Open letter to Locala's school-aged immunisation team

Dear Locala,

We are the founders of the independent health resource, Informed Consent Matters, a resource created as a response to the extraordinary events of the last three years. With respective backgrounds in health, social care, journalism, and law, it concerned us deeply that the imperative ethical and legal principle of informed consent in medicine was being so frequently flouted throughout the "Covid pandemic" - in relation to vaccination in particular.

We are writing to you today because our concerns have recently become amplified by the impending mass national application of the flu nasal spray to all school-aged children. We understand that in Kirklees, where we reside, you are responsible for disseminating this spray in schools.

As such, we seek your urgent response to the following key questions relating to the application of informed consent when choosing whether to receive this vaccination:

1. What is the absolute (not relative) risk reduction of the flu spray?

2. How many children has the new reformulated Fluenz Tetra spray been tested on?

3. How long were these children studied for?

4. Was the vaccine tested in clinical trials against an inert saline placebo, or non-inert substances containing biologically active ingredients?

5. What controls have been put in place to mitigate the possibility of the live flu nasal spray prompting antibody dependent enhancement - ADE - in children who may have developed this syndrome from the COVID-19 vaccines that many school-aged children have received?

In relation to point five, evidence shows clearly that COVID-19 vaccines carry the risk of inducing ADE in recipients, and many top experts and vaccine developers have warned of this since 2020. As you know, ADE represents a serious abnormality in immune system function, and renders those who develop this syndrome at risk of a catastrophic overreaction to live viruses, such as the types contained in the flu nasal spray.

It is already official advice not to give the flu nasal spray to the immunocompromised for precisely this reason. Plausibly, some Covid-vaccinated children have become immunocompromised (have developed ADE) from this vaccine, and so should not be receiving any live virus vaccines.

Yet it appears that no controls have been put in place to identify these children, nor does any evidence exist showing that the flu nasal spray is safe for Covid-vaccinated children.

This is not to suggest the evidence suggests the spray is "safe" for non-Covid-vaccinated children, as there are a litany of side effects, some of them severe, that have been associated with this spray for many years, long before the advent of the Covid vaccines.

Rather, it is to suggest the flu spray may be far more dangerous for Covid-vaccinated children than their unvaccinated counterparts, and to ask you what evidence you have to demonstrate otherwise. It is also to remind you of your legal obligation under the Montgomery ruling to inform parents and children of all material risks of a vaccine "to which a reasonable person in the patient's position would attach significance".

Any reasonable person would attach a great deal of significance to the risk of ADE, which could be triggered by a live virus vaccine, so it is incumbent on you to fully inform all families of this, and all other, risks when offering the live flu nasal spray to their children.

This is an issue of extreme local and national importance and we seek your prompt and urgent reply, and comprehensive answers to the five listed questions, before you begin administering this spray in schools.

Please note this is an open letter that has been shared on our resource and sent to all our subscribers.

Yours faithfully,

Miriam Finch

Mark Finch

Founders

Informed Consent Matters

https://www.informedconsentmatters.co.uk/

Thanks for reading. Informed Consent Matters is a completely independent health resource with no corporate or pharmaceutical funding, meaning your support is what powers this resource to keep going.

If you would like to support our work, please consider:

Making a purchase from our awareness-raising shop or;

Making a secure donation via Buy Me A Coffee or by direct bank transfer,

Thank you for your invaluable support in spreading the vital message that informed consent really does matter.

Vaccine developers warned of "ADE" - could it cause catastrophe this winter?

“I understand the importance of accelerating timelines for vaccines in general, but from everything I know, this is not the vaccine to be doing it with." So were the prescient words of scientist and vaccine developer, Dr. Peter Hotez, in 2020, regarding the coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines, whilst they were still in development. Hotez, who serves as the dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, should know: he and his team had tried and failed to develop coronavirus vaccines in the past, and Hotez issued an urgent caution to scientists trying to fast-track Covid vaccines, warning that cutting corners and sidestepping vital long-term animal studies could have lethal consequences. Hotez had previously worked on the development of a vaccine for SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome), a type of coronavirus, and found that some vaccinated animals developed more severe disease compared with unvaccinated animals when they were exposed to live viruses. This is a condition known as immune enhancement, or antibody dependent enhancement - ADE. While the idea of "immune enhancement" may sound like a positive, it is anything but - in this context, immune "enhancement" means potential catastrophic immune overreaction. “There is a risk of immune enhancement,” warned Hotez, when commenting on the Covid vaccines still in trials. “The way you reduce that risk is first you show it does not occur in laboratory animals.” This was never shown with the Covid vaccines. Sadly, Hotez' concerns have proven all too valid, with evidence showing that the risk of ADE in COVID-19 vaccine recipients is significant. A 2021 study published in the National Library of Medicine concluded:

"The specific and significant COVID-19 risk of ADE should have been and should be prominently and independently disclosed to research subjects currently in vaccine trials, as well as those being recruited for the trials and future patients after vaccine approval, in order to meet the medical ethics standard of patient comprehension for informed consent." What this essentially means is that those who have received coronavirus vaccines, could be at risk of a much more severe reaction to live viruses than their unvaccinated counterparts. This is especially concerning when one considers that secondary school students - many of whom received the COVID-19 vaccines via their schools - are this year being offered, for the first time ever, the flu nasal spray, which contains a variety of live viruses, including a new B-strain which has never been added to the children's nasal spray before. It is therefore feasible to believe that some of these children's immune systems could dramatically overreact to these viruses as a result of the ADE they may have developed from their Covid vaccines. ADE is a disorder of the immune system, which effectively renders a person immunodeficient, in that their immune system is not functioning in the normal or optimal way. It is already official medical advice not to give the flu nasal spray to immunodeficient children. To quote from the University of Oxford: "The nasal flu spray should not be given to anyone who is severely immunodeficient (so that their immune system cannot control viral infections in the normal way)... The resource continues:

"Children who have been vaccinated with the nasal spray should avoid close contact with people who have very severely weakened immune systems (for example, bone marrow transplant patients requiring isolation in a protective environment) for about two weeks following vaccination. If it is not possible for a child to avoid contact with someone who is severely immunosuppressed (for example, because they live in the same house), the child should not receive the nasal flu vaccine." This means that even children who do not receive the nasal flu vaccine, could be at risk from others in close quarters (such as schoolmates) who do. There is no data at all to establish that it is safe to give the flu nasal spray to children who have received COVID-19 vaccinations, children who may have developed ADE, and therefore could have a catastrophic reaction to the live viruses contained within the flu spray. These reactions could be labelled by the government - not as vaccine reactions - but as evidence of "a new variant" that another lockdown is required to contain. Ministers have already warned us that future pandemics and lockdowns are to be expected very soon. Please help us raise awareness of this critical issue by sharing this news bulletin with family and friends and by handing out our awareness-raising leaflet. The flu spray programme commenced this month (September) and will run until December 2023 so there is still time to get this information out into the local community and to warn parents of the potential risks to their children from receiving this spray (or being near others who do). Thank you for your support in helping us spread the critical message that, when it comes to children's health especially, informed consent really does matter.

Open letter to council regarding an imminent future "pandemic"

Dear Councillors and Officers of Kirklees Council,

I am writing to you, on behalf of myself and the co-signatories listed, following the recent abrupt resignation of former council leader, Shabir Pandor, a resignation that was prompted by an upcoming no-confidence vote that he was expected to lose.

The BBC described the council's leadership under Pandor as "too distant", with a "lack of accountability and poor communication".

As a resident of Kirklees who has attempted to communicate with Mr Pandor, and other high-ranking members of the council, on numerous occasions over the last three years, and on matters of acute urgency (it would not be too extreme to say "life and death"), I can confirm that this is an accurate summation.

It is therefore my hope that the renewed council leadership, which has challenged and put an end to Mr Pandor's corrupt, unaccountable, and ineffectual regime, will address the concerns I have with the gravity and seriousness that they deserve, rather than the glib dismissals I had come to expect from Mr Pandor.

As a freelance writer with a speciality in open letters, all my past correspondence to Mr Pandor has been made public, as this letter has been, too.

To sum, the nature of my past concerns related to the grotesque mismanagement by Kirklees Council of the "Covid pandemic", with particular reference to Kirklees' uncritical and unethical promotion of the experimental injections known as Covid vaccines - a promotion which went so far as to use public money to bribe inexperienced teenagers to endorse these injections on their social media pages (a fact that was uncovered by investigative journalists at The Examiner newspaper). This of course is staggeringly unethical to the point of being legally questionable, as I elucidated to the council in my letter.

Kirklees Council has to date dealt with none of my concerns adequately, which appears to be a reflection of the general organisational structure of corruption, arrogance, and chaos as sponsored by Mr Pandor.

Now that Pandor has departed, and thus, I assume, so has the attitude of aloof dismissal towards Kirklees residents he displayed and encouraged, I ask you to turn your urgent attentions to the imminent manufacture of another "pandemic", which - if it goes ahead - would likely prove even more disastrous to the residents of Kirklees than the last one.

Please note the deeply distressing and terminal decline of Huddersfield town centre as an example, where multiple, previously thriving and signature, businesses have closed their doors for good. Many more local businesses are now teetering on the precipice of collapse, and another declared "pandemic", with attendant shutdowns and restrictions, would destroy them - and the jobs and opportunities they created - permanently.

So is another "pandemic" on its way?

Please note that, as of Friday 1st September, the UK government intends to offer the proven dangerous flu nasal spray to every child in the country aged from 2 to 16. Such a huge childhood cohort has never before been offered this concoction, as most in this demographic are not at high risk for the condition the spray claims to prevent.

Meanwhile, the 50-64 year-old cohort, who are at much higher risk from the flu than healthy children, are not being offered a flu vaccination.

This makes no sense from an epidemiological, medical, or economical point of view. If the point of the flu vaccine is to protect from harm those most vulnerable to flu's complications, then they are the ones who should be prioritised for the flu vaccine.

Healthy children, especially teenagers, are not at high risk, and the Joint Committee for Vaccination and Immunisation, which advises the government on vaccination, has itself said, only those at "high risk of serious disease" should be offered a free flu vaccine.

Yet, a cohort of millions of children who are not at high risk at all, are being offered the flu spray, at huge public expense.

This is an inexplicable strategy if the end goal is to reduce the maximal number of serious complications from the flu (hospital admission and death), as healthy teens are at effectively zero risk of these complications.

Therefore, logic dictates there is highly likely to be another reason for the UK government spending such large sums to orchestrate such a massive immunisation exercise to a cohort not at serious risk from the condition the vaccine claims to prevent.

The flu nasal spray is known to create and spread illness in children, and does so every year. If it is being administered to more children than usual, it therefore follows it will create more illness than usual.

In 2022, the then-Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, warned the UK public that we would return to a lockdown situation if there was a "new variant that affects children". The UK government has already told the public to prepare for another pandemic where lockdowns and other restrictions are applied much more harshly, and beyond what "feels comfortable".

It is therefore the contention of several researchers at this time that the flu spray being disseminated in all the nation's schools between September and December this year could create a wave of illness that will be labelled a new pandemic, and therefore used as an excuse by the government to plunge the country back into lockdown.

I am writing to you today, as local government employees who will be tasked by central government with imposing any such restrictions, to let you know of this plausible imminent future. Therefore, if and when central government does instruct you that there is a "new variant that affects children", and tells you to once again destructively dismantle thousands of lives, by closing businesses, shutting schools, and disrupting travel, you have the information at your disposal to reject these instructions.

A spate of illness that is caused by putting toxic ingredients directly up children's noses is not "a new pandemic" that requires any draconian and undemocratic restrictions imposed on the rest of the populace by the government. All that is required is that the unwell children are treated appropriately - and, ideally, that the flu spray, dangerous and unnecessary, is withdrawn from schools for good. The evidence supporting the use of this spray is very poor, and common sense dictates that healthy children do not need to be vaccinated against ordinary seasonal illnesses, as for many past generations they were not.

Please note that the Informed Consent Matters independent health resource, that I co-founded, along with an individual with extensive experience in health and social care, has been actively campaigning to raise awareness of these issues, including sending letters directly to schools and disseminating leaflets to share information in the community.

I am therefore writing to you in my capacity as a campaigner to ensure you are aware of these issues too, and to furnish you with facts you may previously not have had: facts that will, I sincerely hope, enable you to make far more ethical, humane, and evidence-based decisions than your predecessors - especially where it comes to the critical matter of children's health.

Please note this letter is being sent to multiple recipients, including my local ward councillors, Manisha Roma Kaushik, Imran Safdar, and Jo Lawson, whom, as my direct local representatives, have a duty to respond.

I look forward to hearing from you promptly.

Yours faithfully,

Miriam Finch (Crosland Moor, HD4)

(Plus four co-signs, redacted for privacy in the public version of this letter)