Toxic MMR - vaccination forced on UK toddlers = autism?

[TonyGosling]

This marks a pretty aggressive shift in how we manage vaccine refusers and the costly, deadly outbreaks of diseases like measles and whooping cough they help spark.
https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/8/3/16069204/vaccine-fines -measles-outbreaks-europe-australia

Here’s a quick roundup of the global crackdown on vaccine-refusing parents:

In Germany on Thursday, lawmakers passed a law stating that parents need to prove they’ve vaccinated their kids against measles — or risk fines up to €2,500 (about $2,750). Unvaccinated children also risk losing their places in school.

Italy’s parliament passed a law that makes 10 childhood vaccinations mandatory for kids up to age 16, and requires parents to prove their children are immunized before entering school or else face a €500 (about $560) noncompliance fine. And kids who aren’t vaccinated are being told not to come to school.

In France, the health ministry made 11 vaccines — up from the current three (diphtheria, tetanus, and polio) — mandatory for children, though there’s no talk of a fine yet.

Further afield, New South Wales, Australia, passed “no jab, no play” legislation in September 2017: The law bans unvaccinated kids from preschool and day care and fine the directors of schools that admit un-immunized children $5,500 Australian dollars ($4,400). The law in New South Wales is modelled on similarly stringent laws in other Australian states, and across the country, parents with children who aren’t immunized aren’t eligible for child care benefits.

In the US, New York — where a large measles outbreak raged on for nearly a year — the government threatened parents who don’t vaccinate their children with a fine of up to $1,000.
These fines come amid a growing problem with measles globally. Over the past two years, measles cases have been edging up in countries around the world, with a 300 percent rise in cases over the same period in 2018, according to the World Health Organization.

[TonyGosling]

England Has 250,000 More Autistics in 15 years – 1 in 21 English Schoolboys is Now Autistic Official Education Department Government Statistics Indicate
Posted on May 30, 2020 by ChildHealthSafety
https://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2020/05/30/england-has-250000- more-autistics-in-15-years-1-in-21-english-schoolboys-is-now-autistic- official-education-department-government-statistics-indicate/


Official UK statistics indicate 1 in 21 English schoolboys is now autistic. Worse still when school leavers are included, in just 15 years the total number of new autistic school children and young adult school leavers is 258,000 according to CHS’ estimates from the official figures.

This is good solid information.

We have only just heard for Northern Ireland that: One in 16 Boys is Autistic Show New UK Official Statistics – But Nobody Cares – And Its Worse than COVID-19

These are all truly horrifying figures. And you can see from the chart how the numbers have been increasing every year.

If the USA follows the same pattern Americans have today an extra 1.6 million autistic children and young adults added in just the last 15 years. But the US has the highest vaccine burden of any country in the world, so the figure could be higher. 1.6 million is a crude estimate for the equivalent number of new autistic American children and young adults added to the US population over the past 15 years. This is calculated by multiplying CHS’ estimate for England by 6 times. The USA has approximately six times the population of England [330 million US vs 54 million England].

People like Sir Norman Lamb a former UK health minister and Matt Hancock the current English Secretary of State for Health along with many others have been pretending nothing is wrong and that vaccines have nothing to do with causing autism. It is just not true and the evidence has been building up for over three decades now.

The British Government can spend billions on a lockdown caused by junk science but does not care about 250,000 new autistics added to the English population in just 15 years. To these we need to add the Irish, Welsh and Scottish autistic children and the now young adult school leavers in those regions over the past 15 years.

The figures these estimates are taken from are highly reliable. They are not from inaccurate surveys. The figures are official government figures from the annual schools census. The census counts every child in school in England known to be autistic.

The hollow claims of those who either want to cover up this disaster for children and their families or bury their heads in the sand or sit in denial, that there is no real increase are hollower by the second. It is not credible nor scientific.

But if anyone wants to play stupid games claiming there is no increase and we always had these numbers of autistic children, the recent figures from Ireland show that nearly two thirds of autistic children are stage 5.

What does that mean? It means if we always had the same numbers of autistic children and young adults before now, two thirds of them would be so severely disabled you could not miss them unless you were blind deaf or dumb or the UK’s National Autistic Society, [NAS] or the UK’s Autistica or Professor Brugha and his UK team of “expert” autism researchers at Leicester University. or even Professor Simon Baron-Cohen and his team at Cambridge University. Professor Baron-Cohen and his team were quoted in The Independent saying:

…. the authors dismissed suggestions that changes in lifestyle or the environment were behind the rise. They put it down to improved awareness and detection, and the inclusion of milder conditions within the diagnosis.”

NAS have claimed for a very very long time the prevalence of autistic conditions is 1 to 1.1%. Autistica has paid Brugha and Baron-Cohen’s groups to carry out research. Autistica tells us 1% of children are autistic. None of these groups and organisations recognise the dramatic increase nor do they accept the scientific evidence that vaccines play any role.

And of course over this period the scientific evidence that vaccines play a significant role in causing autistic conditions has been building up steadily.

To that body of scientific evidence can be added this just published 28 May 2020 journal paper Analysis of health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children: Developmental delays, asthma, ear infections and gastrointestinal disorders.

You can read the authors’ news release and an explanation here:

Unvaccinated Children Much Healthier Shows New Study [May 2020]

Whilst the new official figures provide a sound base for these CHS estimates that is not the full picture as you will see from the annual totals below and notes. For every 3 cases identified as autistic in the current English school population, there are another two children who have not been identified as autistic: (2009) Baron-Cohen et al “Prevalence of autism-spectrum conditions: UK school-based population study“

The science has also consistently shown about 4 in every 5 cases is a boy. The new figures from Northern Ireland indicate 3 in every 4 cases is a boy.

Hence taking these aspects into account provides the overall 3% prevalence of autistic schoolchildren in England as at January 2019 and the 1 in 21 figure for English schoolboys with an autistic condition.

Why is there “vaccine hesitancy”? It is because no one can hide the problem any longer and more and more mothers and fathers and future parents planning their new families are becoming and are vaccine aware. Vaccine awareness is a political and philosophical position based on knowledge and science of the risks vaccines pose to you and your children.

Further figures are due for publication in just over a month’s time. CHS will keep you posted.

Every time they add a new vaccine to the schedule we get more autistic children
Japanese & British Data Show Vaccines Cause Autism
Aut_Inc_vs_vax_prog

The data for the graph above is from a 2001 paper by Jick et al. The dates of introduction of the vaccines has been superimposed. The authors of the paper claimed [emphasis added]:-

“The increase ….. could be due to …… environmental factors not yet identified.” “Mumps, measles, and rubella vaccine and the incidence of autism recorded by general practitioners: a time trend analysis” BMJ 2001;322:460-463 24 February.

No need to guess what those environmental factors are. We have 258,000 new reasons to know for sure.

TABLES

Sources for the 2020 autism figures in this CHS post: Data from each Annual School’s Census from the Department for Education from 2004 to 2019.

Percentage of School children in England with ASD as Primary or Secondary Special Educational Need (2). Sources – Annual School’s Census from Department for Education [See Notes at end]
Year (1)

% School children in England with ASD as Primary or Secondary Special Educational Need (2)

Census Taken

Total Autistic Children

2004

0.91%

January 2005

41,380

(3)

2005

0.94%

January 2006

46,381

(3), (4)

2006

1.04%

January 2007

51,097

(3)

2007

1.15%

January 2008

56,027

(3)

2008

1.25%

January 2009

60,471

(3)

2009

1.37%

January 2010

66,668

(3)

2010

1.49%

January 2011

72,665

2011

1.60%

January 2012

78,580

2012

1.70%

January 2013

84,280

2013

1.81%

January 2014

90,670

2014

2.12%

January 2014

107,185

2015

2.30%

January 2016

117,980

2016

2.47%

January 2017

128,680

2017

2.72%

January 2018

142,683

2018

2.98%

January 2019

157,958

[TonyGosling]

In 2016, a media firestorm erupted when Tribeca Film Festival abruptly censored its documentary selection, VAXXED: FROM COVER-UP TO CATASTROPHE, amid pressure from pro-pharmaceutical interests.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/o8rp84H5NZFi/

https://seed167.bitchute.com/9vkUdhASxQGv/o8rp84H5NZFi.mp4

In response to media silence on CDC whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson, who admitted to fraud on a pivotal vaccine safety study, VAXXED catapulted to notoriety and became a worldwide trending topic, opening to sold out theater audiences nationwide.

Stunned by the immense volume of parents lining up outside the theaters with vaccine injury stories to share, VAXXED producer Polly Tommey began to livestream worldwide reaching millions, and a community that had once been silenced were empowered to rise up.

In VAXXED II: THE PEOPLE'S TRUTH, Polly and the team travel over 50,000 miles in the USA and around the world. Interviews of parents and doctors with nothing to gain and everything to lose exposed the vaccine injury epidemic and asked the question on every parent’s mind, “Are vaccines really as safe and effective as we’ve been told?”

Director: Brian Burrowes

Producer: Toby Tommey

Executive Producers: Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Polly Tommey, Kay & Charles Chilton

Production Company: Tommey Burrowes Productions

⁣www.Vaxxed2.com
Release: November 6, 2019

[outsider]

'Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History':
by Suzanne Humphries MD and. Roman Bystrianyk
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dissolving-Illusions-Disease-Vaccines-Forgott en/dp/1480216895/ref=sr_1_1?Here is the stock description on Amazon:
'Not too long ago, lethal infections were feared in the Western world. Since that time, many countries have undergone a transformation from disease cesspools to much safer, healthier habitats. Starting in the mid-1800s, there was a steady drop in deaths from all infectious diseases, decreasing to relatively minor levels by the early 1900s. The history of that transformation involves famine, poverty, filth, lost cures, eugenicist doctrine, individual freedoms versus state might, protests and arrests over vaccine refusal, and much more.Today, we are told that medical interventions increased our lifespan and single-handedly prevented masses of deaths. But is this really true?Dissolving Illusions details facts and figures from long-overlooked medical journals, books, newspapers, and other sources. Using myth-shattering graphs, this book shows that vaccines, antibiotics, and other medical interventions are not responsible for the increase in lifespan and the decline in mortality from infectious diseases. If the medical profession could systematically misinterpret and ignore key historical information, the question must be asked, “What else is ignored and misinterpreted today?"
Perhaps the best reason to know our history is so that the worst parts are never repeated.'

I'm about half way through it at the moment; I recommend it to anyone interested in the vaxx debate, especially if they have children at risk of being forcibly vaxxed.

[TonyGosling]

Andy Wakefield Podcast · The Andy Wakefield Podcast Episode 17: Who is Tony Fauci?

https://soundcloud.com/andy-wakefield-podcast

[outsider]

[outsider]

'Dr. Andrew Wakefield warns about risks of coronavirus vaccines':
https://brlghteon.com/6124310f-ecef-4f27-80e7-ae7f5199b52c

“1986 The Act”: Dr. Wakefield’s New Film:
https://brlghteon.com/6124310f-ecef-4f27-80e7-ae7f5199b52c

[outsider]

'Read the Fine Print, Part Two—Nearly 400 Adverse Reactions Listed in Vaccine Package Inserts':
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/read-the-fine-print-part-two-n early-400-adverse-reactions-listed-in-vaccine-package-inserts/

[outsider]

'WISDOM FROM COURAGEOUS – AND SILENCED – WHISTLE-BLOWING “VACCINE SKEPTICS”:
https://www.globalresearch.ca/wisdom-whistle.../5728764
Update your knowledge, and start complaining...

[outsider]

''Medical Doctor Warns that “Bacterial Pneumonias Are on the Rise” from Mask Wearing':
https://www.globalresearch.ca/medical-doctor.../5725848
But the various governments, 'Fact Checkers' and MSM seem to be cocking a deaf 'un...

[outsider]

'‘Something extremely bogus is going on’: Musk says he’s positive & negative for Covid-19 after taking 4 tests in 1 day':
https://www.rt.com/usa/506551-musk-covid-tests-positive-negative/?
You don't have to like Elon Musk to appreciate that his support for the fact we are being played is invaluable.
How does the so-called 'Left Wing' MSM rag, the Daily Mirror, report it?
'Elon Musk tests positive for Covid-19 but calls the results 'extremely bogus''.
And the three (?) 'comments' (apart from my responses, which may disappear 'afore long) play on his excentricity, NOT on the facts.

Even the New York Times has a better article:
'Does Elon Musk have the coronavirus? After four tests, he still doesn’t know':
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/13/world/does-elon-musk-have-the-coron avirus-after-four-tests-he-still-doesnt-know.html

A fake 'Left-Wing' rag (Mirror) is worse than no 'Left-Wing' paper at all. At least then there will be a vacuum to be filled.

[outsider]

'Crimes Against Humanity, fraudulent PCR Tests Taken To Court - Interview with Lawyer Reiner Füllmich':
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQYzb5_kax8&feature=share
Crimes Against Humanity, fraudulent PCR Tests Taken To Court - Interview with Lawyer Reiner Füllmich - YouTube
10 NOVEMBER 2020
www.youtube.com
Though this has been up before, the Service Provider started f^cking with it so it slowed down so much it was unwatchable - now it's OK;

'Dolores Cahill prof. announces the formation of the World Freedom Alliance whose aim is to create a Better Normal':
https://www.facebook.com/1104846566256038/videos/1526415437551618

Corruption Awareness Ireland on Facebook Watch
Dolores Cahill prof. announces the formation of the World Freedom Alliance whose aim is to create a Better Normal.
www.facebook.com

[outsider]

Great News!!
'CDC REMOVES CLAIM ‘VACCINES DO NOT CAUSE AUTISM’:
https://thehighwire.com/videos/cdc-removes-claim-vaccines-do-not-cause -autism/

Groan! Not so great - they removed it from one place, but still have it just below, and elsewhere on their website.

[outsider]

'Large Numbers Of Health Care And Frontline Workers Are Refusing Covid-19 Vaccine':
https://www.forbes.com/.../large-numbers-of-health.../...
Not everyone is stupid!

[outsider]

'THE UNEXPLAINED DEATH OF ANDREW MOULDEN PH.D. MD':
ANOTHER GREAT AUTISM RESEARCHER/TRUTH TELLER DIES MYSTERIOUSLY
https://www.brasscheck.com/video/the-unexplained-death-of-andrew-mould en-ph-d-md/?omhide=true

Dr. Andrew Moulden's Tolerance Lost: Part 1 of 3 - "The Problem":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re8UI8aCLpM

'Dr. Andrew Moulden's Tolerance Lost: Part 2 of 3 - "Seeing is Believing":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E4eDIIGdbY

'Dr. Andrew Moulden's Tolerance Lost: Part 3 of 3 - "Believing is Not Seeing":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Qyc_nteag


The unexplained death of Andrew Moulden Ph D MD:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaW2CTJYZpU&t=8s

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

Safety concerns around aluminium adjuvants
Professor Chris Exley | 10th November 2018 | Infection/Disease, NHS, Paediatrics, Pharmacy/Drugs | 1 Comment
https://www.hippocraticpost.com/infection-disease/safety-concerns-alum inium-adjuvants/

It is approximately 10 years since we began our investigations into aluminium adjuvants and specifically their mode of action. We have reviewed the field in our new publication in Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology and in particular in the light of what are known as serious adverse events immediately following vaccination.

What might be the cause of such events, ranging from health issues directly associated with the injection site to brain encephalopathy and death? Arguably, they are unrelated to the vaccine antigen, the reason for the vaccine, and aluminium adjuvants, unsurprisingly are recognised as prime suspects in initiating these events. I say, unsurprisingly, since there is no requirement to demonstrate that aluminium adjuvants are safe for human use. There is no approval mechanism. Only vaccines are approved for human use. There are two commonly used aluminium adjuvants, Alhydrogel® and AdjuPhos®, and a sulphated version of the latter, which is included in Gardasil, a vaccine against the human papilloma virus (HPV). To my knowledge, to date Merck has not given permission for independent study of its proprietary adjuvant.

Merck’s own safety’trial data suggest a frequency of adverse events for the vaccine of approximately 2.5% and similarly 2.5% for their ‘placebo group’ who received their proprietary adjuvant. So, even though 25000/1,000,000 perfectly healthy recipients become ill on receiving Gardasil it is safe since the same number become ill on only receiving the adjuvant alone. In a very small true control group where the placebo was reported as saline, there were zero (none) adverse events. This raises some serious questions about adjuvants themselves.

We know that aluminium adjuvants are toxic at the injection site, and this toxicity is essentially their mode of action, and evidence is burgeoning that this toxicity is also being manifested away from the injection site. New and important research on sheep and recently published in the journal Veterinary Pathology now provides direct evidence of the fate of aluminium adjuvants following sub-cutaneous injection. The research confirms the accumulation of aluminium adjuvant in lymph glands. However, it also shows that while lymph glands are a target destination for aluminium adjuvant for the whole vaccine this is not the case when only the aluminium adjuvant is injected. Essentially the handling by the body of aluminium adjuvant is different between whole vaccine and that which is mainly used as the control or placebo in vaccine safety trials. These seminal data for sheep raise new and important questions about how vaccine safety trials are conducted in humans and offer further insight into the role of aluminium adjuvants in serious adverse events following vaccination.

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

SCIENCE SOLD OUT
Written by: Miri |
November 8, 2021
https://miriaf.co.uk/science-sold-out/

SCIENCE SOLD OUT: How one of the UK’s top research scientists has been smeared, vilified, and forced into silence for his lifelong commitment to genuinely “following the science”

An exclusive report by Miri Anne Finch

Internationally renowned scientist, Professor Chris Exley, has been forced out of his longstanding university position because his ground-breaking research challenged vaccine dogmas. Researching vaccine safety has lost him the support of standard funders, attracted malicious media smear campaigns, and, eventually, cost him his livelihood. Here is the full report of how it happened, how I got involved, and why it is critical we expose this shocking story of corruption, injustice, and science sold out.

When I started to become seriously concerned with issues surrounding vaccine ethics and safety - after I was nearly force-vaccinated at university and threatened with expulsion and deportation if I did not comply (a threat I challenged and successfully overturned) - I had no idea where to turn to find credible further information. After all, I had been strenuously warned off all the 'quacks' and 'conspiracy theorists' on the internet, and, coming from an academic background myself - I had grown up on a university campus where both my father and grandfather had lectured for many decades - I wanted to engage with solid science and accomplished scientists in my quest to further explore and understand the undeniable safety concerns surrounding vaccinations.

At first, my search turned up very little (I didn't know at the time that Google obscures anti-establishment search results, making information counter to the mainstream narrative very difficult to find), and the few scientists investigating vaccine safety concerns I did discover, were primarily based in America – a country with a very different medical, social, and political climate to the UK. I knew I needed something closer to home if I was to properly explore and engage with this issue, but it seemed there was very little available on home soil.

I was becoming more than a little demoralised and starting to suspect I would hit endless dead ends in my research endeavours, when, one day, I happened to tune into a podcast that was half-way through interviewing a scientist named Professor Chris Exley. Exley, the podcast informed me, was widely known as 'Mr. Aluminium' and regarded as the world's foremost expert on the metal and its dangers to human health. Aluminium is a common vaccine ingredient – it is added to many non-attenuated vaccines as an adjuvant, to stimulate a stronger immune response - and is known to be linked to some of the most serious vaccine adverse events. There is no known safe quantity of aluminium to inject into the human body, and there are no clinically approved aluminium adjuvants.

"There are clinically approved vaccines which contain aluminium adjuvants," explained Professor Exley, who is not 'anti-vaccine'. "But the adjuvants themselves have never been studied independently and verified safe."

A biologist by profession, with degrees from the University of Stirling, Exley has held a Royal Society University Research Fellowship and is currently a Fellow of the Royal Society of Biology. He had, by the time I heard this interview, been studying aluminium for over thirty years and had published prolifically in a wide array of top research journals. He was most widely known at the time for his research linking aluminium accumulation in the brain to Alzheimer's disease.

I listened avidly to Professor Exley's highly engaging and very accessible descriptions of aluminium and its potential dangers (no "blinding with science" here), and I thought how great it would be to talk to him further. But, I concluded, he's probably based miles away. Probably not even in this country. He had an English accent, but I felt sure, based on my attempted explorations into the vaccine safety field to date, a researcher as accomplished as him would have been snapped up by some wealthy international institution years ago.

I could therefore hardly believe my ears when the interviewer stated at the end of the interview that Professor Exley was based at the University of Keele; the UK university campus where I had grown up, and where my family had been based since the 1950s. Upon looking Professor Exley's profile up on the university website, it emerged that his office was a stone's throw away from my childhood home.

Like another eminent scientist, Carl Jung, I don't believe in coincidences, so I immediately composed an email to Professor Exley, asking him if it would be possible to talk further. I congratulated him on his great work and, in particular, on making it so accessible to ordinary people, at a time when we live in an increasingly oppressive technocracy, based on the extremely ominous idea that only 'experts' are allowed to read, think about, and comment upon scientific findings. It was abundantly clear that Professor Exley was not a proponent of this view, and that he had spent a great deal of time throughout his highly accomplished career giving interviews to 'ordinary people' and speaking at non-specialist events - including 'alternative' events - in order to make his work as accessible as possible to as wide a variety of people as possible.

Professor Exley - or 'Chris', as he signed himself in his reply - wrote back to me that same day, stating how nice it was to hear from me (he remembered my family well, he said, having been based at the university since 1992) and inviting me to meet with him in his office. I was thrilled... but also a little apprehensive.

Having grown up on a university campus, I was aware that senior and celebrated academics can sometimes be a little stuffy or superior - especially where mere 'civilians' without a string of postgraduate qualifications like myself are concerned - but Chris could not have been more accommodating, engaging, or down-to-earth. Expecting our meeting to last around 20 minutes, we ended up talking for over an hour, and by the end of it, Chris had suggested that one way I could become more involved in the vaccine safety debate and help this come to more prominence in the UK was to start my own website - which heralded the birth of STRIVE (the Student and Teacher Research Initiative for Vaccine Education), a comprehensive vaccine resource, informed by verifiable science, aimed at young people to help guide their vaccine choices. STRIVE is now six years old, and, in that time, has served as a launchpad for introducing me to hundreds of incredible people involved in vaccine safety activism.

Over the subsequent years, I continued to follow Chris' work closely, as his career went from strength to strength, and he continued as a prolific publisher of cutting-edge academic research, becoming one of Keele University's star researchers in terms of attracting large research grants (the sustaining lifeblood for any university). As anyone who has ever been involved in academic research knows, successfully attracting grants is a challenging and stringent process, and researchers and their awarding bodies must pass through a number of rigorous checks and balances. Chris and the bodies who supported his research always passed with flying colours, bringing into the university more than £5 million in funding by 2021.

Although Chris' research had always been somewhat controversial - the immensely wealthy aluminium industry has never been too keen on having its products linked to severe neurological illness, funnily enough - and, as a result, by 2015, many aluminium research groups throughout the UK and world had bowed to industry pressure and closed down, Keele had always remained steadfast in its unconditional support of Chris' research endeavours. This proved particularly important as time went on, as - as Chris’ research became ever-more challenging to the extremely wealthy and influential aluminium and pharmaceutical industries - more and more standard funders - often beset with conflicts of interests regarding said industries - declined his funding applications. This led Chris and his team to look further afield, to more unconventional sources of funding, which Keele was always happy to support, provided the funders in question passed their own internal checks - which they always did.

All this began to change, however, when, in 2015, there was an abrupt change in management at the university, and Vice Chancellor Nick Foskett - a professional educator who had begun his career as a schoolteacher – took sudden early retirement, and was replaced by Trevor McMillan, a radiobiologist who had occupied high-ranking positions in the NHS and, until 2014, served on an advisory board for Public Health England.

McMillan's appointment coincided with Chris' research team focussing more attention on aluminium adjuvants in vaccines, an area that was becoming of increasing importance to the public, as more and more people were noticing negative health changes in themselves and family members following receiving aluminium-containing vaccines. Chris was contacted particularly frequently by parents of teenage girls who had suffered severe adverse events following receipt of the aluminium-laden HPV vaccines, the now-discontinued Cervarix, and Gardasil.Merck, producers of the Gardasil vaccine, used a novel aluminium adjuvant in the production of this vaccine, which they have consistently refused to release to independent scientists for review. Chris spoke publicly about his concerns regarding the HPV vaccines in the three-part documentary series, Sacrificial Virgins, produced by award-winning former BBC broadcaster, Joan Shenton.

As public scrutiny on vaccine safety continued to intensify, in 2016, Chris and his team published a seminal new study on aluminium adjuvants, concluding that, "the loading of aluminium into viable cells offers a mechanism whereby significant amounts of aluminium, a known neurotoxin, might be translocated throughout the body and even across the blood-brain barrier and into the central nervous system". In other words, aluminium from vaccines doesn't always remain at the injection site before being broken down and flushed out by the body, as is frequently claimed by vaccine manufacturers; in fact, it can travel to other areas of the body, including the brain, and, as a known neurotoxin, would clearly therefore be capable of doing some damage.

This conclusion was furiously resisted by the immensely wealthy and powerful pharmaceutical industry, who have always insisted the adjuvants in vaccines are safe. But, as 'Mr. Aluminium', Professor Chris Exley, has repeatedly impressed upon his critics - there is no evidence to determine this, as no aluminium adjuvant has ever been independently studied and verified safe.

In a piece for medical blog, The Hippocratic Post, Exley explained, "[t]here are no clinically-approved aluminium adjuvants only clinically approved vaccines which use aluminium adjuvants. This makes it imperative that all vaccine trials which use aluminium salts as adjuvants must not use the aluminium adjuvant as the control or placebo. This has been common practice for many years and has resulted in many vaccine-related adverse events due in part or in entirety to aluminium adjuvants being unaccounted for in vaccine safety trials."

As a result of his work on aluminium adjuvants, Chris Exley’s name became more prominent in vaccine safety circles, and as a result, he found himself increasingly inundated by messages from individuals who wanted to support his work. He therefore approached his university about the possibility of a donations’ portal on the university's website, where individuals could make charitable donations to support further research. Although these discussions began in 2013, it was not until 2016 that such a portal was finally established by the University.

Although this portal initially worked well, and Chris would receive an email notification whenever a donation was made, less than 18 months later, he was abruptly informed by university management that the portal was 'unsuitable' and he needed to contact an IT technician about changing it. He promptly did so, and was informed that action would be taken to create a more 'suitable' portal.

Six months later, this action had still not been applied, and in April 2019 - over a year after his initial donations’ portal had been deemed 'unsuitable' - and in receipt of many emails from supporters stating they were unable to donate via the existing link, Chris received notification that the Finance department of the university had been instructed to completely disable the donations link many months before. There had been no consultation whatsoever with Chris regarding this.

Although a new donations portal was eventually established, this was beset with multiple obstacles (including Chris’ name being removed from the drop-down menu to indicate who the donation was for) and, by February 2021, had been terminated permanently.

In the period leading up to this termination, Keele University had also begun targeting multiple other areas of potential funding for Professor Exley’s research, including funding emanating from the Children's Medical Safety Research Institute (CMSRI), a USA-based initiative concerned with the deteriorating health of children in developed countries and the explosion of chronic illness in this cohort. The CMSRI is especially interested in investigating what role the ever-expanding children’s vaccination schedule may have played in children’s health decline, given many chronic disorders now so common in children, are also known and documented potential side effects of vaccines.

CMSRI had made several generous research donations to Exley's team over the years, donations which Keele had always been very pleased to accept. However, in 2021, Keele declared that grants from CMSRI would no longer be admissible, due to what Keele alleged was the institute’s "anti-vaccine" stance.

Chris Exley is not anti-vaccine and has pointed out on several occasions that rigorously investigating vaccine safety concerns is crucial to increasing public confidence in vaccine programmes around the world. The public has valid concerns over the use of aluminium adjuvants in vaccines and therefore it is imperative these concerns are investigated fully to resolve any issues and restore public faith in vaccinations. The grants from CMSRI were funding this vital research, and the results were reported accurately in the relevant journals. If, as the pharmaceutical industry claims, these adjuvants are safe, then that is what the research would have found. But that the research did not find this demands that further investigation is undertaken as a matter of urgency. For Keele University to terminate this possibility by severing funding does a gross disservice to science and to human health across the world.

Exley and his team kept their large network of international followers abreast of these developments, and the increasing struggles they were facing in securing research funding. These appeals attracted the attention of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a long-time public health advocate and activist, who has made a career of holding corrupt industry to account through his work as an attorney. Immediately appreciating the critical importance of Exley's research, and the severity of the threat posed to it if donations became inaccessible, Mr. Kennedy wrote a personal cheque for $15,000 and sent it to Exley’s team via Keele University.

To the stunned disbelief of both Professor Exley and Mr. Kennedy, Keele University rejected the donation, citing ‘reputational concerns’. To reject a donation from a private individual with no corporate conflicts is effectively unheard of within academia.

Challenging the university on this extraordinary decision, Mr. Kennedy wrote, in a now-public letter to Keele’s Pro Vice Chancellor, David Amigoni,

"You explain that accepting my donation could “jeopardize the strong relationships [Keele] holds with its existing major funders and partners”. I assume that you mean to imply that some well-meaning philanthropist donor might have stumbled across, and believes, the defamatory pharmaceutical industry slur that I am “anti-vaccine”. If that is indeed the case, it still seems unfair to punish Dr. Exley—and those who benefit from his research—for a strategic slander against me that is patently inaccurate. I have always made it clear that I am not “anti-vaccine”. I want safe vaccines, robust science and uncorrupted regulators. By calling me “anti-vax”, vaccine companies seek to discredit, marginalize, silence me so as to prevent me from raising legitimate, urgent questions about the thoroughness of vaccine safety and efficacy assessments.

I have never made a statement that could be legitimately construed as “anti-vaccine”. To the contrary, I have spent my 37-year career as an environmental and public health advocate fighting for evidence-based science, and science-based policy. I have prevailed in many hundreds of lawsuits against the world’s largest polluters and I have helped build, and currently run, the globe’s largest water protection group; Waterkeeper Alliance, the umbrella organization of 350 Waterkeepers in 48 nations—including the U.K. I spent much of the past three decades fighting to get mercury out of fish, pesticides out of food, and to decarbonize our energy system. No one calls me “anti-fish” , “anti-food”, or “anti-energy”. Nor should Pharma be given credence when it attempts to dismiss me as “anti-vaccine” simply because I have challenged the use of toxic metals such as mercury and aluminum in vaccines.

The only people with genuine reason to object to my donation are the vaccine industry, it’s stakeholders, and captive regulators. I presume that these are the cohorts who actually pressured you to reject my donation."

You can read more about this incident, and the full correspondence with the university, - including a supporting correspondence from me, in my capacity as having long standing personal and professional ties to the university - in the article that Mr. Kennedy published on his Children's Health Defence website, here.

Despite being held to account by a member of the Kennedy family, one of the most prominent and well-respected dynasties on Earth, Keele University held firm and reiterated its refusal to accept Mr. Kennedy's donation. Meanwhile, they were quite happy to accept an enormous donation from a dubious online betting company, and even name one of their buildings after its founder. While Chris Exley’s work seeks to protect people from harm and improve and enhance human health all over the world, online gambling seeks to exploit and capitalise upon human weakness and misery, with the number of lives irreparably decimated by gambling addictions inestimable. While this stark contrast has been pointed out to Keele University by several people, it does not appear to have prompted any ethical concerns or change in donations policy.

It was around this time that Chris Exley was also coming to increasing prominence in the mainstream media, mainly as a result of a ground-breaking 2018 study he had co-authored, entitled 'Aluminium in brain tissue in autism'. This study, which was the first of its kind, looked at the concentration of aluminium in those who had died with an autism diagnosis - and found they had disproportionately large amounts. This stunning finding, corroborating many longstanding concerns about the connection between aluminium exposure and the development of autism, attracted enormous attention in the UK and around the world and was downloaded from the publisher's website over a million times, making it one of the most widely-read scientific studies ever.

Despite this fact, at the time of publishing, the study was almost completely ignored by the mainstream media, with the Mail Online the only UK news resource to pick it up. The Mail’s article, which initially reflected the study's findings accurately and impartially, has since been amended, to instead reflect the mainstream bias and press smear campaign against Professor Exley’s work. The article now opens with the note:

This article has been amended since first publication to remove a republication of the Hippocratic Post article, and to clarify criticisms of the author's research.

Even more extraordinary was that Chris’ own university did not report the study in any of its own internal memos or newsletters.

As most readers of this piece will have learned to their cost, linking vaccines to autism in any way - even tangentially, by observing that vaccines contain aluminium and aluminium is linked to autism - is the ultimate heresy and taboo within mainstream circles, and anybody who attempts to do this professionally is likely to be smeared, vilified, and ultimately have their career and professional reputation destroyed - as was so starkly illustrated by the case of Andrew Wakefield.

Whatever one’s personal views on the Wakefield saga, his treatment by the press sent a clear and irrefutable message to all scientists – if your research draws any connection between vaccines and autism, then, no matter how accomplished a scientist you are nor how credible your research, you will be destroyed. As medical safety advocate and award-winning film producer, Del Bigtree, who has interviewed Professor Exley, has remarked, “The really sad thing is the amount of doctors who say to me, “I know that vaccines are causing autism, but I won’t say it on camera, because the pharmaceutical industry will destroy my career just like they did to Andy Wakefield.”

Once he made this connection himself with his own research, it quickly became apparent that Professor Exley was to be 'Wakefielded', with merciless media hit pieces beginning to appear on him throughout the mainstream press. The first such example appeared in the online clickbait 'Buzzfeed', which was then swiftly followed up by pieces in The Guardian and Sunday Times - the latter being the same vehicle that orchestrated the ruthless smear campaign against Dr. Wakefield. I wrote to the Sunday Times about their 'article' (really nothing more than a cynical and highly misleading propagandist assault), a letter you can see here.

Meanwhile, The Guardian, libellously describing Professor Exley as an "academic who promote[s] anti-vaccine misinformation", published a vicious polemic insinuating that Exley was benefitting personally from the charitable support of his work from donors, by stating that "he" had raised more than £150,000 in research funding through his university website's online portal. The Guardian refrained from clarifying that this money does not go to Professor Exley in a personal capacity and is only available to be used as research funding; research that has always followed all the proper protocols, met with peer review requirements, and has never been found to be in any way illegitimate.

Within days of the publication of The Guardian's article, Keele University management – rather than vigorously defending one of their star researchers and his academic freedom - disabled the donations portal for Exley’s work permanently.

At this point, with virtually all his funding avenues blocked, Chris and his team faced a stark dilemma: how would their vital research be able to continue with no funds? Hoping to be able to move forward on the issue with his employers, when he approached Keele University senior management, Chris was met with a mixture of hostility, defamation, and lies. Commenting on the situation on his website, Chris observes that the Keele administration has, since the appointment of Trevor McMillan as Vice-Chancellor, engaged in an effective witch-hunt against him – mischaracterising his views and undermining the importance and impact of his research - with the ultimate aim of terminating his research permanently. Chris says:

"[D]ocuments show that within one day of the publication of the article in The Guardian, the Vice Chancellor, Professor TJ McMillan, has openly branded me and my research as anti-vaccine and disseminated these views to senior management at Keele."

He continues, "The following comment from the ‘discussion paper’, shown below in italics, is the first to undermine significantly my research and myself.

‘The Advisory Group have considered the recent guardian press coverage of Dr Chris Exley's research and the link to anti-vaccination. Dr Exley's views on this area have been an ongoing area of concern for the University leadership, as although the scientific research he conducts is adequate; his conclusions and publicised views are less compelling and have limited academic integrity.’

​“This is an outrageous comment and misinforms a committee membership that does not know me from Adam. As such, they will undoubtedly accept his personal views without any need of evidence to support them."

The ultimate corollary of this extraordinary situation has been that Professor Chris Exley - as one of Keele's most loyal, prolific, and celebrated research academics - was forced to abruptly terminate his career in August 2021.

In the concluding section of his public comment on the situation, Professor Exley says, "In future, as suggested by the VC, I can make applications to the UK research councils and similar government-funded bodies as a box-ticking exercise. However, the stark reality of his actions is that if I returned to Keele I would no longer be research active. He knew very well that by withdrawing the lifeblood of research from my activities at Keele that I would not be returning.

“I have written this statement to explain why I had no choice but to leave Keele. I express no judgement on those mentioned by name. I am not pursuing any form of direct justice. I am drawing a line under these highly unfortunate circumstances. I am proud of my achievements at Keele University and I have always been proud to be a Keele academic."

Let us reiterate at this point that the Vice Chancellor of Keele University, Professor Trevor McMillan, has occupied senior positions in the NHS and has served on an advisory board of Public Health England. Both Public Health England and the NHS are extremely ardent supporters of vaccination that routinely downplay, or disregard altogether, the documented severe damage it is known vaccines can and do cause.

Some other saliant facts about Keele University and its lucrative ties to those heavily invested in creating and promoting vaccines, are that the university is a recipient of funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This organisation is known to be an aggressive promoter of vaccination around the world and its eponymous founders have consistently dismissed and smeared vaccine safety concerns as “anti-vax conspiracy theories”. As Robert F. Kennedy Jr. detailed in his letter to Keele University, quoted earlier in this article, organisations who profit from vaccination routinely defame and mischaracterise the concerns of vaccine safety advocates in an attempt to discredit, marginalise and silence them.

It is also worth noting that Keele University, via its science park, is home to Cobra Biologics, the manufacturers of the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccination. To quote from Keele’s website,

“Cobra, which has two facilities on the University’s Science and Innovation Park, has signed a supply agreement with the global pharmaceutical giant to manufacture vaccine candidate AZD1222” (emphasis mine).

I will leave it to the discernment and discretion of the reader to determine whether the malignment, vilification, and ultimate termination of world-class scientist Professor Chris Exley and his internationally celebrated research, may be in any way connected to the colossal amount of revenue Keele University is in receipt of as a result of uncritically supporting and promoting vaccinations.

By composing this article, it is the hope of its author that this kind of astonishing corruption and suppression of urgently important science - that is unfortunately not uncommon - can begin to be brought to light, and action taken accordingly.

Academic freedom should be the fundamental founding principle of any university, and academics rigorously and unconditionally supported to pursue it - free from any ‘conflicts of interest’ that may be influencing university management.

The bullying, censoring, silencing, and personal and professional persecution directed at Professor Chris Exley, one of the most talented, prolific, and courageous scientists of his generation, is nothing short of a national scandal, and deserves to be thoroughly exposed and investigated by all the relevant bodies as such.

Scandalous as it is, however, this is but a small slice of the systematic corruption and strangulation of real science that rages within all our most trusted institutions, including universities, the Houses of Parliament, and the NHS.

Events of the last 18 months have revealed irrefutably that our democracy hangs by a thread and that our most prized social values of personal liberty, academic freedom, and freedom of speech are dangerously imperilled.

Please act now to ensure this story, and all stories like it, are widely circulated to encourage eyes and minds to open to the critical danger we as a liberal democracy face - before it is too late.

For more information on Professor Exley and his research, and to join his mailing list, please visit his website at: https://www.aluminiumresearchgroup.com/

[TonyGosling]

My Leaving Statement

CE My Leaving Statement.pdf
https://www.aluminiumresearchgroup.com/history

The actions taken by Keele University senior management that made it impossible for Christopher Exley PhD FRSB to continue research on human exposure to aluminium at Keele University.

I have had the privilege of working with many collaborators during my 29 years at Keele. I have also had the good fortune of tremendous personal support including many whom have donated to our research. I have written this leaving statement for those who have provided this support over almost three decades. I want you to know that leaving Keele and, as it transpires, bringing my research on aluminium to an end was the hardest decision of my life. In my opinion, I had no choice. I have not abandoned you. I have, as I always have, simply tried to do my best in increasingly difficult circumstances.





Bullying and Birdseed

​

Some of you will already be aware of previous actions taken against me by Keele’s senior management. These actions began in earnest about five years ago. It has taken a number of forms including disciplinary action against me. For example, in May 2020, in response to an article by Russell Reader (more on him later) in the THE online, I questioned the United Kingdom Government’s priorities in relation to covid restrictions. I asked why it was that I could order birdseed (classed as an essential service by the Government) while my group was not allowed to continue our groundbreaking research on Alzheimer’s disease and other human disease at Keele. Not until late July 2020 did my new head of school, Dawn Scott, (someone to this day I have never met in person) take up the role of lead investigator in initiating disciplinary action against me. Apparently for bringing the University into disrepute. The subsequent, seemingly delayed, disciplinary hearing took place in late December 2020. Perhaps delayed to accommodate Keele’s nomination in September 2020 by the THE as University of the Year. When, in mid-December, nothing transpired from this nomination Keele, Wastling (The Dean) and Scott, took disciplinary action against me. I received a verbal warning for my transgression, a warning that remains on your HR record for 12 months. Needless perhaps to say, neither myself nor any other staff at Keele have voiced any criticism of Government policy on covid. Wither academic expression and freedom!

​

I present this vignette only as an example of my recent personal circumstances at Keele. For over twenty years, I had the full and unconditional support of the University.

​

Within weeks of being sentenced for my birdseed crime, the attack that finally broke this camel’s back took place. The attack had significant practical consequences, I would be unable to raise funding for future research, but it also demonstrated the actions that Keele’s senior management were prepared to take to undermine me and my reputation as a scientist. I think that when the full facts are known it should be clear to all that I could not return to my academic position at Keele.

​

I have written those ‘facts’ as I understand them below. As always, as a scientist, I await judgement by my peers.



A Brief History of Donations

​

Donations to support our research at Keele have consistently been the vehicle through which Keele’s senior management have acted against my group.

​

I have always received unsolicited donations from the public to support our research. However, from about 2013, requests to donate became more numerous and I began discussions with Keele’s research management and finance departments as to how the process of making a donation could be simplified.

​

It was not until 2016 that a colleague called Paul Buttery in Finance established an online donations portal for my group.

​

http://estore.keele.ac.uk/browse/product.asp?compid=1&modid=1&catid=66

​

This online portal worked well. I would receive an email acknowledgement whenever a donation was made by this route.

​

Less than 18 months later I was informed in a meeting with Professor D Amigoni, at the time, the Pro-Vice Chancellor for Research, that the donations portal set up by Finance was ‘unsuitable’ and I should contact someone called Natalie Lloyd about changing it. I did this in February 2018 and subsequent emails involving someone called Lauren Huss (hear more about her later) suggested that action would be taken to provide an alternative online donations link. In October 2018, 6 months later, I sent an email to Lloyd, copied to Amigoni, to ask if there had been any progress in setting up the alternative donations portal. I received no reply.

​

On the 11th of April 2019, following receipt of a number of emails from potential donors unable to make a donation using the online link, I was told by someone called Lee Bestwick in Finance that he had been instructed to disable the donations portal set up by Finance on my behalf. He was not aware that there had been no prior discussion with me about this. An email from me to the Vice Chancellor of Keele University, Professor TJ McMillan, to ask about this was not acknowledged. Thereafter it transpired that Amigoni had given Bestwick this instruction. I am copying Amigoni’s email to me on this below.

​

Dear Professor Exley,

​

thank you for your e-mails at the end of last week, following suspension of the donations portal which, as I explained, enacted (albeit belatedly) a decision which we had reached last year. I'm grateful to Louise Middleton for writing to you explaining my absence from the university on Friday. Louise indicated that I would bring you up to date, which I am doing in this e-mail.

I've had an opportunity to consult more widely across the University and presented a discussion paper to UEC today.

​

UEC have decided that, as a university, we need clearer principles of governance around the solicitation of crowd-funded donations. Natalie Lloyd, in liaison with colleagues in RIE, RaISE and Finance, will be working on these and they will return to UEC in due course for discussion and approval. Until that time, UEC have agreed the continued suspension of your group's donation portal.



During the period of suspension, around which at this stage I am afraid I cannot set a precise time frame, UEC accepted that charitable donations, unsolicited by the university, may still be channeled to researchers by other means.



With sincere regards,

Professor David Amigoni



My reply, copied to the VC, is shown below.

​

This is completely unacceptable.

​

You made a grave mistake in accusing me of not complying with our discussions of February 2018. I have pointed out to you in the clearest possible terms your mistake.

​

There is no 'crowdfunding' here? There are no crowd-funded donations and there have never been any crowd funded donations. This is an irrelevant statement. Where is it coming from?

​

The fact is that you simply closed my charitable donations link without any prior consultation and without providing the alternative link, presumably already set up by Natalie Lloyd in March 2018 but without it being communicated to me.

​

Why are you preventing individuals making charitable donations towards our research?

​

I cannot even begin to understand your reasoning but what you have done is clearly unfair and will result in my research group losing valuable funding.

​

Once again, please explain why you disabled my charitable donations link without consultation and without providing any alternative.

​

Professor McMillan, please could you address this if, as it seems, Professor Amigoni is unwilling to do so.

​

I would also like someone to explain Professor Amigoni's statement;

​

UEC accepted that charitable donations, unsolicited by the university, may still be channeled to researchers by other means.

​

So, how might donors continue to support our research. What alternative mechanism are you suggesting? Please inform immediately so that I can let everyone know.

​

Best wishes

​

Chris

​

It is clear from the actions of Amigoni, seemingly fully supported by a compliant VC, that donations to our research were then and would become a vehicle through which senior management would continue their actions against our research. Closing our online donations link without any attempt at prior discussion with me was a clear indication of their intention to target my research funding as a means of preventing our research.



It was not until the end of June 2019 that a new online donations portal was established for my group.

​

Details on how donations could now be made were made clear by me to all potential donors as indicated below.



Please Donate to Help to Support our Research

(choose Professor Exley's Research from the drop down menu)

https://epay.keele.ac.uk/donations



Donations were now managed by the alumnus office. This link worked successfully for about 6 months. However, in February 2020 I was informed by potential donors that the option of choosing my name had been removed from the drop down menu on the donations portal. Again, this change had been made without any prior consultation with me. Upon email consultation with Lloyd, I had to issue new instructions for potential donors, see below.



Please Donate to Help to Support our Research

(choose Advancing Research from the drop down menu and send an email to alumni.hq@keele.ac.uk to indicate that the donation is for Professor Exley, copy your donation receipt to me for peace of mind)

https://epay.keele.ac.uk/donations



Senior management at Keele seemed determined to make donations towards my research as difficult as possible for potential donors. This included refusing to inform me when a donation had been made. I had to rely upon donors contacting me to inform me that they had made a donation. However, donations continued to be received and this unconditional support of our research by individual donors was only brought to an end in February 2021 when Keele’s senior management acted to prevent all donations to my group.

​

Above is a potted history of how senior management at Keele has used ‘donations’ to make life difficult for my research group over the last five years. Their actions were not successful and, thankfully, we continued to receive support for our research.





Their Final Act

​

Senior management at Keele has always contended that the University is not per se against me personally or my research. For example, the ‘official’ line since 2016 for not having issued a single press release about our research or even featured our research in any internal research documents is that it is ‘unremarkable’.

​

They even maintained this position of apparent ambivalence immediately following the recent article about my research and, specifically, research funding in The Guardian newspaper (9th February 2021).



For example, see the statement by the Dean in an email to me below.

​

As you are aware, from time to time, concerns have been raised by both our external and internal communities, as a result of press stories, about research undertaken at the University by you and its use to question vaccine safety in a manner which may undermine public health initiatives. On this we make no judgment. (Email sent to me on the 25th of February 2021.)

​

Wastling, the Dean, states that the University makes no judgement on the subject of my research and research funding. However, I know now that this is not the case.

​

The truth, revealed through internal communications, is very much different. In particular, documents show that within one day of the publication of the article in The Guardian, the Vice Chancellor, Professor TJ McMillan, has openly branded me and my research as anti-vaccine and disseminated these views to senior management at Keele. These views are thereafter repeated by Keele’s ‘Chief Operating Officer’, Dr Mark Bacon and by Keele’s head of the alumnus office, Ms Lauren Huss. Is this what Wastling meant by ‘on this we make no judgement’?

​

At this point it is probably worth pointing out that I have never met in person any of McMillan, Bacon or Huss. I have never spoken to the VC nor have I had any form of two-way correspondence with him.

​

In internal communications all three, McMillan, Bacon and Huss, have no qualms in telling others that I am anti-vaccine.

​

Below are my notes on emails and attachments contained within these communications. They show unequivocally and contrary to Keele’s official view, that the VC has branded me and my research as anti-vaccine. His views are fully supported by Bacon (COO) and Huss (Alumni Office).

​

The communications also suggest some form of collaboration between Keele’s senior management (including the VC) and both The Guardian newspaper and Keele’s student newspaper, Concourse, in disseminating such branding to as wide an audience as possible.



My Notes

​

At 14.15 on February 10th 2021 the VC sent a ‘paper for discussion’ to senior members of the University Governance Committee for further discussion at 17.30 on that evening. These senior committee members included the Pro-Chancellor (Jo Williams) and Deputy Pro-Chancellor (David Hall) of Keele.

​

This ‘discussion paper’ became available just 24h after The Guardian article appeared online. It is worth noting that at this time I was completely unaware of the University’s ‘position’ on the article in The Guardian. No one, neither my head of school, Professor D Scott, nor my faculty Dean, Professor J Wastling, made any attempt to talk to me about what had been written in the newspaper.

​

The VC states in his ‘discussion paper’ that he is acting on behalf of the ‘University Advisory Group’. This is not an officially recognised group at Keele. A search of Keele’s website produces no hits for this group. Those copied into the VC’s email as cc include Ormerod (Deputy VC), Bacon (COO), Dumbelton (Governance Manager) and Paddison (VC Office), perhaps these constitute this ‘ad hoc’ advisory group?

​

The University Advisory Group met and ‘considered’ the article published in The Guardian and, presumably, wrote the paper for discussion, sometime between the afternoon of the 9th of February (when the article was posted online only) and 14.15 on the 10th of February when the paper was sent to the Governance Committee. Again, it is worth noting that no attempt was made by this ‘Group’ to obtain any feedback from me about this.

​

Note that in the ‘discussion paper’ the VC does not address me as Professor Exley. He is perhaps giving the impression to the University Governance Committee (who will not know anything about me or my research) that I am a small fish / irritation at Keele and not, as is the case, one of Keele’s longest standing and most celebrated and awarded academics.

​

The following comment from the ‘discussion paper’, shown below in italics, is the first to undermine significantly my research and myself.

​

The Advisory Group have considered the recent guardian press coverage of Dr Chris Exley's research and the link to anti-vaccination. Dr Exley's views on this area have been an ongoing area of concern for the University leadership, as although the scientific research he conducts is adequate; his conclusions and publicised views are less compelling and have limited academic integrity.

​

This is an outrageous comment and misinforms a committee membership that does not know me from Adam. As such, they will undoubtedly accept his personal views without any need of evidence to support them.

​

The VC states that my views on ‘anti-vaccination’ have been an ongoing area of concern for the University leadership. If this is true then he neither gives examples of my ‘views’ nor does he describe any previous occasions when this subject has been broached with me. In truth, this ‘discussion paper’ is the very first time that I have heard about such ongoing concerns.

​

The VC describes my research as ‘adequate’. My ‘adequate’ research record, including over 210 peer-reviewed publications, an ‘H’ index of 50 (Web of Science) and external research income in excess of £6m, is second to none among my peers at Keele. Therefore, if my research record ranks as only ‘adequate’ then Keele’s overall record of research must rank as extremely poor. The VC knows that the information he presents is untrue. The VC has access to research records and a simple search on, for example, Web of Science or Google Scholar, identifies me within the top five researchers currently working at Keele. The VC will also know that I remain the only Keele scientist in the history of the University to have won and served a full term as a Royal Society University Research Fellow. He knows that such prestigious accolades are not awarded for adequate research.

​

He questions my academic integrity, misinforming the University Governance Committee, without offering any evidence. To my knowledge, my academic integrity has never been questioned and it is actually my integrity that is highlighted over and over again by my peers. I am a Fellow of the Royal Society of Biology an award that recognises my pre-eminence in research and my academic integrity.

​

Once again, in the following statement the VC chooses to misinform the Committee presumably in order to undermine and besmirch myself as much as possible.

​

Funding for Dr Exley's research has been mainly through private donations, rather than more traditional research grants or University monies. The nature of any grants he has received have been from companies in the US, where it is difficult (sometimes impossible) to ascertain the origins of the funding or indeed much information about the grant-awarding group itself.

​

These statements are blatantly wrong. During my time at Keele I have won research awards amounting to in excess of £6 million. Over £5 million of this total has come in the form of traditional research grants, to use the VCs term. The latter include a significant number of grants from the UK research councils, MRC, NERC and EPSRC. I have also won significant grants from Europe (EU Framework Programme) as well as home-based charities such as the Wellcome Trust and The Royal Society. Why does the VC misinform the Governance Committee about this when all these details are easily available to him through Keele’s funding office?

​

I have not obtained any funding from ‘companies in the US’. Over the last ten years I have won research funding from a Washington DC –based charity called Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute (CMSRI). Keele has openly and willingly accepted funding from this organisation. Indeed Keele recently (18th August 2018) used its Ethics Oversight Committee chaired by Professor Alistair Ulph at the University of Manchester to review funding from CMSRI, and this review body found no objection to receiving funding from them. It gave CMSRI a clean bill of health to continue to support our research.

​

Recently I have won two large donations ($70K and $100K) from the Mericos Foundation, a member of The Whittier Trust. These are philanthropic services, they are fully transparent and Keele has approved both of these donations. The latter donation was rapidly ‘turned into a grant’ by Keele to enable it to fund my experienced researchers, Drs Mold and Shardlow. The former ($70K) remains unspent.

​

The VC’s statement about the origins of my research funding is wrong and he is misinforming the University Governance Committee.

​

One has to wonder why the VC then needed to remind the same Committee of the only donation towards my research that Keele has actually rejected.

​

One specific anti-vaccination donation has previously been considered and rejected by the Nominations & Governance Committee

​

Surely, since approving such donations is the responsibility of the Governance Committee, they were already well aware of this, as it was only at the end of 2019 that they, purportedly, made this decision. The donation, a personal cheque for $15K, was from RF Kennedy Jr. and since he is a lawyer, he will probably wish to deal with this slur against his name.

​

The VC clearly wished to highlight this donation, without providing any details, as an example of anti-vaccination funding destined for my research.

​

Contrary to that written in the VC’s ‘discussion paper’ independent donations from individuals made through Keele’s own online donations portal have amounted to less than £50K over the past five years. These donations are periodically made available by Keele research services to my group to use as we wish on our Keele-approved research programmes.

​

The VC has misinformed the Governance Committee about funding to my group, painting a picture of obscurity to support his contention that I am anti-vaccine and therefore, so is my research.

The following statement by the VC is obscure and misinforms further the Committee that my funding streams are out of step with those of the University.

​

No other person or group within the University receives funding or donations of this nature; therefore this research funding is very much out of line from the rest of the University and inconsistent with our normal approach to funding research activity.

​

The VC clearly does not recognise significant funding received by Keele from The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (a US company) or Bet365 (a UK company) as being in any way equivalent. However, in this statement he does recognise that no other research within Keele is sufficiently prominent worldwide to receive unsolicited donations from individuals. Hence, Keele had no issues with closing down its only online donations portal for several weeks to prevent further donations towards my research.

​

The VC continues his wholly unsupported statements in the following passage.

​

Given the national importance of vaccination campaigns at this point in time, the University Advisory Group, in conjunction with the Faculty Dean felt that it would be inappropriate to continue accepting this piecemeal funding for the work that Dr Chris Exley is undertaking, especially as the research integrity of his conclusions is questioned by many of his peers.

​

The final line is personally insulting. When he wrote this paper he had absolutely no evidence to support this view. It was his view. However, he put it into the minds of the Governance Committee members that I did not have the support of my peers. Two of the main participants in this ‘discussion paper’ are the Pro-Chancellor (Jo Williams) and the Deputy Pro-Chancellor (David Hall). They have since received a copy of the ‘letter of support’ sent to the VC and Keele’s Chancellor (Jonathon Porritt) and signed by over 100 of my peers. This letter is unequivocal in its support for myself and my research. The letter is available at this website. https://tinyurl.com/mdtu5w6m

​

If they have read this letter then Williams and Hall will know that they have been misinformed by the VC. Whether or not they have brought this up directly with the VC is unknown but this seems unlikely (see later).

​

The VC uses the misinformation in this discussion paper to ask approval of the Governance Committee to prevent me from receiving research funding from charitable and philanthropic services and, importantly, to disable my group website. The latter remains disabled without the VC providing any evidence whatsoever that it promotes any form of anti-vaccine sentiment. The VC asks the University Governance Committee for approval of;

​

1) That funding for Dr Chris Exley's research will no longer be accepted via private donation

​

2) That private donations made to date to fund the research will be repaid to the donor, at the

expense of the University

​

3) That grant funding for the research will only be accepted from sources where the reputation and sources of income for the grant are clear and unambiguous.

​

Note point 2) above. As of the end of August 2021 no private donations have, to my knowledge, been refunded and Keele has refused every donor who has asked for a refund. These are clearly issues for organisations such as the Charities Commission and the tax office, Keele having already claimed Gift Aid on these unspent donations.



On the 23rd of February, David Hall, the Deputy Pro-Chancellor writes to members of the Governance Committee in a clear attempt to rubber stamp decisions made by the VC. For example, he writes;

​

I commend Trevor for his open, thoughtful and balanced approach to these issues and for the care he has taken to consult widely.



and he follows this with his own personal recommendation to all Committee members;

​

​

I hope you will forgive me expressing my views up front in this e-mail, but Trevor or I would be very happy to speak to anyone with concerns individually or as a group if those concerns are significant and the member feels they would like to have a group discussion before reaching a conclusion. From Trevor’s soundings I do not expect that to be the case and so perhaps you can indicate your approval (or otherwise) to Fiona by e-mail. As a Committee we have no direct responsibility to approve the actions to be taken in respect of the website, but you are welcome to comment on that aspect as well if you wish.

​

So, he is confident that information given by the VC is accurate and sufficient for them to accept it and act upon it without any further discussion. This is exactly what followed. Would they have made a similar decision if they had not been misinformed?



Further cementing the views expressed by the VC are those of Keele’s Chief Operating Officer, Mark Bacon, in email correspondence on the 10th of February and prior to the discussion of the VC’s paper, with Lauren Huss, head of the alumnus office.

​

At one point Huss writes the below to Bacon.

​

therefore donors are not giving specifically to research that may be damaging to the institutional reputation (although at this point most of Exley's research could be classed as such)

​

While Huss admits that donations received through Keele’s online portal are entirely independent she then proceeds to defame myself with the following comment in brackets. Who is Huss, someone who has never met myself or probably looked at any of our published research, to state that most of our research is damaging to Keele’s institutional reputation. It is, as if she is enjoying playing her part in the tyranny of misinformation against me. She goes on to say in the same email to Bacon.

​

​

However, it is ultimately impossible to always guarantee that someone hasn't donated because they have seen a video or article which promotes anti vax messaging which we don't know about.

​

The narrative is clear here. She has been led to believe that both my research and I are anti-vaccine. She doesn’t need any evidence for this. She takes the word of the VC and COO.

​

Bacon replies at 20.18 on the 10th of February, presumably post discussion of the paper written by the VC since this meeting was scheduled for 17.30.

​

I think it is clear that the decision is in the best interests of the charity: accepting donations solicited by an individual supporting anti-vaccine misinformation risks a £9m research income per annum from NIHR being lost.

​

Bacon clearly defames my name, suggesting forcibly that this was also the conclusion of the discussion of the VC’s paper, and adds that my remaining at Keele risks a substantial loss of income from NIHR. https://www.nihr.ac.uk/ Note CEO of NIHR is Chris Whitty.



Bacon continues his libellous narrative with;

​

The Guardian headline is spot on: Keele facilitates money flowing to a prominent anti-vaccine academic.

​

He has clearly bought the messaging coming from the VC as Bacon does not know me or my research from Adam. He is simply repeating the prior discussion hosted by the VC. He goes on to say;

​

There is a clear link between his calls to action and the flows of donations: with the majority of donations by number and value being directed to CE.

​

An outrageous statement but again presumably one taken from the previous discussion with the VC. He talks about my ‘calls to action’ again without a shred of evidence of any such calls. He continues to defame my name. He calls me a high profile anti-vaccine academic. He can only have developed this opinion from the earlier discussion meeting with the VC.

​

I don’t know of the detail of our gift acceptance policy to know whether it reads as sufficient or not. But the fact remains we facilitate donations to high profile anti-vaccine academic. So our gift acceptance policy does not therefore seem fit for purpose now, given today’s likely decision: so it will have to be revised.

​

Bacon’s libellous statements continue.

​

I would be interested to understand whether the commission would be acting in the public interest to fine Keele for aiming to reduce the influence of anti-vaccine movement, given the WHO estimates of avoidable deaths as a result of anti-vaccine propaganda.

​

He is clearly revelling in his position and he continues to confirm that which I said earlier that decisions would be made by chair’s action, based upon the misinformation offered up by the VC.

​

I can also see that the Secretary to Council (David Hall) is suggesting chairs actions/via correspondence decision from nominations committee who are delegates to rule on controversial donations.



All of this correspondence demonstrates that the VC, of his own volition or otherwise, has branded me and my research as anti-vaccine in order it would seem to gain approval by the University Governance Committee of his proposed actions against myself and my research.



This decision is further reinforced by allowing the publication of a highly defamatory article by an anonymous author in Keele’s student newspaper, Concourse. The VC was certainly aware of this article as he was alerted to it in emails by Russell Reader (Marketing and Bird Seed advocate). Despite the article painting me as a leading anti-vaccine advocate he did nothing to have it removed. He was happy to see this message about my research and myself sent to myriad Keele students past and present.



There is another significant issue that remains completely unresolved. No direct evidence has been forthcoming that The Guardian made a FOI request to Keele to obtain information on my funding. However, if such a request had been made then according to information from Lauren Adams in Keele’s FOI Office, it should have been refused based upon the fact that it asked for highly personalised information specific to myself. To respond to such a request would presumably contravene the FOI Act.



I have repeatedly asked Keele’s FOI Office for full details of the FOI request made by The Guardian. Anne-Marie Long, Keele’s Data Protection Officer, has treated my formal requests as FOI requests. However, below is all the information they would provide me with, no original documentation, just information they have typed into an email to me.



FOI Request 1 - Please provide details of financial donations and gifts made to Professor Chris Exley's in the last two years. Detail who made the gift or donation to research, what it was/how much, and when it was made.



Answer - Please find attached the information held in relation to donations made to Professor Chris Exley in the last two years. The names of individuals are withheld under Section 40(2)(3A)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act, being personal information the release of which would contravene one or more of the data protection principles within the Data Protection Act 2018.





Please note that this data runs from May 2019 as information relating to the months prior was provided to you previously within an FOI response in May 2019.





FOI Request 2 - Please provide details of financial donations and gifts made to Professor Chris Exley's in the last two years that were rejected by Keele University. Please detail the reasons why it was rejected. Detail who made the gift or donation to research, what it was/how much, and when it was made.



Answer - One donation during the requested time period was rejected, as indicated in the attached document. Further detail is withheld under Section 43(2) of the Freedom of Information Act as release would be likely to prejudice the commercial interests of the University. This is a qualified exemption and the public interest test applies.



Look at the underlined (my underlining) in both requests. Either the requests are incomplete or Keele’s FOI Office has made two identical errors in transcribing the ‘original’ FOI requests. This information has been confirmed as being correct by Anne-Marie Long, Keele’s Data Protection Officer, and so we must assume that the original requests from The Guardian were written in this form. Keele’s FOI Office somehow managed to interpret these requests to provide the detailed information sent to The Guardian.



Independent requests to Keele’s FOI Office for this information have, similarly, fallen on deaf ears, at least for now.



The information I present demonstrates that the VC, fully supported by senior management, acted to undermine significantly both my personal reputation and that of my 29 years of research at Keele. He has branded me as anti vaccine and my research as adequate. Would anyone expect me to be able to return to work at Keele in such an environment and with such rules, applicable only to me, on how research funding could be raised in the future?



Regarding the raising of external research funding.



Rather than celebrate the fact that I (and, according to the VC, I alone at Keele) have been able to bring in funding from charitable and philanthropic services amounting to in excess of £1m over the past 10 years the VC has decided that these previously Keele-approved sources of funding (primarily CMSRI and The Whittier Trust) are no longer acceptable. The result of his actions being that all research in my group stopped at the end of August 2021 and my two first class research fellows are out of a job.



The VC, through my lawyer, suggested I look to alternative sources of funding such as UK research councils. He should know the difficulties I have faced in recent applications to such bodies. If funding was possible then I would not be devoting significant amounts of time to alternative funding sources.



However, let us examine research funding in my field through the UK research councils. If we use the research councils’ websites and use search terms such as aluminium and human health we can find out how many grants have been awarded in this area over the last 20 years in the UK.



BBSRC – number of grants awarded = 0

MRC – number of grants awarded = 1. Successful applicant, C Exley, Keele University NERC – number of grants awarded = 1. Successful applicant, C Exley, Keele University EPSRC – number of grants awarded = 2. Successful applicant (2) C Exley, Keele University



In the last 20 years, UK research councils have supported 4 grant applications in the fields of aluminium and human health (most recently in 2012) and all 4 grants have been awarded to me. The VC now proposes that I make multiple applications to the research councils to support my research, even though the probability of success is zero.



I have been successful in bringing in research funding from what the VC calls ‘established funding bodies’, amounting to over £5m during my time at Keele. I have not excluded applications to such bodies over the past few years for any reason other than the knowledge that they have zero chance of success.



In future, as suggested by the VC, I can make applications to the UK research councils and similar government-funded bodies as a box-ticking exercise. However, the stark reality of his actions is that if I returned to Keele I would no longer be research active. He knew very well that by withdrawing the lifeblood of research from my activities at Keele that I would not be returning.

I have written this statement to explain why I had no choice but to leave Keele. I express no judgement on those mentioned by name. I am not pursuing any form of direct justice. I am drawing a line under these highly unfortunate circumstances. I am proud of my achievements at Keele University and I have always been proud to be a Keele academic.

Dr Christopher Exley FRSB

KATHARINE GUN II: DAVID AMESS MURDER; NO CANADA PANDEMIC;162K UK COVID VACCINE DEATHS JULIAN ASSANGE
https://seed307.bitchute.com/9N5Yg4kpoQOv/SHsJAcPlltFf.mp4

[TonyGosling]

Infanrix Hexa gets a mention
Systemic uninformed consent to MASS VACCINATION Pr Dr Chris Busby


Link


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klo5mYdJenc