Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

COVID-19

Media failing to cover ‘powerful testimony’ of people injured by COVID vaccines

Published

2 months ago

5 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D., The Defender

Kate Scott’s husband Jamie was an athlete, a high-power executive, and an active husband and father of two boys until he nearly died after experiencing jab-induced immune thrombosis and thrombocytopenia from the AstraZeneca COVID shot.

Important information coming out of the ongoing UK Covid-19 Inquiry is “slipping between the cracks” of media coverage, YouTube commenter John Campbell, Ph.D., reported on a recent episode of his show.

Campbell played clips of testimony by Kate Scott, who represents the U.K.’s Covid Vaccine Injured & Bereaved (VIBUK). Kate’s husband, Jamie, suffered a traumatic brain injury and was left severely disabled by the AstraZeneca vaccine.

Kate’s testimony is part of the inquiry’s fourth module, investigating issues related to the COVID-19 shots and therapeutics.

Jamie was an athlete, a high-power executive, and an active husband and father of two boys until he nearly died after experiencing jab-induced immune thrombosis and thrombocytopenia. He was in a coma for four weeks and five days.

Jamie survived, Kate explained, but his life will never be the same. His traumatic brain injury affects his thinking processes and his emotions. He is partially blind and he will never be able to work again, to live independently, or to look after their children.

Kate said that she and her group were testifying to draw attention to the fact that many people were injured by the shot, to remove the stigma of jab injuries, and to compel the government and pharmaceutical companies “to look again at how to deal with the inconvenient fact of vaccine injury and bereavement and the lives it has shattered.”

She said the very first serious side effects from the AstraZeneca shot “should have rung an alarm with the MHRA” – Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency – and the U.K. “government that there was a serious problem. However, no action was taken.”

She presented data that VIBUK obtained via a freedom of information law request showing that, as of November 30, 2024, 17,519 vaccine injury victims have made claims to the government’s Vaccine Damage Payment scheme.

Of those, she said, only 194 victims have been notified that they are entitled to payment, and only 55 have received any payment. The maximum allowed payment is 120,000 pounds (approximately $150,000).

Kate also revealed that people are deemed ineligible for compensation if they are considered less than 60 percent disabled and that many people receive diagnoses that they are 59 percent disabled.

“A percentage disablement is also somewhat offensive,” she said. “Regardless of if it’s 10 percent or 59 percent or, Jamie, way over 60 percent, or dead — I guess that’s 100% disabled — there’s no compensation if you fall below that [60 percent].”.

“The consequence of being told, ‘sorry you’re only 55% disabled,’ it’s awful, it’s devastating and then there’s nothing for you, no one to help.”

Commenting on her testimony, Campbell asked, “How on earth can a clinician adjudicate someone is only 59 percent disabled? Why not 58? Why not 61? How can you be 59 percent disabled? I don’t understand that. I simply don’t understand it.”

Kate added, “Statistics are interesting, aren’t they? Within our group, [for] 100 percent of the people in it, [the vaccine] was not ‘safe and effective.’”

The group recommended that pharmaceutical companies should not fund the government agencies that regulate them. They also said the Yellow Card scheme — which is the U.K.’s adverse events reporting system for medicines, vaccines, medical devices and other products — should be mandatory rather than voluntary.

Kate also said the government should follow up when people file yellow cards. Many people in their group had filed cards, but no one ever contacted them to investigate.

“We are important,” she said. “We’re part of this pandemic story.”

Campbell asked, “Why is it that so many things only come to light from freedom of information requests?” He said it’s a pity these stories are not being picked up by the media. “Powerful testimony, not well-covered, unfortunately,” he said.

Watch here:

Republished with permission from Children’s Health Defense – Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

Before Post

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
COVID-19 / 8 hours ago

Tamara Lich and Chris Barber trial update: The Longest Mischief Trial of All Time continues..

Energy / 9 hours ago

Straits of Mackinac Tunnel for Line 5 Pipeline to get “accelerated review”: US Army Corps of Engineers

John Stossel / 10 hours ago

Climate Change Myths Part 1: Polar Bears, Arctic Ice, and Food Shortages

COVID-19

Tamara Lich and Chris Barber trial update: The Longest Mischief Trial of All Time continues..

Published on April 17, 2025

By

Here are the last two posts on Tamara Lich’s Substack posted April 16 and April 17:

April 17: 

We weren’t able to secure a date yesterday for the sentencing hearing and instead another ‘speak to’ was set for April 28. In addition to time needed to enter numerous impact statements (coincidentally and conveniently comprised of individuals suing us for $300,000,000.00), the Crown has added a forfeiture order to seize Big Red which will add significant time to argue. Therefore I suspect all parties will need to find 4-5 days in their schedules for the sentencing hearing.

The Crown is also seeking two years in federal prison for each of us.

Three days were tentatively set aside at the end of May for a Stay of Proceedings application put forth yesterday by Ms. Magus on Chris’ behalf.

And so The Longest Mischief Trial of All Time continues to plod along, still no end in sight.

 

April 16:

In our trial, the longest mischief trial of all time, we set hearing dates to set hearing dates.

There will be a ‘speak to’ this afternoon to set a date for the sentencing hearing which we think will take 3-4 days. Following that hearing, Chris and I will return to Ottawa again for the actual sentence.

The Crown is seeking 2 years in a federal penitentiary for both of us, plus they have decided to file an application to confiscate Big Red. Funny, there hasn’t been a single other convoy case in which the Crown demanded that persons property or vehicle, yet they seem to want Big Red. You need to ask yourself why.

Chris raised his children in that truck, changed their diapers in that truck, had his old dog, Buddy, put to sleep in the passenger seat when his time came because that was Buddy’s favourite place in the world.

This is not about the rule of law.

It’s about crushing a Canadian symbol of Hope, Pride & Unity

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Canadian student denied religious exemption for COVID jab takes tech school to court

Published on April 16, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is helping Philip Anisimov fight Ontario Tech University, which this week has to defend in court its decision to deregister the student.

An Ontario university student who was kicked out of school after his religious-based COVID vaccine exemption request was rejected is in court to argue his civil rights were violated.

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) is helping Philip Anisimov fight Ontario Tech University, which this week has to defend in court its decision to deregister the student for choosing not to receive the experimental, abortion-tainted COVID shots on religious grounds.

According to a press release from the JCCF, yesterday, April 15, and today, April 16, Anisimov’s legal team will be making arguments in an Ontario court that the university “violated his right to be free from discrimination on the basis of his religion.”

“The University tried to characterize Mr. Anisimov’s belief as a personal preference by arguing that vaccination is not truly contrary to his faith,” noted constitutional lawyer Hatim Kheir.

“Decision-makers are not permitted to engage in speculation and theological debates about which dogma is correct. So long as a belief is religious in nature and sincerely held, it must be accommodated,” Kheir explained, outlining how the Human Rights Code of the province has to be interpreted according to the law.

Anisimov’s case goes back to August 30, 2021, when Ontario, under the direction of its Chief Medical Health Officer Dr. Kieran Moore, mandated that all students in the province show proof of vaccination unless they have an exemption or agree to attend a COVID jab education session boasting about the shots.

However, the third option was not available at Ontario Tech University, as the government mandate allowed schools to chose whether or not they would offer such a program to students.

As a result, Anisimov, who had requested accommodation for religious reasons but was denied, was deregistered from all his courses.

He was then forced to spend an entire extra year to complete his studies. According to his lawyers, Ontario Tech University’s decision to not approve his COVID jab exemption request “not only disrupted his career plans but also violated his right to be free from discrimination on the basis of religion, as protected by the Ontario Human Rights Code.”

“Mr. Anisimov has a sincere religious objection to the COVID vaccines and could have been accommodated without difficulty,” he added.

COVID vaccine mandates, as well as lockdowns, which came from provincial governments with the support of the federal government, split Canadian society. The mRNA shots have been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children.

Beyond health concerns, many Canadians, especially Catholics, opposed the vaccines on moral grounds because of their link to fetal cell lines derived from the tissue of aborted babies.

Continue Reading

Trending

X