Robert Malone, 16,000 physicians, Implore Parents To Get Facts About Jabbing Children

While Seseme Street coerces children to get jabbed (see below), Dr. Robert Malone and thousands others logically say otherwise:

Robert Malone Implores Parents To Get Facts About Vaccinating Children

Before you vaccinate your child — which is irreversible and potentially permanently damaging — find out why 16,000 physicians and medical scientists around the world signed a declaration publicly declaring that healthy children should NOT be vaccinated for COVID-19.

My name is Robert Malone, and I am speaking to you as a parent, grandparent, physician and scientist. I don’t usually read from a prepared speech, but this is so important that I wanted to make sure that I get every single word and scientific fact correct.

I stand by this statement with a career dedicated to vaccine research and development. I’m vaccinated for COVID and I’m generally pro-vaccination. I have devoted my entire career to developing safe and effective ways to prevent and treat infectious diseases.

After this, I will be posting the text of this statement so you can share it with your friends and family.

There are three issues parents need to understand:

The first is that a viral gene will be injected into your children’s cells. This gene forces your child’s body to make toxic spike proteins. These proteins often cause permanent damage in children’s critical organs, including

Their brain and nervous system.
Their heart and blood vessels, including blood clots.
Their reproductive system, and
This vaccine can trigger fundamental changes to their immune system.
The most alarming point about this is that once these damages have occurred, they are irreparable.
You can’t fix the lesions within their brain.
You can’t repair heart tissue scarring.
You can’t repair a genetically reset immune system, and
This vaccine can cause reproductive damage that could affect future generations of your family.
The second thing you need to know about is the fact that this novel technology has not been adequately tested.

We need at least 5 years of testing/research before we can really understand the risks
Harms and risks from new medicines often become revealed many years later. Ask yourself if you want your own child to be part of the most radical medical experiment in human history.

One final point: the reason they’re giving you to vaccinate your child is a lie.

Your children represent no danger to their parents or grandparents. It’s actually the opposite. Their immunity, after getting COVID, is critical to save your family if not the world from this disease.

In summary: there is no benefit for your children or your family to be vaccinating your children against the small risks of the virus, given the known health risks of the vaccine that as a parent, you and your children may have to live with for the rest of their lives.

The risk/benefit analysis isn’t even close.

As a parent and grandparent, my recommendation to you is to resist and fight to protect your children.

The statement was delivered at a December 12 livestream event hosted by Unity Project and Global Covid Summit. Dr. Robert Malone and other leading physicians discussed their recent Physicians’ Declaration update, why healthy children should not be vaccinated and the associated risks. Read Supporting Documents.

They are targeting children with trusted and beloved characters:

The fictional children’s character is supposed to be 6 years old, which if he were real, means he became eligible for the COVID vaccine last week when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine for emergency use in children ages 5 through 11.

Big Bird’s endorsement of the COVID vaccine for children isn’t an isolated incident — it’s just the latest example of Sesame Street endorsing federal health agencies’ COVID messaging for young children, with the help of corporate media.

But the announcement was met with backlash from elected officials and media pundits who accused the character of spreading government propaganda.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman of Children’s Health Defense, today said:

“The use of trusted and beloved figures in this propaganda assault to induce children into submitting as guinea pigs to injections with an experimental high-risk zero-liability medical product with no proven benefits for kids is unconscionable and revolting.

”Big Pharma has turned Big Bird into a child predator.”

‘Big’ shot: Big Bird gets his COVID-19 vaccine:

Big Bird, Elmo and other Sesame Street characters appeared on CNN for a Saturday morning program called, “The ABCs of COVID Vaccines.”

Rosita, a furry, turquoise, Mexican monster, was inoculated against COVID-19 Friday.

Unfortunately, Elmo — who is just 3 — isn’t yet old enough to get his COVID shot.

“Elmo was so happy to talk to Dr Sanjay Gupta at the town hall today! Elmo learned that Elmo’s friends can get the COVID-19 vaccine now, and soon Elmo can too!” he tweeted early Saturday.

While Big Bird was excited about getting the jab, Sen. Ted Cruz seemed less than thrilled by it.

“Government propaganda…for your 5 year old!” the Texas Republican tweeted.

Big Bird gets vaccinated, 1972

Lawyers worldwide submit new evidence to International Criminal Court alleging World Leaders & Scientific Advisors have used Covid-19 & the Injections to commit Genocide and Crimes against Humanity

6 Likes

Picture above says it all, thinking they do good when doing evil. Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for Light, and Light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!Could it be that all this evil is taking place because we have clearly been disobedient and not obeyed God's Law?

Deut. 1:39 Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in there, and unto them will I give it, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.

https://defending-gibraltar.net/t/children-become-the-next-target-for-the-jab

Children Become The Next Target For The Jab

Children To Be Shot in Gibraltar

The Song of Moses

3 Likes

Experts do NOT agree that Covid vaccines are necessary for children as young as five due to little risk they face from the virus and potential adverse effects of the jab

  • Covid vaccines are being rolled out to children as young as five in many developed nations, but some experts say they are not needed
  • In Sweden, regulators rejected to approve the shot for healthy kids under the age of 12
  • One Swedish regulator said 'we don't see any clear benefit with vaccinating' young, healthy, children
  • Dr Michael Kurilla, an NIH official, abstained from approving the shots for young children over concerns about data collection and long-term side-effects
  • Two U.S. health experts also said this week that would not want their male children to receive booster shots over concerns of myocarditis

By Mansur Shaheen U.S. Deputy Health Editor For Dailymail.Com

Published: 12:45 EST, 28 January 2022

Covid vaccines have been available for children as young as five in the U.S. since late-October, though some experts are still unsure whether the shots are needed, and some countries abroad have bucked the growing trend of recommending the shots to all young children.

This week, Swedish health officials declined to open vaccine eligibility for all children five or older, deciding to instead only allow the shots to children under 11 who have a serious medical condition.

The UK has a similar policy to their Nordic peer, allowing for all children 12 and older to get the shot, but only allowing children five to 11 to get the jab if they have a pre-existing health issue that puts them at serious risk.

In the wake of the Omicron variant's rise through out the world, many European countries opted to expand vaccine eligibility in an effort to control the variant.

Many health officials disagree with the decision, though, and debate has opened as to whether the shots are necessary.

Still, though, in places like New York City, children must be jabbed to take part in some activities at school and to do things like go to restaurants or movie theaters.

image
Covid vaccines are being rolled out to children as young as five years old throughout the world, though many experts doubt that the shots are necessary for people that young. Pictured: A young child in New York City, New York, receives a shot of a COVID-19 vaccine on November 3

'With the knowledge we have today, with a low risk for serious disease for kids, we don't see any clear benefit with vaccinating them,' Britta Bjorkholm, a Swedish Health Agency official, said at a news conference Friday.

Covid has shown little ability to cause much harm to healthy, young, children.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that deaths among children younger than 12 make up a fraction of a percentage of those that have died from the virus in the U.S.

A study performed by researchers at the University of Utah last year found that 50 percent of cases among children are asymptomatic - and the study was performed during the Delta surge, before the more mild Omicron wave took over.

There figures have spurred some to questions why children have to receive the Covid vaccines.

Dr Michael Kurilla (pictured), of the NIH's National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, was the only member to abstain in the FDA's advisory committee vote of 17-0-1 to recommend approval of COVID-19 vaccines in children ages five to 11

Dr Michael Kurilla (pictured), of the NIH's National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, was the only member to abstain in the FDA's advisory committee vote of 17-0-1 to recommend approval of COVID-19 vaccines in children ages five to 11

Dr Michael Kurilla, the director of the Division of Clinical Innovation, at the National Institutes of Health's (NIH) National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences and member of the Food and Drug Administration's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), was the lone member to abstain from approving the shot for kids aged five to 11 in October.

At the time, he told DailyMail.com that while he thinks children with certain conditions that put them at a high risk should receive the shot, he is not sure if healthy children need it as well.

He also worried that the protection provided to children by the jab would quickly wane, and noted that previously infected children should already be protected enough - even without the shot.

Kurilla had some concerns about the study Pfizer performed as well. He said the follow up period of only two to three months, potentially missing some longer term side-effects.

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization (JCVI), and independent advisory committee in the UK, believes the shots are only necessary to certain young children.

2 Likes

1 Like

Home5G Roll-Out5G Roll-outDefend kids against the Jaberwonky – open letter to UK gov from 76 very concerned doctors

Defend kids against the Jaberwonky – open letter to UK gov from 76 very concerned doctors

There are no excuses, no "we didn't know", and by their actions we shall know them

August 15, 2022 Steve Cook 5G Roll-out, COMMENTARY, ENVIRONMENT, GOVERNMENT, HEALTH, HUMAN RIGHTS, SPOTLIGHT 0

In the US, the FDA has long been a front for the pharmaceutical-industrial complex masquerading as a government agency.

The latest scandal in which it approved the dangerous Pfizer biochemical agent currently being touted as a v4cc1n3 on the basis of egregiously dodgy “evidence” presented by the criminal pharmaceutical corporation has now made that corruption so glaringly obvious you’d have to be virtually brain dead not to see it.

Or the government, which evidently amounts to the same thing.

How the FDA has lasted this long without being dismantled and replaced by something more honest is a mystery – except that the US government is in a similar position: a front group for the globalist money powers masquerading as a government and pretending to serve the people whilst actually doing them in in myriad inventive ways.

Are the equivalent agencies in other countries – the UK’s MHRA for instance – similarly subverted? We’ll see.

How the MHRA responds to the letter below will give us a clue.

We’ll be very surprised if the MHRA does not show its true colours and ignore the open letter below. But maybe we are too bitter after decades of watching Her Majesty’s Government selling out its citizenry. It would be nice to be proved wrong.

Come what may, the UK Government and its MHRA have no excuses. They cannot pretend they “don’t know” how dangerous is the jab where kids are the selected target.

So if they give it the green light, any harm that results will have been inflicted with malice aforethought

By their deeds we shall know them.

Letter to the U.K. Gov from 76 Doctors

Comprehensive reasons why the U.S. FDA decision authorizing COVID vaccinations in infants and young children must not happen in the UK.

Robert W Malone MD, MS

An open letter to the MHRA:

Below is a letter signed by 76 doctors in the UK, to the Medical and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and other U.K. Government officials. This letter lays out comprehensive reasons why the recent U.S. FDA decision authorizing COVID vaccinations in infants and young children must not happen in the UK. The letter is well-sourced and accurate. Let us hope that main-stream media here in the USA and in the UK report on this letter in an unbiased fashion.

(the letter continues)

We are writing to you urgently concerning the announcement that the FDA has granted an Emergency Use Authorization for both Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines in preschool children.

We would urge you to consider very carefully the move to vaccinate ever younger children against SARS-CoV-2, despite the gradual but significant reducing virulence of successive variants, the increasing evidence of rapidly waning vaccine efficacy, the increasing concerns over long-term vaccine harms, and the knowledge that the vast majority of this young age group have already been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 repeatedly and have demonstrably effective immunity. Thus, the balance of benefit and risk which supported the rollout of mRNA vaccines to the elderly and vulnerable in 2021 is totally inappropriate for small children in 2022.

We also strongly challenge the addition of COVID-19 vaccination into the routine child immunization program despite no demonstrated clinical need, known and unknown risks (see below) and the fact that these vaccines still have only conditional marketing authorization.

It is noteworthy that the Pfizer documentation presented to the FDA has huge gaps in the evidence provided:

  • The protocol was changed mid-trial. The original two-dose schedule exhibited poor immunogenicity with efficacy far below the required standard. A third dose was added by which time many of the original placebo recipients had been vaccinated.
  • There was no statistically significant difference between the placebo and vaccinated groups in either the 6–23-month age group or the 2-4-year-olds, even after the third dose. Astonishingly, the results were based on just three participants in the younger age group (one vaccinated and two placebo) and just seven participants in the older 2–4-year-olds (two vaccinated and five placebo). Indeed, for the younger age group the confidence intervals ranged from minus-367% to plus-99%. The manufacturer stated that the numbers were too low to draw any confident conclusions. Moreover, these limited numbers come only from children infected more than seven days after the third dose.
  • Over the whole time period from the first dose onwards (see page 39 Tables 19 and 20), there were a total of 225 infected children in the vaccinated arm and 150 in the placebo arm, giving a calculated vaccine efficacy of only 25% (14% for the 6-23 months, and 33% for 2-4s).
  • The additional immunogenicity studies against Omicron, requested by the FDA, only involved a total of 66 children tested one month after the third dose (see page 35).

It is incomprehensible that the FDA considered that this represents sufficient evidence on which to base a decision to vaccinate healthy children. When it comes to safety, the data are even thinner: only 1,057 children, some already unblinded, were followed for just two months. It is noteworthy that Sweden and Norway are not recommending the vaccine for 5-11s and Holland is not recommending it for children who have already had COVID-19. The director of the Danish Health and Medicines Authority stated recently that with what is now known, the decision to vaccinate children was a mistake.

We summarize below the overwhelming arguments against this vaccination.

A. Extremely low risk from COVID-19 to young children

  • In the whole of 2020 and 2021, not a single child aged 1-9 died where COVID-19 was the sole diagnosis on the death certificate, according to ONS data.
  • A detailed study in England from March 1st 2020 to March 1st 2021 found only six children under 18 years died with no co-morbidities. There were no deaths aged 1-4 years.
  • Children clear the virus more easily than adults.
  • Children mount effective, robust, and sustained immune responses.
  • Since the arrival of the Omicron variant, infections have been generally much milder. That is also true for unvaccinated under-5s.
  • By June 2022 it is now estimated that 89% of 1-4-year-olds had already had SARS-CoV-2 infection.
  • Recent data from Israel show excellent long-lasting immunity following infection in children, especially in 5-11s.

B. Poor vaccine efficacy

  • In adults, it has become apparent that vaccine efficacy wanes steadily over time, necessitating boosters at regular intervals. Specifically, vaccine efficacy has waned more rapidly against the latest Omicron variants.
  • In children, vaccine efficacy has waned more rapidly in 5-11s than in 12-17s, possibly related to the lower dose used in the pediatric formulation. One study from New York showed efficacy against Omicron falling to only 12% by 4-5 weeks and to negative values by 5-6 weeks post second dose.
  • In the Pfizer 0-4s trial, the efficacy after two doses fell to negative values, necessitating a change to the trial protocol. After a third dose there was a suggestion of efficacy from 7-30 days but there is no data beyond 30 days to see how quickly this will wane.

C. Potential harms of COVID-19 vaccines for children

  • There has been great concern about myocarditis in adolescents and young adults, especially in males after the second dose, estimated at one per 2,600 in active post-marketing surveillance in Hong Kong. The emerging evidence of persistent cardiac abnormalities in adolescents with post-mRNA vaccine myopericarditis, as demonstrated by cardiac MRI at 3-8 months follow up, suggests this is far from ‘mild and short-lived’. The potential for longer term effects requires further study and calls for the strictest application of the precautionary principle in respect of the youngest and most vulnerable children.
  • Although post-vaccination myocarditis appears to be less common in 5-11-year-olds than older children, it is, nonetheless, increased over baseline.
  • In the Pfizer study, 50% of vaccinated children had systemic adverse events, including irritability and fever. Diagnosis of myocarditis is much more difficult in younger children. No troponin levels or ECG studies were documented. Even a vaccinated child in the trial, hospitalized with fever, calf pain and a raised CPK, had no report of D-dimers, anti-platelet antibodies or troponin levels.
  • In Pfizer’s 5-11s post-authorization conditions, it is required to conduct studies looking for myocarditis and is not due to report results until 2027.
  • Of equal concern are, as yet unknown, negative effects on the immune system. In the 0-4s trial, only seven children were described as having “severe” COVID-19 – six vaccinated and one given placebo. Similarly, for the 12 children with recurrent episodes of infection, 10 were vaccinated against only two who received placebo. These are all tiny figures and much too small to rule out any adverse impact such as antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) and other impacts on the immune system.
  • Also unanswered is the question of Original Antigenic Sin. It is of note that in a large Israeli study, those infected after vaccination had poorer cover than those vaccinated after infection. In the Moderna trial, N-antibodies were seen in only 40% of those infected after vaccination, compared with 93% of those infected after placebo.
  • There is evidence of vaccine-induced disruption of both innate and adaptive immune responses. The possibility of developing an impaired immune function would be disastrous for children, who have the most competent innate immunity, which by now has been effectively trained by the circulating virus.
  • Totally unknown is whether there will be any adverse effect on T-cell function leading to an increase in cancers.
  • Also, in terms of reproductive function, limited animal bio-distribution studies showed lipid nanoparticles concentrate in ovaries and testes. Adult sperm donors have showed a reduction in sperm counts particularly of motile sperm, falling by three months post-vaccination and remaining depressed at four to five months.
  • Even for adults, concerns are rising that serious adverse events are in excess of hospitalizations from COVID-19.

D. Informed consent

  • For 5-11s, the JCVI, in recommending a “non-urgent offer” of vaccination, specifically noted the importance of fully informed consent with no coercion.
  • With the low uptake in this age group, the presence of therapy dogs’, advertisements including superhero images and information about child vaccination protecting friends and family all clearly run contrary to the concept of consent, fully informed and freely given.
  • The complete omission of information explaining to the public the different and novel technology used in COVID-19 vaccines compared to standard vaccines, and the failure to inform of the lack of any long-term safety data, borders on misinformation.

E. Effect on public confidence

  • Vaccines against much more serious diseases, such as polio and measles, need to be prioritized. Pushing an unnecessary and novel, gene-based vaccine on to young children risks seriously undermining parental confidence in the whole immunization program.
  • The poor quality of the data presented by Pfizer risks bringing the pharmaceutical industry into disrepute and the regulators if this product is authorized.

In summary, young healthy children are at minimal risk from COVID-19, especially since the arrival of the Omicron variant. Most have been repeatedly exposed to SARS-CoV-2 virus, yet have remained well, or have had short, mild illness. As detailed above, the vaccines are of brief efficacy, have known short- to medium-term risks and unknown long-term safety. Data for clinically useful efficacy in small children are scant or absent. In older children, for whom the vaccines are already licensed, they have been promoted via ethically dubious schemes to the potential detriment of other, and vital, parts of the childhood vaccination program.

For a tiny minority of children for whom the potential for benefit clearly and unequivocally outweighed the potential for harm, vaccination could have been facilitated by restrictive licenses. Whether following the precautionary principle or the instruction to First Do No Harm, such vaccines have no place in a routine childhood immunization program.

(Signed):

Professor Angus Dalgleish, MD, FRCP, FRACP, FRCPath, FMed Sci, Principal, Institute for Cancer Vaccines & Immunotherapy (ICVI)
Professor Anthony Fryer, PhD, FRCPath, Professor of Clinical Biochemistry, Keele University
Professor David Livermore, BSc, PhD, Retired Professor of Medical Microbiology, UEA
Professor John Fairclough FRCS FFSEM retired Honorary Consultant Surgeon
Lord Moonie, MBChB, MRCPsych, MFCM, MSc, House of Lords, former Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State 2001-2003, formerCconsultant in Public Health Medicine
Dr Abby Astle, MA(Cantab), MBBChir, GP Principal, GP Trainer, GP Examiner
Dr Michael D Bell, MBChB, MRCGP, retired General Practitioner
Dr Alan Black, MBBS, MSc, DipPharmMed, Retired Pharmaceutical Physician
Dr David Bramble, MBChB, MRCPsych, MD, Consultant Psychiatrist
Dr Emma Brierly, MBBS, MRCGP, General Practitioner
Dr David Cartland, MBChB, BMedSci, General practitioner
Dr Peter Chan, BM, MRCS, MRCGP, NLP, General Practitioner, Functional medicine practitioner
Michael Cockayne, MSc, PGDip, SCPHNOH, BA, RN, Occupational Health Practitioner
Julie Coffey, MBChB, General Practitioner
John Collis, RN, Specialist Nurse Practitioner, retired
Mr Ian F Comaish, MA, BM BCh, FRCOphth, FRANZCO, Consultant Ophthalmologist
James Cook, NHS Registered Nurse, Bachelor of Nursing (Hons), Master of Public Health
Dr Clare Craig, BMBCh, FRCPath, Pathologist
Dr David Critchley, BSc, PhD in Pharmacology, 32 years’ experience in Pharmaceutical R&D
Dr Jonathan Engler, MBChB, LlB (hons), DipPharmMedDr Elizabeth Evans, MA (Cantab), MBBS, DRCOG, Retired Doctor
Dr John Flack, BPharm, PhD, retired Director of Safety Evaluation at Beecham Pharmaceuticals and retired Senior Vice-president for Drug Discovery SmithKline Beecham
Dr Simon Fox, BSc, BMBCh, FRCP, Consultant in Infectious Diseases and Internal Medicine
Dr Ali Haggett, Mental health community work, 3rd sector, former lecturer in the history of medicine
David Halpin, MB BS FRCS, Orthopaedic and trauma surgeon (retired)
Dr Renée Hoenderkampf, General Practitioner
Dr Andrew Isaac, MB BCh, Physician, retired
Dr Steve James, Consultant Intensive Care
Dr Keith Johnson, BA, DPhil (Oxon), IP Consultant for Diagnostic Testing
Dr Rosamond Jones, MBBS, MD, FRCPCH, retired consultant paediatrician
Dr Tanya Klymenko, PhD, FHEA, FIBMS, Senior Lecturer in Biomedical Sciences
Dr Charles Lane, MA, DPhil, Molecular Biologist
Dr Branko Latinkic, BSc, PhD, Molecular Biologist
Dr Felicity Lillingstone, IMD DHS PhD ANP, Doctor, Urgent Care, Research Fellow
Dr Theresa Lawrie, MBBCh, PhD, Director, Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd, Bath
Katherine MacGilchrist, BSc (Hons), MSc, CEO/Systematic Review Director, Epidemica Ltd.
Dr Geoffrey Maidment, MBBS, MD, FRCP, Consultant physician, retired
Ahmad K Malik FRCS (Tr & Orth) Dip Med Sport, Consultant Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgeon
Dr Kulvinder Singh Manik, MBBS, General Practitioner
Dr Fiona Martindale, MBChB, MRCGP, General Practitioner
Dr S McBride, BSc (Hons) Medical Microbiology & Immunobiology, MBBCh BAO, MSc in Clinical Gerontology, MRCP(UK), FRCEM, FRCP (Edinburgh). NHS Emergency Medicine & Geriatrics
Mr Ian McDermott, MBBS, MS, FRCS(Tr&Orth), FFSEM(UK), Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
Dr Franziska Meuschel, MD, ND, PhD, LFHom, BSEM, Nutritional, Environmental and Integrated Medicine
Dr Scott Mitchell, MBChB, MRCS, Emergency Medicine Physician
Dr Alan Mordue, MBChB, FFPH. Retired Consultant in Public Health Medicine & Epidemiology
Dr David Morris, MBChB, MRCP(UK), General Practitioner
Margaret Moss, MA (Cantab), CBiol, MRSB, Director, The Nutrition and Allergy Clinic, Cheshire
Dr Alice Murkies, MD FRACGP MBBS, General Practitioner
Dr Greta Mushet, MBChB, MRCPsych, retired Consultant Psychiatrist in Psychotherapy
Dr Sarah Myhill, MBBS, retired GP and Naturopathic Physician
Dr Rachel Nicholl, PhD, Medical researcher
Dr Christina Peers, MBBS, DRCOG, DFSRH, FFSRH, Menopause specialist
Rev Dr William J U Philip MB ChB, MRCP, BD, Senior Minister The Tron Church, Glasgow, formerly physician specialising in cardiology
Dr Angharad Powell, MBChB, BSc (hons), DFRSH, DCP (Ireland), DRCOG, DipOccMed, MRCGP, General Practitioner
Dr Gerry Quinn, PhD. Postdoctoral researcher in microbiology and immunology
Dr Johanna Reilly, MBBS, General Practitioner
Jessica Righart, MSc, MIBMS, Senior Critical Care Scientist
Mr Angus Robertson, BSc, MB ChB, FRCSEd (Tr & Orth), Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
Dr Jessica Robinson, BSc(Hons), MBBS, MRCPsych, MFHom, Psychiatrist and Integrative Medicine Doctor
Dr Jon Rogers, MB ChB (Bristol), Retired General Practitioner
Mr James Royle, MBChB, FRCS, MMedEd, Colorectal surgeon
Dr Roland Salmon, MB BS, MRCGP, FFPH, Former Director, Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre Wales
Sorrel Scott, Grad Dip Phys, Specialist Physiotherapist in Neurology, 30 years in NHS
Dr Rohaan Seth, BSc (hons), MBChB (hons), MRCGP, Retired General Practitioner
Dr Gary Sidley, retired NHS Consultant Clinical Psychologist
Dr Annabel Smart, MBBS, retired General Practitioner
Natalie Stephenson, BSc (Hons) Paediatric Audiologist
Dr Zenobia Storah,MA (Oxon), Dip Psych, DClinPsy, Senior Clinical Psychologist (Child and Adolescent)
Dr Julian Tompkinson, MBChB MRCGP, General Practitioner GP trainer PCME
Dr Noel Thomas, MA, MBChB, DCH, DObsRCOG, DTM&H, MFHom, retired doctor
Dr Stephen Ting, MB CHB, MRCP, PhD, Consultant Physician
Dr Livia Tossici-Bolt, PhD, Clinical Scientist
Dr Carmen Wheatley, DPhil, Orthomolecular Oncology
Dr Helen Westwood MBChB MRCGP DCH DRCOG, General Practitioner
Mr Lasantha Wijesinghe, FRCS, Consultant Vascular Surgeon
Dr Damian Wilde, PhD, (Chartered) Specialist Clinical Psychologist
Dr Ruth Wilde, MB BCh, MRCEM, AFMCP, Integrative & Functional Medicine Doctor

Source

‘Preposterous’: FDA, CDC Authorize New COVID Boosters for Kids as Young as 5 — With No Data, No Independent Review

2 Likes