February 2024
« Jan    

Healthcare or authoritarian control?

Monday/Tuesday blog

I thought I was joking

In my weekend blog, I proposed that the reason the Met Office started naming storms in 2014 was largely due to the establishment’s propaganda campaign to terrify us about the worsening supposed ‘climate catastrophe’ to ensure our cowering obedience to whatever restrictions the elites decide to impose on our lives. I then suggested slightly facetiously “Perhaps the worthless net-zero-obsessed Met Office will soon start naming heat-waves so they and the idiots in the mainstream media can start claiming something like we’ve had more ‘fatal’ heat-waves in the last few years than in the last 100 years?

Well, I didn’t have to wait long to find out that my sarcastic comment was likely to become reality. The day after I wrote my blog, in the Sunday Times on page 15 was an article titled “Why we need to name hot spells”. In the article we were told that the Met Office was considering naming heatwaves because heatwaves “kill many more people each year than storms”.

This statement is certainly true as fewer than 20 people a year are killed by storms in the UK. In 2021 Storm Eunice, for example, killed a ‘massive’ three people. We know that there is a very slight increase in deaths during heatwaves:

(left-click on chart, then left-click again to see more clearly)

The Sunday Times article tells us: “roughly 1,000 to 3,000 people die every year as a result of heat”. But looking at the Office for National Statistics chart above (where heatwaves are marked by the shaded columns), one might conclude that the ‘journalist’ is exaggerating more than slightly and that the real ‘death-by-heat’ is only around maybe 100 people per heatwave. It’s certainly nowhere near the “roughly 1,000 to 3,000 people” the hyperventilating ‘journalist’ claims.

However, while the excess deaths from heat in the UK are obviously greater than deaths from storms, the number is small in comparison to the excess deaths from respiratory diseases caused by cold because our high energy prices (due mainly to subsidies for useless, expensive, unreliable, supposed ‘renewable energy’) mean many older people cannot afford to heat their homes properly:

(left-click on chart, then left-click again to see more clearly)

In the Sunday Times article some expert from that well-respected academic institution Reading Poly (sorry, I mean “the world-famous University of Reading”) was quoted as saying: “People just don’t realise that heatwaves are very dangerous. We should be doing anything we can to raise awareness in the same way as we do for storms”. And, of course, another ‘expert’ bleated the usual: “with climate change we’re going to expect more fatalities for heatwaves and we’re not prepared for them”.

And here’s a nice picture from the 1934 heatwave (when atmospheric CO2 levels were much lower than they are today) which dried up many UK reservoirs and killed a few people (I haven’t been able to find the number of deaths):

Vaccinate – vaccinate – vaccinate

Some older readers might have happy memories of the Daleks:

Well, it seems that the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have been taking lessons from the Daleks with the CDC’s obsession with vaccinate – vaccinate – vaccinate! Last week the CDC recommended children aged from 6 months to 5 years get vaccinated against the Chinese lab-leaked plague. ‘We know millions of parents and caregivers are eager to get their young children vaccinated, and with today’s decision, they can,’ says CDC Director Dr Rochelle Walensky.

Really, Dr Walensky? Are parents really “eager to get their young children vaccinated” as you claim?

We know that Covid has an almost negligible fatality level in people under 50 years old:

In fact, serious illness and deaths from Covid in children is so low that there haven’t been sufficient cases for these to be reliably measured.

Moreover, the trials carried out by Pfizer didn’t include sufficient numbers of children to conclude whether vaccination or catching Covid would be more dangerous to young children.

However, there is a massive amount of information emerging about the side-effects of the untested experimental vaccines – increase in Sudden Adult Death Syndrome, neurological conditions, auto-immune problems (monkey-pox) and heart muscle inflammations (myocarditis and pericarditis).

It is my understanding that the main argument for the CDC’s recommendation was to “ensure consistency”. What is meant by that was – if the CDC recommended young children (6 months to 5 years old) shouldn’t be vaccinated against Covid, then people might start wondering about the effectiveness and safety of the vaccines. Then they might begin to question whether children aged between 5 years and 10 years old should be vaccinated. Then the doubts could extend to those aged between say 10 and 20 years old and so and so forth. It’s more than possible that the CDC has painted itself into a corner. Having come out so strongly in favour of vaccination for young adults, the CDC has been trapped into recommending vaccination for ever younger age groups more for reasons of maintaining its credibility and social control than for any medical rationale.

Oh, and it might be worth mentioning the huge amounts of money flowing from the Big Pharma companies to US government supposed ‘scientists’. Senator Rand Paul has just revealed that in the period 2010 to 2017, 27,000 royalty payments were made to 1,800 US National Institutes of Health employees totalling $190m. We don’t know the figures since 2017, we don’t know which companies paid these royalties and we don’t know the names and specialities of the ‘scientists’ who received these royalties. But I’m sure that none of us would be so cynical as to suspect that the mad rush to vaccinate everyone in the US over 6 months old would have anything to do with the fact that the largely ineffective Covid vaccines – when even the great Dr Fauci has just caught Covid despite having (I believe) four Covid jabs –  will be the most profitable medical treatments in human history.

6 comments to Healthcare or authoritarian control?

  • A Thorpe

    I saw Neil Oliver discussing climate change with Lembit Opik (studied philosophy) and John Grant of Sheffield Hallam University (seems to be a town planner) a few days ago. There’s nothing like a discussion with no experts to get to the truth.

    They argued about consensus. Opik was talking about the analysis from years ago but Grant was talking about a new analysis from Cornell University and they didn’t realise they were discussing different studies. Then they discussed the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice age and the “data”. What data? Do they think temperature records exist? Michael Mann who eliminated these periods says they only existed in Europe. He might be right because there is even less information about other parts of the world in these periods. Then Grant went onto to say in response to Opik talking about CO2 levels in the past, that it isn’t the amount of CO2, it is the rate of change that matters because the atmosphere doesn’t have time to adjust. This is a new theory. Strange how much the temperatures can vary in a single day and Grant doesn’t know about it.

    These discussions on GB News do not help. They claim to be unbiased and present both sides of a debate but they create more confusion by not involving experts and having it chaired by somebody with even less knowledge, and not giving sufficient time to debate a complex issue.

    As you point out above, when there is data, the media ignores it and will claim the opposite. It now applies in any area of human activity. They get away with it because of mass psychosis, or perhaps it is better to call it educated ignorance.

    Pleased to see you mention Rand Paul. I saw a video of him discussing socialism recently and found a copy of his book to download. He’s one of the few politicians I have time for, along with Malcolm Roberts in Australia.

  • Ed P

    If an age group is excluded from being jabbed, the death merchants, sorry, wonderful and noble preservers of mankind, could lose their emergency authorizations. Then the facts about vaccine damages and deaths would have to be revealed, and they, for I’m sure some undoubtedly good reason, do not want that to happen.

  • A Thorpe

    Ed – I have just looked at the Pfizer trial results and the age range seems to be 16 to 91 with a median age of 52. Pfizer reported that 6 people died during the period reported and they said none of the deaths were Covid or vaccine related. When the vaccines were approved the trials had not run long enough to identify adverse effects.

    I read recently that when the thalidomide problems were identified that the Belgian government left it on the market for another 8 years to be sure that it was thalidomide that was causing the problem. They didn’t think that taking it off the market to see if the problems vanished could have been a better approach. There was another drug to prevent miscarriages introduced in 1947 and was on the market for about 30 years before it was discovered to be completely ineffective but increased the risk of breast cancer and caused some birth defects. There’s nothing new about trials failing to identify adverse events and the effectiveness of drugs, and the failure of governments to protect us from these failures.

    When you look at the UK data for deaths before the Covid vaccines were available, it was mainly the elderly and the average age was over the expected age of death and they had other health issues which was more important than their age. I doubt that any people in this group would volunteer for a trial.

    If you look on The Conservative Woman website there is an article today about Pfizer and allegations of fraud in the trials.

    There are several aspects about this issue which make it difficult to establish the truth – deaths due only to Covid and deaths with Covid both for vaccinated and unvaccinated, and deaths and other adverse events due to the vaccines. There are some UK deaths where coroners have determined that the vaccine was the cause of death. The government doesn’t seem to be concerned.

  • Stillreading

    I understand the Government has just sanctioned the first payment of compensation to the widow of a previously healthy man in his thirties who died following a jab. This will open the door for many, many more – people who had blood clots in the brain, a man who lost his leg to a blood clot, the dpendants of young healthy men who mysteriously died of myocarditis and so on. The initial payment approved seems totally inadequate compensation for the loss of a life, so presumably there’s a long way to go yet. Man-child Justin Trudeau of Canada has I believe recently had a 4th jab but nevertheless has just succumbed to a third visitation of the Chinese Plague. In my view, it is nothing short of wicked to be advocating this type of vaccine, be it Moderna, AstraZeneca or Pfizer to 6 month old babies! We have absolutely no idea of possible long-term effects on health or development. Why? What’s the motive? Covid becomes increasingly benign with each variant, the duration of effectiveness of the vaccines is a mere few months, and being vaccinated prevents neither acquisition nor transmission. I ask those perhaps better informed than am I, Why?

  • Eric Legge

    “When a degenerate kind of man has succeeded to the highest rank among the human species, his position must have been gained at the cost of the reverse type — at the cost of the strong man who is certain of life. When the gregarious [herd] animal stands in the glorious rays of the purest virtue, the exceptional man must be degraded to the rank of the evil. If falsehood insists at all costs on claiming the word “truth” for its own particular standpoint, the really truthful man must be sought out among the despised.” – Friedrich Nietzsche. Ecce Homo

  • Brenda Blessed

    If you had to guess the ethnicity of Dr Rochelle Walensky would it be doddle or pretty difficult?

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>