UK Members of Parliament debate Vaccine Damage

The truth starts to become more mainstream

Last week a debate on the Vaccine Damage Payments Act 1979 was proposed by Sir Christopher Chope, a Conservative Member of Parliament (MP) for Christchurch (an area on the south coast of England). The Speaker of the House allowed the debate to go ahead but it was scheduled in the evening when most MPs had already gone home. In total, it looked as though only a handful of MPs attended.

Christopher Chope seems to have been one of only a few MPs to have consistently asked some awkward questions outside the narrative. Recent questions of his include:

• What reason has the MHRA not yet decided whether to approve Ivermectin as a treatment for covid-19?

  • Answer - The Department of Health and Social Care has indicated that it will not be possible to answer this question within the usual time period. An answer is being prepared and will be provided as soon as it is available.

• In anticipation of the Vaccine Damage debate a series of questions were tabled. Seven of those questions were outstanding for more than one week and one more than six weeks. What can the Deputy Speaker do to ensure that the Department of Health and Social Care delivers?

  • Answer - When Members submit questions, they ought to be answered on time. There is simply no excuse for them not to be answered.

• What steps is the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care taking to investigate 427 suspected cases of major thromboembolic events with concurrent thrombocytopenia; and if the Government will make it its policy to those affected by those suspected cases of the availability of the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme?

  • Answer - Following a review, it was determined that an association between the AstraZeneca vaccine and TTS was likely. All Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme claims are clinically assessed on a case-by-case basis.

• What regulatory action has the MHRA taken in response to the side effects detected as a result of the analysis of Yellow Cards and how has that action has been publicised?

  • Answer - The majority of the Yellow Card reports relate to injection-site reactions and generalised symptoms such as ‘flu like’ illness and headaches. Such symptoms are not associated with more serious or lasting illness. Where the MHRA has establish a plausible link between a vaccine and a new side effect, warnings have been added. Few serious new safety concerns have been identified but on these occasions, the MHRA has issued a press statement and letters to healthcare professionals.

The few MPs that did attend the debate had some interesting things to say. Things that won’t be reported in the mainstream press due to the controversial nature of the subject matter.

The rest of this article is for paid subscribers only. If you want to find out what was said in the debate then please subscribe to my newsletter. My articles take a lot of time to research and write so your support is very much appreciated and will ensure that I can continue to produce the same quality and quantity of articles going forwards.