By Norman Fenton January 24, 2024          READ

IF THERE were a group of whistleblowers within a government-funded organisation who wanted to subtly tell the world that there is no longer any credible evidence to support the ‘safe and effective’ narrative about the covid vaccines, they might do the following:

1. Use their privileged access to extensive health data to show that all the previous publicly released ONS vaccination data were wrong;
2. Concoct an obviously flawed study which conflates the genuinely unvaccinated with all those who are vaccinated but not ‘fully up to date and boosted’ into a category called ‘undervaccinated’ to ludicrously compare their outcomes with the ‘vaccinated’;
3. Write the conclusions in such a way that the mainstream media will wrongly be able to claim that those vaccinated are less likely to be hospitalised or die from covid;
4. Discredit the results by making clear that all the authors are part of a government-funded organisation with a vested interest in the vaccines;
5. Further discredit the results by stating (in the ‘data sharing’ statement of the paper) that ‘The data that were used in this study are highly sensitive and are not available publicly’;
6. Submit the paper to the most high-profile medical journal that has a known history of publishing bogus research that promotes the benefits of the vaccines.