A Callous disregard for humanity but no one is responsible? Part 2
In Parts 2 and 3 I take a deeper look in order to assess the accuracy of the predictions about the damage that would be caused by their actions.
I will though begin by re-addressing the loss of democratic accountability and freedoms which I highlighted in Part1 , this excerpt below is from my exchange with our Chief Medical Officer CMO).
I believe that if you are going to introduce the most draconian laws in our history on health grounds then you must demonstrate unequivocally that the threat is deadly, the solutions work and that the benefits outweigh the harms.
In December 2022 I wrote to the CMO asking him why we were proposing to vaccinate children. His response:
“In early December 2022 the MHRA approved a new age appropriate formulation of the Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (Comirnaty) for use in infants and young children aged from 6 months to 4 years after the vaccine met the required safety, quality and effectiveness standards.
This approval was given following a thorough review of safety data specific to the vaccine”
As the response did not address my questions I asked him to address them.
-why children with a 99.9987 percent survival chance need a vaccine.
-how many babies/children had died from Covid.
-did he accept the multiple analyses, confirmed by the European CeEuropean CDCin August 2020,indicating that children have little capacity to transmit the virus and which showed that reopening schools in 2020 had not been associated with significant increases in community transmission.
And if so, to confirm that he will not recommend that course of action again. Or alternatively, to send me evidence that children and schools are in fact a centre for transmission.
– to confirm that the vaccine was never actually tested for its capacity to prevent transmission, as stated by Pfizer executive Ms. Small at the European Parliament, and therefore confirm his advice to vaccinate children and babies is solely to reduce the risk to the children themselves.
And that furthermore his position would presuppose that children,0-19, are actually at risk, whereas the evidence is that they are not at risk, having 0.0003 percent risk of death.
-to explain to how the vaccine could have undergone safety trials on children and babies sufficient to give anyone confidence in its long term safety.
– if citizen’s rights with respect to informed consent as set out on the NHS website are clearly available at vaccination centres and surgeries
-if the practice of health care meets the ethical standards of public health principles , namely :
Public health is about comparative risk evaluations and requires public trust, recommendations should.. never employ fear or shame to sway or manipulate the public; medical interventions should not be forced or coerced upon a population, but rather should be voluntary and based on informed consent.
it is unacceptable for public health professionals to censor, silence or intimidate members of the public or other public health practitioners.
Throughout I was asking similar questions of our Public Health Authority and authorities with a similar lack of engagement. This is the issue which exposed the lack of accountability and level of censorship on a personal level.
Asking why we were vaccinating children led to a ban from Linkedin. Further examples of our loss of freedom of speech followed and when I told the BBC that masks harm children I was shut down and when I was invited by Professor Richard Ennos to speak on the theme “What are we doing to our children?” Edinburgh Council blocked four venues and I delivered in a park HERE
What was known about the risk to children?
Data from official sources shows that no healthy child had died of Covid In Scotland , N.Ireland , Canada , USA and Iceland nor Ireland , actually anywhere. Professor Ioannidis, in fact, updated his original survival chance from 99.97 to 99.9997 percent Similarly In the US, analysis of the FDA’s data shows the risk of any child dying of COVID-19 is 0.000015.
They also knew children did not transmit, so were not a danger to anyone. “Children DO NOT transmit the virus” said Professor Mark Woolhouse, a member of Sage, in August 2020. “
There are thousands and thousands of transmission events that have been inferred [from contact tracing] – out of all those thousands, still we can’t find a single one involving a child transmitting to a teacher in a classroom .”
‘re-opening schools had not been associated with significant increases in community transmission’. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control ( ECDC) report August 2020
In addition to knowing children were not at risk and not a risk to others, the authorities knew that masks and school closures/lockdowns did not work. I have written extensively about mask harms HERE and HERE and in Principia Scientific International HERE but nonetheless a short review focussing on what official sources were saying about masks at the time is appropriate before turning to the main item, lockdowns/school closures.
The farce of facemasks Information from Sir Patrick Vallance’s notebooks , published by the UK Covid-19 Inquiry here reveals that as early as August 2020 , the Chief Medical Officers of the four
nations agreed on a plan for reopening schools, highlighting the very low impact of Covid-19 on children. Masks were dismissed as likely to be ineffective. Sir Chris Whitty then commented in his WhatsApp messages that “there were “no very strong reasons” for introducing the change but it was “not worth an argument” with Ms Sturgeon.”
after the Scottish government resolved to introduce masks. None of them seem to have seriously put children’s welfare at the heart of their decision making. Whilst a letter in August 2022
signed by the Co Chairs of the APPG (All Party Group at Westminster on Pandemic Response and Recovery) includes the statement:
“It was deeply concerning to see schools “strongly encouraging” children to wear face coverings before the summer break. Despite early hopes, we now know from the real world data that mask mandates had no significant effect on interrupting the spread of coronavirus.
Meanwhile, the damaging unintended harms of covering our faces are profound and still being felt. The use of masks is not, and has never been, a benign or recommended public health intervention
In August 2020 Carl Heneghan , Professor of Evidence-based medicine at Oxford and a government advisor.) told the N.I Executive
“ There is no evidence that masks are protecting children and teachers in schools. Mandatory face coverings is the wrong policy”
And The UK Government’s own Evidence Summary on the use of face coverings in education settings found they had NO statistically significant effect on transmission – they serve NO purpose in controlling the spread of Covid.
Similar authority based evidence was available across Europe and in the US. A European community trial in November 2020 found no significant effect for facemask wearers .
And in the US As Jeffrey Anderson, former Director of the US Bureau of Justice Statistics, points out “In light of all this (evidence), it seems indefensible to mandate—or even to advise—the wearing of masks, especially among the young”. He adds, “keeping in mind they are not inline with the obligation in particular to protect born or unborn children from potentialharmful influences.”
Once again it was impossible to get the authorities to justify insisting that children wear masks, the risk benefit analysis which would have revealed the need for a realistic view of risk to children and their parents and for which I called on October 2nd 2020, has still not been carried out.
The Disgrace of Lockdowns/School closures, In May 2020 Professor Michael Levitt , a Nobel Laureate Stanford University stated:
‘I think lockdown saved no lives. I think it may have cost lives. It will have saved a few road accident lives, but social damage – domestic abuse, divorces, alcoholism – has been extreme. Lockdown was a huge mistake”
Professor Mark Woolhouse , an infectious diseases expert and a member of SpiM modelling group which provided pandemic advice to the Government, stated : in March 2022
“Lockdowns – an idea concocted by China and WHO made a bad situation worse… A global public health failure on a massive scale, it was untried and not thought through.
Harmful restrictions were imposed without evidence that such measures would work. Even when it became clear some of the restrictions were not needed the U.K. continued to impose them at great cost to lives, livelihoods and society.
We did serious harm to children and young adults who were robbed of their education, jobs and a normal existence.”
Donald Henderson, called the 20th century’s most acclaimed disease eradicator had led the successful global smallpox-eradication programme, in 2006, he wrote
‘There are no historical observations or scientific studies that support the confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods in order to slow the spread of influenza…
It is difficult to identify circumstances in the past half-century when large-scale quarantine has been effectively used in the control of any disease.
The negative consequences… are so extreme … that this mitigation measure should be eliminated from serious consideration.’
This explains why lockdown doesn’t feature in the Department of Health’s 2011 plan, the WHO’s 2019 ‘non-pharmaceutical interventions’ plan or in Chris Whitty’s 2018 Gresham College lecture on managing pandemics. Lockdown was rejected around the world until it was adopted by China in 2020.
Current research carried out by Professor Norman Fenton, Dr Gerry Quinn et al at the University of Ulster revealed that seasonality was overwhelming more important than any of the government measures-the vaccination programmes or the many public health interventions including lockdowns, masks, travel restrictions and vaccines
In 2021, Swiss Policy Research Group had reached a similar conclusion:
“analysis carried out by the Swiss Policy Research comparing the death tolls in over 50 countries, including the U.K., that had locked down, countries that had shut down playgrounds, forced their children to wear facemasks and closed schools all have been hit worse than Sweden, which largely didn’t impose restrictions on children .
The researchers went on to say that this means that “almost every single government intervention, in particular, lockdowns, school closures, mask mandates, mass testing and ‘contact tracing’”, as well as ‘vaccine passports’, have been entirely ineffective and unjustified while having caused almost unprecedented social and economic harm”.
And as the evidence of prior knowledge mounts the confirmation of what was said at the time also mounts. Professor Ian Brighthope in his opening statement to the Covid Royal Commission wrt Pandemic Management stated:
“The lockdowns, masking, social distancing, hygiene, testing, tracking and tracing were introduced based on flawed science.
This approach is essentially ineffective, dangerous to the health of the population, extremely costly and is a reflection of the failure to fully research, train in, understand, plan and manage infectious diseases and in summary, Covid-19 posed very little risk to people of good health.
“It was clear, from early 2020, that the virus would eventually spread across the globe, and that it would be futile to try to suppress it with lockdowns.
It was also clear that lockdowns would inflict enormous collateral damage, not only on education but also on public health, including treatment for cancer, cardiovascular disease, and mental health.
We will be dealing with the harm done for decades. Our children, the elderly, the middle class, the working class, and the poor around the world—all will suffer.”
Children faced minuscule risk from Covid, and interrupting their education would disadvantage them for life (and lead to) “a startling learning loss in the US” an effect not seen in Sweden, which did not enforce lockdowns nor close schools and which had the lowest excess mortality among major European countries during the pandemic.
Almost everyone now realizes that school closures and other lockdowns, were a colossal mistake ”
Professor Angus Dalgleish, an expert in Immunology and professor of oncology, comments on the role of prominent advisers:
“All three have been honoured and rewarded for their great contributions to mismanaging (if not manipulating) the pandemic, wrecking the British economy and public health possibly for generations and leaving the country burdened with some three trillion pounds of debt and rising.
This is despite the fact that we have detailed knowledge of the dreadful decision-making and dire influence on policy that they all had on lockdowns.
We now know that Fauci, with others in CEPI orchestrated the lockdowns, ridiculous distancing advice and mask mandates (especially cruelly those involving schoolchildren)…we now know – in fact it was known even before the vaccine rollout – that these vaccines never prevented infection nor transmission.
It was also known from before the roll out that the evidence for asymptomatic transmission – a rationale for the vaccine – was woeful.“
It was as if the scientific evidence and views of experienced, esteemed and highly qualified academics counted for nothing. And furthermore:
“ Modelers Were ‘Astronomically Wrong’ in COVID-19 Predictions—and the world is paying the price” according to Professor John Ioannidis. AND THE PRICE? THEY IGNORED THE PRICE
It was obvious that the policies would cause great harm, far outweighing any possible benefit and the authorities were repeatedly told throughout, it is important to note that the reality presented then regarding the harms was correct.
In a wide ranging report the Association of Directors of Children’s Services refer to the “the devastating impact Covid (and austerity) had on children in England”, the report highlights-underdevelopment, educational regression, poverty and a wide range of health issues-the number of young people experiencing destitution or extreme poverty – meaning their families cannot afford to clothe them, clean them or keep them warm – has tripled over the past three years.”
So-called “Covid babies” reaching school age still wearing nappies, and unable to use a knife and fork. Whilst older children are also dealing with the legacy of pandemic lockdowns and cuts, with falling school attendance, deteriorating classroom behaviour and rising exclusions linked to the post-Covid breakdown in the social contract between schools and parents.
And the evidence was there from the start, a s early as November 2020 , Ofsted, the body which inspects and reports on schools in England, reported that the majority of our children were going backwards educationally, they found regression in communication skills, physical development and independence.
Record numbers of young people are seeking help for mental health conditions , with 1.4 million in England in 2022 referred to child and adolescent mental health services for treatment of anxiety, depression, eating disorders and other psychological problems.
Last month, the World Bank warned that lockdown disruption to education would scar multiple generations of children who have suffered serious developmental and learning delays.
In Part 3 I cover the harms in more detail.
Header image: The Guardian
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About Covid 19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
VOWG
| #
A world full of terminally stupid people.
Reply
The author
| #
Do you think they were “stupid”?
Reply