Exclusive| UK COVID-19 inquiry|15 Jan 2025

Testimony by Ruth O'Rafferty from the Scottish Vaccine Injury Group.

Introduction

The Scottish Vaccine Injury Group (‘SVIG’) (on social media platform X @scottish_vig) has been set up to provide support for those who have suffered adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines. All applicants are rigorously screened to ensure everyone who joins had an adverse reaction to Covid-19 vaccines. You can view their opening submission to the Scottish COVID-19 inquiry 24th October 2023 here. Since then, in the last 15 months membership of the group has trebled to 750 members.

A comment made by Hugo Keith KC-Counsel to the inquiry (at 7mins 30s) is very revealling and worth pointing out.

‘‘In your statements you have raised a vast number of points and issues, spanning the technology of vaccines, the scientific foundations for them..their authorisation, their research and development, their delivery, almost every aspect of vaccination…this falls widly outwith the scope of this inquiry and i don’t want to take time looking at those.’’

An abysmal performance by the KC overall with many interruptions at key moments of Ms.O’Rafferty’s evidence.

Full session

I will add the main points and quotes below because feedback to me recently indicates many people don’t have the time to watch longer videos and or lack the attention span like mainstream media viewers.

• Majority of 750 members suffered a vaccine injury

• Stigma and censorship in NHS and media

• Fear of repercussions prevents doctors from raising concerns

• Regulatory capture by drug companies

• Safety sacrificed due to speed of development

• Overlap with vaccine injury and 'Long COVID'

• Lack of informed consent

• Medical coercion

• Yellow card scheme concerns

• VDPS reform needed

‘‘A survey in our group about how doctors feel about vaccine injury…46% said that even though doctors said to them yes we think this was the vaccine that caused this they didn’t write it in their medical notes.’’

‘‘In 2005 there was a parliamentary review into the influence of the pharmaceudical industry on the regulatory process in the United Kingdom and they made lots of recommendations which still have not been implemented.’’

‘‘mRNA vaccines have never been before been authorised for use in the public and because they were brought out on such a massive scale our concerns are that there wasn’t enough vigilance.’’

‘‘We had somebody who ended up in hospital paralysed for months and we discovered that she had the same diagnosis as a condition that appeared on the Astrazeneca trial.’’

‘‘Alot of our members were not given a leaflet until AFTER they had received their vaccination which means they didn’t really have informed consent.’’

‘‘We have lots of people in our group in the medical profession who WERE coerced…emails were distributed around their workplace naming and shaming people who hadn’t yet had their vaccine.’’

‘‘Doctors were NOT reporting to the yellow card even though they said to us they felt the vaccine was responsible.’’

Mainstream reporting

Below is the BBC analysis of the testimony. Are you impressed?

Link to must read full statement

‘‘Some of our group members were refused post-mortems because of 'emergency regulations'. One of our members joined our group because his father, aged 79, who was fit and able to get out and about perfectly well by himself took an immediate reaction to a booster jab. His health declined over the next 17 hours before he passed away, apparently from a heart attack.’’

‘‘His story is repeated throughout our group.’’

-Paragraph 67-68

Thanks for your attention. Share if you care.

X-link 1

X-link 2