Good afternoon. It's Friday the 23rd of February 2024, just after 1:00. Welcome to UK Column News. I'm your host Mike Robinson joining me today. We have Ben Rubin and Debbie Evans and Cheryl Granger is with us today as well and we will have another guest later on. Now we're going to get started with, well, the Online Safety Act, online safety in general, because it's basically not happening fast enough. So you can see switching on very
slowly at the moment. This is according to the Public Accounts Committee. So they have published a report called Preparedness for Online Safety, relegation. Sorry, regulation. So let's have a look and see
what they're saying. The public may be disappointed with the new regime if people cannot quickly see improvements to their online experience or understand how their complaints are acted on. As the regulatory regime will not be fully implemented until 2026, there's a risk that public confidence in the regime will be undermined.
Now, if anybody's been watching the UK column for the last few years while we've been talking about this, I hope very much that public confidence in the regime has already been significantly undermined because we would much prefer that the regime doesn't happen at all. But let's go on with what they had to say. This was the next bit.
Ofcom. As yet, work through the detail of how fees levied on industry will work, including how it will recover the setup costs and cover the ongoing costs of the regime. So the regime is going to be paid for by the platforms, apparently, and not the taxpayer, is what they seem to be hinting at.
So maybe that's one benefit. But they go on to say Ofcom faces significant challenges about how it will engage with supervised and regulated providers based overseas, which constitute the vast majority of regulated services, in particular smaller providers and those who may seek to avoid Ofcom's gaze. And of course, this is the biggest problem for them, because the likes of of Facebook
and so on will be quite happy. Because they've been engaged in this process from the beginning, since 2017, they will be quite happy to do whatever the government asks them to do, X perhaps less so. But ultimately what they'll be required to do by by this online censorship act is to to maintain a standard of their terms and conditions. In other words, if they say that they're going to limit certain types of speech, they will have to enforce that.
And they will have to enforce that with the penalty of managers going to prison if they don't cooperate with Ofcom. We've covered that many times. But this issue of smaller providers, Of course this is the rumbles of the world who are still small, relatively speaking, to YouTube and whatnot, but certainly the UK government, or at least the Public Accounts Committee, extremely concerned that they will fall under the the radar. Now. This is Meg Hillier and this is what she had to say.
Ofcom must accelerate its coordination with other regulators, both at home and overseas, in recognition that it is at the forefront of a truly global effort to strike the right balance between freedom and safety online. So this is what they're claiming that they're going to do, is strike a balance between these things. But it's a truly global effort. Ben, I realize I'm hijacking you once again here, but I mean, what are your thoughts on this?
Because this is something that they're trying to coordinate with countries in the European Union and the European Commission of course, but also in the United States. And although there, there it's a lot more difficult in the United States because of the protection of freedom of speech in the Constitution. They are attempting to bring in this Kids Online Safety Act in the US to try to bring the the, the platforms more or less in line with other countries, but a
global effort. It reminds me of the MHRA in many ways. Yeah, I mean, what do they say? The safety of the public is the alibi of tyrants thing as the phrase who, who, who are these people? Where did they come from? Who asked them to do this stuff? I don't understand what's going on, but it's it's completely, completely remarkable, totally unacceptable.
Yeah, that's my my reaction. Yeah, OK Well, in the meantime then of course GB News, which has effectively become a mouthpiece for the Conservatives government party these days nonetheless, as we know, is being investigated once again by Ofcom. But they have decided that they want to push publish an opinion piece from Anna Firth, who's an MPA Tory MP, of course promoting the idea of the online safety
bill. So the online safety bill is ground breaking according to her opinion piece and she said this. The online safety bill is a ground breaking piece of legislation designed to protect children. Now of course we've been covering this for many, many years and all the way through this process we have made the point that the pretence of protecting children is what the Online safety bill has been created under and the now the Online Safety Act of course. But this is not about protecting
children at all. There are other ways to protect children already in existence. But anyway, she says we face potential lag of 18 months until the benefits of it will be felt. She went on to say. Children's Commissioner Dame Rachel Rachel D'souza quite rightly reiterated her calls for a comprehensive range of measures around safety by design, safety in schools and parental education, preferably
funded by the tech companies. Now this issue of safety, of course we saw what that brought us during COVID, because that was that safety, public safety was the justification for everything that happened there and safety is the justification for everything that's happening around this censorship industrial complex is being built. And this article from Anna Firth goes on to say it goes on.
It also warned about the dangers of harmful AI and the metaphors, and this is staggering that, I mean the optics here are amazing because of course it's the Tory government, the current Tory government of which she is a part that is pushing AI so hard at the moment in the UK. So it is incredible to me that she is attempting to to push this narrative and then sort of in parallel with with all this going on.
Of course, a week or so ago we were pointing out that Tobias Elwood had been had experienced A protest going on outside his house. Now this has driven parliament mad. And of course, that was part of the furor over Lindsay Hoyle and the Gaza vote and the actions that he took there because he was saying that he did that in order to protect MPs and he was expressing his deep concern that MPs are in extreme danger at the moment.
So now they're talking about setting up exclusion zones around MPs houses and around MPs constituency offices. And it's the constituency offices thing I think is is really problematic because I understand. I think I can appreciate that MPs families didn't sign up to have protests run outside their homes. I personally think that the Tobias Elwood, that exercise was totally a false flag in the sense that it was a staged event in order to to bring forward this narrative.
It's my personal opinion. I don't have any particular evidence for that, but that's just what I my reading of of
events. But nonetheless, the idea of MP safety is now becoming a problem and we've already, over the last number of years seen a distancing between the public and MPs going on. This is going to become even more significant in the near future, but the the fact that that they're talking about exclusion role zones around constituency offices and no right to protest outside the constituency office, this seems to be the wrong direction to be going in. But let's just finish with a
little bit of video from James Cleverly who's speaking on Sky. I think this was just have a listen to this. Well, Lord Warney, who has himself been a Member of Parliament and now advises the government on these issues, has put forward a report which I've not had a chance to read in
detail. But the headlines I think are important and and there is, there is a requirement to protect freedom of speech and that is very, very well protected in the United Kingdom. But there is also an absolute requirement to make sure that we defend democracy, that people who make decisions in government, at whatever level are, are, are doing so based on their judgement, based on the information, based on their beliefs, not based on fear of reprisals. They absolutely must and will be
protected from that. So there you go. They're going to be protected from anybody telling them that they're doing the wrong thing, or that they haven't been listening and so on. And they're going to make sure that they are protected from being told that they haven't been listening by making sure that they can't listen even harder. Because by separating the public from them even further, and you will undoubtedly have heard James cleverly say with a straight face that the UK is
protecting freedom of speech. I just find that quite an incredible statement from him. So Debbie, let me welcome you to the programme and Cheryl as well. Just introduce Cheryl if you could. Everyone and safety seems to be the theme today, doesn't it? Because Cheryl is going to be breaking news and giving us an exclusive today on a question that she asked of the board
meeting with regards to safety. She received a very significant e-mail from Doctor Allison Cave, Chief Safety Officer at the MHRA and she's here to give us an update. Welcome Cheryl. Please take us away on what you found out. Thanks, Debbie. Hello, everybody. Yes, I asked a question I wrote in and asked a question of the MHRA board meeting in November and three months later I got a reply this week.
And what this question was asking, it was asking about the ruling that prescription medicine code of practice authority had made on AstraZeneca because it had violated it's codes according to the ABPI code of practice that operates for pharma and it repeatedly had referred to COVID-19 vaccines has been safe in a December 2020.
So about the time that the vaccine was going to be released and that it claims were based on relative risk reduction and not absolute risk reduction which was a vastly smaller number. So 75% compared to 1.2% figures is what they used. And so I asked, would the CEO and the Chief Safety Officer of the MHRA like to retract the often repeated label that they have associated with the vaccines of safe and effective? And of course that's always used without qualification.
In the case of the MHRA, the ruling in the ABPI code of practice is that you can't use the word safe without qualification. I also reminded Doctor Cave that in a previous answer to a question I had asked, she actually had stated that the MHRA concluded that the COVID-19 vaccines were safe and effective and the benefits of the vaccines outweigh any risks. So this is the letter that I was
sent in reply. Obviously, I won't go through the whole thing, but she talked about the MHRA and its press releases to inform us about new medications coming out like the AstraZeneca vaccine. She talked about the MHRA in terms of safe and effectiveness, which we're going to concentrate in a minute on that particular paragraph. She also talked about the safety monitoring through things like the yellow card system and how it's now been advised.
The MHRA has been advised by the CHM to actually transition now into the less frequent way of recording information due to the stable safety profile that we are now seeing that one out.
And then we in the final paragraph, she started to talk about information that has been published on pharma because this question of mine related back to the vaccine injured thrombocytopenia group which were taking Asha Seneca to court because they had broken consumer protection that with the words that they'd use here, we're talking about 485 people with the condition with 81 unfortunate deaths, which means one in five of the group have actually passed.
So let me concentrate on the safe and effective paragraph from my letter. This is saying that no medicinal products is completely risk free is what Alison Cave actually wrote to me. I forgot to say that it was Alison Cave who wrote the letter. So no medicinal products is completely risk free. And I don't know how you can call something safe if you know that there no products is completely risk free, which is the reason why the ABP is code of practice says you can't use
the word safe on any medication. She goes on to say that the MHRA is to ensure that medicines, including vaccines, they must meet applicable standards of safety, which is the effects on people and quality, which is to do with manufacturing and distribution and effectiveness. Which is basically asking does it work at the time of the first authorisation and that the benefits continue to outweigh the known risks thereafter.
So a conclusion is reference to a medicinal product being safe and effective refers to this balance of benefits and risks remain remaining positive. So she probably regrets it, but she basically asked that if I have any further questions to get in touch. So that's what I've done and this is what I've asked Doctor Cave, She talks about these applicable safety standards. Where are they? You know, what are their standards? What standards are they working to?
Where do the MHA publish their safety standards? Also this benefit risk ratio. In order to work that out, you've got to know what the benefits are. I know that there are over 3400 clinical peer reviewed papers now that tend to go on about the risks, but what about the benefits? How did they work out the benefits? What are the benefits of the vaccines? Can they give us a list because you can't work out the ratio accurately if you don't know all
the information. And then how does that benefit risk ratio apply to effectiveness? Might be another question that I could ask her. And then the other thing I'd like to know about is the licensing agreement of the vaccines, because all of them actually state that it prevents from COVID-19 infection. Whereas when you look at the data, it doesn't prevent against infection, transmission, hospitalisation or death. And therefore has it broken its licensing agreement.
What happens when you break your license agreement and these other comments that she make about how many lives have been saved by the vaccine? Well, how many lives have been saved? What's their evidence for that and how many deaths do they actually use? What level of death do they use to withdraw a vaccine? In the past it's been less than 50. And then why are deaths that are reported? So at the moment, at the end of January 2640, deaths were reported. So there's more questions that
I've asked. They are all listed here. And what I'd like to say is that this morning I sent this off last night at 8:00 and this morning I got a reply to say they've referred this letter to the safety and surveillance group. So perhaps it will get back to Alison Cave. Thank you. Cheryl, thank you so much for that. And I just have to say to our audience watching, we've got a big reveal coming in extra to do with this, this same segment. So please stay tuned for extra. There's more to come.
OK, Debbie, Cheryl, thank you very much for that. Ben, let me welcome you back onto the programme and sticking with health issues, pharmacies and so on are becoming the frontline as far as most people are concerned. So what have you got? Absolutely. Thanks Cheryl for that. That was, that was fascinating and incredibly rebelling and really relevant to what I'm
going to come on to now. So we're going to talk a bit about the NHS privatization, digitization, the ever closer integration of the health system with the Pharmaceutical industry and which can kick things off by hearing from Boots the chemist. The NHS Pharmacy First service represents a major change for patients accessing care. For minor ailments.
In England, it gives patients the opportunity to access care in their pharmacy 1st for treatments for seven common conditions, rather than going to their GP to get A. Prescription. The NHS anticipate that this service will help to save 10 million GP appointments by next winter. Pharmacy 1st is a hugely positive development. It frees up time for GPS like myself so that we can offer help to patients with different
healthcare needs. It'll be great that they can now extend their support for our patients with the pharmacy first service. So we're told that Pharmacy 1st is all about reducing demand on GPS and transforming primary care. It's certainly transforming primary care, but I think the the main outcome of this is just making it easier to get pharmaceuticals out to the public. They're call me cynical. This is a huge business which is the biggest chemist in the
country. It's 175 years old, They handle well over £10 billion a year in NHS prescriptions. It's a huge business for them and the idea of this is to make it even bigger. They're effectively becoming the front door to the NHS. This is public private partnership. We've talked about a lot. It's not just Boots by the way, it's also the smaller pharmacies. This is taking place across the UK, but obviously Boots got a big marketing budget so they've done a nice fancy video about it.
And the other thing that jumped out at me about that was the presence in the film of this lady doctor, Sarah Kyatt, who came to some prominence, or certainly came to my awareness, after this appearance on Good Morning Britain in early 2021. Well, what's really excellent is, and it's a statistic that I think should be shouted from the rooftops, is that after 12 days from the first vaccination of the AstraZeneca vaccine.
You are 100. Percent effective against hospitalisation and death, so you know those. Are the statistics. We need to be hearing and. Yes, we why haven't we heard that? Before. Well, here I am. OK, so that aged like a pint of milk on a hot summer's day, didn't it? For the interviewer and the interviewee, 100% prevention of death. That was quite a bold claim, wasn't it?
Apart from we've seen quite a bit of death, not just from vaccinated people who've caught COVID, but also via the yellow card reporting scheme which Cheryl talked about earlier through all the adverse reactions to the AstraZeneca vaccine that the doctor there was just talking about. So if we just click on, we can see in the bottom there that we've had 1364 deaths directly from that vaccine and the thick end of a million adverse reactions, some of those really
serious injuries. Now, for my money, that you, young woman should have been struck off and potentially facing criminal charges for what she did there. But apparently Boots think that she's someone who should be being given a lucrative contract pushing further medicalisation and privatisation of healthcare. Really, really odd stuff going on in the health system at the moment. Boots, by the way, is run by one of this mob. You'll probably be familiar with the photo.
This is the Burlington Club. You can see Boris Johnson bottom front right and David Cameron back there, but also this guy Seb James in the front left. So he's the current chief executive of Boots. He's been there for about 6 years now, earns the thick end of £2,000,000 a year on his basic salary plus bonuses etcetera. And he is running a major part of this integrated public private health system. And this is what's happening in the NHS right now. What else are they doing?
What else are they building? A drone delivery network. This popped up on my radar this week and ultimately the goal of this, we have to understand is, is to deliver pharmaceuticals more efficiently to patients. They're building it nationally. We can see from the website of this company Apion, that this is a national network and it gives you a sense of the coverage, what we're talking about across the entire health system.
This lady, Juliette Bauer, recently joined their board as Chief Commercial Officer. So she's basically responsible for the commercial operations in the growth of this enterprise. But she's also at the same time a current serving governor of Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. She's working inside the NHS as well as building a private enterprise in the health system. I do not understand how this is possible. How can Juliette Bauer for doing
that work? And she's been working in the health system like this for quite some time before she joined AP. And she was also the Chief growth Officer and UK managing director of an organization called CRY, which is a Swedish digital GP business, which is again just one of the digital platform players that's been building big commercial operations on top of our health system. Because apparently the NHS, he's incapable of building and deploying his own technology.
And Juliet Barr would know that because before that she was the chief digital officer of the NHS between 2016 and 2019. Quite a remarkable CV that she has. She also used to work when she was a cry with this fella. And I want to just bring him up because he's a fascinating character. Johanna Shield, he looks like a Bond villain. I don't know if you can see properly, but he's one of his eyes and he's a different colour to the other one and he's slightly greyed out.
But also he's got this fascinating image in his LinkedIn profile at the top there, which I think tells you a lot about how these people think, right? They basically view the world as a computer simulation that they can manipulate using their technology platforms, and we can see this playing out in the way that the NHS is expanding into virtual wards. We've got a short film here to explain a bit more about that. What is a virtual ward?
Virtual wards provide hospital level care and remote monitoring in your own home. They allow you either to stay at home, receive care at home, or after being in hospital, to continue your treatment at home where you are most comfortable. There is emerging evidence to show the patients have better outcomes when treated at home rather than being treated in
hospital. Virtual wards have teams of healthcare professionals near to you who can provide high quality care to you, either face to face in your own home or remotely, usually supported with clinical advice, cutting edge monitoring devices, smartphones and other technology. They're evolving to manage a wider range of medical conditions that would otherwise be treated in hospital, particularly for frail patients and those with acute respiratory
infections. Thousands of people across England are benefiting from being treated at home on a virtual ward. So you can get a sense of what the NHS is up to it. It is attempting to become omnipresent. Yeah, they are building a digitally enabled biotechnological surveillance network. It's going to be across the whole UK. It's going to be in your
bedroom, your living room. It's going to be enabled by the drone technologies, and it's being delivered through public private partnerships, which, as we've spoken about extensively on the news, is the dictionary definition of fascism. This is all extremely concerning. Yeah. And not just public private partnerships, Ben, but public private partnerships where some of the key staff seem to be working on both sides of, you know, on the public and in private. So that's that's a key. Point.
Yes, OK, thank you. OK, let's move on. If you like what the UK column does, you would like to support us, please head over to support.ukcolumn.org. All the options for helping us out are there and your help very much needed and appreciated. You could pick something up at the UK Column Shop, but please do share anything you find on the various platforms, especially ukcolumn.org and UK column extracts.co.uk. Debbie, your latest blog is up. It is happiness. Big business happiness, as is
fluoride. Going to be a big agenda too. So all of those subjects and more and the bubonic played in the Alaska parks are just a bit of a warning. Cats. We seem to be targeting cats, so please check it out. Sorry, Debbie, did we not target cats during COVID as well? We did. We did indeed, And we seem to be appearing to target cats again for both Bubonic plague and Alaska Box.
OK, thank you. Now yesterday the an interview where the gutsy woman interview went out with Dan Rasmussen Mcaddy that will be on the website later on. Today we expect and on Sunday let's remember the Midazolam murders exposing state sanctioned involuntary euthanasia. This is symposium taking place on the UK column website 6:00 PM and Sunday. Do join us for that if you possibly can because that's got to be a pretty hard hitting event.
We just were asked to remind everybody that and the petition is being run to end EU KS adoption of UUN Agenda 2030 and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. If anybody would like to to sign that, please do so. And we were also asked to point this out. There's a consultation going on at the moment around the storage and retention of original will documents. So this is documents that are held with respect to probate and they've been being held in paper form I believe since the mid
1800s. The government is going, there's consulting on the on the plan to digitize all these and then destroy the original documents. They say they're going to retain some of the documents that have originated with well known people, but otherwise everything is going to be destroyed and there's some concern that that's going to result in certain records being lost. So just wanted to point that out to everybody to have a look and see if you want to make a
response to that consultation. Debbie, let's say hello to you again and talk about Pfizer, Yeah. Well, we've talked about AstraZeneca, we've talked about safety, we've talked about pharmacies. So let's go for Pfizer. We all know the risks associated with the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. So we've got our Pfizer situation room on the front page of UK column that Cheryl is running. The Pfizer documents analysis reports, But Pfizer need a new
agenda, don't they? So let's just have a look at their new agenda and don't stop them because they're having a good time. Tonight I'm going to help myself through a good time. I feel alive and the world floating around in ecstasy, so. Stop me now. Don't stop. Crush I'm having a good time. Having a good time. You're shooting star leaping through the sky like a tiger. I don't want to stop at all. You can't make it up, can you? Let's outdo cancer.
But let me introduce you to Arena Pharmaceuticals now. Arena Pharmaceuticals are AUS company set up in 1997. They specialized in drugs under development. Now let's have a little bit a look at Arena in more depth. They've a third party warehouse in the UK still to find out where this warehouse is and they're also MHRA audited and licensed, which means they've got ambient and shield storage
and distribution. Now their registered office seems to be in Buckingham, Hemel Hempstead, they're a wholesale pharma that they that they they're a wholesale pharmaceutical distributor. So you can see a bit about them there. They're based in Central in central England, but they're also they've been presenting to JP Morgan as well. So they're a big company, a very
big company. And just after they presented to JP Morgan, the Amit Munshi, the CEO was was doing that presentation in 2021, Pfizer announced that they would be buying Arena to help them with their cure for post COVID. So all of the conditions that maybe have been caused through the COVID-19 injection, they're now going through Arena Pharmaceuticals with a load of cures.
So they confirmed in 2022 that they'd completed the acquisition of Arena. So post COVID, they're going to be be bringing a portfolio of diverse products. Now one of these products I want you to take note of and we'll talk about it more in extra because Cheryl's here, but it's called Etrazimod. So I just want you to take notice of that Etrazimod and this is for Crohn's and
ulcerative colitis. Now I just want to bring your attention to a peer reviewed paper that I've found that would suggest that many gastrointestinal problems are being now seen after the injection and there is a case of ulcerative colitis appearing to be significant after injection. So if we skip on to the next slide, what I want to show you is a little a little tiny video about Crohn's and colitis. What is it? I'm sure it's just a dodgy tummy. It comes and goes. I read a. Blog.
That said, just avoid certain foods. Maybe it's too much partying. If you have any of these symptoms, it's time to cut the crap. It could be Crohn's or colitis. Over 500,000 people are living with Crohn's or colitis in the UK, but often the signs are ignored. Check your symptoms today with the Crohn's and Colitis UK Symptom checker. OK, so this is a big deal. So the NHS overview is that this
affects the colon and rectum. When it becomes inflamed you can get diarrhoea with pus and blood in it. Tummy pain, frequency of emptying your bowels. You get flare ups and you can feel very fatigued and get a loss of appetite. What causes ulcerative colitis? Well, actually, nobody really knows. They think it could be genetic, it could be environmental. Um. And what are the complications of um, Ulcerative colitis? So they do say that that more fear and increased risk of cancer.
One in 227 have a diagnosis of ulcerative colitis that equates to 296,000. And it also notes there the most common descendants are Ashkenazi Jews, which I thought was a bit strange. Anyway, there's been a trial, a gladiator trial. Funny how these trials have suddenly got names like storms, which Cheryl alerted me too. So the gladiator trial is your daily life disrupted by your ulcer, your ulcerative colitis. Now what do you get on this
trial? Well, you get an investigational drug actually and you get oversee by ulcerative colitis experts. But who are the sponsors of this trial? Well, it won't surprise you to find out that it's arena Pfizer and patient wing. Now this new drug Etrazimod, this is Pfizer's new drug and they have now had it approved by the EMA, but the other name for it is Valcicity. Now I want you to just take note of that Valcicity 22 names for it.
So if we skip on to the next slide, you can see there that we've got a couple of studies now on long term safety and efficacy of this new drug and you can see in some cases it made patients ulcerative colitis actually worse. In the next study in nature you'll be able to see that actually safety data should be accumulated because actually long term efficacy hasn't been seen. But if we go to Pfizer's own page, they they this is a patient information page for Valcipiti.
So this is for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. OK, so please go to this page to look. So before you start the treatment, you're going to need a full blood count, full blood work, eye and skin examinations, and an ECG. This all sounds pretty dramatic, doesn't it? But it goes on. If we go on one, we can see that they say don't take valcipity. If you've had a heart attack, chest pain, stroke, mini stroke, transient ischemic attacks,
certain types of heart failure. If you've had a history of unusual heartbeats, talk to your health provider before taking valcipity and going on from there. Again, they want to check vaccination records and say that the serious side effects can include death, basically uh serious infection. Those infections can be life threatening and cause death. So I really would urge everybody to look at this these slides in detail when you get the chance.
And if you do know somebody with ulcerative colitis, please get them to look at the Valcippity page because it's been approved by the EMA so could easily be proved by the MHRA. These are what they did. These are the instructions. They tell you to speak to your health provider or all about your medical conditions in great depth if you are going to take this drug. And this includes anybody that's pregnant or plans to become pregnant or is breastfeeding.
So I'm taking it from that as it's an investigational drug that this could possibly mean it's teratogenic. And I would just like to remind people, and I'm not going to make any predictions here, but the Princess of Wales was in hospital for a very long time after having abdominal surgery. None of us know what that is. But it's interesting that Prince William has appointed now former government diplomat as his
private secretary. This is Ian Patrick, who is also a sufferer of colitis and Crohn's and is a trustee of the Crohn's trust. So just keep your eyes on these new drugs that are coming down through these new pharmaceutical companies, this one arena. Thank you, Debbie. Ben, let's come back to you and AI. Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free, but that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
This year from Tony Blair, it could be a whole generation of bio weapons spawned as a result of this. There there can be interference in elections. You know there are I think you can identify categories of risk fairly easily. Then you've got to decide what you actually do about that. But then as as as Martha was just saying, we will want government will want business to be efficient, business will have to employ this technology.
But when it employs the technology, it will do so often by making redundant some of its workforce, potentially quite a lot of its workforce potentially as I understand it, as much in white collar industries as as not. So this is a, you know this, the, the, the social and political implications are are are going to be huge. There's a lovely moment in that video. It's from Chatham House back in September last year, I think it
was. And he basically says what we will want and then catches himself and says what governments will want business to do. So he's he forgets his lines for a second and it's like he's not calling the shots. But obviously Blair is one of these people telling governments and businesses what to do globally. He's a big proponent of AI. He's sketched out some of the risks there.
We're aware of what they are, the potential for the creation of new bio weapons, election interference, and the huge social and political implications, particularly things like mass unemployment. Let's have a look what Amazon are up to. This is a grocery packing warehouse in the southeast of London.
Folks have ordered their groceries online and instead of people walking up and down the aisles of a traditional grocery store to pick up items, these little devices move more than a million items every day between them. Instead of trying to build machines that fit into a world designed for humans, this entire facility, the size of seven football fields, is custom built to make this as efficient as possible. I cannot get across on camera just how incredibly large this whole place is.
A million items a day. So what is that? I don't know. 10,000 jobs, 20,000 jobs gone in one warehouse in South London, right. And obviously none of this is new. Automation has been going on for a long time. We're seeing it happen with white collar jobs as well. Even the technology sector is beginning to lay people off because of AI. The snake is beginning to eat its own tail here, as they say. As I said, this has been going
on for decades. Automation and digitisation means that the number of employees required to generate you can flick on to the next slide, the there, there we go. The number of employees required to generate $1,000,000 in revenue in the S&P 500 has fallen from 8:00 in the mid 80s to just over 2 today. It's a huge drop in the number of employees required to do the work that was being done. And Elon Musk says quite quite emphatically that there will come a point where no job is needed.
AI will be able to do everything AI built and owned by people like Elon Musk, one of the men with machines that we talked about at the start. So what happens next? Let's hear from you, Val. Noah Harari. The technology will. On the one hand, make it possible to start enhancing and upgrading humans, and on the other hand, especially the rise of AI will make more and more humans economically unnecessary, useless and therefore also
politically powerless. And the world or humanity might have different parts of humanity, might have different futures. And we might see really a process of some kind of speciation speciation, the formation of new species as a result of geographic, physiological, anatomical, behavioural factors that prevent previously interbreeding populations from breeding each up with each other. They actually think that they're going to elevate themselves into becoming non human superhuman.
This is the Nishan Ubermensch on steroids, right? This is what Harare and others like him believe that they are about to become. I think Elon Musk is probably in that same category. Here's another one, Sam Altman, who is a Jewish guy, apparently going to his Twitter profile. He's very keen for you to know that, and he runs A blog, apparently on the Internet. What could possibly go wrong? But more than that, Sam Altman is, according to Wired magazine,
one of our AI overlords. Maybe that's the speciation. It's the AI overlords who are going to be the new species. Because Sam Altman, if you weren't aware, is the founder of Open AI of ChatGPT fame. You've probably heard of it. People have been talking about it a lot for the past 12 to 18
months. It began as a non profit but it's since become one of the richest and fastest growing companies on earth due to a partnership with this fella who is Satya Nadella from Microsoft. And they have embedded Open AI technology into their tech, into their core stack and introduced this new product line called copilot which is for Nadella's money the future of the business. And Elon Musk who was one of the founders founding investors of Open AI described this as being the opposite of Open.
Open AI is essentially captured now by Microsoft. Let's say you founded an organization to save the Amazon rainforest and instead you became a lumber company, chopped down the forest and sold it. That's what he's saying that Altman has done here. So what is Altman's vision for the immediate future? Let's have a listen to him now. I hope the sound was OK for everyone because I didn't hear
that properly for some reason. But what Sam was talking about there, Mr. Oldman was talking about, there was the idea that in the immediate future we're going to be seeing one person companies worth a billion dollars, right? So in a world of artificial intelligence, mass automation and digitisation, we're going to have individuals running companies worth a billion dollars, right? What kind of world is that? What social utility is there to
an organization such as this? And what mentality sees that as a desirable end state? It is absolutely psychotic. They also talked about in the video a place called Cerebral Valley where a lot of this thinking is being developed. This is a a virtual location as you'd expect. They've got a website you can go and look at it.
It talks about all of the things that we're talking about here in very positive terms, but it's also a physical place as well, called Hayes Valley in Central San Francisco. And this is being billed as the new hub of the future, the role that Silicon Valley used to play through the 90s and the 2000s. The real focal point of that for artificial intelligence is this one district in San Francisco, and they are building this technological future that Altman sits right at the heart of.
What do we know about him? Well, the business that he's one of his original partners has said essentially is completely sold out and portrayed his founding principles. He says he's going to have to evolve in uncomfortable ways. And he talked about to Axios recently about how they're going to have to do things which sit outside the normal ethical codes and understanding of right and wrong. You can see this in in practice in the manner in which they
approach copyright legislation. So they submitted some evidence to the House of Lords recently, saying that because copyright today covers virtually every sort of human expression, including blog posts, photographs, forum posts, scraps of software code, and government documents, it would be impossible to train today's leading AI models without using copyrighted materials. So therefore, open AI ChatGPT.
Sam Altman sees himself and his company sitting outside of the restrictions placed upon everybody else. And he's only just getting warmed up because he's talking about raising a $7 trillion fund to build this new AI ecosystem within which he as the founder and operator of that fund. This is absolutely unprecedented scale of venture capital private
equity investment. He individually will be hand picking members of his elite new species of men with machines and this is the future that they are attempting to take us into. Ben, thank you. We're going to have a lot to talk about in extra because that's I want to touch on that particular topic as well. But Debbie, we've got another guest has appeared I see. And well welcome to Doctor Ahmed Malik. But Debbie, go ahead.
I'm delighted to be able to welcome Doctor Ahmed Malik when we need doctors qualified consultants. More than ever in the NHS we seem to be losing them and Ahmed's here to tell us about his license and what's happened to it. Ahmed, welcome to UK column. Tell us what happened to your license. Oh, thanks for having me on. I was totally engrossed, engrossed in that previous clip, by the way. Wow, that's kind of scary right? Back to me.
So basically, having been cancelled and suspended from all the hospitals that I was working out of bar one, I was fat. I was in a position where I can practice anymore financially, just didn't make any sense. I was losing money every month for about 3-4 months. So I thought, what? What is the point of a surgeon? If you can access an operating theatre, I'd love to operate here. My garden studio. I think I would get into trouble for it. I don't have the equipment.
It's not very sterile, so I can't really do that. So a surgeon with an operating theatre is pretty goddamn useless. It's like a Navy without ships, almost like the Royal Navy anyway. So basically I thought, right, I just need to give it all up. There's no point hanging around. And the problem is, if you're registered with the GMC, not only do you have to pay £450 a year for the license, you need to do a yearly appraisal, which
is thousands of pounds. Spending it on courses and CPD points and then actual appraisal is almost 1000 lbs. For what? Just so that I can be on the registrar. And I'll be honest with you, for the last year something very strange happened. I've been a doctor for 25 years. For the last year, I felt a noose around my neck. I have felt the GMC noose, you know, just getting a little bit tighter and tighter because you don't like doctors like me who speak up and question.
And I've already been investigated once based on anonymous online Twitter troll complaints. I just don't need this anymore. It feels like I'm. I'm driving down the road and there's cop cars all around me. And the moment you speed one mile over the limit, they come up, pull you over, take you to jail, then let you go again. And the next day you're back on the road and there's another
four cop cars around you. But The funny thing is the cars are driving, You know, the drivers are under influence. They're crashing and speeding. The cop cars are totally ignoring them, and they've got their eyes on me. And the other doctors were questioning the COVID job, transgender ideology. So I actually applied for voluntary erasure, you know, in January. And to my surprise, they have let me go. So I'm no longer GMC registered. I don't have a license to
practice. It's kind of sad, but at the same time, it's very liberating. I feel kind of free now that you know, someone's not going to come after me and just start an investigation out of the blue. And if this all sounds very paranoid, oh, Ahmed is very paranoid. Dogmatic. The paranoid Dr. It's not really. Just look around you. We started off with Andrew Wakefield. We've got Sarah Myhill, who's under a suspension for apparently prescribing that famous horse, Dewormer.
Wink, wink, you know, every six months her face is dragged across the Daily Mail. And you had Jane Donahan the same. You've got Jerry Waters across the Irish Sea. He's suspended for being, you know, a conscientious objector to jabbing people with an experimental shop. I just spoke to a guy last night. His name is Charles Hoff. He's a Canadian doctor. He's going through, he's going
through the court system. He's been, you know, taken to court by his licensing board for simply objecting to giving the experimental shot to someone who had COVID had an adverse reaction to the first shot and said second time around, maybe it's not in your interest, don't take it. And said, oh, I'm seeing a large number of neurological complications. And the Canadian licensing board has said, right, we're going to suspend you and we're going to
take you to court. I mean, this is what doctors are facing. So yes, I agree the public is, you know, angry, particularly in our camp. But why have doctors not spoken out? The reality is, when you do, you get crucified by the system, by the institutions that are meant to be there to protect the patient, the public. These are now all captured.
They're all government instruments who are working at the behest of corporations and they will make sure they punish and destroy any Doctor Who's a dissident, so. You're sorry, can I? Yeah. Can I just interrupt and ask you a question here because you know you've let you've listed half a dozen names there And of course another name would be Meryl Nas who also got struck off in the United States for for also using that horse, Dewormer Wink, Wink
that you were talking about. So you know, but we're talking about a handful of people. What is your understanding of the sort of the thoughts of people within the within the business? Are those people a fraction of the people that actually would hold the same views, or or are those really the limit of the people that that hold those views? I think it's like any other profession. Mean and the vast majority, it's like the it's just just draw a sample of the population.
It's the exact same as that. See people want to put doctors on a pedestal that needs to stop. We're no different from lawyers. Joe Public or I think, you know 80% of people are in. Totally indoctrinated and brainwashed. Believe in everything they say. We'll do whatever it takes to have a quiet life, easy life,
have no discomfort, be numbed. And, you know, brainwashed, zombified, you've got a 15%, maybe 18% of people who who know something's wrong, want to support people, want to do something, but are scared to put their head above the power pit because they'll get chopped down. And then you got one or two percent who, like Ed Griffin has said, have got the crusader gene who are like, to hell with it. I don't care if you kill me tomorrow. I don't care if I've got a mortgage and three young kids.
I need to do something for humanity and I need to fight these evil people. I'm trying my very best not to swear, but it's difficult being a glass region anyway. So you know, that is the situation that we're faced in. I mean, I would actually correct myself. I think professionals are more indoctrinated and brainwashed and prone to virtue signalling and have hubris and arrogance compared to, you know, the the working class people.
I think that's what made me a little bit more immune as well because I'm working class through and through. We smell the BS and, you know, we have a a natural distrust of authority. They've never done us any favours. And I think that's what it's all about. Unfortunately, I know of lots of doctors who agree with what I say but are too scared. They are too scared. And you know, I hear all the time, you know, I was at a wedding. There's two doctors who said to me, oh, love your work, love
your work. I I mean, I honestly thought they were going to ask for my autograph, at which point I would have vomited. But anyway, they they were like, you know, we'd love to do what you're doing, but we can't because we we can't lose it all. And I'm like, what? And I can. I'm in a position to lose it all. So I mean, as long as there's that mindset, then we've got problems.
And you know, Ahmed, I just want to interrupt you very quickly there because we are, we are running out of time because I want to just say to everybody that you have on that you've given up your career, you've given up your livelihood, and now you're making your mark as a podcaster. And I just want to share with people where they can find you on Doc Malik, authentic conversations with fascinating people. And you've also got a sub stack
too. So I just want to direct everybody to that because you have given up everything and I just want to thank you so much and hopefully you'll still be with us for extra. I know that you're a very, very busy person, but thank you so much for joining us today. Yes, thank you and hopefully you will be back for extra. Now we're just going to end with the Navalny, the Navalny situation and just bring this lady on screen, the wonderful Alicia Kearns, who was stating in parliament definitively
Alexei Navalny was murdered. And it was. It is important we in this House call call it out for what it was because that's what he deserves, she went on to say, following his murder. I was also in Munich where I heard his wife Yulia ask us to stand by her.
That's what we must do. Now this was followed up and now she of course, the chair of the foreign affairs Select Committee. But that comment was followed up by Neil Doherty's foreign minister, junior foreign minister, and she, he said she is right to use the word murder. We do seek to hold the state and the Russian leadership to account. So as a result, the UK government has now applied some sanctions specifically on the head of the Arctic penal colony that he died in, plus five other
deputy heads. And so that's the UK's response. Just before we came on air, actually, the US announced that it was going to be issuing massive sanctions on Russia over this, I think 500 different people being sanctioned. But I just wanted to to look at what John Kirby said.
So here he is and he said this. We would all love to know what happened here because of course, at this point we still don't know exactly what he died of. Regardless of the actual scientific answer, Mr. Putin is responsible for it. So never mind the facts, don't worry about what actually happened. It's absolutely Putin that's responsible and nothing else to be said here.
So then of course, this morning or yesterday, we had the video coming out from Navalny's mother claiming that the Russians are refusing to allow her access or to to make a proper burial. Now, of course, the Russians are hostage to fortune on this. If they allow the burial to be a public event, it becomes a show, a show burial, effectively a show funeral. Otherwise, they get continuing attacks from the West and so on about the way that they're treating the family.
But I just want to remind everybody that this narrative has been building for so many years. We have the Integrity initiative. If you haven't read the articles associated with this page on the UK accounting website, please do so. But also a related case, of course the Skripal case. And if again, if you haven't seen this article, the day of the Skripal, this basically is by Tim Norman. It basically goes through a timeline of all the main
mainstream media reports. And it's it's a great highlight of all the inconsistencies in the story. And we must never forget with respect to Novichok in particular, because novelty, of course, the accusation was that Novichok was the reason for his death, but also that he had been poisoned with Novichok a number of years ago.
We must never forget that Dame Sally Davies, the the Chief Medical Officer at the time, claimed that the best way to deal with, if you suspected you'd come into contact with Novichok, it was to use baby wipes because that will solve the problem. So that's how seriously we should take that whole narrative, and I suspect this narrative as well. But we will talk more about that in the coming days. Debbie, let's just end with one final slide. Yes, and look at this beautiful
little face. And what a lovely message. And one that I think we should all hold fast. They want us to hate each other. Don't let them win. Yes, indeed. A nice sentiment to end on. Thank you very much for everybody that's joined us today and thanks to all our contributors today. We'll be back in a few minutes for some extra. We will see you then if you're Auk column member. Otherwise we'll see you at 1:00 PM as usual on Monday. Have a great weekend. Bye, bye.