Scientific’ advisers: Is their position that of an independent third party; free of a conflict of interest?

Prime Minister’s Office did not have the information requested.

Dear Prime Minister’s Office,
Your and/or the Gov-‘ decision to quarantine people (thereby disturbing children’s educational, psycho-social, and physical development, as well as restricting or disturbing people’s independent and vocational means of earning and living their lives); relies on your ‘scientific’ advisers:
a) Is their position that of an independent third party; free of a conflict of interest?
b) Did your advisers disclose their current or previous relationships with the pharmaceutical industry and institutions and/or its funders or interest groups; or did they disclose a conflict of interest?
c) How did you avoid to have blindspots and groupthink (closed ranks): a collection of advisors from the same background, the same field, the same institutions, serving on multiple panels, or serving one particulair interest group?
d) What have you and/or the Gov done to prevent that commercial interests are not in control of key decisions about the public’s health?
e) On or about 18 May you had a meeting with Bill and Melinda Gates and/or BMGF: did said meeting bear any relationship with said advisers?
f) Regarding these questions and for to serve an independent position; should or did you consider the following issues?

1) In 2008, Chief Medical Adviser Prof Chris Whitty, accepted, $40 million from Bill Gates to control British vaccine promulgation: and he stated “COVID-19 vaccines and drugs would need to be in place before measures could be lifted … “:
2) The Imperial College; Neil Ferguson for Covid-19 mortality predictions (0.5 million in UK) accepted £184 million from B. Gates.
3) Patrick Vallance (5-12 yrs.) GlaxoSmithKline ex-director, he chairs SAGE which was created by Bill Gates for to advise WHO & UK gov- on vaccine & immunization policies, research, development, and delivery systems;
4) Gates is the main donor & stakeholder of the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, Welcome trust and Pirbright institute who claims to have a patent SARS-CoV-2 and produces its vaccine. He is the main and most influential funder of WHO via which he implements the vaccination of the global population.
5) Prof J. van Tam served the interest of the pharmaceutical industry 1997 – 2000, as an Associate Director at SmithKline Beecham. In April 2001 he moved to Roche as Head of Medical Affairs, before joining Aventis Pasteur MSD in February 2002 as UK Medical Director. He chaired the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) Expert Advisory Group on H5N1 human vaccines, sits on the UK national Scientific Pandemic Influenza Committee (SPI), the UK Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) and was a short-term consultant and temporary adviser to the World Health Organization on many occasions. On WHO/van Tam’ advice of was a mass vaccination by H5N1 human vaccines from which Roche and GSK each earned billions £. And said industries was not held liable for the damaged inflicted on thousands of people by their vaccines.
6) Professor Dame Angela McLean, Deputy Chief Scientific Adviser, her career and professorship was funded via the Imperial College; as by Bill Gates
7) Sharon Peacock, the director of the National Infection Service: Welcome Trust (BMGF)
8) Maria Zambon, director of Reference Microbiology Services at PHE and head of the UK World Health Organization National Influenza Centre (BMGF)
9) Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust (BMGF)
10) Dr Edward Mullins is a clinical lecturer at Imperial College (BMGF)
11) Dominic Cummings and Ben Warner are related to an artificial intelligence company for data-mining operation which was teamed up with Palantir, founded by the rightwing billionaire Peter Thiel, who shares biotech startups with Bill Gates.

Yours faithfully,

Bartholomeus Lakeman

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/scientific_advisers_is_their_pos?fbclid=IwAR0rnNGMt-O1xuM8rAGMrtsVrFpQfUFuRYYHmw41OMvyev76-CIxyV3g5C0

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

2 Responses to “Scientific’ advisers: Is their position that of an independent third party; free of a conflict of interest?”

  1. ian says:

    Obviously not. Plain and simple.

  2. BenBecula says:

    Would it be worth loads of us writing to them with the same questions??

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.