Nurse Resigns Over Covid

by don - 2021-06-26 ( life / health / covid ) [html version]

A veteran British nurse's recent letter of resignation. A longish read,

yet many points well made. Her points echo those of others coming up

time and again in what has become an all too familiar pattern.

"Dear Ms Sutcliffe and all Executive Directors,

I write to you today as a highly experienced nurse with 27 years

service, to inform you that when my registration expires on 31.05.2021 I

will not be renewing it and therefore I am resigning my registration and

leaving the profession.

The reasons for this are many but to summarise I am utterly dismayed and

disheartened by my profession and with you as our governing body at the

complete lack of integrity that has been displayed since the beginning

of the 'covid19 Crisis'.

The facts about the reality and truth of this alleged crisis are readily

available for anyone to find and investigate for themselves, not least

you, a body that should have been doing just this, seeking the truth and

advocating for both your members and our patients, past, present and

future. We are patient advocates not government puppets.

Under the guise of 'covid19' (which has never been isolated or purified)

a massive injustice has been served onto the people of this country and

globally. It was and remains our duty as healthcare professionals to

learn the truth and to be the voice of these people, yet there has been

a deafening silence and a sickening desire to simply comply by you and

so many of my colleagues that I can not and will not condone. Sadly in

these times, for me to speak out about these injustices and to be a true

advocate for my patients has meant me being bullied and ostracised by my

colleagues, removed from clinical practice by hospital management who

state they are unable to consider any evidence presented to them that

questions the official narrative and state that they must simply comply

with government 'guidance' regardless of any harm they may cause.

When did our profession cease to be based on evidence? When did we

become order followers uninterested in the facts on which we base the

care we give and devastatingly now on which we deny patients and their

families care? To speak out about the many 1000s of people in this

country alone that have had treatment and investigations delayed or have

been left to die, has meant me living in constant fear of being 'struck

off' the register for simply doing what I swore to do, speak and act for

the benefit of my patients at all times.

I refer below to the first part of our code of conduct.

"Prioritise People

You put the interests of people using or needing nursing or midwifery

services first. You make their care and safety your main concern and

make sure that their dignity is preserved and their needs recognised,

assessed and responded to. You make sure that those receiving care are

treated with respect, that their rights are upheld and that any

discriminatory attitudes and behaviours towards those receiving care are

challenged".

NMC Code of Conduct

This no longer seems to be at the forefront, of too many of my nursing

and medical colleagues, minds and motives. I have witnessed personally

and professionally many examples of the above ethos being completely

disregarded and have been informed by patients and friends of their own

experiences where their holistic needs have been disrespected and

disregarded because 'covid19' is a priority over, it seems, every other

illness, and, a priority over the emotional, psychological and spiritual

well being of both our patients and their families. Any nurse who can

deny a child their families being with them when they are sick or dying

totally contradicts the entire foundations of our profession, care. As

does any nurse who denies end of life patients spending precious time

with their loved ones, denying them entry into hospices for fear of

'covid' transmission. Enforcing these restrictions rigidly and brutally,

making families say their last goodbyes via the internet or knowing that

families have slept in hospital/hospice carparks just so that they can

feel close to their loved one at the time of death, because we have

removed their right to hold their hands and be with them as they pass.

The trauma that this must have caused people is unforgivable and not

something I will ever condone and nor should you or anyone in our

profession.

The devastating isolation of residents in care homes was, in my opinion,

inhumane. It is equally unforgivable and unthinkable that such treatment

could ever have been perpetrated by staff who allege to care for these

people. The emotional trauma they and their families must have suffered

is irreparable and I am ashamed to be associated with a profession that

claimed this was to protect them. Holistic care now seems to be a thing

of the past as does an individuals right go choose.

Mask exempt patients have been denied treatment in A&E and spoken to in

such a manner that any healthcare professional found to be conducting

themselves like this should be investigated and disciplined. Yet they

are not, despite so much evidence in the public arena. Why are you

seemingly supporting the actions of these health care professionals by

omission of action, by your silent acquiescence?

Do you condone the behaviour of the nurses on your register that are

bullying and coercing patients into wearing masks and to take the test?

What has happened to informed consent?

Where is the informed consent for masks?

Mask do not work and are potentially harmful. You should know this. Yet

you remain silent and allow the people of this country to have this

imposed on them despite the absence of any scientific supporting

evidence. You remain silent while masks are imposed on children. Surely

you have considered the devastating effect this will and has already had

on their mental health and consequently their physical health?

The shaming of people who are mask exempt is actively encouraged.

Many of those that are mask exempt are too afraid to leave their homes

for fear of the judgement and abuse they may receive. As a nurse I have

been told by too many mask exempt patients of the distress they have

suffered at the hands of others, healthcare professionals included. They

have been bullied, shamed and coerced into feeling they must wear a mask

even if this would be detrimental to them. Emotionally blackmailed, "

Wearing is Caring". Disgraceful marketing campaigns displayed everywhere

insisting that masks must be worn otherwise entry/service will be

denied. Yet these masks are useless.

Bullies in all types of establishments, once again, healthcare settings

included, insisting on proof/ disclosure of exemption and denial of the

existence or validity of the 'Equality Act 2010'. There are people that

are simply not mentally robust enough to withstand the

discrimination, judgements and verbal assaults, so they either stay home

( meaning further social isolation/exclusion) or succumb to the bullying

and wear masks despite it causing them physical or mental distress/

harm. This is totally unacceptable. Yet you remain silent.

Where is the informed consent for tests?

The tests are unforgivably inaccurate. The PCR test was never designed

as a diagnostic tool, clearly stated by its inventor Kary Mullis. Surely

you are aware of this too? If not why not? It is your responsibility to

be aware of the facts. And if you are aware why are you silent? Why are

you not challenging the Government policy in order to protect and do no

harm?

These inaccurate tests have been used to justify injustices on the

people on a scale that is nothing short of criminal.

They have been used to fabricate a health threat and bring this country

to its knees through fear.

These tests have been used to label healthy, asymptomatic individuals as

a potential threat to the lives of others and to facilitate world

governments in rolling out Draconian measures/restrictions on their

people, the people they were elected to serve.

So-called asymptomatic cases have never in the history of respiratory

disease been the driver for the spread of infection. Rather it is

symptomatic people who spread respiratory infections – not asymptomatic

people.

Why have you not challenged this?

The measures imposed on us all are responsible for the destruction of

lives, livelihoods, mental health and the very essence of what makes us

human, our connections to one another, making people, and sickeningly,

children, fearful of each other. Dehumanisation.

It has all been 'marketed' as protecting the vulnerable.

What about all the other vulnerable members of our society? I am sure I

don't need to list them.

Are their needs no longer important?

The fact that Healthcare professionals across the UK are refusing

patients treatment and investigations if they are mask exempt and if

they refuse a test and/or being told that they will be removed from

treatment and investigation lists if they refuse the test is unethical

medical tyranny.

I have personally been party in my professional capacity to my

colleagues proudly stating how they have informed patients that if they

refuse a test they will be removed from the waiting list. I asked a

senior colleague to show me where in the admission process we asked

patients for their informed consent for mask wearing. I was told, that

patients are

told they must wear a mask and they know if they do not then they will

not be admitted to the hospital and therefore they will not get

treatment, so they wear a mask. I witnessed all surgical patients being

expected to wear surgical masks post surgery and even some Consultant

Anaesthetists insisting patients requiring oxygen therapy must wear

surgical masks beneath their oxygen delivery masks, without any evidence

of efficacy or potential harm this may cause. I saw my own colleagues

enforcing this, without any evidence to back up this new practice.

Do you condone this?

Again, if you do not then why are you silent?

Where is the informed consent for the experimental vaccines?

Do you have the supporting evidence that the vaccines are safe and do

not cause harm?

In the absence of this evidence why are you not challenging Government

roll out of the vaccine?

Why are you not speaking out about the Government proposals to make it a

requirement for healthcare professionals to have the vaccine ? Surely

consultation is necessary? Why are you not in consultation with the

Government on this matter?

I called your helpline and was told that you were not in consultation

and would simply follow the guidance of the Government.

Why are you not advocating for your members and the people of the UK?

Are you aware of the many devastating adverse reactions that are being

experienced by people who are having this experimental vaccine? Are you

aware of the deaths caused by this experimental vaccine?

Why have you not challenged this?

To be a healthcare professional who asks questions now is to be labelled

'uncaring' a 'firebrand' or a 'conspiracy theorist'.

This is wrong, we have a duty to question.

We have a duty to be informed, to inform and to provide care that does

no harm and is consented to via informed consent.

I assume you agree.

Yet part of our training on radicalisation now includes those people who

question the official government narrative on 'covid 19' as having been

potentially radicalised into extreme views.

This is wrong. Do you support this?

Are your members that are in support of the vaccine roll out and are

administering these vaccines fully aware of all the facts of each vaccine?

Are they providing patients with all these facts? If not why not?

I would suggest that this is in the very least negligence by any party

to be not appropriately informed and to not appropriately inform.

Are you aware that Dr Reiner Fuellmich has initiated legal proceedings

against the CDC, WHO and the Davos Group for crimes against humanity and

violations of the Nuremburg Code?

"Fuellmich and his team present the incorrect PCR test and the order for

doctors to describe any comorbidity death as a covid death – as fraud.

In addition to the incorrect tests and fraudulent death certificates,

the "experimental" vaccine itself violates Article 32 of the Geneva

Convention...

Under Article 32 of the 1949 Geneva Convention, "mutilation and medical

or scientific experiments not required for the medical treatment of a

protected person" are prohibited.

According to Article 147, conducting biological experiments on protected

persons is a serious breach of the Convention.

The "experimental" vaccine violates all 10 Nuremberg codes – which carry

the death penalty for those who try to break these international laws".

Soren Dreier

09.05.2021

You will of course be aware that a 'covid' death, is a death from any

cause within 28 days of a positive test.

A test that is inaccurate and deaths whose primary (actual) cause could

have been anything, yet the people of the UK have had their businesses,

lives and health destroyed based on these figures.

And still you remain silent.

Below is an article written by

Dr Yeadon

May 10, 2021

Why are we being lied to about covid? There's no good reason

BE in no doubt, among the reasons that voices and opinions like mine are

never heard in the main media is extreme censorship more suited to China

than a liberal democracy. Please allow me to illustrate with an example

close to my heart why it is high time for us to change our response.

Ivermectin is one of the WHO's 'essential drugs' which all countries

should have access to. It's very cheap as its patent has long expired;

it's one of the most-used drugs in world history; it's extraordinarily

safe; it is often life-saving against parasitic infections. It is also

one of the best-established pharmaceutical treatments for covid-19,

showing benefit in every stage of the disease, in multiple independent

clinical trials of varying quality. On

January 3, 2021, Dr Tess Lawrie attempted to alert the Prime Minister to

the potential of Ivermectin. Her video was pulled from YouTube within

hours of posting, though it survives on Vimeo. The paper by the FLCCC

group of US intensivists (whose survival rates for severe covid-19 are

best in class) that was the inspiration for Dr Lawrie's work was

accepted after extensive open peer review (including two career

employees of the FDA) and 'provisionally accepted' by the 'open science'

journal Frontiers in Pharmacology. The screenshot of the abstract

tweeted by Clare Craig attracted more than 100,000 views. Then,

mysteriously, it was rejected and pulled by the Frontiers editor in

chief. It is still in cached form though the Ministry of Truth has been

at work and placed it in a memory hole, so no trace survives on

Frontiers' own website.

Intended for a Special Issue on 'repurposed drugs' for covid-19, various

guest editors were so incensed at this behaviour that they resigned in

protest. They concluded that 'these unfortunate events constitute gross

editorial misconduct by Frontiers.' Fortunately this major paper is now

published by the American Journal of Therapeutics and can be read below.

This nevertheless successfully delayed by nearly six months its

circulation to leading public health bodies starting mid-November. A

copy was sent to Sir Jeremy Farrar (boss of the Wellcome Trust and

member of Sage) who passed it on to Professor Peter Horby (also on

Sage), amongst others, on November 18, 2020. So the efficacy of

Ivermectin must be well known to the Government's advisers, but they

have done nothing about it. Likewise, the formal and rigorous

meta-analysis performed by Dr Tess Lawrie's team at the Evidence-Based

Medicine Consultancy Ltd has been communicated to Matt Hancock, but

without reply.

I am telling you about this, because all that governments, their

scientific advisers, big Pharma and regulatory agencies will tell you is

that Ivermectin doesn't work in covid-19. They are lying. I am inviting

any of them to sue me, but they won't, for I would win easily.

If Ivermectin was more widely used, there'd be no need for vaccines.

To date, despite the brains, expertise and stature of those scientists

questioning the official covid-19 narrative, as a group they have quite

patently been ineffective. And this is unlikely to change while, as

polite professionals, they won't say: 'This is corruption and they're

lying deliberately to scare the people.' Furthermore, unwittingly, they

have been playing the parts intended by those, including our own

Government and their advisers, who control the global covid narrative.

They judged correctly that we polite Brits wouldn't accuse them of

outright lying, even though they often do exactly that. Boris son's

recent piece to camera, telling us that it was lockdown and not

vaccination which reduced cases and deaths, is a case in point.

Yet it's certain this isn't true, and also certain he and his advisers

know it isn't true.

The government's advisers are not fools. Some may be, but the upper

echelons are very smart. They believe polite people won't say 'not only

are you lying but you're doing it in concert with other, non-democratic

actors', because that's conspiracy theory stuff, right? Powerful people

never use their influence to benefit their interests, do they? Hmm. The

only thing that's different is scale and the power their public

positions give them. Other than that, they're just another a bunch of

grubby criminals, ripping off unsuspecting people.

Truth is our most powerful tool. And that truth is that we're being lied

to.

The truth also, however hard it is to believe it, is that there is

unequivocal and clear evidence of planning and co-ordination. Not to

face this fact is to have your head in the sand. Where it's leading is

easy to discern, once people are willing to lift their internal

censoring and look objectively at the evidence.

First, though, the lies. It's abundantly clear now that pretty much

everything that the public has been told and continues to be told is

between untrue and downright lies.

I offer as a shortlist that:

-PCR mass testing reasonably reliably distinguishes infected and

infectious people from others;

-that masks reduce transmission of respiratory viruses;

-that transmission of infection in the absence of symptoms is an

important contribution to epidemic spreading;

-that lockdowns as executed reduce hospitalisation and deaths;

-that no matter how small the remaining susceptible population and no

matter that virtually no people who, if infected, might die remain

unvaccinated, the position is perilous;

-that no pharmaceutical treatments are available;

-that variants are different enough to warrant border closures and

require new vaccines; -that the gene-based vaccines are safe and effective;

-that 'vaccine passports' will increase safety while having no material

impacts on freedom of choice in a liberal democracy.

It is impossible to believe that intelligent, well-connected and

well-briefed senior advisers to governments don't know that almost all,

if not all, of the above are simply not true.

It is not a matter of opinion in almost all cases. These statements,

which have been explicitly stated and used in justification for the

extraordinary interferences in the lives of citizens in democratic

countries, are mostly demonstrably wrong, as defined by there being

multiple well-conducted, peer-reviewed studies showing the contrary.

To continue with the pretence that there's scientific uncertainty, and

it is therefore understandable that an adviser might offer nuanced

advice, is wrong and misleading. This perhaps is where the mainstream

media has been most culpable.

It is not reasonable to expect typical viewers and readers of speeches,

articles and editorials – whether by scientist sceptics or by critical

commentators – to appreciate that, when we point out that what's

happening doesn't make sense, we mean 'the executive is knowingly and

deliberately harming the country and its citizens'. We are mostly not

saying this, leaving it to the audience to sum up for themselves. But in

my view the audience are

reluctant to do this. They want to believe in government and perhaps

above all they want a quiet life. To disbelieve is so much harder than

to believe.

So in recent weeks I've made a clear decision no longer merely to point

out what it is that governments and their advisers and spokespersons

around the world are doing is wrong, scientifically unjustified and

harmful, but to join the dots in an attempt to provide potential

explanations of why they're doing these things.

It is time for all Doubting es to take a lead and state

unambiguously that 'government and its advisers are telling us things

that are manifestly untrue and maintaining restrictive, damaging

measures for which there's no justification'. By not doing so they are

playing into the hands of those who I firmly believe are engaged in a

determined series of crimes against humanity.

Why do I say this? Simply because there is no benign interpretation of

the acts of commission and omission consistently imposed upon us and no

explanation of the statements which are flatly wrong other than an

intention to deceive the population.

Looking around us now, we see that the prevalence of the virus in the

community is effectively zero. Note that the authorities have never

conceded and determined the operational false positive rate of PCR mass

testing. Subtracting any reasonable estimate of oFPR and we observe no

cases at all. This was true for months as indicated by the positive rate

in lateral flow tests.

No variant of the virus differs by more than 0.3 per cent from the

original sequence, and numerous academic immunologists have stated

strongly that there is no possibility that booster/top-up/variant

vaccines are required. Yet we get daily 'fear porn' on this topic. The

European Parliament just voted through the basic outlines of a vaccine

passport system. It's a racing certainty that the UK will soon follow.

Mask regulations continue in force and many psychologists believe some

people are so traumatised that they will continue to wear them

indefinitely, even though they are useless.

The economy and currency may already be damaged beyond repair. Yet

there's another six weeks minimum until the last restrictions are

scheduled to be lifted.

Almost no one is dying 'with' covid-19 now, and the attribution

methodology overestimates this anyway. Yet hospitals and primary health

care remain far less accessible than they should be, inevitably

resulting in causing or storing up avoidable non-covid-19 deaths, to say

nothing of the suffering and misery of the millions awaiting treatments

for painful and worrying illnesses.

Most terrifyingly, it appears we will soon be required to possess

VaxPass apps if we wish to continue to access our lives.

This system can run effectively only if everyone is vaccinated. This is

a monstrous concept, because it is known that all four vaccines in use

in Europe contain a fatal design flaw: they cause the fusogenic, pro

coagulation spike protein to be expressed wherever the vaccine is taken

up. In some people, especially those so young that they're at no

measurable risk of death if infected by the virus, vaccination results

in their deaths from thromboembolic events. Permitting the inexpert

population to walk into this trap is

unconscionable: there will be thousands of further vaccine-induced

deaths of young people.

I invite thoughtful people to ask that difficult question: 'Why are they

doing this?'

It is my deduction and conclusion that the only motivation that fits all

the observations is the intention to 'herd' every citizen into a VaxPass

system. This is a completely novel system. Never before have all

individuals been represented in a single, interoperable database as a

unique digital ID, accompanied by an editable health-related field.

Whoever controls that database, and the algorithms which govern what it

permits and denies, has literally totalitarian control of the entire

population. There is no personal threshold crossing or transaction which

doesn't fall to those operating that system.

At the very least, the public deserves to be warned that this is coming.

I do not expect conventional judicial processes to protect us in any

way. Every institution has already failed the people of the UK.

Given that numerous government decisions (as instructed by Sage) have

arguably already led to many avoidable deaths, I think it's only

reasonable to consider what the prize is that leads intelligent people

to do the things they've done and continue to peddle.

The possible answers to this question are all bad. I cannot conceive of

a situation where we will shortly be permitted to resume our normal

lives. There is not the slightest hint of that in any case.

I have found it impossible to come up with a benign interpretation of

the events. No one works as carefully and for so long as evidently has

been done, across the world, only suddenly to stop. Why?I've asked

hundreds of people and not a single one has (a) pointed out where my

logic fails or (b) come up with a benign interpretation.

My own conviction is that the purpose is, at minimum, to establish a

system of totalitarian control which will mean the extinguishing of

liberal democracy.

It almost doesn't matter what the next steps might be, but they could,

for example, have been sold to numerous people as the only solution to

'anthropogenic global warming': the amount of resources we'll be

permitted to produce and consume will be set by some unseen controllers.

It is possible they could go a step further than this, and see reducing

population or depopulation as another route to solving the perceived

problem of AGW.

Consider the elimination of the class of the inquiring journalist, the

censorship of all mass media. The relentless smearing and exclusion of

those who ask too many awkward questions. The astonishing waste of

public money, which apparently the foreign exchange markets are

unperturbed about. The destruction of SMEs which provide a third of all

jobs and a substantial proportion of tax revenues. The relentless lying.

The misinformation. The use of psychological operations to frighten and

subdue. The utter disregard for those vaccinated with 'vaccines' that

are way too unsafe for their role. The bending past illegality of the

use of incorrect information to persuade pregnant women to get

vaccinated. The numerous breaches of the Nuremberg Code, since no one is

being explicitly told that these vaccines are experimental and so

recipients are being unwittingly enrolled in an unprecedentedly large

and unmonitored Phase 3 clinical trial. The announcement that, soon, our

minor children are to be vaccinated.

Add in the 'top-up vaccines'. They're not vaccines. Whoever has been

vaccinated has no need of further vaccination. Immunology is perhaps my

strongest suit, so I am certain of this. Is it impossible that in those

one billion vials which has already told us its manufacturing, there is

some gene sequence which will instigate one of a few dozen pathologies,

with onset times ranging from near-immediate to a short number of years?

I assure you, biotechnology has awesome power, and it can be used for

good or ill.

I think I've made a decent case that what governments and their advisers

have done easily amounts to conspiracy. The same 'mistakes' have been

made everywhere. The same tricks and manipulation. Those who claim this

is all coincidence are coincidence theorists.

I argue that unless this is pointed out to the public before any

possible 'vaccine passports' system is established, we've all

collectively failed to discharge our duties to be courageous, to take

chances, to risk looking foolish: I am absolutely committed to

continuing to speak out for as long as I have breath in my body".

https://mobile.twitter.com/ClareCrai...80939368243203

https://web.archive.org/web/20210225....org/articles/

10.3389/fphar.2021.643369/abstract

https://journals.lww.com/americanthe...xt/2021/06000/

Review_of_the_Emerging_Evidence_Demonstrating_the.4.aspx

"Dr Yea has a degree in biochemistry and toxicology and a

research-based PhD in respiratory pharmacology. He has spent over 30

years leading new medicines research in some of the world's largest

pharmaceutical companies, leaving Pfizer in 2011 as Vice President &

Chief Scientist for Allergy & Respiratory. That was the most senior

research position in this field in Pfizer. Since leaving Pfizer, Dr

Yea has founded his own biotech company, Ziarco, which was sold to

the worlds biggest drug company, Novartis, in 2017"

I ask you, are you aware of Ivermectin and the work of Dr Tess Lawrie?

If not why not?

Why are you not pressuring the Government to at the very least consider

this?

Why are you not questioning government policy and demanding their

evidence to support their policies?

Instead through your silence you have and continue to allow them to

aggressively enforce, social distancing, social isolation, closure of

businesses and places of spiritual practice, ineffective and harmful

masks, hand sanitiser and the roll out on an uninformed public of

experimental vaccines?

They trust us and you are failing them through your silence and

unquestioning complicity.

Dr Yea and Dr Tess Lawrie are not alone in questioning what is

happening yet all and anyone that does question are aggressively

censored. Their work removed and labelled dangerous misinformation. All

debate and reasonable discussion immediately quashed.

Do you not stop to wonder why? You should. You have a moral and

professional responsibility to do so.

In my opinion anyone now that knows that something is very wrong with

what we are being told, even merely suspects something is very wrong and

does nothing, remains silent, condoning these injustices and encourages

the vilification or actively vilifies or

attempts to silence those speaking for truth and justice is morally

bankrupt. So, do what you will or won't with this letter but now you are

in possession of it and if you choose to ignore the issues presented

then you can no longer claim nescience but are being wilfully ignorant.

It is with immense sadness that I end my nursing career but I will not

be a part of these crimes against humanity and against the patients I/we

should be protecting and I do not consent or wish to be governed by a

body that silently complies with Government tyranny and bases their

judgement as to whether I am fit to practice as a nurse on my levels of

compliance or in my case

non- compliance with tyranny.

I echo Dr Yea in saying I will fight for truth, freedom, medical

freedom and the health, rights and freedoms of others so long as I have

breath in my body.

Yours sincerely

(Sent by email)

Emma"