This is part 3 of a series of three posts featuring a recent podcast with pathologist Dr Clare Craig, who is among those best placed to speak about the covid era from an evidence-based perspective. The interviewer is Will Coleshill — freedom journalist and founder/editor of Resistance GB.1
Part 1 featured introductory comments on the alternative media and medical ethics, followed by a wide-ranging discussion of the damage caused during the covid era:
This final part of the series features discussion on other vaccines, recent developments in the US, judicial consequences for covid era crimes, and autism. Topics covered under “other vaccines” include similar outcomes from very different vaccination schedules, and how research into measles in Fiji in the 1870s led to a horrific and unexpected discovery.
Again, if you want a shorter version, just read the parts in bold.
Similar outcomes from different vaccination schedules
[Coleshill] So what about the other vaccines… if I may ask… or do you not want to go into other vaccines? You don’t have to if you don’t want to, but… for a lot of people it’s a pressing concern, that they’ve been lied to in terms of data on this [covid] “vaccine”, and they’re questioning all of the other vaccines…
[Craig] Yes, I know. They are, and it’s interesting… I was pro-vaccine till very recently… till 2021. So it’s interesting having come at it from my medical education and training and beliefs from before… and… that system taught me that the reason you don’t have placebo control trials with these things is because the benefit outweighs the harm. And [that] we know that from the off, and therefore you don’t want to have anybody unvaccinated, so you can’t have a placebo because that’s unethical, because otherwise [they] might get these diseases that aren’t around, and… they might die. So you have to always be testing one vaccine against the other… That’s the mindset that that got us into this place…
The reality is that there are countries that have wildly different vaccination schedules and do not have differences in infectious disease problems… For example, there are Scandinavian countries, and actually the UK, where the vaccine schedule is quite narrow, or certainly has been until recently… quite small in terms of how many jabs children were getting… Whereas in the US they’re giving them 77 by the age of 18… It’s an absolutely extraordinary number of injections.
The following snapshots are from the US government’s CDC website detailing injections from birth to a mere 15 months:
[Craig] And then they can’t say, “Well, look we’re healthier because of it”, because… these infectious diseases aren’t a problem.” You’re treating a non-problem. And so you have to ask the question, “Well, are you unhealthier because of it.” And the answer might be, “Yes.”
Measles in Fiji in the 1870s, and a horrific and unexpected discovery
[Craig] So I think it’s a really important question to ask [i.e. about other vaccines], and that question has led me down into writing a new book actually, which I must get finished this year, because it matters… It’s a book about measles, and measles in Fiji in particular… [Almost] nobody cares about this, but I really care about this…
150 years ago, 25% of the Fijian population died in a 4-month period in 1875, and it was described as being because of measles. And that bothers me a lot, because that’s awful. That’s a really horrific massacre of people.
And I was looking at it and thinking, “Well, this doesn’t really add up with what we know about measles.” It’s not possible to kill a quarter of a population. So I’ve been digging into that, and I have learned an awful lot along the way. And the conclusion that I’ve reached is that, again, that was a drug-related massacre.
At the time, the Fijian health care system was largely missionaries who were doing their best… some with and some without medical training. But medical training in 1875 was not what it is now. And… what we described as a disease is not what it is now. And… the treatment… was mercury [compounds]… So people were taking mercury, and they died, almost all… Not of pneumonia or of an encephalitis, which is… how measles kills people. They died of dysentry. They had bloody diarrhoea [i.e. diarrhoea containing blood], and that is what killed them.
The way that people thought about diseases has changed over time… [These days] we will say, “If you’ve got this collection of symptoms, and you’ve got this evidence of this virus, we’re going to call that measles.” But then there was this idea of… “That was a nasty measles you got there, with a bloody diarrhoea”, where it might start off looking like measles, but literally any symptom could be added to that picture, and you would just say, “That was a particularly different type of measles”, which we wouldn’t do now. So you can look back at this historical documentation with our current diagnostic framework and say, “Look, that was measles plus, and the plus was the mercury.” And there’s another level to that story, but I’ll do that in the book for people…
But ultimately… the other aspect of it I suppose is that we are told all of the time that the big public health breakthrough that stopped children dying globally was sanitation. That’s always the story, isn’t it? Sanitation… that’s what cured… that’s what saved lives.
I wonder how many people think that it was mainly vaccination that resulted in the remarkable reduction in mortality rates from diseases between the time of the Crimean War and World War II… a notion that is — to say the least — difficult to reconcile with historic data such as this:
[Craig] And I think [sanitation] would have absolutely had an impact for diseases that are spread through water like cholera… But I think the bigger impact was nothing to do with sanitation, because if you look at the trajectory of all these illnesses… the ones that spread through the air and the ones that never had a vaccine [at that time]… typhoid, diphtheria and scarlet fever and measles… these were all killing babies and children, they all fall at the same rate… as they stop giving mercury. And I think mercury is what actually killed people.
As noted in the above diagram, there is no vaccine for scarlet fever.
[Coleshill] So mercury was the big killer…
[Craig] [It] absolutely was. It was mercury…
[Coleshill] Wow… That’s a bombshell… Did you have this idea yourself…?
[Craig] I’ve been working on it over the last… few months. And that is the conclusion that I have reached… that massive drop in mortality that you see from 1850 to 1900… that was before any of the other excuses for a drop in mortality… came with skepticism around mercury…
They were still giving mercury after 1900, and particularly [to] pregnant women actually. And they were still giving it right up until antibiotics became something you could give instead. And so, for example, teething babies in the 1950s were still being given mercury. And then that became a scandal… I think that was really the last point when it… hit… “Enough now…” And they… stopped.
But it was never expressed openly. It was this… quiet scepticism… There were some doctors saying it. They never got a big platform… But [the amount of mercury given was] quietly reduced, and [people] stopped dying.
[Coleshill] Wow… a lotof people say it [was] nutrition that improved… so… the factors would have been combined… that led to the drop in diseases…
[Craig] Yes. I think nutrition probably has played a role, but I think mercury’s the biggie… One of the things that was absolutely mind-blowing to me is that when you look at pre-Victorian death rates you start to get onto much… dicier territory in terms of the evidence, because you haven’t got… mortality bills that we had…
We had great mortality data from a long time ago in this country, but you go back a bit further and you’re like… “I’m not so sure now…” But you do have archaeological digs where they can look at bones. And they’ll dig up burial sites from pre-history… thousands of years ago… And you can… get this idea of… what was mortality like before mercury… And say, “Well, what was the baseline?” And the official answer is, “Well, half the kids died in childhood [of diseases].”
But it’s not as clear-cut as that at all, because if you go to, say, ancient Israeli sites, and you dig them up, [only] 10% of the bones are children’s bones. And you’re like, “Well, hang on a minute, if 50% of children are dying… and if you’ve got a stable population that’s not growing… then half of the bones should be children’s bones… that’s how it would work out.”
But that’s not what happens… You might have a growing population, but if you’ve got a growing population there should be even more children’s bones. But what the archaeologists convince themselves of is that the smaller bones get lost. And so you think, “Well, actually there might be some truth in that…” They’re saying, “Well… if you die as an infant you wouldn’t necessarily be buried with the adults… you might be buried at the home… there were different traditions around that.” So [perhaps] there’s some truth in it. And also, baby’s bones might get lost or damaged over time…
[But] then I said “Okay, let’s look at teenagers because teenagers are big. They… ought to disappear at the same rate as as adults.” And they were claiming that the teenagers were disappearing at higher rates. I’m like, “You’ve lost me now. I think you’re just lying.”
So I think that ultimately the truth is that historically… babies and children did not die at these ridiculous rates. And then [in the 1800s] we gave them all mercury, and they died for a period…
[Coleshill] And that’s the start of our data, so that’s the baseline… they’ve been using… that’s what they consider to be normal for the past.
[Craig] The story is always, “Half the kids died [of diseases].” [And] I don’t think it’s true…
[Coleshill] [looking understandably shocked] The amount of people who died [from mercury poisoning]… That’s millions… insane… it’s horrific…
[Clare Craig] It’s absolutely horrific…
[Coleshill] Do you ever start crying… finding this out?
[Craig] It can be an emotional thing, but mostly I try to do it as a pathologist. I’m putting on that hat.
[Coleshill] You’re used to it…
[Craig] I’m analysing it… I’m just trying to get to the truth. And the thing is that it’s really important, because although this is history… we’re living with it today, because this fear of infectious diseases is driving the pandemic preparedness industry. It’s driving this whole idea that we have to do this and we have to do that, or we’re all going to die. But this “We’re all going to die” thing… it’s just not based in evidence at all. And the fears of these diseases being able to spread and kill people is based on a time when people were dying of poisoning, or being made sicker…
If you have mercury, it will suppress your immune response. So you’re going to be more susceptible to the disease that you’re trying to treat… It’s counterproductive But also there’s an additional problem with mercury, which is that the drug that they loved giving was a drug called calomel… which was was two mercury atoms and two chloride atoms… [Hg2Cl2 — also known as mercurous chloride or mercury(I) chloride]
[Craig] But over time, and particularly in heat and humidity, one of those [mercury atoms] would drop out and it would become one versus two. [Hg2Cl2 → HgCl2 + Hg, i.e. giving HgCl2 — also known as mercuric chloride or mercury(II) chloride — plus elemental mercury Hg(0)2]
[And] this other compound [mercury(II) chloride] that is created over time… is really toxic… like 20x higher fatality. So when you go back to Fiji, the people [there] were being given a drug that had… come from the UK on a boat. And if it had been near the engine room for the journey [or just exposed to light]… [it’s] absolutely possible that you would get batches arriving in Australia and the Pacific that were really toxic.
But the thing is that it’s a batch effect… these people were used to taking calomel… They [would] take it all the time for everything because it was the only thing that they had. And it would “purge them”… that’s what they thought… They believed that… illness was inside… you had to detoxify… you’d take this stuff and it would cause you to empty in a way that wasn’t necessarily diarrhoea… So you would take that drug, and you’d think, “Well that’s what will happen…” But then you get a toxic batch, and you take that, and you start bleeding with diarrhoea. [And] you’re like, “Oh no, I’ve got sicker from the disease I’m trying to treat…” You don’t make the link [with the toxic drug]…
[Coleshill] That’s “the badness coming out”… That’s the way they interpret it.
[Craig] Yes, so they didn’t make the link with the drug because they trusted the drug to be consistent in a way they didn’t trust the disease to be…
[Coleshill] Wow…. That is a huge number of people who’ve suffered from that… the amount of children…
[Coleshill] Are you excited with what’s going on in the United States with RFK [Robert F Kennedy Jr, the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, featured in this recent postand here in May’s Updates post]? Have you met him?
[Craig] I haven’t met him. I am excited about what’s going on, and I am being patient. So the way I see it is… he has over decades got himself into a position where he can actually do something, which is great… But it’s not easy, and I think he’s now in charge, but the people who work for him are almost all on a completely different page. And he can’t change the CDC website… he can’t change the protocols… without convincing these people that that’s what needs to be done… because it’s the body… the institution… it’s made up of these people. And so I think we have to cut him some slack… He needs time to turn the ship. You can’t do it overnight.
[Craig] And yesterday was a biggie. I don’t know if you saw that… he has sacked the ACIP [Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices]… the group within the CDC that make the vaccine recommendations… Those 17 people who make the vaccine recommendations… they’re all gone…And they have been awful over this period… They have almost… on every occasion… voted unanimously for vaccines… for every covid vaccine, for covid vaccines for babies, covid vaccines for pregnant women, boosters, bivalent… unanimously, every time.
And a review of the conflicts of interest of the old ACIP and the new ACIP can be found here and here:
[Craig] Now, if they [were] doing their job then there would be discussion and debate about safety, and there would be a mix of views, and it would not be unanimous every time. The unanimity of it shows how broken the system was, and [that] many of the people within it had vested interests. It was all really wrong how it was set up. There was one time on covid where they weren’t unanimous… actually, to be fair, there’s been a couple in the last year where there’s been one dissenter… but the only other time was when they had paused on the Janssen vaccine, which is like the AstraZeneca… it’s the same tech… because of the brain clots. And they had decided to bring it back to market. And there were four dissenters out of 17 who said, “We don’t want this because it might harm young people.” And it went through for every adult to still carry on getting it…
There’s no compromise with these people. They… just completely categorically thought everything must be safe on principle because it was called a vaccine... The last time that that group said “No” to a vaccine or pulled a vaccine was 1999 when they stopped a vaccine for children that was causing a bowel problem… a completely different set of people [then]…
[Coleshill] It’s not happened for a quarter of a century that [they] said “No” to anything…
[Craig] There’s absolutely no point having a group of people being paid to make a decision if the decision is always “Yes.”
I am reminded of this paper…
…which states that:
…until the Romans ultimately removed the right of the Sanhedrin [an ancient Jewish legislative and judicial assembly] to confer death sentences, a defendant unanimously condemned by the judges would be acquitted… “because we have learned by tradition that sentence must be postponed till the morrow in hope of finding new points in favour of the defence”
And on the subject of justice…
Judicial consequences for covid era crimes
[Coleshill] Are you looking forward to actual judicial consequences and prosecutions against people, because a lot of people have been complicit in what have been crimes… It’s against the Nuremberg code… Over here it would be… the Offences Against the Person Act. They have not given people informed consent. Are you looking to see a “Nuremberg 2”, or just mass trials of people who’ve participated in killing or harming dreadfully a lot of people…
I am reminded of this post featuring footage of UK Professor of Oncology Angus Dalgleish…
[Craig] This is really, really tricky… I would say, first of all, winding back, there was a time when I thought the legal system was going to be our friend. And I thought, “Well, we will… do class action lawsuits for these...”
[Coleshill] My sweet summer child…
[Craig] I know… [I thought] “We will do class action lawsuits… We will get some compensation for people whose lives have been ruined. We will make that happen…” And we tried. We honestly tried. And… it turns out we do not have a legal system in this country [the UK] that supports people who are harmed by [medical] products. It just doesn’t work. It’s completely dysfunctional.
[Craig] You need funding to get any of these cases off the ground. And the funders want to take huge swathes of the money. We saw that with the Post Office scandal… when the Post Office workers got their class action lawsuit, and they… went through all of that pain of a court case to prove their point, because the money… it was all gone… because the lawyers had taken all the money anyway…
So when you realise that that’s how the system works, you’re like, “Well, why would you put injured people through that if there’s nothing at the end for them?” And there wouldn’t be… it doesn’t work.
And then you… see other court cases going on, and you realise that actually, although the legal system is meant to be completely separate from politics, it’s in an environment in which they’re not free to necessarily do what you think would be the right thing. And so… I don’t see that we have any kind of legal recourse in the political environment that we’re in. You need political change first, because that creates an environment where the judges don’t feel exposed by making decisions in one way or another.
That seems to be a long way off in this country, whereas… that has changed in America. But in America they can’t sue… for other reasons… legal reasons. It’s so, so wrong actually, that you can have a situation where people have been harmed, badly… lives destroyed and in such numbers, and nothing comes of it.I am not fighting to see… justice in the way that… might feel fair. I don’t think we can ever get there…
[Coleshill] Should we not try?
[Craig] Yes, sure, we could try… and we can try. I think there are… specifics where you can say, “Well, let’s just focus on that and get that done.” But ultimately… longer term… in the future I want to live in a society that can say, “We did this awful thing. We got it really really wrong. And we’re really sorry, and we’re never going to have it happen again.” That’s… where I want to be in the end.
And to get to that place in the end is going to take a “truth and reconciliation” approach more than an attack approach. I don’t think [an] attack approach will get us to a place where we can agree… with all of the breaches that happened… all of the harm that was caused… and how we stop it happening again. Because as soon as you’re saying, “It’s your fault… we’re going to blame you”…
[Coleshill] That’s all the people in power who control all the media…
[Craig] Well, [there’s another] problem… the numbers are vast. If you’re going to blame everybody that ever injected a person… what then? You can’t…
[Coleshill] But the problem is, if there are no consequences essentially for these people, the next time something like this happens and everyone just follows along in the mass psychosis… people are going to know, “Well, it’s fine committing crimes, so long as I’m in this big group.” And it will happen again, because they’re not going to feel that fear… And unless we genuinely have these consequences for people who committed mass terrible crimes against every set of ethics… every oath they’ve ever taken… then it is predestined to happen again.
[Craig] We’re in a dark place again now in this conversation, aren’t we, but if you look back at places where there have been similar… This isn’t the first time we’ve seen a society go south and go dark and where people have followed awful things in a… mass psychosis type way. Where those situations have resolved… and… where you get to a good place… is through recognition of what it was. And you can point to what it was, and you can even blame people for their role in that. But you’re not going to be able to prosecute them because you can’t prosecute those numbers…
[Coleshill] Could you prosecute at least the people at the top, and have lesser sanctions for other people… say, “Okay, well you’ve lost 10% of your pension for going along with this… at least something… because the MPs… have you met with some of them, because I know some doctors were meeting with MPs and people in positions of authority… Do you think they know?
[Craig] Yes, I think a lot of them do… I don’t think they all do… I think there [were] plenty of MPs who were in the same BBC bubble that was just hearing what they wanted to hear and believing what they wanted to believe. And some of them are still in that place I think, as are [most of] the general public. And others have figured it out and said nothing… and that’s also damning, isn’t it… that if you don’t speak once you’ve figured something out… that’s that awful…
[Coleshill] Yes, it’s basically Andrew Bridgen [now former MP] just by himself… and a few others who toed the line, and say so much, but not past that line…
[Craig] Yes… I don’t know how you solve this problem. It’s a too big a problem to ask me about. I don’t know the answers…
[Coleshill] Sorry, I don’t mean to be too harsh on you…
Autism
[Coleshill] Well, we were discussing America… Are you interested to see the investigations into autism, and also some things with regards to the birth rate, because these seem to be some of the big concerns coming up... I know you’re a pathologist…
Autism, as far as we know, isn’t caused by a pathogen. And the birth rate… are interested to see what’s going on… And are you worried about these two things, which are becoming major topics of conversation?
[Craig] I am all for data transparency. I think that can only ever be a good [thing]… so I think it’s wonderful they’re willing to release the data.
I think the fertility problem is an interesting one because it’s… really emotive. And we absolutely have a catastrophic fertility problem in the world… One of my colleagues published something today on this. They’re going to write a new paper looking at the rates across different countries. And you see that in 2020 nothing much changed, but there’s a massive drop in births across the world in 2021. And then by 2022 it’s… recovering… And she was thinking it [was] still falling, and I’m not so sure it really was. I think it was within the trend of “everyone’s not having enough babies”. And that’s a massive, massive issue. Everyone… go and have babies… we need babies, we really do…
But in this country, when I’ve dug into the data, what I have found is that the drop in fertility… there is a drop in numbers… has entirely been because of an increase in abortions… We’ve got to the point where a third of conceptions are being aborted… 250,000 babies in this country a year are aborted… it’s a massive number. And so that’s where you address that problem, I feel…
I’m not for banning abortion at all. I am for saying we need to think about why this is happening… the societal reasons that are leading women to doing this… And if you want to do anything to change the fertility rate, you can do it very quickly by giving women who are pregnant and having an abortion options that… they don’t feel they have currently.
I think that could make a massive difference, and I think we have to address that head on… And so… saying… it’s… vaccines [that] are causing infertility… no, actually it’s really not [that]… Abortions… are changing how many babies there are born in this country. The number of conceptions hasn’t changed [much] since the early 1970s… The same number of conceptions are happening. We’re just aborting them in a way that we didn’t in the 70s…
I know plenty of people who are parents of my friends or husband… whoever… people my age… who married because of a pregnancy. And that was the culture then. And now the culture is you have an abortion in that scenario. And that’s changed gradually over time, but that’s why we don’t have enough babies.
The conception rate in recent years is actually (slightly) higher now than in the late 1970s:
The latest figures on birth rates can be found here (NB the Change column):
In the columns on the right-hand side, green shows populations that are rising, and yellow/orange/red shows populations that are falling. I find the contrast between the numbers for 2015 (not coloured) and 2025 particularly striking.
For context, here is what happens with a fertility rate of 1.5:
According to the calculator, a country with an average of 1.5 births per woman will lose 74% of its population over four generations.
As to abortion, as I understand it, the UK government has not published data on abortion in 2023, let alone 2024. But here is a snapshot from the latest report — for 2022:
An important question here is: “What is actually causing the rise in abortions?”
[Craig] And… the autism thing is again very emotive. And it’s also not one thing…
So what has happened is… that [autism] label has been given to more and more and more conditions… In the past, people who had a variety of different brain issues that caused learning difficulties would have been given one label. Now almost all of those people have that label and an autism label. So you’ve got to a position where you can’t track autism over time because it’s being diluted out by all of this other stuff…
What’s interesting is to focus on particular types of autism… the ones that are rapid onset particularly… and say, “Well, let’s call that something else and have a look at that”, because you can’t do anything [useful] until it’s labelled correctly. And, as I said… data transparency… I’m absolutely for it… Whatever it shows… let’s just find out…
…to my mind many of the risk factors identified… point clearly to the cause of infant autism.
Let me take febrile seizures as one example. Why not call this condition what it is. Brain inflammation, perhaps occurring in the blood brain barrier or the meninges or within brain tissue. Febrile seizures are fits associated with brain inflammation. In short, infant epilepsy though we are not allowed to equate febrile seizures with epilepsy.
We may have been one of the first research groups to implicate human exposure to aluminium with epilepsybut our finding only supported previous studies going back decades that linked brain aluminium with epilepsy. Indeed, early primate models of human epilepsy (how I wish such experiments had never been allowed) injected aluminium into the brain to induce the disease.
Take a look at what aluminium-induced epilepsy looks like in human brain tissue.
The large image on the left shows a significant deposit of aluminium (yellow/orange fluorescence) in brain tissue and in close proximity to the inflamed tissue, see asterisk, are microglial cells loaded with aluminium. These are shown magnified to the right of the image.
Now take a look at what is seen in autism brain tissue.
Vaguely familiar? A large deposit of aluminium associated with inflamed tissue surrounded by microglial cells loaded with aluminium.
Febrile seizures are moments of brain inflammation in an infant. They may occur at any time including when the infant is sleeping. The consequences of brain inflammation, febrile seizures, are not limited to the immediate affected tissue. They are essentially masts sending out signals to the rest of the brain and body telling of a problem. One outcome of such a message is the movement of white blood cells, such as macrophages and lymphocytes, from the blood into the brain to the affected, inflamed tissue. What happens if those white blood cells are also loaded with aluminium, perhaps picked up from a vaccine injection site.
Something like this.
The image shows lymphocytes loaded with aluminium in transit across the blood brain barrier in autism brain tissue.
The last two images are taken from our seminal paper on aluminium in brain tissue in autism a paper so devastating in its impact and significance that not only its content is censored but also the metrics describing its social impact are censored. The research reported in this paper including the unequivocal images of aluminium in autism brain tissue have never been contested or refuted by any follow up study.I remember that when the research was published and brought to the attention of the individual at the NIH responsible for autism research (I think his name was Joshua Gordon but my memory may have failed me on this) he told me categorically that he did not believe the research and so it would have no influence upon his research programme on the cause of autism. He dismissed it outright. I do hope that the new broom at the NIH will look again at this research. I think that he will.
I find it interesting that Exley, who is a rigorous scientist who seems very reluctant to support causes where the evidence is not strong, is willing to state that:
I am prepared to nail my colours to the mast. To call a spade a spade and to state unequivocally that aluminium is the cause of infant brain damage leading to a diagnosis of autism.
We can test this. We can stop using aluminium adjuvants in infant vaccines and, importantly we can reduce infant exposure to aluminium through formula feeding and other medications such as antacids. None of this is beyond our reach if we truly have the intention of identifying the cause of infant autism. In the shorter term we might use data already available to compare infant exposure to aluminium through vaccines, feeding and other medications with incidence of autism.
So why not test as Exley suggests…? And why not use data already available to compare infant exposure to aluminium through vaccines, feeding and other medications with incidence of autism…?
Some might say that the very fact that this has not already been done — and the results published — tells its own story…
And finally
[Coleshill] Do you want to say quickly, before we end, what you’re working on now…
[Craig] …I have a book that… I’m hoping [is] going to be out in September… Spiked: A Shot in the Darkwhich is the sequel [to Expired]… When I wrote Expired I pulled the vaccine story from it, because it was not finished [at that time]… that [vaccine] story. And so I got the story out which is Expired, which is about lockdowns and viral spread and masking and all of those stories… and just what happened in 2020. And then the story of what happened in 2021 and onwards is Spiked…
[Craig] And then, as I said, I’m… working on this Measles Fiji book as a detective case for a bit more light-hearted reading, which I’m going to try and write without mentioning the C-word, and see if I can do that. There’ll be plenty in there that reflects on what’s happened recently, but I’ll let people take their own view on that as they read it…
[Coleshill] Do you want to speak a little bit more about your organisations?
[Craig] HART… I told you about the beginning… We write a weekly bulletin, and we have spoken at different events… It’s amazing actually, looking back at the stuff that we’ve written that’s held up really well over time. Occasionally we reflect back and see what has changed, and anything that we got wrong, but most of the time it was just basic science, and it was stuff that’s been known for decades, and so we were on pretty firm footing…
Then the People’s Vaccine Inquiry was a project… from all the people who had wanted to put their concerns around vaccination at the UK Covid Inquiry and were turned down… So we did our own inquiry, and presented the evidence there of what was really going on, because… we weren’t going to be given a voice otherwise.
This series of posts features testimony from the People’s Vaccine Inquiry:
[Craig] And then The Hope Accord [link above] is something that everybody can come and sign, whether you’re a member of the public or whether you’re a professional, to say that the mRNA products need to be withdrawn… they’re not safe, and… we need to stop… what’s going on there…
Hg being the chemical symbol for the element mercury, from its Latin name hydrargyrum, itself from Greek hydrárgyros, ‘water-silver’; the conversion of Hg(I) to Hg(II) and Hg(0) is an example of a disproportionation reaction
![[I] Exposing the UK Covid-19 Inquiry (Module 4)](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!_oz1!,w_140,h_140,c_fill,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep,g_auto/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Faaab3e48-4603-4452-baf1-836cfabcaba0_748x730.png)
