UK Has Recorded 5 Times More Deaths in 12 Months Due to Covid-19 Vaccination Than it has Deaths Due to Every Other Vaccine Combined in 21 Years

By The Exposé,

The UK Medicine Regulator has confirmed that over a period of twelve months the Covid-19 Vaccines have caused five times more deaths than the total number of deaths due to all other available vaccines combined in the past 21 years.

A Freedom of Information Request was made via email to the Medicine and Healthcare product Regulatory Agency (MHRA) on the 6th August 2021 in which a Mr Anderson asked the MHRA the following questions –

  • How many Deaths have there been from all Covid-19 vaccines?
  • Are there any other reporting AI system monitoring systems like the Yellow Card scheme?
  • Are Covid-19 Vaccines still in trials?
  • How many deaths has there been in last 20 years by previous Vaccines without Covid-19 Vaccines?
  • What happens if a there is a new vaccine or new drug? What process and monitoring do they go through?
  • What cut off point will the MHRA say a vaccine or drug is unsafe for humans?

The MHRA responded with the usual “we do not hold this information”, as seen time and time again from Government departments.

However, they did confirm that they are using other epidemiological studies, anonymised GP-based electronic healthcare records and international experience to proactively monitor safety alongside the spontaneous reports received via the Yellow Card scheme.

The MHRA also confirmed that the current Covid-19 vaccines on offer in the United Kingdom are only under a temporary authorisation and that these authorisations do not constitute a marketing authorisation.

In answer to the question asked on the number of deaths due to all other vaccines in the past twenty years the MHRA provided the usual robotic response about how great the Covid-19 vaccines are and how they are the “single most effective treatment for preventing serious illness due to Covid-19” but what they did not do is say that they “do not hold this information”.

Instead they revealed that they had received a total of 404 reported adverse reactions to all available vaccines (excluding the Covid-19 injections) associated with a fatal outcome between the 1st January 2001 and the 25th August 2021 – a time frame of 20 years and 8 months.

But how does that fare against the number of reported adverse reactions to all temporarily authorised Covid-19 vaccines associated with a fatal outcome?

Well, since the Pfizer injection was rolled out in December 2020 there have been 684 reported deaths as of 5th Jan 22, meaning that in just 12 months , this “vaccine” alone outnumbers the deaths due to all other vaccines combined in the past 20 years.

However, the AstraZeneca viral vector injection has fared much worse with 1,182 deaths being reported to the MHRA since January 2020, nearly three times as many deaths as what have been reported due to all other vaccines in the past 20 years.

There have also been 29 reported deaths due to the Moderna jab since it was first administered in June 2021, and 37 deaths where the brand of Covid-19 vaccine was not specified in the report.

Therefore, up to January 5th 2022 there have been a grand total of 1,932 deaths reported to the MHRA as adverse reactions to all available Covid-19 vaccines in the United Kingdom since the beginning of the year.

Meaning there have officially been nearly 5 times as many deaths in just 12 months due to the Covid-19 vaccines than there have been due to every other available vaccine combined since the year 2001.

Source: The Expose.

Life Insurer Refuses To Cover COVID Vaccine Death Claiming The Victim Took Part In An Experiment At His Own Risk

Despite the fact that vaccination was recognized as the reason of mortality by doctors and insurance companies, the life insurer has refused to cover COVID vaccine death claiming that the victim, a rich entrepreneur took part in an experiment at his own risk. An experimental vaccine that results in fatality, according to the corporation, is equivalent to suicide.

The reason for this is that the complications of the Corona injections are well recognized and widely publicized. They contend that the deceased participated in an experiment at his own risk. Covid-19 is not considered a “critical illness” in and of itself.

An experimental vaccine that results in fatality, according to the corporation, is equivalent to suicide

The insurance provider explained its objection to compensate the family by noting that the consumption of experimental medications or therapies, such as Corona shots, is specifically prohibited by the insurance policy. Following that, the family filed a case against the insurance company, which was unfruitful.

The following is supposedly how the court rationalized its decision: “The side effects of the experimental vaccine are published and the deceased could not claim to have known nothing about it when he voluntarily took the vaccine. There is no law or mandate in France that compelled him to be vaccinated. Hence his death is essentially suicide.” The insurance company declines to compromise because suicide isn’t really insured by the contract from the start.

Scandalous verdict: taking a life-threatening risk is considered suicide under the law

“The court recognizes the classification of the insurer who, in view of the announced side effects, including death, legally regards participation in the phase three experiment, whose proven harmlessness is not given, as voluntarily taking a fatal risk that is not covered by the contract and legally recognized as suicide. The family has appealed. However, the insurer’s defense is recognized as well-founded and contractually justified, as this publicly known fatal risk is legally considered suicide, since the customer has been notified and has agreed to voluntarily take the risk of death without being obliged or compelled to do so.”

It’s no surprise that the mainstream media is deafeningly silent

The major media in France has failed to cover this incident. Carlo Alberto Brusa, the family’s lawyer, shared the case on social media. Regrettably, no references or court documents are provided, thus the report’s legitimacy cannot be validated at this time, despite prior insurer-recognized warnings about the risk linked with the jabs. The American Council of Life Insurers (ACLI) has refuted reports of non-payment in the United States.

Several French anti-vaccine Facebook circles, particularly supportive groups for Brusa and Professor Didier Raoult, have been shut down abruptly and without cause in subsequent months. The latter has been chastised for his views on immunizations, hydroxychloroquine, and his condemnation of Macron’s administration’s mishandling of the pandemic.

The major support organization for Didier Raoult was disbanded at the end of last year before being restored, thanks to a mobilization on social media and a tremendous relaying on alternative media. A teacher support network for Brusa was discontinued on November 27. The group, which was founded in March 2020 and boasted more than 310 000 members, was shut down for sharing Brusa’s complaint about children wearing masks. A “conspiracy” was suspected of being promoted by the Parisian attorney and his organization Réaction-19.

Vaccines are causing headaches for insurers throughout the globe

Actuaries have warned that mounting claims will deplete the funds reserved by insurers to prevent collapse. Because elderly people do not purchase life insurance, the claims have all come from younger clients. Excess deaths are expected to rise, according to insurers.

According to Alex Berenson, based on Canadian research, the likelihood of damage or fatality from the jab is incredibly large.

According to insurance agent Howden, the rejection to compensate for a vaccine-related mortality is not unexpected given that the worldwide life insurance sector was struck with recorded claims of $5.5 billion during first nine months of 2021, compared to $3.5 billion for the entire year of 2020.

Aegon, a Dutch insurer having two-thirds of its operations in the United States, reported $111 million in third-quarter claims, increasing from $31 million the previous year.

Vaccine-related deaths may compel insurers to hike premiums, and several have stated that they want to penalize the unvaccinated for their financial difficulties.



Germany: Govt Reports 96% of Omicron Cases Are Among Fully Vaccinated, 4% Are Unvaccinated

By Chris Menahan

New data released today by the Robert Koch Institute, a research agency run by the German government, found that though 71% of the population is fully vaccinated nearly 96% of Omicron cases are among the fully vaccinated.

“Robert Koch Institute report released today states that 95.58% of the #Omicron cases in Germany are fully vaccinated (28% of those had a “booster”), 4.42% are unvaccinated,” Disclose TV reported.

Welt reporter Tim Röhn shared the findings on Twitter, noting that “the usual tabular overview of vaccination effectiveness is missing” in the new RKI weekly report.

“Concerning the burden of disease: ‘For 6,788 cases, information on the symptoms was provided, mostly no or mild symptoms were reported. 124 patients were hospitalized, four people died,’” Röhn reported.

As a reminder, Dr. Robert Malone was banned from Twitter yesterday after the AP accused him of “misleading” people by claiming that vaccines “don’t provide protection against the omicron variant.”

Source:  Information Liberation.

93% Of Autopsies Reveal People Who Were Vaccinated With Covid-19 Jab Died From Vaccine

By Nemos News Network,

The Covid-19 jab was implicated in 93% of the deaths in people who were autopsied. The most interesting point to note is the original coroner or public prosecutor claimed that they were not due to the genocide jab. Initially, fifteen bodies were examined, from ages 28 to 95. They had died from 7 days to 6 months after “vaccination.” However, further examination revealed that the clot shot was the cause of death in 14 of 15 patients. The most attacked organ was the heart, but other organs were involved such as the lungs and liver. The significance of these findings is baffling, since there is a potential of millions of deaths.

Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi and Dr. Arne Burkhardt have done marvelous work to make the public aware of these dangerous Covid-19 shots. Family members requested the bodies of these victims to be thoroughly examined. Dr. Bhakdi has dedicated his whole life to practicing, teaching, and researching microbiology and infectious disease. Dr. Burkhardt is a world renowned pathologist and virologist who has published over 300 papers in the fields of immunology, bacteriology, and virology. Both men work currently in Germany. Ironically Dr. Bhakdi is thinking of leaving the country because health authorities want his 4 year old child Covid jabbed.

Both Dr, Bhakdi and Dr. Burkhardt noticed that in 14 of the 15 patients witnessed there were widespread evidence of the body attacking itself, which they had never seen before. These patients were people who died at home, in sporting events, in the car, or at work. Dr. Burkhardt was able to add 55 more patients to his examinations, increasing the total number to 70. In over 90% of the deceased, Dr. Burkhardt found autoimmune self-attack in the tissues of these organs by killer T-lymphocytes, in ages 28 to 90. In all deaths they found the same pathological findings. The only common denominator in all these people was the genocide Covid jab, a gene based therapy, which caused spike protein damage to tissue. Four of the victims from the Covid-19 shot, only received one dose. With each Covid jab, the immune system gets progressively worse. Dr. Bhakdi describes the shots as “leaky,”producing spike proteins that set up the organs for attack by killer lymphocytes. He also noted that these lymphocytes in the lymphatic system are dying. These cells are responsible for destroying viruses and bacteria that are already in our bodies, such as infectious mononucleosis, cytomegalovirus, herpes virus, Epstein-Barr virus, tuberculosis, toxoplasmosis, and any other dormant ones. Dr. Bhakdi also noted there is “an explosion of tumors and cancers among the vaccinated that no one can explain.” The lymphocytes are the cells responsible for controlling cancers in our bodies.

Dr. Hoffe had found earlier this year in his own research that 60% of patients who received the genocide jab, had elevated D-dimer levels, which is an indicator of clotting on on the walls of small blood vessels. Dr. Ryan Cole, another pathologist, is seeing a twenty-fold increase in uterine cancer, along with other tumors as well. Dr. Cole has noted that the “vaccines” do not cause patients to produce enough secretory IgA. Immunoglobulin A is the first line of defense against harmful microbes, while maintaining a balanced immunological response. Lastly, Dr. Cole acknowledges the T-cell infiltrates in the jabbed population are tissue destructive. He wants to do a study to see how the spike protein deposits in the organs at the site of the infiltrates.


The work of the Bhakdi/Burkhardt team is bombshell. This is the first time a study explained how the genocide jabs are killing lymphocytes in the lymphatic system, which is equivalent to a sewage treatment plant of the body. This will consequently lead to the emergence of dormant pathogens infecting the host. I personally know a nurse practitioner in Pennsylvania who came down with shingles and Covid-19 infection, after her third booster shot. One of the questions that I have and I believe we need more research on, is this: Is the death of the lymphocytes a permanent consequence of the Covid injection? We know from previous studies that each shot seems to destroy immunity. Are the jabbed setting themselves up for Antibody-Dependent Enhancement, which would lead to breakthrough infections?

The work of the Bhakdi/Burkhardt team, as well as Dr. Hoffe and Dr. Cole, can be outlined as follows. First, inflammatory events in small blood vessels, are characterized by an abundance of T-lymphocytes and dead endothelial cells, which in turn can lead to blood clots. Second, there is an extensive accumulation of T-lymphocytes in the tissue surrounding blood vessels. Third, there is a massive infiltration of organs and tissue with these killer cells. From the work of all these scientists, we see that the heart is the main organ involved, but clotting can occur anywhere with these Covid jabs, from the brain to the blood vessels. These “clot shots” must be stopped!


For Dr. Bhakdi’s bombshell vide:

Joint US China Mission to Giant ET Space Ark under Atlantic Ocean

On January 10, 2022, my US Army insider, JP, revealed that he participated in a classified mission to an extraterrestrial space ark located under the Atlantic Ocean off the Florida coast in the vicinity of Bermuda. This was the second space ark that he has encountered in covert military missions – the first involved a […]

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

If you believe ‘my body, my choice,’ you should be against abortion AND forced vaccines

by Claire Chretien,

The baby inside a pregnant woman’s body is not part of her body.

Anyone who believes in the right to bodily autonomy — anyone who believes the slogan “my body, my choice” — ought to be against abortion and against forcible vaccination.

The simple reason that “my body, my choice” does not work as an argument for abortion is because the unborn child being aborted is not part of his mother’s body. A child in the womb is a whole, distinct, living human being, with his own DNA, heartbeat, organs, and unique blood type. Your right to “reproductive freedom” does not include a right to violently dismember and destroy the body of your offspring.

The tiny child in the womb has a right to bodily autonomy, to not have his body violated and his arms and legs twisted off and his skull crushed.

His mother’s right to bodily autonomy ends when another person’s life is at stake.

Bodily autonomy never includes the right to kill an innocent person.

What about vaccines? Don’t we have an obligation to protect each other? Isn’t refusing to be vaccinated putting other people at risk?

“Take your medicine so I don’t get sick” is simply not how vaccines are supposed to work. Vaccines are supposed to protect the people who receive them, not the people around them. A person who has been vaccinated for a disease is supposed to have immunity from that disease. If vaccines work the way they are supposed to, a person who has received a vaccine for a disease can enter a room of people who have that disease and not contract it.

An injection that is billed as a vaccine but does not immunize a recipient from the disease and only lessens his symptoms is not a vaccine; it’s a prophylactic therapeutic. And, as evidenced by U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warnings and reports submitted to the U.S. government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), not a risk-free one.

Our Pfizer juice-pushing world leaders even admit this. They constantly bleat about how the best way to protect oneself from COVID-19 is to be vaccinated with as many doses as available (right now in the U.S., for everyone over 18 that number is three, but many believe it’s likely to go up) because vaccination supposedly reduces the chances of severe disease or hospitalization.

But if we follow their premise that COVID shots don’t stop the spread of the disease, and only reduce symptoms, at best, shouldn’t people be allowed to decide how “severe” of an infection they’re willing to personally risk?

What about the argument that people should take vaccines so that those who can’t have the vaccines are protected?

The same people making that argument are usually the ones who argue that everyone should be COVID-jabbed and that there isn’t ever really a medical reason why someone couldn’t be vaccinated — even the immunocompromised, pregnant women, or those with contraindications to vaccines. In the U.S., health officials recommend a fourth vaccine dose for the immunocompromised. Medical exemptions written by doctors are regularly rejected by vaccine-mandating employers and universities.

There is also no precept in medical ethics that obliges someone to undergo a risky procedure or intervention to provide a possible health benefit to another person. Is someone who can’t swim obligated to try to save someone drowning in the middle of the lake, or send his children who can’t swim into the lake to try to make a rescue?

Even in pregnancy, which is a normal physiological process, a mother is not obligated to forfeit her own life to save her baby. The principle of double-effect says a surgery intended to save her life but resulting in the foreseen unintended death of her unborn child is morally okay. St. Gianna is recognized as a saint precisely because of her heroic rejection of cancer treatment that might have harmed her unborn child.

And the relationship between a mother and her unborn child is very different from the relationship a “vaccine-hesitant” person has to a hypothetical stranger who the CDC says can’t be vaccinated (and again, I would love for the pro-forced vaccine crowd to actually admit there are some people who have medical contraindications to the coronavirus vaccines).

Forced vaccines are medical rape

No one should be forced to insert something into his body — particularly something that doesn’t even stop the spread of disease and that could injure or kill him. Forced vaccines are medical rape, and if they are normalized under the false pretense of “protecting other people” they will open the door to a host of forced procedures and disgusting injustices.

Writing for Caldron Pool, Bill Muehlenberg argued:

People need to wake up to what is at stake here. This is a war against freedom and choice, and it is about how far the all-powerful State can flex its muscles and keep people under its iron fist. This IS a new fight for freedom…

And the mandatory medical measures, not least of which, forcing folks to get the jab whether they want to or not, are something we all must resist. As I have said often before, if the State can force you to take a vaccine against your will, they can make you do anything: to be sterilised; to be forced to give up an organ on demand; to be rounded up in internment camps; to be euthanised; and so on. There will be no end to the coercion and enforced subservience to Big Brother.

As to the issue of mandatory jabs, the vital importance of informed voluntary consent is absolutely essential here. But few seem to get it. Way too many brainless wonders will drone on and on about how there is no compulsion here – it is all your own choice. Yeah right.

When the State – and most businesses – can make you lose your job, your livelihood, your ability to feed your family, and strip you of your basic human rights to travel, to shop, to go to school, to leave your own state or country unless you get the two, three or who knows how many jabs, then you are NOT free to choose – you are being coerced, pure and simple.

If an employer or the government can mandate a person take certain drugs, who is to say the employer or government can’t mandate that person have an abortion, or be sterilized, or give up his extra kidney?

Ironically, many on the left today argue that “my body, my choice” means the right to dismember someone else’s body and stop his or her little heart from beating, but not the right of an individual to decline a prophylactic medical intervention.

You have the right to your body. As Christians, we ultimately believe our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, and belong to God. But something everyone of good will can reasonably agree on is that our bodies do not belong to the state.

“My body, my choice” should mean no human’s autonomy is violated — no matter how small that human is or what “variant” of the coronavirus society is facing.



ET Fleet arrives to watch humanity’s liberation – Interview with James Gilliland

A large fleet of spacecraft belonging to highly evolved extraterrestrials has recently entered our solar system according to James Gilliland who has over 35 years of contact experiences. He claims these positive extraterrestrials along with higher dimensional beings are here to oversee a fundamental change in how our solar system and planet are run. James […]

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

We Are Doctors. Here’s the Truth About Transgender Females’ Bodies and Athleticism.

by Michelle Cretella / Quentin Van Meter ,

When it was announced that Laurel Hubbard, a male athlete who identifies as female, was selected to represent New Zealand on the women’s weightlifting team in the upcoming Olympic Games in Tokyo, it was considered by some to be a victory for the transgender movement and “the power of inclusion.” Others consider it unfair to both the sport and the athletes.

Anna Vanbellinghen, a female weightlifter from Belgium who hoped to qualify in the same event as Hubbard, made it clear that she “fully supports the transgender community.” However, she correctly pointed out that steroids—which give athletes unfair advantages—can have retained benefits even years after their use.

“So why is it still a question whether two decades, from puberty to the age of 35, with the hormonal system of a man also would give an advantage [in competing against women]?” she asked in a recent interview.

The International Olympic Committee ruled in 2015 that transgender athletes “who transition from male to female are eligible to compete in the female category” so long as their testosterone level has been below a certain threshold for at least 12 months.

At least two recent peer-reviewed studies challenge this rule. One published in the journal Sports Medicine found “the muscular advantage enjoyed by transgender women [men on estrogen] is only minimally reduced when testosterone is suppressed” for 12 months. A second review article found the male strength advantage to remain even after three years of testosterone suppression.

Even if the strength advantage could be eliminated, however, to reduce the definition of female human being to having a certain level of testosterone in your body for a certain amount of time completely ignores the scientific reality that genetics—not testosterone—is at the root of all that makes the two sexes different.

When males are allowed to compete in athletic leagues designed for females, they deprive female athletes of the opportunity to safe and fair participation in sports. As Vanbellinghen said, “Life-changing opportunities are missed for some athletes—medals and Olympic qualifications—and we are powerless.”

She is not alone. Female sports at all levels have been infiltrated by the transgender ideology. Here are just a few examples of how females have been harmed when forced to compete against males:

  • In track and field, male high school runner CeCe Telfer won three titles in the Northeast-10 Championships for women’s track, and received the “most outstanding track athlete” award.
  • In softball, male player Pat (Patrick) Cordova-Goff took one of 15 spots on his California high school women’s varsity softball team.
  • In basketball, a 50-year-old, 6-foot-8-inch, 230-pound man, Gabrielle (Robert) Ludwig, led the Mission College women’s basketball team to a national championship with the most rebounds.
  • In mixed martial arts, male fighter Fallon Fox shattered female fighter Tamikka Brents’ eye socket and gave her a concussion. Brents said she “never felt so overpowered in her life.”
  • In Connecticut’s state track and field championships, two male high school runners, Andraya Yearwood and Terry Miller, took first and second place in multiple events, beating out top high school girls from across the state. Yearwood was named Connecticut’s “athlete of the year.”

The simple truth is that males outperform females in regard to speed and strength due to inborn genetics and sex hormones. This has consistently been proven by long-term research on elite athletes when matched for training.

The sex hormone testosterone plays an important role in regulating bone mass, fat distribution, muscle mass, strength, and the production of red blood cells leading to higher circulating hemoglobin. This is particularly true during puberty.

After puberty, male circulating testosterone concentrations are 15 times greater than those of females at any age. The result is a clear male advantage in regard to muscle mass, strength and circulating hemoglobin levels even after adjusting for sex differences in height and weight.

Athletic differences are also due to genetics. Studies have identified more than 3,000 genes that are differentially expressed in male and female skeletal muscle. Obvious bone differences due to a combination of genetics and hormones even exist at birth; the average male is heavier and taller than the average female and this advantage continues, when controlled for stage of puberty, throughout life.

Genetics is why a male who self-identifies as female remains male, and giving estrogen to a male does not transform him into a female.

While it is true that a male using estrogen will lose muscle strength and impair other aspects of his physiology, he does not alter his genetics; he remains male at the cellular level in all body systems.

Similarly, a female who self-identifies as male remains female, and giving her testosterone does not transform her into a male. In terms of genetics, she remains female at the cellular level.

These inherent sex-based differences also mean that females are at higher risk of athletic injuries. For instance, stress fractures involving the long bones of the legs in runners are more frequent in females. Male athletes are far less susceptible due to their larger and denser bones.

Taken together, these discrepancies render females, on average, unable to compete effectively against males in power-based or endurance-based sports.

Science and common sense agree. When males are allowed to compete in athletic leagues designed for females, they deprive girls and women of the opportunity to safe and fair participation in sports.