Good afternoon. It's Friday the 23rd of February
2024, just after 1:00. Welcome to UK Column News.
I'm your host Mike Robinson joining me today.
We have Ben Rubin and Debbie Evans and Cheryl Granger is with
us today as well and we will have another guest later on.
Now we're going to get started with, well, the Online Safety
Act, online safety in general, because it's basically not
happening fast enough. So you can see switching on very
slowly at the moment. This is according to the Public
Accounts Committee. So they have published a report
called Preparedness for Online Safety, relegation.
Sorry, regulation. So let's have a look and see
what they're saying. The public may be disappointed
with the new regime if people cannot quickly see improvements
to their online experience or understand how their complaints
are acted on. As the regulatory regime will
not be fully implemented until 2026, there's a risk that public
confidence in the regime will be undermined.
Now, if anybody's been watching the UK column for the last few
years while we've been talking about this, I hope very much
that public confidence in the regime has already been
significantly undermined because we would much prefer that the
regime doesn't happen at all. But let's go on with what they
had to say. This was the next bit.
Ofcom. As yet, work through the detail
of how fees levied on industry will work, including how it will
recover the setup costs and cover the ongoing costs of the
regime. So the regime is going to be
paid for by the platforms, apparently, and not the
taxpayer, is what they seem to be hinting at.
So maybe that's one benefit. But they go on to say Ofcom
faces significant challenges about how it will engage with
supervised and regulated providers based overseas, which
constitute the vast majority of regulated services, in
particular smaller providers and those who may seek to avoid
Ofcom's gaze. And of course, this is the
biggest problem for them, because the likes of of Facebook
and so on will be quite happy. Because they've been engaged in
this process from the beginning, since 2017, they will be quite
happy to do whatever the government asks them to do, X
perhaps less so. But ultimately what they'll be
required to do by by this online censorship act is to to maintain
a standard of their terms and conditions.
In other words, if they say that they're going to limit certain
types of speech, they will have to enforce that.
And they will have to enforce that with the penalty of
managers going to prison if they don't cooperate with Ofcom.
We've covered that many times. But this issue of smaller
providers, Of course this is the rumbles of the world who are
still small, relatively speaking, to YouTube and
whatnot, but certainly the UK government, or at least the
Public Accounts Committee, extremely concerned that they
will fall under the the radar. Now.
This is Meg Hillier and this is what she had to say.
Ofcom must accelerate its coordination with other
regulators, both at home and overseas, in recognition that it
is at the forefront of a truly global effort to strike the
right balance between freedom and safety online.
So this is what they're claiming that they're going to do, is
strike a balance between these things.
But it's a truly global effort. Ben, I realize I'm hijacking you
once again here, but I mean, what are your thoughts on this?
Because this is something that they're trying to coordinate
with countries in the European Union and the European
Commission of course, but also in the United States.
And although there, there it's a lot more difficult in the United
States because of the protection of freedom of speech in the
Constitution. They are attempting to bring in
this Kids Online Safety Act in the US to try to bring the the,
the platforms more or less in line with other countries, but a
global effort. It reminds me of the MHRA in
many ways. Yeah, I mean, what do they say?
The safety of the public is the alibi of tyrants thing as the
phrase who, who, who are these people?
Where did they come from? Who asked them to do this stuff?
I don't understand what's going on, but it's it's completely,
completely remarkable, totally unacceptable.
Yeah, that's my my reaction. Yeah, OK Well, in the meantime
then of course GB News, which has effectively become a
mouthpiece for the Conservatives government party these days
nonetheless, as we know, is being investigated once again by
Ofcom. But they have decided that they
want to push publish an opinion piece from Anna Firth, who's an
MPA Tory MP, of course promoting the idea of the online safety
bill. So the online safety bill is
ground breaking according to her opinion piece and she said this.
The online safety bill is a ground breaking piece of
legislation designed to protect children.
Now of course we've been covering this for many, many
years and all the way through this process we have made the
point that the pretence of protecting children is what the
Online safety bill has been created under and the now the
Online Safety Act of course. But this is not about protecting
children at all. There are other ways to protect
children already in existence. But anyway, she says we face
potential lag of 18 months until the benefits of it will be felt.
She went on to say. Children's Commissioner Dame
Rachel Rachel D'souza quite rightly reiterated her calls for
a comprehensive range of measures around safety by
design, safety in schools and parental education, preferably
funded by the tech companies. Now this issue of safety, of
course we saw what that brought us during COVID, because that
was that safety, public safety was the justification for
everything that happened there and safety is the justification
for everything that's happening around this censorship
industrial complex is being built.
And this article from Anna Firth goes on to say it goes on.
It also warned about the dangers of harmful AI and the metaphors,
and this is staggering that, I mean the optics here are amazing
because of course it's the Tory government, the current Tory
government of which she is a part that is pushing AI so hard
at the moment in the UK. So it is incredible to me that
she is attempting to to push this narrative and then sort of
in parallel with with all this going on.
Of course, a week or so ago we were pointing out that Tobias
Elwood had been had experienced A protest going on outside his
house. Now this has driven parliament
mad. And of course, that was part of
the furor over Lindsay Hoyle and the Gaza vote and the actions
that he took there because he was saying that he did that in
order to protect MPs and he was expressing his deep concern that
MPs are in extreme danger at the moment.
So now they're talking about setting up exclusion zones
around MPs houses and around MPs constituency offices.
And it's the constituency offices thing I think is is
really problematic because I understand.
I think I can appreciate that MPs families didn't sign up to
have protests run outside their homes.
I personally think that the Tobias Elwood, that exercise was
totally a false flag in the sense that it was a staged event
in order to to bring forward this narrative.
It's my personal opinion. I don't have any particular
evidence for that, but that's just what I my reading of of
events. But nonetheless, the idea of MP
safety is now becoming a problem and we've already, over the last
number of years seen a distancing between the public
and MPs going on. This is going to become even
more significant in the near future, but the the fact that
that they're talking about exclusion role zones around
constituency offices and no right to protest outside the
constituency office, this seems to be the wrong direction to be
going in. But let's just finish with a
little bit of video from James Cleverly who's speaking on Sky.
I think this was just have a listen to this.
Well, Lord Warney, who has himself been a Member of
Parliament and now advises the government on these issues, has
put forward a report which I've not had a chance to read in
detail. But the headlines I think are
important and and there is, there is a requirement to
protect freedom of speech and that is very, very well
protected in the United Kingdom. But there is also an absolute
requirement to make sure that we defend democracy, that people
who make decisions in government, at whatever level
are, are, are doing so based on their judgement, based on the
information, based on their beliefs, not based on fear of
reprisals. They absolutely must and will be
protected from that. So there you go.
They're going to be protected from anybody telling them that
they're doing the wrong thing, or that they haven't been
listening and so on. And they're going to make sure
that they are protected from being told that they haven't
been listening by making sure that they can't listen even
harder. Because by separating the public
from them even further, and you will undoubtedly have heard
James cleverly say with a straight face that the UK is
protecting freedom of speech. I just find that quite an
incredible statement from him. So Debbie, let me welcome you to
the programme and Cheryl as well.
Just introduce Cheryl if you could.
Everyone and safety seems to be the theme today, doesn't it?
Because Cheryl is going to be breaking news and giving us an
exclusive today on a question that she asked of the board
meeting with regards to safety. She received a very significant
e-mail from Doctor Allison Cave, Chief Safety Officer at the MHRA
and she's here to give us an update.
Welcome Cheryl. Please take us away on what you
found out. Thanks, Debbie.
Hello, everybody. Yes, I asked a question I wrote
in and asked a question of the MHRA board meeting in November
and three months later I got a reply this week.
And what this question was asking, it was asking about the
ruling that prescription medicine code of practice
authority had made on AstraZeneca because it had
violated it's codes according to the ABPI code of practice that
operates for pharma and it repeatedly had referred to
COVID-19 vaccines has been safe in a December 2020.
So about the time that the vaccine was going to be released
and that it claims were based on relative risk reduction and not
absolute risk reduction which was a vastly smaller number.
So 75% compared to 1.2% figures is what they used.
And so I asked, would the CEO and the Chief Safety Officer of
the MHRA like to retract the often repeated label that they
have associated with the vaccines of safe and effective?
And of course that's always used without qualification.
In the case of the MHRA, the ruling in the ABPI code of
practice is that you can't use the word safe without
qualification. I also reminded Doctor Cave that
in a previous answer to a question I had asked, she
actually had stated that the MHRA concluded that the COVID-19
vaccines were safe and effective and the benefits of the vaccines
outweigh any risks. So this is the letter that I was
sent in reply. Obviously, I won't go through
the whole thing, but she talked about the MHRA and its press
releases to inform us about new medications coming out like the
AstraZeneca vaccine. She talked about the MHRA in
terms of safe and effectiveness, which we're going to concentrate
in a minute on that particular paragraph.
She also talked about the safety monitoring through things like
the yellow card system and how it's now been advised.
The MHRA has been advised by the CHM to actually transition now
into the less frequent way of recording information due to the
stable safety profile that we are now seeing that one out.
And then we in the final paragraph, she started to talk
about information that has been published on pharma because this
question of mine related back to the vaccine injured
thrombocytopenia group which were taking Asha Seneca to court
because they had broken consumer protection that with the words
that they'd use here, we're talking about 485 people with
the condition with 81 unfortunate deaths, which means
one in five of the group have actually passed.
So let me concentrate on the safe and effective paragraph
from my letter. This is saying that no medicinal
products is completely risk free is what Alison Cave actually
wrote to me. I forgot to say that it was
Alison Cave who wrote the letter.
So no medicinal products is completely risk free.
And I don't know how you can call something safe if you know
that there no products is completely risk free, which is
the reason why the ABP is code of practice says you can't use
the word safe on any medication. She goes on to say that the MHRA
is to ensure that medicines, including vaccines, they must
meet applicable standards of safety, which is the effects on
people and quality, which is to do with manufacturing and
distribution and effectiveness. Which is basically asking does
it work at the time of the first authorisation and that the
benefits continue to outweigh the known risks thereafter.
So a conclusion is reference to a medicinal product being safe
and effective refers to this balance of benefits and risks
remain remaining positive. So she probably regrets it, but
she basically asked that if I have any further questions to
get in touch. So that's what I've done and
this is what I've asked Doctor Cave, She talks about these
applicable safety standards. Where are they?
You know, what are their standards?
What standards are they working to?
Where do the MHA publish their safety standards?
Also this benefit risk ratio. In order to work that out,
you've got to know what the benefits are.
I know that there are over 3400 clinical peer reviewed papers
now that tend to go on about the risks, but what about the
benefits? How did they work out the
benefits? What are the benefits of the
vaccines? Can they give us a list because
you can't work out the ratio accurately if you don't know all
the information. And then how does that benefit
risk ratio apply to effectiveness?
Might be another question that I could ask her.
And then the other thing I'd like to know about is the
licensing agreement of the vaccines, because all of them
actually state that it prevents from COVID-19 infection.
Whereas when you look at the data, it doesn't prevent against
infection, transmission, hospitalisation or death.
And therefore has it broken its licensing agreement.
What happens when you break your license agreement and these
other comments that she make about how many lives have been
saved by the vaccine? Well, how many lives have been
saved? What's their evidence for that
and how many deaths do they actually use?
What level of death do they use to withdraw a vaccine?
In the past it's been less than 50.
And then why are deaths that are reported?
So at the moment, at the end of January 2640, deaths were
reported. So there's more questions that
I've asked. They are all listed here.
And what I'd like to say is that this morning I sent this off
last night at 8:00 and this morning I got a reply to say
they've referred this letter to the safety and surveillance
group. So perhaps it will get back to
Alison Cave. Thank you.
Cheryl, thank you so much for that.
And I just have to say to our audience watching, we've got a
big reveal coming in extra to do with this, this same segment.
So please stay tuned for extra. There's more to come.
OK, Debbie, Cheryl, thank you very much for that.
Ben, let me welcome you back onto the programme and sticking
with health issues, pharmacies and so on are becoming the
frontline as far as most people are concerned.
So what have you got? Absolutely.
Thanks Cheryl for that. That was, that was fascinating
and incredibly rebelling and really relevant to what I'm
going to come on to now. So we're going to talk a bit
about the NHS privatization, digitization, the ever closer
integration of the health system with the Pharmaceutical industry
and which can kick things off by hearing from Boots the chemist.
The NHS Pharmacy First service represents a major change for
patients accessing care. For minor ailments.
In England, it gives patients the opportunity to access care
in their pharmacy 1st for treatments for seven common
conditions, rather than going to their GP to get A.
Prescription. The NHS anticipate that this
service will help to save 10 million GP appointments by next
winter. Pharmacy 1st is a hugely
positive development. It frees up time for GPS like
myself so that we can offer help to patients with different
healthcare needs. It'll be great that they can now
extend their support for our patients with the pharmacy first
service. So we're told that Pharmacy 1st
is all about reducing demand on GPS and transforming primary
care. It's certainly transforming
primary care, but I think the the main outcome of this is just
making it easier to get pharmaceuticals out to the
public. They're call me cynical.
This is a huge business which is the biggest chemist in the
country. It's 175 years old, They handle
well over £10 billion a year in NHS prescriptions.
It's a huge business for them and the idea of this is to make
it even bigger. They're effectively becoming the
front door to the NHS. This is public private
partnership. We've talked about a lot.
It's not just Boots by the way, it's also the smaller
pharmacies. This is taking place across the
UK, but obviously Boots got a big marketing budget so they've
done a nice fancy video about it.
And the other thing that jumped out at me about that was the
presence in the film of this lady doctor, Sarah Kyatt, who
came to some prominence, or certainly came to my awareness,
after this appearance on Good Morning Britain in early 2021.
Well, what's really excellent is, and it's a statistic that I
think should be shouted from the rooftops, is that after 12 days
from the first vaccination of the AstraZeneca vaccine.
You are 100. Percent effective against
hospitalisation and death, so you know those.
Are the statistics. We need to be hearing and.
Yes, we why haven't we heard that?
Before. Well, here I am.
OK, so that aged like a pint of milk on a hot summer's day,
didn't it? For the interviewer and the
interviewee, 100% prevention of death.
That was quite a bold claim, wasn't it?
Apart from we've seen quite a bit of death, not just from
vaccinated people who've caught COVID, but also via the yellow
card reporting scheme which Cheryl talked about earlier
through all the adverse reactions to the AstraZeneca
vaccine that the doctor there was just talking about.
So if we just click on, we can see in the bottom there that
we've had 1364 deaths directly from that vaccine and the thick
end of a million adverse reactions, some of those really
serious injuries. Now, for my money, that you,
young woman should have been struck off and potentially
facing criminal charges for what she did there.
But apparently Boots think that she's someone who should be
being given a lucrative contract pushing further medicalisation
and privatisation of healthcare. Really, really odd stuff going
on in the health system at the moment.
Boots, by the way, is run by one of this mob.
You'll probably be familiar with the photo.
This is the Burlington Club. You can see Boris Johnson bottom
front right and David Cameron back there, but also this guy
Seb James in the front left. So he's the current chief
executive of Boots. He's been there for about 6
years now, earns the thick end of £2,000,000 a year on his
basic salary plus bonuses etcetera.
And he is running a major part of this integrated public
private health system. And this is what's happening in
the NHS right now. What else are they doing?
What else are they building? A drone delivery network.
This popped up on my radar this week and ultimately the goal of
this, we have to understand is, is to deliver pharmaceuticals
more efficiently to patients. They're building it nationally.
We can see from the website of this company Apion, that this is
a national network and it gives you a sense of the coverage,
what we're talking about across the entire health system.
This lady, Juliette Bauer, recently joined their board as
Chief Commercial Officer. So she's basically responsible
for the commercial operations in the growth of this enterprise.
But she's also at the same time a current serving governor of
Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust.
She's working inside the NHS as well as building a private
enterprise in the health system. I do not understand how this is
possible. How can Juliette Bauer for doing
that work? And she's been working in the
health system like this for quite some time before she
joined AP. And she was also the Chief
growth Officer and UK managing director of an organization
called CRY, which is a Swedish digital GP business, which is
again just one of the digital platform players that's been
building big commercial operations on top of our health
system. Because apparently the NHS, he's
incapable of building and deploying his own technology.
And Juliet Barr would know that because before that she was the
chief digital officer of the NHS between 2016 and 2019.
Quite a remarkable CV that she has.
She also used to work when she was a cry with this fella.
And I want to just bring him up because he's a fascinating
character. Johanna Shield, he looks like a
Bond villain. I don't know if you can see
properly, but he's one of his eyes and he's a different colour
to the other one and he's slightly greyed out.
But also he's got this fascinating image in his
LinkedIn profile at the top there, which I think tells you a
lot about how these people think, right?
They basically view the world as a computer simulation that they
can manipulate using their technology platforms, and we can
see this playing out in the way that the NHS is expanding into
virtual wards. We've got a short film here to
explain a bit more about that. What is a virtual ward?
Virtual wards provide hospital level care and remote monitoring
in your own home. They allow you either to stay at
home, receive care at home, or after being in hospital, to
continue your treatment at home where you are most comfortable.
There is emerging evidence to show the patients have better
outcomes when treated at home rather than being treated in
hospital. Virtual wards have teams of
healthcare professionals near to you who can provide high quality
care to you, either face to face in your own home or remotely,
usually supported with clinical advice, cutting edge monitoring
devices, smartphones and other technology.
They're evolving to manage a wider range of medical
conditions that would otherwise be treated in hospital,
particularly for frail patients and those with acute respiratory
infections. Thousands of people across
England are benefiting from being treated at home on a
virtual ward. So you can get a sense of what
the NHS is up to it. It is attempting to become
omnipresent. Yeah, they are building a
digitally enabled biotechnological surveillance
network. It's going to be across the
whole UK. It's going to be in your
bedroom, your living room. It's going to be enabled by the
drone technologies, and it's being delivered through public
private partnerships, which, as we've spoken about extensively
on the news, is the dictionary definition of fascism.
This is all extremely concerning.
Yeah. And not just public private
partnerships, Ben, but public private partnerships where some
of the key staff seem to be working on both sides of, you
know, on the public and in private.
So that's that's a key. Point.
Yes, OK, thank you. OK, let's move on.
If you like what the UK column does, you would like to support
us, please head over to support.ukcolumn.org.
All the options for helping us out are there and your help very
much needed and appreciated. You could pick something up at
the UK Column Shop, but please do share anything you find on
the various platforms, especially ukcolumn.org and UK
column extracts.co.uk. Debbie, your latest blog is up.
It is happiness. Big business happiness, as is
fluoride. Going to be a big agenda too.
So all of those subjects and more and the bubonic played in
the Alaska parks are just a bit of a warning.
Cats. We seem to be targeting cats, so
please check it out. Sorry, Debbie, did we not target
cats during COVID as well? We did.
We did indeed, And we seem to be appearing to target cats again
for both Bubonic plague and Alaska Box.
OK, thank you. Now yesterday the an interview
where the gutsy woman interview went out with Dan Rasmussen
Mcaddy that will be on the website later on.
Today we expect and on Sunday let's remember the Midazolam
murders exposing state sanctioned involuntary
euthanasia. This is symposium taking place
on the UK column website 6:00 PM and Sunday.
Do join us for that if you possibly can because that's got
to be a pretty hard hitting event.
We just were asked to remind everybody that and the petition
is being run to end EU KS adoption of UUN Agenda 2030 and
the 17 Sustainable Development Goals.
If anybody would like to to sign that, please do so.
And we were also asked to point this out.
There's a consultation going on at the moment around the storage
and retention of original will documents.
So this is documents that are held with respect to probate and
they've been being held in paper form I believe since the mid
1800s. The government is going, there's
consulting on the on the plan to digitize all these and then
destroy the original documents. They say they're going to retain
some of the documents that have originated with well known
people, but otherwise everything is going to be destroyed and
there's some concern that that's going to result in certain
records being lost. So just wanted to point that out
to everybody to have a look and see if you want to make a
response to that consultation. Debbie, let's say hello to you
again and talk about Pfizer, Yeah.
Well, we've talked about AstraZeneca, we've talked about
safety, we've talked about pharmacies.
So let's go for Pfizer. We all know the risks associated
with the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.
So we've got our Pfizer situation room on the front page
of UK column that Cheryl is running.
The Pfizer documents analysis reports, But Pfizer need a new
agenda, don't they? So let's just have a look at
their new agenda and don't stop them because they're having a
good time. Tonight I'm going to help myself
through a good time. I feel alive and the world
floating around in ecstasy, so. Stop me now.
Don't stop. Crush I'm having a good time.
Having a good time. You're shooting star leaping
through the sky like a tiger. I don't want to stop at all.
You can't make it up, can you? Let's outdo cancer.
But let me introduce you to Arena Pharmaceuticals now.
Arena Pharmaceuticals are AUS company set up in 1997.
They specialized in drugs under development.
Now let's have a little bit a look at Arena in more depth.
They've a third party warehouse in the UK still to find out
where this warehouse is and they're also MHRA audited and
licensed, which means they've got ambient and shield storage
and distribution. Now their registered office
seems to be in Buckingham, Hemel Hempstead, they're a wholesale
pharma that they that they they're a wholesale
pharmaceutical distributor. So you can see a bit about them
there. They're based in Central in
central England, but they're also they've been presenting to
JP Morgan as well. So they're a big company, a very
big company. And just after they presented to
JP Morgan, the Amit Munshi, the CEO was was doing that
presentation in 2021, Pfizer announced that they would be
buying Arena to help them with their cure for post COVID.
So all of the conditions that maybe have been caused through
the COVID-19 injection, they're now going through Arena
Pharmaceuticals with a load of cures.
So they confirmed in 2022 that they'd completed the acquisition
of Arena. So post COVID, they're going to
be be bringing a portfolio of diverse products.
Now one of these products I want you to take note of and we'll
talk about it more in extra because Cheryl's here, but it's
called Etrazimod. So I just want you to take
notice of that Etrazimod and this is for Crohn's and
ulcerative colitis. Now I just want to bring your
attention to a peer reviewed paper that I've found that would
suggest that many gastrointestinal problems are
being now seen after the injection and there is a case of
ulcerative colitis appearing to be significant after injection.
So if we skip on to the next slide, what I want to show you
is a little a little tiny video about Crohn's and colitis.
What is it? I'm sure it's just a dodgy
tummy. It comes and goes.
I read a. Blog.
That said, just avoid certain foods.
Maybe it's too much partying. If you have any of these
symptoms, it's time to cut the crap.
It could be Crohn's or colitis. Over 500,000 people are living
with Crohn's or colitis in the UK, but often the signs are
ignored. Check your symptoms today with
the Crohn's and Colitis UK Symptom checker.
OK, so this is a big deal. So the NHS overview is that this
affects the colon and rectum. When it becomes inflamed you can
get diarrhoea with pus and blood in it.
Tummy pain, frequency of emptying your bowels.
You get flare ups and you can feel very fatigued and get a
loss of appetite. What causes ulcerative colitis?
Well, actually, nobody really knows.
They think it could be genetic, it could be environmental.
Um. And what are the complications
of um, Ulcerative colitis? So they do say that that more
fear and increased risk of cancer.
One in 227 have a diagnosis of ulcerative colitis that equates
to 296,000. And it also notes there the most
common descendants are Ashkenazi Jews, which I thought was a bit
strange. Anyway, there's been a trial, a
gladiator trial. Funny how these trials have
suddenly got names like storms, which Cheryl alerted me too.
So the gladiator trial is your daily life disrupted by your
ulcer, your ulcerative colitis. Now what do you get on this
trial? Well, you get an investigational
drug actually and you get oversee by ulcerative colitis
experts. But who are the sponsors of this
trial? Well, it won't surprise you to
find out that it's arena Pfizer and patient wing.
Now this new drug Etrazimod, this is Pfizer's new drug and
they have now had it approved by the EMA, but the other name for
it is Valcicity. Now I want you to just take note
of that Valcicity 22 names for it.
So if we skip on to the next slide, you can see there that
we've got a couple of studies now on long term safety and
efficacy of this new drug and you can see in some cases it
made patients ulcerative colitis actually worse.
In the next study in nature you'll be able to see that
actually safety data should be accumulated because actually
long term efficacy hasn't been seen.
But if we go to Pfizer's own page, they they this is a
patient information page for Valcipiti.
So this is for the treatment of moderately to severely active
ulcerative colitis. OK, so please go to this page to
look. So before you start the
treatment, you're going to need a full blood count, full blood
work, eye and skin examinations, and an ECG.
This all sounds pretty dramatic, doesn't it?
But it goes on. If we go on one, we can see that
they say don't take valcipity. If you've had a heart attack,
chest pain, stroke, mini stroke, transient ischemic attacks,
certain types of heart failure. If you've had a history of
unusual heartbeats, talk to your health provider before taking
valcipity and going on from there.
Again, they want to check vaccination records and say that
the serious side effects can include death, basically uh
serious infection. Those infections can be life
threatening and cause death. So I really would urge everybody
to look at this these slides in detail when you get the chance.
And if you do know somebody with ulcerative colitis, please get
them to look at the Valcippity page because it's been approved
by the EMA so could easily be proved by the MHRA.
These are what they did. These are the instructions.
They tell you to speak to your health provider or all about
your medical conditions in great depth if you are going to take
this drug. And this includes anybody that's
pregnant or plans to become pregnant or is breastfeeding.
So I'm taking it from that as it's an investigational drug
that this could possibly mean it's teratogenic.
And I would just like to remind people, and I'm not going to
make any predictions here, but the Princess of Wales was in
hospital for a very long time after having abdominal surgery.
None of us know what that is. But it's interesting that Prince
William has appointed now former government diplomat as his
private secretary. This is Ian Patrick, who is also
a sufferer of colitis and Crohn's and is a trustee of the
Crohn's trust. So just keep your eyes on these
new drugs that are coming down through these new pharmaceutical
companies, this one arena. Thank you, Debbie.
Ben, let's come back to you and AI.
Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope
that this would set them free, but that only permitted other
men with machines to enslave them.
This year from Tony Blair, it could be a whole generation of
bio weapons spawned as a result of this.
There there can be interference in elections.
You know there are I think you can identify categories of risk
fairly easily. Then you've got to decide what
you actually do about that. But then as as as Martha was
just saying, we will want government will want business to
be efficient, business will have to employ this technology.
But when it employs the technology, it will do so often
by making redundant some of its workforce, potentially quite a
lot of its workforce potentially as I understand it, as much in
white collar industries as as not.
So this is a, you know this, the, the, the social and
political implications are are are going to be huge.
There's a lovely moment in that video.
It's from Chatham House back in September last year, I think it
was. And he basically says what we
will want and then catches himself and says what
governments will want business to do.
So he's he forgets his lines for a second and it's like he's not
calling the shots. But obviously Blair is one of
these people telling governments and businesses what to do
globally. He's a big proponent of AI.
He's sketched out some of the risks there.
We're aware of what they are, the potential for the creation
of new bio weapons, election interference, and the huge
social and political implications, particularly
things like mass unemployment. Let's have a look what Amazon
are up to. This is a grocery packing
warehouse in the southeast of London.
Folks have ordered their groceries online and instead of
people walking up and down the aisles of a traditional grocery
store to pick up items, these little devices move more than a
million items every day between them.
Instead of trying to build machines that fit into a world
designed for humans, this entire facility, the size of seven
football fields, is custom built to make this as efficient as
possible. I cannot get across on camera
just how incredibly large this whole place is.
A million items a day. So what is that?
I don't know. 10,000 jobs, 20,000 jobs gone in one
warehouse in South London, right.
And obviously none of this is new.
Automation has been going on for a long time.
We're seeing it happen with white collar jobs as well.
Even the technology sector is beginning to lay people off
because of AI. The snake is beginning to eat
its own tail here, as they say. As I said, this has been going
on for decades. Automation and digitisation
means that the number of employees required to generate
you can flick on to the next slide, the there, there we go.
The number of employees required to generate $1,000,000 in
revenue in the S&P 500 has fallen from 8:00 in the mid 80s
to just over 2 today. It's a huge drop in the number
of employees required to do the work that was being done.
And Elon Musk says quite quite emphatically that there will
come a point where no job is needed.
AI will be able to do everything AI built and owned by people
like Elon Musk, one of the men with machines that we talked
about at the start. So what happens next?
Let's hear from you, Val. Noah Harari.
The technology will. On the one hand, make it
possible to start enhancing and upgrading humans, and on the
other hand, especially the rise of AI will make more and more
humans economically unnecessary, useless and therefore also
politically powerless. And the world or humanity might
have different parts of humanity, might have different
futures. And we might see really a
process of some kind of speciation speciation, the
formation of new species as a result of geographic,
physiological, anatomical, behavioural factors that prevent
previously interbreeding populations from breeding each
up with each other. They actually think that they're
going to elevate themselves into becoming non human superhuman.
This is the Nishan Ubermensch on steroids, right?
This is what Harare and others like him believe that they are
about to become. I think Elon Musk is probably in
that same category. Here's another one, Sam Altman,
who is a Jewish guy, apparently going to his Twitter profile.
He's very keen for you to know that, and he runs A blog,
apparently on the Internet. What could possibly go wrong?
But more than that, Sam Altman is, according to Wired magazine,
one of our AI overlords. Maybe that's the speciation.
It's the AI overlords who are going to be the new species.
Because Sam Altman, if you weren't aware, is the founder of
Open AI of ChatGPT fame. You've probably heard of it.
People have been talking about it a lot for the past 12 to 18
months. It began as a non profit but
it's since become one of the richest and fastest growing
companies on earth due to a partnership with this fella who
is Satya Nadella from Microsoft. And they have embedded Open AI
technology into their tech, into their core stack and introduced
this new product line called copilot which is for Nadella's
money the future of the business.
And Elon Musk who was one of the founders founding investors of
Open AI described this as being the opposite of Open.
Open AI is essentially captured now by Microsoft.
Let's say you founded an organization to save the Amazon
rainforest and instead you became a lumber company, chopped
down the forest and sold it. That's what he's saying that
Altman has done here. So what is Altman's vision for
the immediate future? Let's have a listen to him now.
I hope the sound was OK for everyone because I didn't hear
that properly for some reason. But what Sam was talking about
there, Mr. Oldman was talking about, there was the idea that
in the immediate future we're going to be seeing one person
companies worth a billion dollars, right?
So in a world of artificial intelligence, mass automation
and digitisation, we're going to have individuals running
companies worth a billion dollars, right?
What kind of world is that? What social utility is there to
an organization such as this? And what mentality sees that as
a desirable end state? It is absolutely psychotic.
They also talked about in the video a place called Cerebral
Valley where a lot of this thinking is being developed.
This is a a virtual location as you'd expect.
They've got a website you can go and look at it.
It talks about all of the things that we're talking about here in
very positive terms, but it's also a physical place as well,
called Hayes Valley in Central San Francisco.
And this is being billed as the new hub of the future, the role
that Silicon Valley used to play through the 90s and the 2000s.
The real focal point of that for artificial intelligence is this
one district in San Francisco, and they are building this
technological future that Altman sits right at the heart of.
What do we know about him? Well, the business that he's one
of his original partners has said essentially is completely
sold out and portrayed his founding principles.
He says he's going to have to evolve in uncomfortable ways.
And he talked about to Axios recently about how they're going
to have to do things which sit outside the normal ethical codes
and understanding of right and wrong.
You can see this in in practice in the manner in which they
approach copyright legislation. So they submitted some evidence
to the House of Lords recently, saying that because copyright
today covers virtually every sort of human expression,
including blog posts, photographs, forum posts, scraps
of software code, and government documents, it would be
impossible to train today's leading AI models without using
copyrighted materials. So therefore, open AI ChatGPT.
Sam Altman sees himself and his company sitting outside of the
restrictions placed upon everybody else.
And he's only just getting warmed up because he's talking
about raising a $7 trillion fund to build this new AI ecosystem
within which he as the founder and operator of that fund.
This is absolutely unprecedented scale of venture capital private
equity investment. He individually will be hand
picking members of his elite new species of men with machines and
this is the future that they are attempting to take us into.
Ben, thank you. We're going to have a lot to
talk about in extra because that's I want to touch on that
particular topic as well. But Debbie, we've got another
guest has appeared I see. And well welcome to Doctor Ahmed
Malik. But Debbie, go ahead.
I'm delighted to be able to welcome Doctor Ahmed Malik when
we need doctors qualified consultants.
More than ever in the NHS we seem to be losing them and
Ahmed's here to tell us about his license and what's happened
to it. Ahmed, welcome to UK column.
Tell us what happened to your license.
Oh, thanks for having me on. I was totally engrossed,
engrossed in that previous clip, by the way.
Wow, that's kind of scary right? Back to me.
So basically, having been cancelled and suspended from all
the hospitals that I was working out of bar one, I was fat.
I was in a position where I can practice anymore financially,
just didn't make any sense. I was losing money every month
for about 3-4 months. So I thought, what?
What is the point of a surgeon? If you can access an operating
theatre, I'd love to operate here.
My garden studio. I think I would get into trouble
for it. I don't have the equipment.
It's not very sterile, so I can't really do that.
So a surgeon with an operating theatre is pretty goddamn
useless. It's like a Navy without ships,
almost like the Royal Navy anyway.
So basically I thought, right, I just need to give it all up.
There's no point hanging around. And the problem is, if you're
registered with the GMC, not only do you have to pay £450 a
year for the license, you need to do a yearly appraisal, which
is thousands of pounds. Spending it on courses and CPD
points and then actual appraisal is almost 1000 lbs.
For what? Just so that I can be on the
registrar. And I'll be honest with you, for
the last year something very strange happened.
I've been a doctor for 25 years. For the last year, I felt a
noose around my neck. I have felt the GMC noose, you
know, just getting a little bit tighter and tighter because you
don't like doctors like me who speak up and question.
And I've already been investigated once based on
anonymous online Twitter troll complaints.
I just don't need this anymore. It feels like I'm.
I'm driving down the road and there's cop cars all around me.
And the moment you speed one mile over the limit, they come
up, pull you over, take you to jail, then let you go again.
And the next day you're back on the road and there's another
four cop cars around you. But The funny thing is the cars
are driving, You know, the drivers are under influence.
They're crashing and speeding. The cop cars are totally
ignoring them, and they've got their eyes on me.
And the other doctors were questioning the COVID job,
transgender ideology. So I actually applied for
voluntary erasure, you know, in January.
And to my surprise, they have let me go.
So I'm no longer GMC registered. I don't have a license to
practice. It's kind of sad, but at the
same time, it's very liberating. I feel kind of free now that you
know, someone's not going to come after me and just start an
investigation out of the blue. And if this all sounds very
paranoid, oh, Ahmed is very paranoid.
Dogmatic. The paranoid Dr. It's not
really. Just look around you.
We started off with Andrew Wakefield.
We've got Sarah Myhill, who's under a suspension for
apparently prescribing that famous horse, Dewormer.
Wink, wink, you know, every six months her face is dragged
across the Daily Mail. And you had Jane Donahan the
same. You've got Jerry Waters across
the Irish Sea. He's suspended for being, you
know, a conscientious objector to jabbing people with an
experimental shop. I just spoke to a guy last
night. His name is Charles Hoff.
He's a Canadian doctor. He's going through, he's going
through the court system. He's been, you know, taken to
court by his licensing board for simply objecting to giving the
experimental shot to someone who had COVID had an adverse
reaction to the first shot and said second time around, maybe
it's not in your interest, don't take it.
And said, oh, I'm seeing a large number of neurological
complications. And the Canadian licensing board
has said, right, we're going to suspend you and we're going to
take you to court. I mean, this is what doctors are
facing. So yes, I agree the public is,
you know, angry, particularly in our camp.
But why have doctors not spoken out?
The reality is, when you do, you get crucified by the system, by
the institutions that are meant to be there to protect the
patient, the public. These are now all captured.
They're all government instruments who are working at
the behest of corporations and they will make sure they punish
and destroy any Doctor Who's a dissident, so.
You're sorry, can I? Yeah.
Can I just interrupt and ask you a question here because you know
you've let you've listed half a dozen names there And of course
another name would be Meryl Nas who also got struck off in the
United States for for also using that horse, Dewormer Wink, Wink
that you were talking about. So you know, but we're talking
about a handful of people. What is your understanding of
the sort of the thoughts of people within the within the
business? Are those people a fraction of
the people that actually would hold the same views, or or are
those really the limit of the people that that hold those
views? I think it's like any other
profession. Mean and the vast majority, it's
like the it's just just draw a sample of the population.
It's the exact same as that. See people want to put doctors
on a pedestal that needs to stop.
We're no different from lawyers. Joe Public or I think, you know
80% of people are in. Totally indoctrinated and
brainwashed. Believe in everything they say.
We'll do whatever it takes to have a quiet life, easy life,
have no discomfort, be numbed. And, you know, brainwashed,
zombified, you've got a 15%, maybe 18% of people who who know
something's wrong, want to support people, want to do
something, but are scared to put their head above the power pit
because they'll get chopped down.
And then you got one or two percent who, like Ed Griffin has
said, have got the crusader gene who are like, to hell with it.
I don't care if you kill me tomorrow.
I don't care if I've got a mortgage and three young kids.
I need to do something for humanity and I need to fight
these evil people. I'm trying my very best not to
swear, but it's difficult being a glass region anyway.
So you know, that is the situation that we're faced in.
I mean, I would actually correct myself.
I think professionals are more indoctrinated and brainwashed
and prone to virtue signalling and have hubris and arrogance
compared to, you know, the the working class people.
I think that's what made me a little bit more immune as well
because I'm working class through and through.
We smell the BS and, you know, we have a a natural distrust of
authority. They've never done us any
favours. And I think that's what it's all
about. Unfortunately, I know of lots of
doctors who agree with what I say but are too scared.
They are too scared. And you know, I hear all the
time, you know, I was at a wedding.
There's two doctors who said to me, oh, love your work, love
your work. I I mean, I honestly thought
they were going to ask for my autograph, at which point I
would have vomited. But anyway, they they were like,
you know, we'd love to do what you're doing, but we can't
because we we can't lose it all. And I'm like, what?
And I can. I'm in a position to lose it
all. So I mean, as long as there's
that mindset, then we've got problems.
And you know, Ahmed, I just want to interrupt you very quickly
there because we are, we are running out of time because I
want to just say to everybody that you have on that you've
given up your career, you've given up your livelihood, and
now you're making your mark as a podcaster.
And I just want to share with people where they can find you
on Doc Malik, authentic conversations with fascinating
people. And you've also got a sub stack
too. So I just want to direct
everybody to that because you have given up everything and I
just want to thank you so much and hopefully you'll still be
with us for extra. I know that you're a very, very
busy person, but thank you so much for joining us today.
Yes, thank you and hopefully you will be back for extra.
Now we're just going to end with the Navalny, the Navalny
situation and just bring this lady on screen, the wonderful
Alicia Kearns, who was stating in parliament definitively
Alexei Navalny was murdered. And it was.
It is important we in this House call call it out for what it was
because that's what he deserves, she went on to say, following
his murder. I was also in Munich where I
heard his wife Yulia ask us to stand by her.
That's what we must do. Now this was followed up and now
she of course, the chair of the foreign affairs Select
Committee. But that comment was followed up
by Neil Doherty's foreign minister, junior foreign
minister, and she, he said she is right to use the word murder.
We do seek to hold the state and the Russian leadership to
account. So as a result, the UK
government has now applied some sanctions specifically on the
head of the Arctic penal colony that he died in, plus five other
deputy heads. And so that's the UK's response.
Just before we came on air, actually, the US announced that
it was going to be issuing massive sanctions on Russia over
this, I think 500 different people being sanctioned.
But I just wanted to to look at what John Kirby said.
So here he is and he said this. We would all love to know what
happened here because of course, at this point we still don't
know exactly what he died of. Regardless of the actual
scientific answer, Mr. Putin is responsible for it.
So never mind the facts, don't worry about what actually
happened. It's absolutely Putin that's
responsible and nothing else to be said here.
So then of course, this morning or yesterday, we had the video
coming out from Navalny's mother claiming that the Russians are
refusing to allow her access or to to make a proper burial.
Now, of course, the Russians are hostage to fortune on this.
If they allow the burial to be a public event, it becomes a show,
a show burial, effectively a show funeral.
Otherwise, they get continuing attacks from the West and so on
about the way that they're treating the family.
But I just want to remind everybody that this narrative
has been building for so many years.
We have the Integrity initiative.
If you haven't read the articles associated with this page on the
UK accounting website, please do so.
But also a related case, of course the Skripal case.
And if again, if you haven't seen this article, the day of
the Skripal, this basically is by Tim Norman.
It basically goes through a timeline of all the main
mainstream media reports. And it's it's a great highlight
of all the inconsistencies in the story.
And we must never forget with respect to Novichok in
particular, because novelty, of course, the accusation was that
Novichok was the reason for his death, but also that he had been
poisoned with Novichok a number of years ago.
We must never forget that Dame Sally Davies, the the Chief
Medical Officer at the time, claimed that the best way to
deal with, if you suspected you'd come into contact with
Novichok, it was to use baby wipes because that will solve
the problem. So that's how seriously we
should take that whole narrative, and I suspect this
narrative as well. But we will talk more about that
in the coming days. Debbie, let's just end with one
final slide. Yes, and look at this beautiful
little face. And what a lovely message.
And one that I think we should all hold fast.
They want us to hate each other. Don't let them win.
Yes, indeed. A nice sentiment to end on.
Thank you very much for everybody that's joined us today
and thanks to all our contributors today.
We'll be back in a few minutes for some extra.
We will see you then if you're Auk column member.
Otherwise we'll see you at 1:00 PM as usual on Monday.
Have a great weekend. Bye, bye.