest about the fact that the MHRA is funded 86% by Big Pharma. The experimental mRNA vaccines, from the manufacturers’ own trial data, are not safe, with an average of one in 800 people taking them facing death or serious injury as a result. Despite the initial and repeated assurances, the experimental mRNA vaccines, from the Government’s own data, are not effective in preventing infection, transmission or hospitalisation from Covid-19. The experimental mRNA vaccines are not necessary given the risk-benefit of the treatment, and the experimental mRNA vaccines are costing the country a fortune, and creating huge pressure on the NHS from the side effects.
I would therefore ask the Minister, given that the data released on the 25th of January by the UK Health Security Agency was actually presented to the JCVI on the 25th of October 2022: why was the booster roll-out not halted last October given the clear lack of efficacy and the evidence of risks being greater than the benefits to all age groups, except possibly the over-70s with underlying health conditions, where the risk was absolutely identical? Was the data presented to the JCVI passed to the MHRA? If so, when? And if not, why not?
Why was the MHRA still asking the Government to authorise the experimental vaccines to be administered to children down to six months of age in December 2022, six weeks after the booster efficacy data was received by the JCVI? If the data was not passed to the MHRA, the Medicines and Healthcare products Agency, surely the JCVI should have spoken out against the vaccination of small children last December. I’m sure, Mr Deputy Speaker, that despite the members of the JCVI having declared an interest of over a billion pounds, between them, of investments in Big Pharma, this would never have influenced their judgment. Can the Minister also confirm the fact that two-thirds of NHS staff refused last year’s autumn booster?
The simple facts are that, in light of the Government’s own data, Covid vaccinations and boosters are not effective. And from the evidence of the yellow card system, they are not safe. And to the UK taxpayer, they are not value for money. Indeed, given the side effects, Mr Deputy Speaker, if they were free, we couldn’t afford them. The only ones who really benefit from the booster roll-out are Big Pharma, with their licence to print money and indemnification against the harms that their products cause. Once again, Mr Deputy Speaker, Big Pharma have put profits before people, and on this occasion Governments across the globe have been their willing marketing agents.
The whole Covid-19 narrative is slowly unravelling. As I believe I have demonstrated today, Mr Deputy Speaker, no one should have been boosted after the efficacy data was received on the 25th of October last year, and no one should be boosted in future, based on that data. Given the evidence of harms [caused] by the boosters, I now believe that we have the full explanation for both the continuing excess deaths that we have seen since the pandemic— 63,000 excess deaths in England and Wales in the last 12 months—and also the reason for the huge and unrelenting pressure of demand on the NHS. Mr Deputy Speaker, it’s the vaccines, and the boosters, and their side effects.
Sadly, I am confident that I will be proved correct. I sincerely wish that it was not so. But the longer it takes our Government to accept the truth, the more people will be harmed and die. The first step to putting right the problem is always to admit that there is a problem. The Government narrative of “safe and effective” is in tatters, as evidenced by their own data. Three months on from my original speech in this House, we have surely now sacrificed enough of our citizens on the altar of ignorance and unfettered corporate greed to satisfy anyone. I therefore call on the Government to immediately stop the mRNA vaccine booster programme and initiate a full public inquiry into not only the vaccine harms but how every agency and institution, set up to protect the public interest, has failed so abysmally in their duties.
I look forward to the Minister’s response. I am aware that it’s neither his area of responsibility nor expertise. And I will accept that any questions he can’t answer at the Dispatch Box today, he will send to me in writing.
____________________________________
Editor’s concluding remarks
It goes without saying that Mr Bridgen received no response from the Minister.
Just as predictably, the video of the speech duly posted on the Westminster YouTube channel was taken down by YouTube. Thus did a Big Tech arm of the U.S. Military Industrial Complex censor the parliamentary address of an elected representative of an allied sovereign nation (on a matter of life and death no less) without the least fear of media reaction or government protest.
Subsequently, YouTube permanently removed a follow-up interview Dr Campbell conducted with Mr Bridgen. For good measure they banned Dr Campbell’s entire channel for a week.
As the unscientific mania that demonised the unvaxed slowly peters out (for now), our early insistence that we actually faced a "Pandemic of the Vaccinated" continues to be vindicated.
All-cause excess deaths(excluding Covid as a cause of death) remain at stratospheric levels 18 months after the vax rollout. Official UK figures six weeks after Mr Bridgen's speech reflect the ongoing global trend.
The week ending 21 April was 22.1% above the five year average, adding 2,540 British souls to the tens of thousands already cut down prematurely. A week later, another 1,569 had joined them. (Requiescant in pace.)
Meanwhile, using UK mortality data, a US insurance analyst has told Senators that a similar outcome for jabbed citizens in America would see 600,000 excess deaths every year.