Welcome to The Inspirational Blog
Your go to place for inspirational and motivational
quotes, memes and articles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professor Angus (Gus) Dalgleish, MD FRCP FRACP FRCPath Fmed Sci – Professor of Oncology at St. George’s University, London, and Consultant Medical Oncologist
I had a long standing preparation, although I'm a working, jobbing, medical oncologist, I do a lot of work in viruses and how they cause cancer and I did a lot of work in HIV. We could see the HIV vaccines were not going to work, and we rapidly came to the conclusion as to why and how to get round it.
My collaborator, Birger Sorensen of Norway, helped in the development of an effective HIV vaccine which did not use the envelope. The envelope of of HIV, has lots and lots of information in it which confuses the immune response and prevents it seeing it.
Just so you know, all the big randomised studies of HIV vaccines have all failed to date. Even though I was at the conference and asking about it in 1984, promised to have one in 18 months. As soon as the sequence of SARS-2 was available we applied the principles to a COVID vaccine.
Next slide please. And it was then we found, I don't expect you to look at this but I’ve got various things you can look at afterwards, but it immediately became obvious that this was no normal virus. It has six inserts in it, what they did, to make it very, very simple to explain simply, is they increased the charge of the virus.
This made the virus, instead of having to go along to the cell and do its little manipulation and get in; by putting a very strong positive charge on the virus it made it very quick like a fridge magnet (claps his hands together to suggest a fridge magnet snapping home quickly).
So the virus is greatly increased in it’s effect. And by doing this, it used other receptors other than just the ACE-2 receptor which is what's in all the books.
No, it actually can infect other receptors and the two which we came up with long before it became a big deal, was taste and smell, it interferes with taste and smell. So where does that ring a bell?
So go on to the next slide please. And this was the real, real finding, which I think was a tragedy that nobody took any notice of. We actually were able to get this to the cabinet, and see Chris Whitty and SAGE, and show them this data, but they dismissed it, and told hem that I was merely an oncologist, a cancer doctor. So what did I know about it? Well a hell of lot more than they did clearly.
79% of the spike protein with COVID has molecules to human proteins. That means you are going to get definitive side effects if you use that.
So our proposed vaccine was to get rid of 80% of the spike protein and use more conserve ones in the centre of the virus, how we done the HIV.
Just look at PF4, that’s platelet factor-4. If you get antibodies to that you get an incredible clotting problem and strokes etc. It was a very strong homology, and now it’s a very major issue, vaccine induced thrombocytopenia (VITT) syndrome, leading to clotting and strokes, and I know people who've had clotting and strokes from the vaccines without anything to do with work, very strong homology to myelin, it’s virtually identical to myelin.
When you get antibodies to myelin, for one reason or another, you get Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), which Guillain-Barré syndrome is an ascending paralysis, and it was seen in previous flu vaccine programmes, so it's not just confined with this, but this was going to greatly enhance it, and if you go to the MHRA website, they do list both of those as very rare side effects, but they’re not that rare because people in my family have suffered from Guillain-Barré and people that I've treated as well. So not rare at all.
Next slide please. I’ve been asked to comment about various things. I'm going to put that up there and just point out that, from what went on, I came to the conclusion that the whole concept of lockdown, was an absolute disaster, because of the knock on effect of treating everybody else, and besides, it was very clear that the sort of patient who was dying, there's not the people most at risk in the population. I even got coerced into actually writing something in support of vaccine very, very early on. But when the facts changed, my god I changed my mind very, very quickly too.
The Omicron variant, when it was announced from South Africa, this was really quite incredible, because it was the end of the pandemic. It was actually probably the best vaccine ever made, evolved, because it's so infectious, it had natural immunity, narrowed, better than anything a vaccine can do.
Next slide, please. So, one of the things I was asked to write about was ‘what could you do to boost the amount of immunity right from the beginning?’
And we notice the patients I have in my cancer trials, that they are all elderly, with stage four melanoma, so they're really (garbled). These are all patients before the vaccine ever became available. I had actually worked out that if you didn't have very good Vitamin D levels, you did not have a very good immune response. All my patients were pumped up with vitamin D.
Then we looked at many cancer vaccines. This one (IMM-101) is a heat killed mycobacteria which is related to HKMT , but it's a far superior one that continuously boosts the immune system, which starts declining rapidly once you're over 55. By the time you are 70 odd, it's very, very low.
These are the people that should have been getting ill, but they were not. None of them had Covid. This was long before the vaccine programme.
Next slide please. And just to show that we use this in the clinical trial, this is a survival graph, the blue line there, these are people who survive better, are people with metastatic pancreatic cancer, the worst you can get. Even standard chemotherapy, the blue line, they had this immune boost as well. And the people who had standard gene therapy, they did much much worse.
So why was this? Because it was basically an immune response, and we gave everybody boosted vitamin D levels, which is crucially, I mentioned these two things, are crucial to COVID.
Next slide please. And just to point out, this is now in retrospect, we published all this stuff. The fact that the virus escaped from the lab, and had inserts, which the people in Wuhan had published in 2013, 15, 16, 17, is exactly the same. We tried to publish it. We had it rejected from every single major journal, major science, biology journal. So here is the real conspiracy. Everyone had the same words. They said ‘we're not criticising your science but this is not in the public interest’.
Why the hell is it not in the public interest? We finally got the paper published in disguise, using it to say this is the best vaccine we ever made, ??? in The Journal of Biophysics.
Because of the charge issue, the editor immediately cottoned on. So we put it in this journal, I’d never read it before, but it got there, and it got over a quarter of a million downloads in no time at all. So other people thought this was pretty much in the public interest.
The other big study we did, very often, the work I mentioned with the vaccine boosting the immune response, we should do a full review of all Coronavirus development, no successful Coronavirus (vaccine) has ever existed and no Coronavirus (vaccine) was ever likely to be made for this particular virus.
At first they went along with it. We published it. We said that you wouldn't get neutralising beyond the first variant, and then you would get enhancement. It's called antibody dependant enhancement, and this is important.
The more you boost, and this is the other thing, the more you boost, the more you will get useless antibodies which actually enhance and encourage infection, which is exactly what we've seen.
Next slide please. This is the slide where I realised that we have been fooled. If you can't read this I’ll tell you what it shows. It's very, very important.
We were all told that this was 95%, 94%, these vaccines were 95% effective. But this was relative to the risk. Norman Fenton is in the audience and he's the real expert.
But what they didn't tell you was the absolute risk was really low, not worth it. Translate absolute risk, the number of people you needed to vaccinate to prevent one infection. So the very, very best was like 119. Now once you go down into it, you would have to have vaccinated quarter of a million people to stop one infection. And now we know it doesn't stop infection at all. So this was one of the initial pieces of advice that we were told that confused everybody.
Next slide, please. So look back at the boosters. This is my point, is that I mean, ??? showed me for stopping people from getting boosters. I said, why do we need a booster?
First of all, you don't need a vaccine if you've got natural immunity. So why are they pushing vaccines on people that have natural immunity?
The thing with the boosters is they are associated with an enormous increase in excess deaths. We should, at this stage of the pandemic, be having less than normal expected deaths, but they go up and up. They do correlate with the vaccination programmes. So why is everybody refusing to let us look at this data in detail?
Up to 2020 they were basically shouting, with well 2021, 22 at the very latest, they were publishing it every day. Wasting billions of pounds when NHS time is desperately needed.
I have argued strongly that boosters and the vaccine are not needed against a virus that left this planet 18 months ago.
There is no, this is a big lie in the pharmaceutical industry, there is no cross reactivity.
Next slide please. No cross reactivity whatsoever due to something called antigenic sin, or immunological imprinting, which has been the base of every failed Coronavirus state we've got this year.
I also pointed out the booster is worse than no vaccine at all, as once, first of all, if the vaccine needs a booster it doesn't work. That's one of my premises. Once you give that booster, we found this first in our cancer patients, it suppresses the T-cell response, which is the only response ??? to the patient's cancer.
Another thing is it causes an antibody flick, so instead of antibodies that activate things, you have antibodies that send things to sleep. It's inducing the antibodies you use for tolerisation and transplants, so it’s no longer ??? I started seeing all my patients starting to relapse on the booster. Not the first or the second where they got heart attacks and strokes after it. But the ones who got the booster, they started to relapses.
And there's a perfect scientific explanation for that. And it's a massive attack. Then you can say there are 50 times more yellow cards for Covid, in the MHRA, than all the other vaccines ever recorded, and they have done nothing. We have written and addressed this, which is absolutely true. And I must just point out that in 1977 there was a swine flu outbreak in America. It killed lots of young men. It was an absolute, this was a real emergency. They got a massive vaccine programme together. All the manufacturers, they didn't know, a bit like now, but they vacinated 40 million people with the vaccine. And it was halted when physicians reported Guillain-Barré syndrome, which I mentioned before.
But the incidence was rising, so they sent in a team to see if that was true. And they found that over the time the vaccine went from one in a hundred thousand to nine. The FDA turned around and said ‘the virus is no longer killing people’ as they do, over time they get less and less and less. We just killed the programme.
My argument is we passed that point 18 months ago, why didn't the MHRA just kill the programme?
There are more vaccination deaths now among young people than ever from Covid, and more publications in Australia are starting to cover the same thing, and in New Zealand.
Next slide. As you can, this is The Office of National Statistics, Absolutely a decrease in deaths.
Next slide please. Look at that. I’ve got a thousand such publications, a thousand, I’ve just chosen these at random, ‘you're more likely to suffer severe adverse events from a messenger RNA jab than be hospitalised with Covid’.
Next slide please, next to last slide. And all the things I wrote about the origin of the virus. So in the book The Origin Of The Virus, very important contributor Stephen Quay says it cannot possibly be a natural virus, and its actually very complimentary.
And then more recently, I started to write up on the lies they told us, and what went on, why did they stop us from doing studies? Why were my doctor friends actually admonished for actually doing very good sequels.
Anyway, by the time I did this, my friend Paul Goddard had written books on pandemics in the past. He basically said, ‘I think we should really take this forward and I'll help you write this’. And I said ‘you realise that the title will be The Death of Science’. And that's what it is.
The Death of Science:
The retreat from reason in the post-modern world
Paul R. Goddard and
Professor Angus Dalgleish
