Inside the People’s Vaccine Inquiry – Part Three [Article from 12/2/25]

Today we are publishing Dr Clare Craig’s presentation delivered at the People’s Vaccine Inquiry press conference last week. Full details and videos of the event and additional presentations can be found here. 

The first presentation, published on Monday, by Dr Jonathan Engler, explained why the People’s Inquiry was so necessary in view of Lady Hallett’s disgraceful refusal to honestly address the extent and cause of vaccine injury. The second, by Dr Elizabeth Evans, published yesterday, focused on Hallett’s total disregard for the abandonment of medical ethics accompanying the vaccines’ authorisation and roll-out.

Dr Clare Craig, a consultant diagnostic pathologist, who has carried out significant research into the covid epidemic as an individual, was the third speaker. She reiterated that the press conference is not about what was said at the inquiry. It is about what was not said, she said, not forgotten or overlooked; not missed, but deliberately excluded. She went on:

THE LEAD counsel, Hugo Keith, repeatedly interrupted anyone wishing to put forward narrative-challenging evidence. He made the predetermined position crystal clear before a word of evidence had been heard. He said: ‘The exercise of pronouncing the last word on the efficacy and safety of specific vaccines may prove to serve little purpose.’

Little purpose? To whom? These questions matter immensely – to the silenced, to the injured and to the bereaved. But instead of scrutiny, we got slogans. Instead of evidence, we heard echoes of certainty. Not a debate – it was doctrine. They worshipped the novel covid vaccines.

Shamefully, and without evidence, Hugo Keith talked about ‘entirely effective’ vaccines which were ‘undoubted successes’ with ‘lifesaving benefits . . . which . . . vastly outweighed the very rare risk of a serious side effect.’ Adding ‘without any doubt’, he even went as far as saying they offered ‘the promised land’.

Would he say that about other novel pharmaceutical products?

Other participants repeatedly claimed the vaccines were ‘undoubtedly’ beneficial, ‘an extraordinary achievement’, ‘world-beating’ and ‘saved millions of lives’.

Where was the evidence? Buried beneath a mountain of faith. This new faith was built on fantasy born of modelling and a statistical illusion.

I am a scientist. It is, in theory, possible to train the immune system to recognise pathogens. It must be possible to subscribe to that scientific fact but challenge when a particular example manifestly fails. A failed medicine is not a medicine. It is a cash machine.

The models created an illusion of benefit

• The models assumed a never-ending tsunami of infection and death without lockdowns and vaccines – numerous subsequent waves have disproved that.
• The models assumed vaccines prevented 90 per cent of deaths – so, of course, they ‘proved’ millions of lives were saved.
• The models ignored Omicron, which killed fewer people. Omicron stayed in the upper airway like a normal coronavirus. Omicron was half as deadly in the unvaccinated. Omicron the inquiry barely acknowledged.

No one dared admit that Omicron was less severe from the start.

The only mention of Omicron’s severity in oral evidence was from
Sajid Javid who farcically got the evidence – as a former Health Secretary, no less – completely wrong, saying,  ‘We knew Omicron was a lot more severe’.

Now we come to the statistical ‘cheap trick’(a phrase coined by Martin Neil and Norman Fenton to describe a phenomenon many of us have been trying to bring to public attention for years. The illusion of benefit):

• Only around 10 per cent of people are susceptible to each wave.
• The vaccine suppressed immunity for two weeks, triggering infections earlier in those susceptible.
• The two-week window after vaccination? They called it ‘unvaccinated’. A barefaced lie 
• That made the vaccinated look safer –
• And the unvaccinated look doomed.
• A rigged game. A statistical illusion.
• Thereafter the unvaccinated continued to be affected but the vaccinated wave had finished early.
• When the next wave arrived – weeks or months later – they called this waning. It wasn’t waning. It was the washing out of a statistical illusion.

One tragic example was Peter Rossiter. He was 39. A pianist. A son. A life ahead of him. Four days after his second dose, he fell ill with covid. This is the danger period. The immune system is hammered by the vaccine in this period so people become more susceptible to infection.

Read More – Inside the People’s Vaccine Inquiry – Part Three [Article from 12/2/25]