If you feel you have suffered an adverse reaction to any of the intravenous gene therapies that were introduced in response to COVID-19, you might consider filling in an official Yellow Card Report.  You can find more information about how to do that here: https://yellowcard.mhra.gov.uk/.

Yellow Card Reports can help with what is called post-marketing surveillance, whereby if a medical intervention is statistically shown to be a serious risk to the public, it could then be either paused for further investigation, or withdrawn completely.  Given the data collected by the World Council for Health, sourced from official government statistics and posted in their damning 2023 Pharmacovigilance Report online (https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/resources/covid-19-vaccine-pharmacovigilance-report/), serious concerns are being raised worldwide, as regulatory bodies such as the MHRA seem to have their heads buried in the sand.

It is beyond comprehension that these so-called therapies continue to be available in the face of insurmountable evidence showing they may cause serious harm and death, along with an egregious censorship campaign which leaves the rational thinker wondering, if there’s nothing to hide then why the blanket disinformation? In very simple terms when a medication is labelled experimental, it cannot therefore be said to be “safe and effective” until the actual experiment is completed and the data subjected to scrutiny.  The behavioural psychologists and cheerleaders (monetized or otherwise) who tried to sway public opinion have much to answer for because this public coercion, which in some cases may be tantamount to blackmail, has eroded public confidence in both government and the medical establishment in general.

A group of people who claim to have suffered serious adverse reactions to the Astra Zeneca injection are taking the issue to court, in what could prove to be a landmark case. The claimants are pursuing a two pronged strategy: taking legal action under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 as well as claiming payment under the government run Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme. See this article in the BMJ for further background: https://www.bmj.com/content/380/bmj.p725 – the class action is filing for damages in excess of £80 million: https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-sunday-telegraph/20240121/281814288728267

You may be entitled to compensation, particularly if you have suffered a severe adverse reaction to any of these injections; however the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme is limited to £120,000. Further information can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/vaccine-damage-payment. You may also consider taking legal advice.

Whatever your opinion on these matters happens to be, the fact remains that a great many people have been harmed, and many others may have died directly. An emerging body of peer-reviewed evidence in the scientific medical literature is unravelling the extent of the damage that may have been done. Over a thousand articles from medical journals have been compiled about the resultant injuries: https://drtrozzi.org/2023/09/28/1000-peer-reviewed-articles-on-vaccine-injuries/ – these articles should be subject to a meta-analysis and systematic review.

The matter of excess mortality has been raised in the House of Commons by Andrew Bridgen MP, and is also before the US Congress. Northern Ireland MLA Paul Frew has also raised concerns on his Twitter account. Investigations are underway in other parts of the world, for example in the aftermath of the revelations in New Zealand: https://kirschsubstack.com/p/the-new-zealand-data-leaked-by-whistleblower, while the Prime Minister of Slovakia has launched a sweeping investigation: https://rairfoundation.com/slovak-prime-minister-launches-sweeping-investigation-covid-response/.

Unfortunately, there is also a considerable amount of unreliable statements and opinions online which sensationalise the situation, without providing appropriate evidence such as sources and referencing, which only serves to obfuscate any attempt at unprejudiced investigation.  There are also too many school playground bullies resorting to name-calling rather than rational debate. We need clear-headed and impartial assessment. The public demand answers and it precisely because public trust in the government, mainstream media and medical regulatory bodies has been eroded through an apparent lack of checks and balances amid a culture of blanket censorship and conflicts of interest, that many are seeking information elsewhere. The so-called Online Safety Bill and similar legislation in the pipeline which the UK government claims will prevent misinformation may be oxymoronic at best, and tantamount to overreach because the government cannot decide it is infallible.

For anyone who is having repeated symptoms following these injections or who may be concerned, the following protocol may be beneficial: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33800932/

  • Bromelain is an enzyme derived from the stem of pineapples, which may help to dissolve spike proteins
  • N-acetyl cysteine is a type of amino acid which acts as a precursor to the body’s master antioxidant glutathione which helps in the removal of toxins.
  • Nattokinase is made from fermented soya beans and may reduce the risk of blood-clotting https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=nattokinase. If you are concerned about clotting, you should first arrange a D-dimer test through your physician

This combination should be taken together for 3-12 months. Any concerns of potential nutrient-drug interaction can be accessed via drugs.com and discussion with your physician. A similar protocol is outlined here: https://jpands.org/vol28no3/mccullough.pdf

There may be other possible approaches with natural medicines which could help individuals who may have suffered, but in the meantime an immediate cessation of gene therapy products and a non-partisan inquiry, independent of government, may first be necessary if public faith is to be restored in the very institutions that are supposed to safeguard our community.