This week I heard from a leading politician that women have penises and that we have to embrace healthy able bodied people who wish to live their lives as ‘handicapped’. I feel I have to make my position on this very clear. Women do not have a penis, and I cannot embrace or support any other interpretation. The entire ‘trans’ debate is, in my opinion, becoming very dangerous. Before I continue I should add that I know a transgender woman who lives a very private life. She does not wish to be identified, highlighted or made to feel different; she simply wants to get on with her life quietly and blend in with society, unlike many ‘transactivitists’, whose actions she despises and stresses do not represent her own views.
If we are to make this a public debate, why are we not using evidence to support the terms we use? Aside from a very small number of people born with ovotesticular syndrome, there are only two biological genders. Fact. Would I be considered inappropriate or deemed to be transphobic or discriminatory if I suggested that we referred to those within the transgender community as ‘non biological women’ or ‘non biological men’? As a straight ‘biological woman’ I object to being identified alongside ‘non biological women’ who call themselves women. I also object to the new definition of a woman.
Along with many other biological women, I was born with XX chromosomes. A biological man is born with XY chromosomes. It’s not rocket science, it’s a fact. Perhaps as a straight biological woman my view does not count and I am now in the minority? Does anyone else feel the same, or am I alone in feeling like this? To be clear, I have no problem with anyone being whoever they want to be, likewise I want to be me, in the body I was born in. I and billions of others are comfortable with being biological women—we feel happy with the gender we were born with and have no wish to change. However, I do object to deception. Am I not entitled to choose who I spend time with, choose who I introduce my children to, knowing their biological sex? Perhaps I would not chose to be alone with a non-biological woman. Does anyone else feel that biological women are being demonised and discriminated against by biological men who declare themselves as women, and who think it’s their right to be accepted and embraced under the one world woke banner of identifying as a ‘woman’? Why should I have to define myself as a ‘cis’ woman? I object. Why are biological women not standing up and protesting?
And here I introduce Transableism, the new culture of normalising ‘handicap’, a word that I had believed was shunned from our language decades ago and appears to have returned with a ‘woke vengeance’. In my day, an able bodied healthy person asking to have their spinal cord cut or leg amputated would be regarded as suffering from a mental health condition. In 2023, surgeons are being asked to accommodate these people in the name of gender identification. Back in my younger days I worked at Stoke Mandeville Hospital Spinal Injury Unit. Many of our patients were youngsters who had become paralysed through accidents or injury, their lives changed in a millisecond. As nurses, we witnessed not just the physical trauma, but also the mental and psychological trauma of having to adapt to a life in a wheelchair along with many months of physiotherapy and intense rehabilitation. Many would also become dependent on others for the rest of their lives. Being disabled is not a solitary experience, nor is it one that is chosen. Disability, whether visible or invisible, often involves family and loved ones who desperately try to pick up the pieces and make adaptations in their own lives to accommodate their loved ones. Lives change forever in every way possible.
I would ask the following questions to anyone considering transableism. Have you considered the impact of your decision on those around you? Have you spoken to those who are genuinely disabled through no fault or action of their own? I wonder just how much help and support a ‘transabled’ person will need in order to work, live an independent life and support themselves. I wonder if they expect others and State Benefits to look after them for the rest of their life? How do those with genuine disabilities feel? Has anyone thought to ask? I'm guessing not. Whilst we ignore the thousands with vaccine injuries, the NHS becomes an enabler of mutilation and disability.
Abracadabra: more than half a million hospital appointments to vanish
Published in the Telegraph this week, we learn that in a desperate effort to cut NHS waiting lists, what better way than to cut the services we have become so used to having available to us. 58 procedures and treatments currently offered on the NHS will be withdrawn in an effort to save £250 million a year. If you have an eye condition or you are on a waiting list for eye treatment, you will be the first to be targeted, along with those reliant on angioplasty in ‘stable’ heart conditions. MRI scans will now be offered to patients who are used to needle biopsy of the prostate gland. The big exception to the rule, if you are obese, rest assured you will still be allowed to access NHS treatments.
New kids and government departments on the block
Have you noticed the many new government departments that are popping up, almost by stealth?
ARIA – The Advanced Research Invention Agency – responsible for seed funding high risk new tech start ups and is the brainchild of Dominic Cummings.
DSIT – The Department of Science, Innovation and Technology was launched in February by Rish Sunak. Appointed to take the helm is Michelle Donelan MP. With a brand new department to run, perhaps it would have made more sense to appoint someone who was not expecting to take maternity leave shortly after their appointment. Michelle went on maternity leave in April, but we are assured the department has been left in the safe hands of Chloe Smith MP. A past employee of Deloitte, Chloe Smith also has responsibility of The Online Safety Bill and ARIA.
The latest list of ‘movers and shakers’ in the digital health world can be found in the latest publication of digital health, where you may notice a reference to another new application, DrDoctor, a platform for physicians which is billed as a “patient engagement platform to make data driven decisions, activate patients through self-booking and provide remote care”. Healthcare has changed forever. Human contact with a qualified GP is fast fading.
Along with new departments, we appear to be welcoming new faces. Perhaps I am being cynical in thinking rats and sinking ships, but with many familiar names leaving their posts, who is replacing them?
Sir Patrick Vallance, Chief Medical Officer, is to be succeeded by Dame Angela McLean. A professor of mathematical biology, Dame Angela has been advising the Ministry of Defence and worked with SAGE during the pandemic.
Kate Brintworth has been appointed as the new Chief Midwifery Officer for England. The announcement was made on 19 May 2023.
Sara Hurley, Chief Dental Officer for England, is to stand down—at a time when the NHS Dental service is almost non-existent, there does not appear to be an interim CDO, and at the time of writing there is no one waiting to fill the post.
Richard Sharp, Chair of the BBC has been forced to step down, but who is being considered to replace him?
Stephen Lightfoot is also about to leave the MHRA Board. As chair, he has decided to devote more time to his grandchildren. But who will replace him? The hunt for a new Chair has been launched.
Professor Chris Whitty is still Chief Medical Officer for England but has stood down in his capacity as Chief Scientific Advisor. He has been succeeded by Professor Lucy Chappell. In his capacity as our WHO representative, it appears his term of office ends in 2023. Is this indicative of a looming resignation? Perhaps.
‘Life Sci For Growth’
The Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, has been busy. He is ‘firing up’ a £650 million ‘war chest’ to include delivery of the UK’s ambition to becoming the global superpower in life sciences. The Life Sciences Council met on 25 May for a biannual discussion. Unsurprisingly, Jeremy Hunt was joined by his good friend, Sir Pascal Soriot, CEO AstraZeneca (AZ), supporter of King Charles, Terra Carta. Concerned that UK Biotech has seen a drop off in investment during 2022, the Chancellor is determined to reassure industry that Britain is still the best place to invest. Perhaps Sir Soriot spooked Mr Hunt recently by relocating the new AstraZeneca factory complex to Dublin.
The UK agenda for the ‘Brave New World’ is Life Sciences, of that there can be no doubt. Do you remember signing up to become a living lab rat for your country? I remember the phrase ‘Your Country Needs You’, but this pushes it to a whole new realm.
The Life Science sector employs over 280,000 people. Contributing over £94 billion to the UK economy, it is regarded as key in driving UK growth. In effect, over 67 million of us have been nominated against our will to become experimental lab rats, trapped in a ‘one country health system’ with no way out. Rich pickings indeed.
So who stands to benefit? Reading this article, it certainly doesn’t appear to be the British public:
As the package was first revealed to the UK Life Science Council it was welcomed by the CEO’s of global life science companies and industry representatives
Yes, I bet it was. Maybe they could see their bank accounts bulging. Did you know there was a Life Sciences Connect Conference that Jeremy Hunt hosted in March 2023, where he was seduced by promises of a golden life science future for the UK by industry leaders?
‘Life Sci For Growth’ has been published by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology in collaboration with the Department of Health and Social Care. In brief, we can look forward to:
announcements in reducing NHS waiting times.
changes to ‘improve commercial clinical trials’.
In reality, this means ACCELERATION of clinical trials and fast track delivery of new/novel/experimental medicines to the UK population. “Ambitious life sciences package”, in reality, means funding for new technology, skills and infrastructure.
Let’s break the funding down a bit:
£121 million for clinical trial acceleration
£48 million for scientific innovation to prepare for ‘future health emergencies’
£154 million to increase capacity of UK biological data bank
£250 million to ‘incentivise’ pension schemes to invest science and tech firms
The Academic Health Science Network is about to be relaunched as the Health Innovation Network. This is ‘word soup’ for bringing together a mish mash of services to include the NHS, local communities, charities, academia and industry to ‘share best practice’, another misleading term, which really means ‘cost cutting’. Local communities and charities means volunteers (practicing more virtue signalling skills). I predict an army of volunteers, school leavers, silver surfers and cheap labour for the foreseeable future.
Keen to neglect our public/private railways, there is an urgency to plough ahead with plans to update the East West Railway (EWR) in order to improve connections between the golden triangle ‘life science’ giants, London, Oxford and Cambridge—and noticeably, how to free up laboratory space. Could that have anything to do with Europe’s biggest ‘wet lab’ currently being built at Canary Wharf, home to the MHRA? How convenient.
Thanks to the recently published government response to the O’Shaughnessy Review on commercial clinical trials and Dame Angela McLean’s review on the life science regulatory system, we can expect a fast track of approvals for clinical trials and an acceleration of new products to get to all NHS patients. GP’s will be incentivised to use experimental drugs on their patients. Will you be one of the patients who will be used in trials in order to promote clinical research? Would you even know if you are being experimented on? If not, ask!
The NHS waiting list is currently sitting at around 7.3 million and rising. In order to address the backlog and reduce waiting times, your GP may offer you up to five other healthcare providers if they need to make a referral out of area. Apparently we (the public) can access our preference through the NHS App or website. Marketed as being in the ‘patients best interest, and giving them the ‘right to choose’, I would argue that travelling out of area for a service you could access locally, and probably on your own, is not in anyone’s best interests. It is, in my opinion, another way of separating families and increasing anxiety, distress and confusion. Those who are vulnerable, disabled or elderly, will be cared for many miles away from their home, support network and families. But what if that person does not have a ‘smart phone’, access to the internet or even the wherewithal to be able to use technology to access help?
As we brace ourselves for yet more junior doctor strikes and the threat of yet more nurses strikes, the NHS is in chaos. Perhaps I am being cynical in thinking that whilst the Government has no intention of giving doctors huge cash pay outs, maybe the incentives, grants and awards that will be offered via the backdoor will make up any shortfall.
With no end in sight, a summer of discontent ahead of us and a growing waiting list, we, the patients, will be told to choose where and when we will be treated, which could be hundreds of miles away from our own homes. I fear many patients will be put off from seeking help, preferring to stay at home. Will we see a further increase of deaths taking place at home?
I couldn’t possibly write a blog without including the latest news from the MHRA. Considering the World Health Organisation has declared Covid–19 is officially no longer a global emergency, the jabs just keep on coming. This time it's SKYCovion. For anyone considering volunteering for this injection or any other, read the patient information leaflet carefully before giving consent. It should be noted that safety data is scant.
There is no data on interchangeability of this product and it is not recommended to be used with other vaccines, so who will be receiving it? I am sure those who have avoided all jabs thus far will not be tempted into starting a course of SkyCovion. Anecdotally, my 85 year old mum recently received a text inviting her to book a booster. However, the NHS could not indicate which jab it would be, but stated that it may contain squalene. SkyCovion does contain squalene, and as far as I know none of the others do. Please correct me if I am mistaken, but it would appear that the UK Government and the MHRA are not reading the manufacturers' guidelines.
SK Chemicals, who manufacture SkyCovion, are based in South Korea. CEO and President, Kim Cheol, appears to have a good relationship with Bill Gates. SkyCovion has been supported by funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness (CEPI), with support from the European Union’s Horizon Programme. However, this is just the beginning. SK Chemicals plan to develop a ‘combination’ vaccine candidate (universal vaccine) that will be suitable against flu and Covid–19, using the SkyCovion platform.
This is another black triangle product, meaning it should be under intense pharmocovigilance. This is not an mRNA vaccine like Pfizer and Moderna, it is an adjuvanted vaccine and works with nanoparticles of the SARS-CoV-2 spike. There is no effectiveness through one dose; two doses must be administered to complete the primary vaccination course. Furthermore, there is no available safety data for children, pregnant women or lactating women.
More to come on the MHRA, who appears to have decided that the new definition of ‘regulator’ is ‘enabler’. A new video of Dame June Raine explaining the role of the MHRA has been recently published on YouTube. With only a handful of views, I don’t expect Dame June expected anyone to find it or even watch it.
As we continue to see children getting sick and many babies being diagnosed with myocarditis, we have to ask ourselves, how much more do we have to endure before each and every one of us says NO? How many more have to become ill and die? When does enough become enough? There are more of us than there are them, and they need us more than we need them.
Until next week,
Mathew 19:14 KJV
But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for such is the Kingdom of Heaven.