1986 The Act: See the Movie Scarier than Halloween Itself For Yourself
New York Rabbi Begs For President Trump To Help Jewish Community

"Triumph" and "Ambush" vaccines to be rolled out in the UK next month?

image from news.images.itv.comby John Stone

A news story in the Sun newspaper suggests that coronavirus vaccines will be rolled out in the UK as early as next month: VACCINE BOOST:NHS ready to roll out covid jab from next month with tens of thousands of people being vaccinated before Christmas”. While this runs against so many apparently informed reports that vaccines may not be available until way into next year it coincides with the consultation last month to suspend licensing regulations to allow roll out this year.The report states:

“The first mass vaccination centres are planned for sites in major cities including Leeds, Hull and London...They will be supported by hundreds of mobile vaccination units dotted nationwide, while roving teams will visit care homes and vulnerable Brits.”

This corroborates an earlier BBC report:

“Mass vaccination sites and mobile facilities are being commissioned as part of as a "fairly massive exercise"...According to the document, the two vaccines are called Ambush and Triumph...Ambush needs to be stored at -70C (-94F) and kept in hospitals due to regulations set down by the Medicines Health Regulatory Authority.”

”Triumph” is thought to be the Oxford Astra Zeneca vaccine which requires two vaccinations within 28 days and the one requiring extreme refrigeration is likely the Moderna vaccine which has novel RNA engineering which has been closely backed by Bill Gates. Neither of the products is likely to prevent the disease at a useful level as even articles in the New York Times and the Washington Post highlight.

According to the Daily Mail:

Under the proposed ranking by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, the vaccines will be rolled out in the following order:

  • older adults' resident in a care home and care home workers
  • all those 80 years of age and over and health and social care workers
  • all those 75 years of age and over
  • all those 70 years of age and over
  • all those 65 years of age and over
  • high-risk adults under 65 years of age with underlying health woes
  • moderate-risk adults under 65 years of age with underlying health woes
  • all those 60 years of age and over
  • all those 55 years of age and over
  • all those 50 years of age and over
  • rest of the population (priority to be determined)

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation is chaired by Andrew Pollard who is also lead developer of the Oxford vaccine. Both vaccines are already known to have unpleasant side-effects. The Oxford Astra Zeneca Vaccine is still under  investigation by the FDA.





Thank you Laura. Feel free to contact me privately.
Good luck!

Laura Hayes


I have forwarded your latest post here to the two attorneys to whom I sent your earlier post. One has replied regarding receipt of the first email I sent and was eager to read what you wrote. I will keep you posted with regard to further replies, either here on this thread, or privately through Kim Rossi.

I think your legal argument is both brilliant and compelling!



Your article is an excellent overview of everything that is wrong with our current state of vaccine affairs. However, with all of that knowledge/evidence, no one has won in court to rectify it. My approach is much harder for them to legally defend because it highlights the fact that the 1986 Federal vaccine law is bad law. The goal of pharma in pushing the law was to increase their PRIVATE profits by gaining legal FEDERAL protection from vaccine product liability. To do this, with the appearance of Constitutionality, they had to LEGALLY DEFINE the product "vaccine" so that all of their other medical products were excluded from this protection. Next, the Federal government took on the liability through its unconstitutional "vaccine court". In essence, the 1986 law sets up a capped insurance payout for legally defined injuries ("Vaccine Injury Table". ) The Constitutional problem was where to get the money for the injury claims payouts. Under the Constitution, Federal money can only be raised through taxation. This is why they came up with the "taxable vaccine." When the Federal government purchases vaccines from PRIVATE pharma manufacturers through the 1986 law, the MANUFACTURERS pay a tax on each vaccine sold, which goes into the Treasury to be held in a separate account for vaccine injury payouts. (Has anyone researched how many $ billions is sitting there UNUSED?) Of course, even though the manufacturers pay the "tax", they have huge leverage for pricing their vaccines. The higher cost is passed on to the taxpayers. In order to get this deal encoded into law, the vaccine manufacturers sell their product exclusively through the Federal government. By this same law, the Federal government must PROMOTE (free advertising) the "taxable" vaccines. This is why Trump must occasionally push them and cannot publicly condemn them. (more on this later).

So, where does this leave the states? Because of State's Rights and a separate law code, states can only purchase the "taxable vaccines" from the Federal government. There is no law preventing a state from creating its own vaccine program; what is the benefit of purchasing the Federal product? MONEY.
If the Federal government is already giving pharma liability protection, the states would also need to. Why would pharma make a vaccine exclusively for a state that didn't offer the protection? Also, a state could not compete with volume purchases by the Feds. Another big benefit to the state if using Federal "taxable vaccines" is that Federal taxes pay for vaccine injury payouts AND the liability protection extends to STATE doctor's/healthcare workers administering the vaccine.

With all of this mutual benefit from the Federal program, there is an Achilles heel for states wanting to force vaccinate its citizens. In 1986 there were oppositional forces to the law including parents with vaccine injured children who were quite informed on the Nuremberg Code and informed consent. This was negotiated into the Law. "If you want liability protection, we want informed consent- "recommended" only." Because of all of the above, THE STATES CANNOT WRITE A STATE LAW TO CANCEL OUT THE FEDERAL VACCINE LAW. Their only recourse is to create their own state vaccine program that removes informed consent. States cannot afford to do this.

I conclude that currently, anyone in a state that purchases Federal "taxable vaccines" and has removed informed consent for vaccines from their state law, would have legal grounds to sue for fraud. Just my opinion. This would be a difficult case for the state to defend against. Additionally, the true nature of the Federal 1986 law would come to the general public's attention.
"Jacobson vs Massachusetts" would not protect them from this approach.

Laura Hayes


Agreed! You cannot have medical mandates in a free and ethical society. Additionally, one should not be required to formally exempt out of a medical treatment or procedure for oneself or one's child, a simple "no thank you" should always suffice.

Here is something I wrote a little over a year ago, more pertinent than ever:


It would be excellent if we could enlist more doctors to refuse to give mandated vaccines for fear of a lawsuit. Unfortunately, it still seems as though we are quite a ways from that happening. Pertinent to that is a key fact from my article above, which I also included in my "Why Is This Legal?" presentation:

"It is important to note that if any of the categories of ingredients listed above (known poisons, carcinogens, toxins, neurotoxins, sterilizing agents, etc.) were to be injected into another person by anyone other than a doctor, nurse, or pharmacist, that person would face criminal charges."

Hard to argue with that fact. And worthy of a lawsuit, in addition to the fraud you mention!


@ Laura Hayes

It has been my prayer for a long time that we could stop forced/coerced vaccination. This is key to the future health and safety of our citizens. California has always been a key state legislatively. If they can pass it there, the other states will fall like dominoes. We have already seen this in action regarding the removal of religious exemptions. Likewise, if we can prove vaccine fraud, it will have a chilling effect on the rest of the states. Perhaps some of the Frontline Doctors could influence California doctors to reject giving mandatory vaccines for fear of a fraud lawsuit. We could work both ends.


Interesting comment from one of the volunteers to test one of the COVID vaccines.
here is a link to his twitter account
He is, bless him, still pro vaccines, but also, it seems, imo, very worried.
He describes a "hellish" night, far worse than what was described by the news, which included his oxygen saturation dropping down to 82% while he decided whether or not to call 911.
Apparently others he spoke to also had similar reactions. One suggested his grandmother might not have survived it. Luke thinks that it would likely be ok for older people due to their less reactive immune systems, but that children may have even worse reactions.
He thinks that other COVID vaccines in the pipeline might be safer, but doesn't seem to realize that the same reporting that minimized his symptoms could well apply to the other vaccines as well.

Angus Files

Boris Johnson, lockdowns kill more than they cure

"I'm talking about the 15,000 scientists, epidemiologists and doctors worldwide who signed the Great Barrington Declaration and are begging governments to change their lockdown strategy because, they say, there's a better way to fight the virus. But this Government isn't listening. It's steadfastly refusing to acknowledge the growing international consensus that lockdowns don't work despite a recent Edinburgh University study (which it commissioned) that not only confirms this but says the restrictions and school closures that are still being imposed could actually increase deaths by prolonging the pandemic."

Pharma For Prison



The Corona Carousel Crew, in it's pestilence pantomime presentation.
Galloping gerbles and chuckling chumps at Oxford with chimpanzee adeno vaccine vectors tae chuck around .
Covid-19 & Animal Research: Study in hamsters shows ...... 26 May 2020 .
Snapshot pictures shows silly hamsters not wearing their masks properly !
www.Research.oxac.uk>coronavirus Research
About the Oxford Covid-19 Vaccine Research /University of ...... 19 July 2020 .

They'll no be laughing when the "Public Inquiry" gets done for "The Culling Corridors" in The Health and Social Care Sector .
Just following their orders? From :
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [ NICE Guidelines and criteria] advocating and promoting guidelines of treatment interventions with ,"The old dogs for the hard road, with morphine pump set up ,and the handicapped pups for the pavements!"

Laura Hayes


Wow, very compelling legal argument!

I am going to share what you wrote with a couple attorneys.

You are wonderfully astute and articulate! I sure hope one of these attorneys finds your argument compelling and worth pursuing...stay tuned!


@Laura Hayes

Thank you for your kind words and encouragement. We are truly "all in this together." I have read your fine work and Age of Autism for several years. I will continue to post my ongoing research. I have been doing this for years on other sites. I really appreciate the Age of Autism gang!

Key to a California vaccine fraud lawsuit is the Federal LEGAL definition of "vaccine" and "taxable vaccine" found in the U.S. tax code and originating in the 1986 Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.

Here is something I wrote previously:

"....I see a legal way to stop states from removing informed consent from citizens regarding vaccines. It's all about the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and the current Federal legal definition for "taxable vaccines" and "vaccines".The Federal 1986 Act legally establishes 4 things: Informed consent regarding the "taxable vaccine" (vaccines are only "recommended"), liability protection for vaccine manufacturers, liability protection for doctors, nurses, healthcare providers and whoever administers the taxable vaccine, and the collection of a Federal excise tax (75 cents) on each vaccine purchased from the manufacturer to be deposited in the Treasury until needed for an award paid out through the Federal vaccine court administered by HHS and the DOJ.

It is my opinion that the legally named and defined Federal "taxable vaccine" represents a product that includes all of the above. It is essentially a Federal contract. If a state uses this "product", which all do, then they cannot write a state law which breaks the contract (removal of right to informed consent) and expect the other benefits. The state law has created a NEW product (immunization) which does not exist. It is NOT a Federal "taxable vaccine." If a citizen is denied the thousands of dollars for education (which they have a rightful claim to under the compulsory education law) because they choose, by informed consent, to reject the vaccines for their child, they could sue for fraud.

Here is the Federal legal definition for "taxable vaccine" and "vaccine" which was given to me via email when I wrote HHS to request it:

"Please give me the legal definition for the term “vaccine” as used in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (Vaccine injury Table) described in “National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act 1986” Public Law 99-660 Nov. 14, 1986, 42 USC 300aa-14 “Vaccine Injury Table” Sec. 2114 (a).

Does the new Heplisav-B product fit this definition? It is not an attenuated virus. It is an artificial recombinant DNA product with a novel adjuvant, Toll-like receptor 9 agonist.

"Dynavax is a fully-integrated biopharmaceutical company focused on leveraging the power of the body's innate and adaptive immune responses through toll-like receptor (TLR) stimulation. Dynavax discovers and develops novel vaccines and immuno-oncology therapeutics. The Company’s first commercial product, HEPLISAV-B® [Hepatitis B Vaccine (Recombinant), Adjuvanted], is approved in the U.S. for prevention of infection caused by all known subtypes of hepatitis B virus in adults age 18 years and older.” (April 18, 2019 Press Release)

I look forward to your response.


Good morning,
Per 26 USC 4132, this would be a covered vaccine under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Here is a link to an additional reference: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2006-title26/pdf/USCODE-2006-title26-subtitleD-chap32-subchapC-sec4132.pdf


Dale Mishler, DHSc, MS, APRN
Captain, United States Public Health Service
Chief, Countermeasures and Review Panel Branch
Division of Injury Compensation Programs
Healthcare Systems Bureau
Health Resources and Service Administration
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
5600 Fishers Lane, Room 08N168
Rockville, MD 20857

Here is the definition from that link:

"§ 4132. Definitions and special rules
(a) Definitions relating to taxable vaccines
For purposes of this subchapter—
(1) Taxable vaccine
The term ‘‘taxable vaccine’’ means any of the following vaccines which are manufac- tured or produced in the United States or en- tered into the United States for consumption, use, or warehousing:
(A) Any vaccine containing diphtheria tox- oid.
(B) Any vaccine containing tetanus toxoid.
(C) Any vaccine containing pertussis bac- teria, extracted or partial cell bacteria, or specific pertussis antigens.
(D) Any vaccine against measles.
(E) Any vaccine against mumps.
(F) Any vaccine against rubella.
(G) Any vaccine containing polio virus. (H) Any HIB vaccine.
(I) Any vaccine against hepatitis A.
(J) Any vaccine against hepatitis B.
(K) Any vaccine against chicken pox.
(L) Any vaccine against rotavirus gastro-
(M) Any conjugate vaccine against strep-
tococcus pneumoniae.
(N) Any trivalent vaccine against influ-
(O) Any meningococcal vaccine.
(P) Any vaccine against the human

(2) Vaccine
The term ‘‘vaccine’’ means any substance designed to be administered to a human being for the prevention of 1 or more diseases."

According to Federal law, a taxable (2) “vaccine” can have anything in it, doesn't have to work (just designed), can be put into the body any way (insects, ticks, vaccinated mother's milk, gmo plants, aerosol, shot, etc.), is only for humans (can't collect in vaccine court for vaccine injured animals), only attempts to “prevent” - NOT cause one to gain immunity, and is not limited to communicable diseases. Based on this definition, the undefined word "immunization" used in the California state code is a new product, is NOT a Federal taxable vaccine, and to my knowledge, DOES NOT EXIST.

California uses the Federal Vaccines for Children Program, which clearly supplies Federal "taxable vaccines" to the state, paid with Federal taxes. California providers sign a contract agreement that makes direct reference to ACIP RECOMMENDED (not mandatory) vaccines and the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.
(Doc. IMM-1241 (12/16) ) "Vaccines For Children Program"

In my opinion, these doctors are committing FRAUD by using these FEDERAL TAXABLE VACCINES to fulfill California state "immunization" mandates. By legal definition, these vaccines do not provide guaranteed immunity to the recipient, as required by state law. Currently, THAT PRODUCT DOES NOT EXIST.

This has been challenging to explain, but I hope that you can run it by your legal department. If my reasoning is sound, this is a means to defeat every state law removing informed consent. It would lend itself to a massive class action lawsuit, and damages for those unvaxxed and DISCRIMINATED against by loss of thousands in public education dollars.

The greed of Big Pharma to make liability-free vaccines and thus force the Federal government to write a LEGAL definition for "vaccine", which was expanded so future medical products could be declared a "vaccine" (Hotez' Hookworm vaccine, and cancer vaccines using Toll Like Receptors 4 and 9, come to mind) has come back to bite. They have rendered State law meaningless. "

I hope this helps. This is just my opinion. I am not a lawyer.

Jenny Allan

Just to remind us all:-
"The Nuremberg Code
1.The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision."

John Stone

A version published in BMJ Rapid Responses:

Government proposing to roll out “Triumph” and “Ambush” vaccines next month?


Re: Covid-19: Government poised to amend regulations to allow use of unlicensed vaccine Clare Dyer. 370:doi 10.1136/bmj.m3757

Dear Editor

Following Clare Dyer’s disturbing report [1] it does indeed look as if the government may be intending roll out two unlicensed Covid vaccine products as early as next month. In a BBC report last week which seemed so fanciful I was inclined to ignore it products were injudiciously codenamed by government agencies as “Triumph” and “Ambush”. The report by Michele Paduano, however, is still there and states [2]:

“Mass vaccination sites and mobile facilities are being commissioned as part of as a "fairly massive exercise"...According to the document, the two vaccines are called Ambush and Triumph...Ambush needs to be stored at -70C (-94F) and kept in hospitals due to regulations set down by the Medicines Health Regulatory Authority.“

The “Triumph“ vaccine is believed to be the Oxford Astra Zeneca product which has to be administered twice within 28 days. The refrigeration requirements for the “Ambush” vaccine fit the the profile of both the Moderna and Pfizer products [3]. A similar but less detailed report has now appeared in the Sun newspaper [4].

All three vaccines have been criticised for their effectiveness by Peter Doshi and Eric Topol in the New York Times [5] and by William Haseltine in the Washington Post [6]. Both the Oxford and Moderna vaccines are known to have unpleasant side-effects [7]. The Oxford vaccine when I last heard was still under investigation by the FDA [8].

Against which background one can only echo once again the editor’s call a few weeks ago for “Less haste, more safety”.

[1] Clare Dyer, ‘Covid-19: Government poised to amend regulations to allow use of unlicensed vaccine’, BMJ 2020; 370 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3757 (Published 28 September 2020)

[2] Michele Paduano, ‘ Coronavirus: Doctors told to plan for vaccination scheme’, BBC News 2 October 2020, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-54375643

[3] Jaimy Lee, ‘ Moderna and Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine candidates require ultra-low temperatures, raising questions about storage, distribution’, MSN 31 August 2020, https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/moderna-and-pfizer-e2-80-99s-co...

[4] Nick McDermott, ‘ VACCINE BOOST Covid vaccine to be rolled out by NHS from next month with tens of thousands of people to get jabs daily by Christmas’, The Sun 8 October 2020, https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12872851/covid-vaccine-nhs-jab-christmas/

[4] Jaimy Lee, ‘ Moderna and Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine candidates require ultra-low temperatures, raising questions about storage, distribution’, MSN 31 August 2020, https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/moderna-and-pfizer-e2-80-99s-co...

[5] Peter Doshi &Eric Topol, ‘ These Coronavirus Trials Don’t Answer the One Question We Need to Know’, New York Times 22 September 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/22/opinion/covid-vaccine-coronavirus.html

[6] WillIam Haseltine, ‘Beware of covid-19 vaccine trials designed to succeed from the start’, Washington Post 22 September 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/22/beware-covid-19-vacci...

[7] Hilda Bastian, ‘ Covid-19 Vaccines With ‘Minor Side Effects’ Could Still Be Pretty Bad’, Wired 21 July 2020, https://www.wired.com/story/covid-19-vaccines-with-minor-side-effects-co...

[8] Daniella Genovese, ‘ FDA widens probe into AstraZeneca's US coronavirus vaccine trial: report’, FOXBuisness 1October 2020, https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/fda-widens-safety-inquiry-astrazenec...

[9] Fiona Godlee, ‘ Covid-19: Less haste, more safety’,
BMJ 2020; 370 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3258 (Published 20 August 2020)

Laura Hayes


I agree about Dr. Blaylock! I have been at this for almost 28 years now, just a few years less than you based on one of your comments, and have shared his excellent work on many occasions.

I commented back to you on a different thread a couple of weeks ago that I am greatly appreciating your comments here on AoA :)

I have been writing and speaking out for quite some time now. To see a listing of my published work, just click this AoA Special Reports link:


Included in that listing are 2 comprehensive vaccine-related presentations I have given, and my most-recent article about the costs of complying with tyranny:




I shared one of your recent comments yesterday with two longtime friends who are also “autism” moms, as well as medical choice freedom and parental rights activists...your comment about CA needing a class action lawsuit, which they thought was excellent...and I included that your child was vaccine injured prior to our children being injured by their “routine” vaccines, and one called you “a treasure trove”. I agreed! Please keep your comments coming here on AoA :)

Angus Files

Some are catching up..allowed to print even..

We’re constricting our lives based on a COVID LIE – it can’t go on, says FREDERICK FORSYTH
IT IS only a short word and we all know what it means. We have known for generations, centuries, and never shied from it, accepting it as a totally unavoidable part of the human condition.


Pharma For Prison


John Stone


I didn’t know Americans knew that old Guy Fawkes rhyme, I think even now mostly forgotten in the UK. Our times are as weird as the gunpowder plot (Shakespeare wrote Macbeth at just this time “Fair is foul and foul is fair”). Everything is being usurped.


@Laura Hayes

Dr. Russell Blaylock is an anti-vaccine saint and prophet. He has uncompromisingly been speaking vaccine Truth for years. His latest video is a culmination of his wisdom and knowledge. He hit it out of the ballpark! All Americans should heed his warning.

Ken stoller

Remember remember the 5th of November

Greg Hill

If Bill Gates really wants to combat vaccine hesitancy as he says he does, the single most impactful thing he could do would be to have a YouTube video made of himself being injected with the very same vaccine he is promoting, verified by independent observers to be the real thing and not a "placebo". I would not suggest holding your breath until that happens.

Laura Hayes

Dr. Russell Blaylock speaks...my prayer is that every American would listen.


75 minutes well spent listening to this from start to finish. Please listen, then share.


"Effectively these cohorts are being used as guinea pigs."

This Trump video is a MUST SEE. Published yesterday when he was just out of the hospital, he is now vigorously pushing the Regeneron monoclonal antibody treatment he received (especially for the elderly) and credits it with his "miraculous" improvement. He mentions that the MILITARY would be available to distribute it if the FDA gives it the emergency authorization. Was this the remedy planned all along? NOT the vaccine? I'm hoping. This strategy would fit with the recent Covid 19 Declaration featured on Dell's show. It would target the most vulnerable and sick. Trump claims this is as good as a cure. If so, under U.S. emergency pandemic law, this would replace vaccines for product liability protection. Pharma has already said they will not ship vaccines without that protection.

John Stone


I take your point.

Tim Lundeen

"everyone develops long-term coronavirus immunity after infection - and it's not just about antibodies" -- so why exactly do we need a vaccine, when we already have herd immunity?




I wonder if they can get away with vaccinating the extra vulnerable with this change .


Bob Moffit

Here is a column for AoA that I wrote .. regarding National Adult Immunization Plan established in 2010 .. with stated 2020 goal of achieving their National Adult Immunization Plan.


I think it worth reviewing their GOAL 2020 National Adult Immunization Plan .. as it seems very convenient this COVID VACCINE is being rushed at 'warp speed' before 2020 ends.

Maybe it's just little old cynical me .. but … this plan has been a work in progress for at least ten years … and now seems as if it will become THEIR DREAM COME TRUE

Grace Green

As we have repeatedly been assured that the vaccines will not be mandated - let alone compulsory - the report should read eg. "All those 75 years of age and over WHO WISH IT" if it is to be believed at all. Personally I think it's more of the same old scare mongering. I'm seeing more and more reports to the effect that no vaccination will be necessary, as the viral infection has turned out to be insignificant.

Elizabeth Hart

Johnson's Covid strategy is changing Britain for the worse | TheArticle


Elizabeth Hart

Re my previous comment about the article in The Telegraph, here’s the study referred to, published in The BMJ:

Effect of school closures on mortality from coronavirus disease 2019: old and new predictions | The BMJ


John Stone


Yes, I think they won’t actually go after the extra vulnerable directly despite the list - my guess is care home workers, people aged 50-65. Whatever it is it is reckless and cynical.

Jenny Allan

Cheers John,
It occurred to me demented patients in care homes and hospitals would not have the cognitive ability to refuse this Covid-19 vaccine. Care home staff would be pressurised into accepting the vaccine, refusal would almost certainly result in losing their jobs. Effectively these cohorts are being used as guinea pigs. The Oxford Covid-19 Vaccine, has not even been demonstrated to be effective, and safety trials have been mired in secrecy and obfuscation. Like the US -we should stop these trials NOW. Instead it seems our Government is hell bent on on forcing it onto an increasingly sceptical public.

Another artice in today's Mail by Jenni Murray expresses outrage about elderly persons in UK care homes being regarded as 'expendable'. This issue has also been taken up by Amnesty International. These persons were often left to die alone, without proper NHS access to doctors and medications, and denied even the comforting presence of loved ones and friends.

Angus Files

The old age pension fund managers must be rubbing their hands still need the younger population to do the work so the elite can live and we must all die.

Soon will be an offence to be old.

Pharma For Prison


John Stone


Thanks. I have incorporated that.


Elizabeth Hart

Also consider this interesting article in The Telegraph...

Herd immunity could have saved more lives than lockdown, study suggests: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/07/herd-immunity-could-have-saved-lives-lockdown-study-suggests/

Some quotes:

Blanket social distancing and the closure of schools may have cost more lives than if herd immunity had been allowed to build slowly in the community, a study suggests.

A reanalysis of the Imperial University modelling that led to lockdown in March shows that shutting schools and preventing youngsters from mingling may have had the counterintuitive effect of actually killing more people.

In a study published in the BMJ, Edinburgh University predicted that over the entire course of the pandemic, keeping children out of classrooms would increase deaths by between 80,000 and 95,000. Likewise, social distancing of everyone, rather than just the over-70s, could cost between 149,000 and 178,000 lives.

Experts say the virus was able to spread faster to vulnerable people once lockdown measures were introduced than if some level of immunity had been allowed to build up in the young.

Jenny Allan

"Covid vaccine 'could be rolled out NEXT MONTH': Leaked NHS documents reveal plan for 'tens of thousands of Britons to get the jab every day by Christmas'
• Tens of thousands could be vaccinated each day according to leaked documents
• Hundreds of NHS staff deployed in 'five mass vaccination sites' across country
• Plans rely on Oxford University getting successful vaccine trial result this month"
Under the proposed ranking by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, the vaccines will be rolled out in the following order:
• older adults' resident in a care home and care home workers
• all those 80 years of age and over and health and social care workers
• all those 75 years of age and over
• all those 70 years of age and over
• all those 65 years of age and over
• high-risk adults under 65 years of age with underlying health woes
• moderate-risk adults under 65 years of age with underlying health woes
• all those 60 years of age and over
• all those 55 years of age and over
• all those 50 years of age and over
• rest of the population (priority to be determined)

Elizabeth Hart

How does this stack up with a Financial Times report in which UK British COVID vaccine taskforce head Kate Bingham says: “There’s going to be no vaccination of people under 18. It’s an adult-only vaccine, for people over 50, focusing on health workers and care home workers and the vulnerable.”?

And David Nabarro, special envoy to the World Health Organization on Covid-19 says addressing the coronavirus crisis was “not going to be a case of everyone getting vaccinated”.

He added: “There will be a definite analysis of who is the priority for the vaccine, based on where they live, their occupation and their age bracket.

“We’re not fundamentally using the vaccine to create population immunity, we’re just changing the likelihood people will get harmed or hurt. It will be strategic.”

See more via this link: Less than half UK population to receive coronavirus vaccine, says task force head. Financial Times, 5 October 2020: https://www.ft.com/content/d2e00128-7889-4d5d-84a3-43e51355a751

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)