Supporting Evidence

What forces Covid into reverse? To many, the obvious answer is lockdown. Cases were surging right up until the start of the three lockdowns, we’re told. It’s often said that all else failed. The Prime Minister said on Tuesday that lockdown, far more than vaccines, explains the fall in hospitalisations, deaths and infections. But how

Throughout the pandemic, the government and its scientific advisers have made constant predictions, projections and illustrations regarding the behaviour of Covid-19. Their figures are never revisited as the Covid narrative unfolds, which means we are not given an idea of the error margin. A look back at the figures issued shows that the track record,

How DARPA and Moderna pioneered the idea behind mRNA vaccines

Vaccines are not magic; they are chemical substances, and therefore open to analysis

American citizens were recently coerced into being part of the test or control groups of a medical experiment, without adequate knowledge and without their consent. Hundreds of thousands of Americans likely died from the resulting denial of timely and adequate treatment of Covid-19 and more importantly, its preventable secondary conditions. This was an egregious violation of The Nuremberg Code on human rights. The time has come for jurisprudence and restitution to those harmed.

Signals that Covid-19 Vaccines may have caused death in children and young adults

Vaccinated Children Become Susceptible to Bacterial and Fungal Infections

German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced on Thursday that unvaccinated people in Germany will be barred from nonessential stores, restaurants, and sports and cultural venues, as COVID cases rise across the country.

null

Weber Shandwick was hired to help the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) team responsible for the vaccination programs last year.

A potential $50 million contract allows PR firm to be “embedded at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta as part of the Division of Viral Diseases team.”

European Commission president says EU states need to discuss idea in response to spread of Omicron variant

308 vitamin D COVID-19 studies. 36% improvement for treatment studies, p 0.0001. 52% improvement for sufficiency studies, p 0.0001.

Background Gargling had been reported to have significant roles in the prevention and treatment of respiratory tract infections. The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of regular gargling to eliminate SARS-CoV-2 in the oropharynx and nasopharynx. Methodology This pilot, open labeled, randomized, parallel study compared the effect of 30 seconds, 3 times/day gargling using 1% povidone-iodine (PVP-I), essential oils and tap water on SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance among COVID-19 patients in a tertiary hospital in Kuala Lumpur. Progress was monitored by day 4,6 and 12 PCR (Ct value), gargling and symptoms diary as well as clinical observations. Results Five confirmed Stage 1 COVID-19 patients were recruited for each arm. The age range was from 22 to 56 years old. The majority were males. Two respondents had co-morbidities, which were asthma and obesity. Viral clearance was achieved at day 6 in 100%, 80%, 20% and 0% for 1% PVP-I, essential oils, tap water and control group respectively. Analysis of 1% PVP-I group versus control group showed significant p-value for comparison of PCR results on Day 4, Day 6 and Day 12. Conclusions This preliminary study showed that gargling with 1% PVP-I and essential oils show great potential to be part of the treatment and management of Stage 1 COVID-19. Larger studies are required to ascertain the benefit of gargling for different stages of COVID-19 patients. This study was registered in clinicaltrial.gov ([NCT04410159][1]). ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Clinical Trial clinicaltrial.gov ([NCT04410159][1]) ### Clinical Protocols ### Funding Statement None ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: This study received approval from the Research and Ethics Committee, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM PPI/111/8/JEP-2020-372). All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable. Yes Data is available upon request [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT04410159&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F09%2F09%2F2020.09.07.20180448.atom

This randomized clinical trial investigates the efficacy of nasopharyngeal povidone iodine solutions in reducing the viral load of patients with COVID-19.

Povidone-iodine (PVP-I) is a time-tested antiseptic agent with excellent virucidal (99.99%) properties. Repurposing it against coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is a relatively newer concept and has been sparsely tested in vivo. The most common route of entry of severe acute respiratory syndrome cor …

As the greatest public health emergency for a century brought illness, bereavement and hardship to millions in the UK and presented taxpayers with a £75bn bill for extra health spending, a smaller band of opportunists was using that cash to fund the richest of private paydays. This is the story of the Covid profiteers who took advantage of a country in crisis and the government that let them get away with it.

The Pfizer 6 month data shows that Pfizer's COVID-19 inoculations cause more illness than they prevent. Plus, an overview of the Pfizer trial flaws in both design and execution.

And the inconstancy of key players...

Why the BBC and Prof. Sir David Spiegelhalter are wrong.

Following our article (https://wherearethenumbers.substack.com/p/the-misplaced-attacks-on-bridgens) responding to ths BBC attack on MP Andrew Bridgen (for hi...

An MP's speech about Covid vaccines was removed from YouTube for alleged misinformation.

In the deluge of data, is anyone asking any questions?

Has anyone noticed the sustained rise in deaths? Why we need causal investigations based on signals in the data.

Hundreds of fact-checking “experts” gathered in Oslo, Norway to stop false claims on the Internet, but why won’t they fix their own misinformation?

When good science is suppressed by the medical-political complex, people die Politicians and governments are suppressing science. They do so in the public interest, they say, to accelerate availability of diagnostics and treatments. They do so to support innovation, to bring products to market at unprecedented speed. Both of these reasons are partly plausible; the greatest deceptions are founded in a grain of truth. But the underlying behaviour is troubling. Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health.1 Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science. The UK’s pandemic response provides at least four examples of suppression of science or scientists. First, the membership, research, and deliberations of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) were initially secret until a press leak forced transparency.2 The leak revealed inappropriate involvement of government advisers in SAGE, while exposing under-representation from public health, clinical care, women, and ethnic minorities. Indeed, the government was also recently ordered to release a 2016 report on deficiencies in pandemic preparedness, Operation Cygnus, following a verdict from the Information Commissioner’s Office.34 …

Leaked documents show that some early commercial batches of Pfizer-BioNTech’s covid-19 vaccine had lower than expected levels of intact mRNA, prompting wider questions about how to assess this novel vaccine platform, writes Serena Tinari As it conducted its analysis of the Pfizer-BioNTech covid-19 vaccine in December, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) was the victim of a cyberattack.1 More than 40 megabytes of classified information from the agency’s review were published on the dark web, and several journalists—including from The BMJ —and academics worldwide were sent copies of the leaks. They came from anonymous email accounts and most efforts to interact with the senders were unsuccessful. None of the senders revealed their identity, and the EMA says it is pursuing a criminal investigation. The BMJ has reviewed the documents, which show that regulators had major concerns over unexpectedly low quantities of intact mRNA in batches of the vaccine developed for commercial production. EMA scientists tasked with ensuring manufacturing quality—the chemistry, manufacturing, and control aspects of Pfizer’s submission to the EMA—worried about “truncated and modified mRNA species present in the finished product.” Among the many files leaked to The BMJ , an email dated 23 November by a high ranking EMA official outlined a raft of issues. In short, commercial manufacturing was not producing vaccines to the specifications expected, and regulators were unsure of the implications. EMA responded by filing two “major objections” with Pfizer, along with a host of other questions it wanted addressed. The email identified “a significant difference in % RNA integrity/truncated species” between the clinical batches and proposed commercial batches—from around 78% to 55%. The root cause was unknown and the impact of this loss of RNA integrity on safety and efficacy of the vaccine was “yet to be defined,” the email said. Ultimately, on 21 December, …

Data should be fully and immediately available for public scrutiny In the pages of The BMJ a decade ago, in the middle of a different pandemic, it came to light that governments around the world had spent billions stockpiling antivirals for influenza that had not been shown to reduce the risk of complications, hospital admissions, or death. The majority of trials that underpinned regulatory approval and government stockpiling of oseltamivir (Tamiflu) were sponsored by the manufacturer; most were unpublished, those that were published were ghostwritten by writers paid by the manufacturer, the people listed as principal authors lacked access to the raw data, and academics who requested access to the data for independent analysis were denied.1234 The Tamiflu saga heralded a decade of unprecedented attention to the importance of sharing clinical trial data.56 Public battles for drug company data,78 transparency campaigns with thousands of signatures,910 strengthened journal data sharing requirements,1112 explicit commitments from companies to share data,13 new data access website portals,8 and landmark transparency policies from medicines regulators1415 all promised a new era in data transparency. Progress was made, but clearly not enough. The errors of the last pandemic are being repeated. Memories are short. Today, despite the global rollout of covid-19 vaccines and treatments, the anonymised participant level data underlying the trials for these new products remain inaccessible to doctors, researchers, and the public—and are likely to remain that way for years to come.16 This is morally indefensible for all trials, but especially for those involving major public health interventions. Pfizer’s pivotal covid vaccine trial was funded by the company and designed, run, analysed, and authored by Pfizer employees. The company and the contract research organisations that carried out the trial …