Great job Michael!! You are demonstrating very clearly just how absurd, illogical and un-trustworthy the people heading up these institutions actually are. The ICO perhaps aren't expected to have a great handle on the scientific method, but they should be able to see their own circular reasoning... claiming a security risk involving a virus, when there is no evidence of a virus in the first place.

Expand full comment

Dear Michael,

Here are what I can think of. You could also emphasise point 2(see below) and ask them to acknowledge the understanding of severe health risk of multiple vaccine injections against a non existent virus.

1. The virus isolation technique with no control has been judged invalid by a Germany court in 2016. All virologists are legally and morally required to given up the same method as soon as the Germany ruling dropped.

"The OLG Stuttgart on 16 February 2016 overturned the judgment of the court of first instance, dismissed the action and referred, inter alia, to the central message of Prof. Podbielski with respect to the six publications. The plaintiff filed an appeal against the judgment of the OLG to the Supreme Court. As reason he stated his subjective, yet factually false perception of the trial sequence at the court in Stuttgart, and the assertion that our naming of facts about measles posed a threat to public health. The plaintiff’s position was rejected by the Supreme Court in plain words. Thus, the Supreme Court confirmed the judgment of the OLG Stuttgart from 16 February 2016."

The full judgement text: http://lrbw.juris.de/cgi-bin/laender_rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bw&GerichtAuswahl=Oberlandesgerichte&Art=en&sid=46bf3db2df690aba6e4874acafaf45b6&nr=20705&pos=0&anz=1

2. National security is a concern because a vast majority of the world human and animal population is subject to mandatory vaccinations. We are talking about all types of vaccines. And multiple intravascular injections are known to cause severe anaphylactic shocks animals and humans.

See Charles Richet's Nobel Prize lecture (especially the last 8 paragraphs): https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/1913/richet/lecture/

3. The cause and cure for anaphylaxis has been part of the scientific knowledge since 1902 A.D. If virus does not exist (as judged by the German court in 2016), the ICO risks a crime against humanity by siding with the pseudoscience.

Larousse médical illustré (1924): https://archive.org/details/BIUSante_269035 (the 'anaphylaxis' entry is on page 57; the 'antianaphylaxis' entry is on page 69; The introduction,Page VIII, of the book actually discussed the discovery of Pasteur and Richet separately, but one of them is proven false today. )

Expand full comment