The UK Joint Committee for Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), is, according to the government, a body that “advises UK health departments on immunisation” but have failed to declare that their members work for organisations, which collectively have received approximately $1,000,000,000 – one billion dollars – from the Gates Foundation.”
Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
On February 16th 2020, they advised a non-urgent offer to all 5 to 11-year-olds of 2 (10mcg) doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech paediatric vaccine.
Are they in a position to advise COVID vaccinations to our children when they have failed to declare their conflicts of interest and big monies received in their workplace from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation?
The following information has been sourced from a “deep dive” search conducted by Dr Zoe Harcombe.
The JCVI issued a statement on February 16th:
“The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) has updated its vaccination advice for children aged 5 to 11, with a view to increasing protection against potential future waves of coronavirus (COVID-19).
“Although this age group is generally at very low risk of serious illness from the virus, a very small number of children who get infected do develop severe disease.
“Latest evidence suggests that offering the vaccine ahead of another potential wave will protect this very small number of children from serious illness and hospitalisation – and will also provide some short-term protection against mild infection across the age group.
“The committee has therefore advised a non-urgent offer to all 5 to 11-year-olds of 2 (10mcg) doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech paediatric vaccine. The 2 doses should be given with an interval of at least 12 weeks between doses.
“The recommendation should not displace the delivery of other non-COVID-19 childhood vaccinations or any other part of the COVID-19 vaccination programme” (source).
Not one member of the JCVI COVID -19 subcommittee who was responsible for that statement declared conflicts of interest. However, the majority of them have links to the pharmaceutical companies and/or Gates Foundation through the money for their research or their institutions receiving huge amounts of money from them.
The Members of the JCVI
The JCVI has a COVID-19 sub-committee which has 15 core members and one lay member.
- Professor Anthony Harnden, Deputy Chair (University of Oxford)
- Dr Kevin Brown (Public Health England)
- Dr Rebecca Cordery (Public Health England)
- Dr Maggie Wearmouth (East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust)
- Professor Matt Keeling (University of Warwick)
- Alison Lawrence (lay member)
- Professor Robert Read (Southampton General Hospital)
- Professor Anthony Scott (London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine)
- Professor Adam Finn (University of Bristol)
- Dr Fiona van der Klis (National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Netherlands)
- Professor Maarten Postma (University of Groningen)
- Professor Simon Kroll (Imperial College London)
- Dr Martin Williams (University Hospitals Bristol)
- Professor Jeremy Brown (University College London Hospitals)
“The overall chair of the JCVI is Professor Andrew Pollard, Chair (University of Oxford). The membership details reported, “In order to prevent any perceived conflict of interest it was agreed that the JCVI Chair (Professor Andrew Pollard), who is involved in the development of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine at Oxford, would recuse himself from all JCVI COVID-19 meetings.”
Five of them had provided additional information in the “non-declaration” that did in fact reveal, conflicts of interest. Additionally, a “cursory” search on the remaining members, was carried out by Dr Zoe Harcombe that was to reveal that six members had conflicts of interest which included, running a COVID-19 vaccine trial to being their organisation’s representative for Pfizer.
Shockingly, one member even failed to declare that he leads the Pfizer Vaccine Centre of Excellence.
The I Have “Nothing to Declare” JCVI Members
Professor Lim Wei Shen
Professor Shen stated categorically on 4th August 2021, Professor Lim that 12-15-year-olds would not be offered COVID-19 vaccines. (just below) Hardly 6 weeks after that statement, 12-15 year olds were in fact offered jabs (source), and barely 6 months after that, 5-11 year olds are being offered them.
Professor Anthony Harnden
Although Professor Harnden declared no conflicts of interest, in the “other information” conflicts were described which shows he has involvement in vaccine administration and deployment.
The University of Oxford has received $278,724,831 from the Gates Foundation (source).
Dr Kevin Brown (Public Health England)
“Dr Brown has no registered conflicts of interest.”
Dr Brown declared despite declaring no conflicts of interest, his employer, Public Health England has received $7,451,295 from the Gates Foundation (source)
Dr Brown also co-authored a “favourable” study on the “real world effectiveness” of the Pfizer & AZ jabs (source).
Dr Rebecca Cordery (Public Health England)
“Dr Cordery has no registered conflicts of interest.”
Again her employer is Public Health England with/Gates Foundation conflicts as above.
Dr Maggie Wearmouth (East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust)
Dr Wearmouth declared no interests, and no interests were found except on 6 April 2021, Dr Wearmouth said “in a personal capacity” that the vaccine roll-out should be slowed “in younger people” to maintain public trust and confidence, after the committee had discussed concerns over a possible link between the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine and a rare type of blood clot (source)
Professor Matt Keeling (University of Warwick)
Professor Keeling was found to have conflicts of interest connected to Wellcome Trust on his university page and the University of Warwick has received $7,115,915 from the Gates Foundation (source).
Ms Alison Lawrence (lay member)
As a lay member, it is thought that Ms Lawrence will have little or no influence.
Professor Robert Read (Southampton General Hospital)
“Professor Read receives no payments from the manufacturers of vaccines.
“Professor Read has no registered conflicts of interest.”
Professor Read declared no interests, but it was found that he is Director of Southampton NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, which is doing a COVID-19 vaccine study (in pregnant women) (source)..
Professor Anthony Scott (London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine).
Professor Scott is Director of the Health Protection Research Unit at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. He receives research funding from the National Institute for Health Research, the Medical Research Council, the Wellcome Trust and Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.” No conflicts of interest? Hmm.
Again, despite the Professor declaring no conflicts, the “other information” described conflicts with several organisations invested in vaccines:
The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine is similarly invested with its own COVID-19 vaccine centre (source). The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine has also received $308,640,471 from the Gates Foundation (Source).
Professor Adam Finn (University of Bristol)
He is also a local Principal or Co-investigator in the Oxford-Astra Zeneca COV001, COV002 and COV006 studies and the National Immunisation Schedule Evaluation Consortium study ComFluCov. “
“Professor Finn doesn’t consider being the chief, principal or co-investigator for several different COVID-19 vaccine trials as a conflict of interest,” says Dr Harcombe
Finn says he receives “no personal payments from the manufacturers of vaccines”, but his research/institution is funded by these companies and presumably, he is paid a salary for his research by his institution.
The University of Bristol has received $16,870,808 from the Gates Foundation (source).
Professor Finn also failed to declare that he leads the Pfizer Vaccine Centre of Excellence at the University of Bristol, which was given an initial investment of £4.6 million from Pfizer (source).
Dr Fiona van der Klis (National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Netherlands)
Dr van der Klis declared no interests, but a search discovered that she works for the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, which approved COVID-19 jabs for 5-11-year-olds from mid-December 2021 (source).
I have taken this as no conflicts of interest.
Professor Maarten Postma (University of Groningen)
“Professor Postma has no registered conflicts of interest.”
Comment: As Professor Postma declared no conflicts of interest, but, a cursory search found that his university website lists him as a “Representative of Pfizer” (source).
Professor Simon Kroll (Imperial College London)
Imperial College London was arguably the single institution responsible for lockdowns with the harmfully inaccurate modelling done by Neil Ferguson. Imperial College London has received $303,875,383 from the Gates Foundation (source).
This included one grant for $79,006,570 in March 2020, which was the month of Ferguson’s report.•
Dr Williams declared no interests, but had collaborated on a paper with Professor Adam Finn (above) with Pfizer funding declared (although not directly for Dr Williams) (source). In this June 2021 paper, Finn declared his interests as follows
“As is a member of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization (JCVI) and chair of the World Health Organization European Technical Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (ETAGE) committee. In addition to receiving funding from Pfizer as Chief Investigator of this study, he leads another project investigating transmission of respiratory bacteria in families jointly funded by Pfizer and the Gates Foundation.”
It’s not ideal for committee members to be co-workers. They are unlikely to challenge each other. There are also the Public Health England/Gates Foundation conflicts again. However, Dr Williams was counted as having no conflicts.
Professor Jeremy Brown (University College London Hospitals)
Professor Brown has/is:
MRC and Wellcome research funding not related to COVID-19 vaccines
University College London (UCL) and University College London Hospital (UCLH) BRC and Rosetrees charity funding for work on COVID-19 serological responses and post-COVID lung damage
Local principle investigator for the multicentre PHOSP COVID study phenotyping patients after being hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia
Working on UCL / UCLH clinical studies of the longer-term effects of COVID-19 pneumonia”
Professor Brown declared no conflicts, but the “other information” suggests otherwise.
If you’re funded for research other than vaccines, you’re still not going to bite the hand that feeds you if that funder also makes vaccines. University College London has also received $68,284,599 from the Gates Foundation (source).
The Code of Practice states that “The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI, the Committee) is an independent Departmental Expert Committee and a statutory body.” Independent from what? asks Dr Harcombe.”The government, maybe, but not from industry.”
Members of the COVID-19 JCVI sub-committee work for organisations that receive approximately $1,000,000,000 – one billion dollars – from the Gates Foundation. Has this committee truly been able to provide an independent assessment of the risk and reward of the main products of interest of the Gates Foundation?
The Professors and Doctors, from JCVI surprisingly do not seem to know what a “conflict of Interest” is, so plainly, “If the organisation you work for receives money directly or indirectly from an organisation with an interest in vaccines (e.g., Pfizer or The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation), there is at least a potential conflict of interest” .or perhaps they JVCI members are lying by omitting to declare their true links with those that have a vested interest in jabbing the population. Which of course is now predictable and more than likely the case.
Either way, their advice and judgement regarding the vaccine can not be trusted.
Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
WE URGENTLY NEED YOUR HELP…
We’re not funded by the Government
to publish lies & propaganda on their
behalf like the mainstream media.
Instead, we rely solely on our support. So
please support us in our efforts to bring you
honest, reliable, investigative journalism
today. It’s secure, quick and easy…
Just choose your preferred method
to show your support below support
Categories: Breaking News, Did You Know?, World News
A while ago to many people it became clear that the oft quoted Yougov polls couldn’t be trusted due to extremely close links between the polling company and the Government quoting their figures.
Is the same now true for the so-called independent JCVI?
I so wish i could fund this Co.I have no funds to help. but i am sharing all i can so USA will see what there doing to us.
I get paid more than $90 to $100 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this I have earned easily $10k from this without having online working skills . Simply give it a shot on the accompanying site…
Here is I started.…………>> http://Www.NETCASH1.Com
“JCVI tells the Government to offer the jab to kids aged 5 to 11”
So the brown paper envelopes from gates of hell have arrived successfully. I thought they’d got lost.
Now, parents, roll your children’s sleeves up and line up for the death jab. If the first one don’t do the job there’s always the boosters.
[…] JCVI告诉政府向5至11岁的儿童提供该疫苗，但没有告诉我们他们与辉瑞公司和… […]
[…] Read More : Corrupt JCVI Advises Jab for 5 to 11-year-olds […]
Corruption at a deep level by self-serving psychopaths, the kind of people who salivate when testing animals without anaesthetic. Bare-faced liars with no remorse, knowing full-well that children will die or be harmed by the vaxxes and masks.
[…] 18. Februar 2022 The Expose: JCVI tells the Government to offer the jab to kids aged 5 to 11, but fails to tell us about their li… […]