The #muttoncrew's @dr_barrett, a self-proclaimed "paediatric haematologist" just accused @DrAseemMalhotra of making a false claim over the Jorja Halliday case.
Neil Barrett, who claims to be at @CHIatConnollym is a member of the #muttoncrew, the UK's famous "disinformation warriors" on twitter. He has a researchgate profile but that's where his trace ends.
He's a real doctor but no web presence.
Whether he is practising is unknown.
But now we have an interesting conundrum because Neil is claiming that Jorja Halliday's death was not vaccine related, even though she was certified as dying of "myocarditis" - "on the day she was due to receive her vaccine". news.sky.com/story/sister-o…
Except the story doesn't fit because she supposedly died 4 days after testing positive for COVID.
Viral Myocarditis doesn't work like that, it appears later.
At worst this may produce cardiac failure down the track and in a young girl in a hospital without cardiac failure, there would be a myriad of options for support if she got it.
The story stinks.
@DrAseemMalhotra is a cardiologist and KNOWS how post-viral myocarditis works
So, where was Tracey Halliday?
Well Sky News portrayed Tracey as a single mother of 5 living in a council flat in the UK. The only time we see someone who could be her is in their photo.
In fact it's almost as if the media were trying to portray Tracey Halliday as the new Shannon Matthews bbc.com/news/uk-388814…
And any search for Tracey Halliday or Jorja Halliday prior to September 2021 is more or less a dead end. Apart from spurious findings of make-up artists working with the media.
Obviously @TraceyJSpencer is nothing to do with this.
Far too posh.
Talking of posh. If Tracey Halliday is a council house mother of 5 as portrayed by Sky, how has her sister managed to get such a refined accent?
Almost like an actress in this ITV interview, but without the emotion.
It's worth watching this clip. These days a lot of medical school and medical college exams use actresses, and it looks like this. No emotion. Read from a script.
Why would this interview be so emotionless?
And the call for vaccination seems out of place.
Scripted.
So there is something very fishy about the story of Jorja's death.
I suspect it has to do with her care at @icu_portsmouth.
I asked this question of the lead clinician there.
Let's see what happens.
In the meantime I would welcome any updates from @laurabundock who was given the scoop, despite being a Royal Correspondent.
It now becomes imperative that the truth about Jorja Halliday's death is told. Because on the face of it it looks like someone is hiding something.
And the story really reminds me of the death of Adriana Takara, that we know to be a cover up of a terrible mistake resulting from the imposition of fear to coerce an experimental RNA therapy.
It looks like we found our vector.
They moved from spraying live (cloned) viruses to putting them in drinking water.. which we thought wasn't possible due to chlorine.
Well, it turns out that it is, if you use a stabiliser.
The @NIH told us that they stopped funding GOFROC research but they clearly didn't.
This is a modified live virus. That is, they took a pathogenic influenza and genetically modified it and propagated it using infectious clones (reverse genetics). nature.com/articles/s4154…
"MLVs were diluted in distilled water containing Vac-Pac Plus (Best Veterinary 418 Solutions, Columbus, GA, USA) to neutralize residual chlorine and adjust the pH"
There are a lot of pharma agents celebrating on twitter recently because the now-conflicted @cochranecollab dropped their standards and published something on HPV vaccination they didn't understand.
To explain it you need to understand the difference between the two studies quoted.
The first (Bergman) analysed a bunch of real studies (including RCTs) and concluded that the effect on cancer couldn't be seen - despite nearly 20 years of follow up.
The second (Henschke) cherry picked a bunch of "real world data" studies and concluded that the vaccine prevented a gazillion cervical cancers, pretending that it analysed 132 million patient records. It did nothing of the sort. What it did was look at two studies, take out the bit where it showed that the vaccine increased the risk of cancer (Kjaer 2021, over 20s) - replicated in multiple country statistics, split them into three studies, ignore the other studies showing the opposite, and ignore the fact that none of this data is verifiable.
Notably, one of the major studies (Palmer 2024, which was found to be seriously flawed) has been excluded from the meta-analysis because it did not show a cancer benefit in the under 16 age group.
It is very difficult to "fix" a randomised controlled trial.
It is very easy to "fix" a meta-analysis of observational studies where the data is "not available".
There is a huge difference between "real" studies and "real world data" studies because the latter are cherry picked or even fully synthetic, and the authors don't have access to the data. They are produced by vested interests groups to sell a narrative.
This was the most corrupted review that Cochrane have ever performed and this time they shot themselves in the foot by contradicting their own reviews. cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.10…
your childish insults drew my attention to your lab's quite incredible paper confirming that chronic activation of cGAS-STING, as happens with plasmid-contaminated vaccines, causes cancer.
Retraction Watch busted for collusion with Rolf Marschalek, who is not only part of BioNtech's Goethe university..
but - get this - their Corona fund was pump primed by the Quandt family - infamous for their role in Nazi Germany.
The dude keeps going, but betrays that this is a copycat to a bunch of accounts linked to one dubbed "Penguin" that only appeared when I pointed out the Joe Sansone scam that is being coordinated by Sasha Latypova to derail legal cases.
This is also strange.
The Quentin registry study shows a big jump in vaccination rate by age group but the Bernard study doesn't show the same.
This is more like what a synthetic data set might show based on assumed characteristics of the underlying data.
There are possible explanations for all of these anomalies, but this is the problem with secret registry data:
It's not credible when it conveniently matches a narrative and nobody is allowed to see it.